New Republic - Conway's ad "the ugliest, most illiberal political ad of the year"

[MRoCkEd]

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/78456/sympathy-rand-paul

Glenn Greenwald, civil libertarian from salon.com agrees:
http://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/27747134021

[sailingaway]

Yeah, but it essentially pretends that if you like Ayn Rand's novels and think she made a lot of intelligent points, you can't be a Christian which is rot. She didn't think much of libertarians either, according to Ron. She was an objectivist and I know that Ron, at least, is not. Rand seems not to be either since he has done so much charity work. Objectivists aren't into that.

[KurtBoyer25L]

Re: Ayn Rand & New Republic
Let's all shout it from the roof once more & finally --

A FUNNY PICTURE YOU HAPPENED TO GET OF SOMEONE! IS NOT AN ARGUMENT! IT IS A PROPAGANDA DEVICE! CALLING SOMEONE A "NUT" AND THEN MOVING ON! IS NOT AN ARGUMENT! IT IS AN EVASION OF ARGUMENT!

Very few people venture a basic, philosophical rebuke of Ayn Rand because her message is so simple. What they try to pick on is various extensions & practical manifestations of her ideas present in her books, grabbing at whatever they can that seems extreme "a voluntary rape victim? A holy symbol of money?" and going from there. Since all modern liberals are pragmatists, they see all specific policy views as existing on the same "level" of deduction, as opposed to a person's basic ideas and basic ethics existing as the bedrock of what practical ideas and manifestations spring from it. If that's a bit vague, recognize this as the "logic" used by any conscientious, astute citizen who votes for a corporate major-party politician. "He's basically corrupt and dishonest, but he's gonna vote for x, y, and z, which is equally/more important."

The idealistic opposite of Ayn Rand would be someone who thinks the world is not real, there is no certainty in anything, work is bad, sex is bad, thinking is bad, and only what is done in complete self-abolishing charity can be worthwhile. As Rand wrote, if people such as that really want to "prove" what they say, they shouldn't speak or make any physical action at all, since that would immediately contradict their assertions -- the only "proof" the hardcore social/spiritual mystic can offer is to shut up, expound no theories, and die.

Everything they say makes me like Rand (Paul). It would be exciting to send someone to congress with serious contempt for organized religion.