WARs comments on Palin Speech.

This is probably one of the most stunning articles I have seen in the whole of the campaign. While many candidates will pay lip service to an opponent this article in Libertarian Republican from Wayne Allyn Root really takes the cake.

 There is a great deal of conjecture over Palins ‘libertarian credentials’ but she certainly appeals to many of them.

 Below is a part of Waynes comments. For the full comments by Wayne click this link

 Hockey Mom and Hunter Leaves Two US Senators as Road kill!

 By Libertarian Vice Presidential Nominee Wayne Allyn Root

 That should be the headline in newspapers around the world this morning. A couple of weeks ago I took off my Vice Presidential hat to act as political commentator and pundit to critique Barack Obama’s V.P. choice of Joe Biden. I called it a terrible choice, a bland choice, and strategically, a failure. As a matter of fact, strategically, BOTH parties blew it. If Obama picked Hillary (and her 18 million primary votes) he would have had a good chance of sitting in the White House. But Joe who? From Dela-where? The guy known for plagiarizing his speeches?

 After watching last night’s Sarah Palin performance, I can only say, now, that Obama’s best shot at victory is if Biden plagiarizes Palin’s speech! …….

 A pit bull Hockey Mom just left most of America’s most gifted male politicians (and orators) dead in the middle of the road. She sliced and diced Obama, last night, like a wood chipper. Obama’s political career is lying in pieces, in a ravine somewhere in Alaska- with snowmobile tracks leading from the carnage.

 Palin’s line about a “community organizer” being about the same as a small town Mayor…”except the mayor has responsibilities” was a hockey puck to Obama’s groin. Then, she finished Barack off, by referring to his fake Greek columns being carted back to Hollywood. Ouch! I could hear every guy in Middle America screaming in laughter. With one line she emasculated Barack’s entire fake career. Then, the hunter shot him once more for good measure with the line about Obama saying nice things to small town America to their faces…then badmouthing them when he’s back in San Francisco. Did the body move on that last shot? Or was he already finished off? Hard to tell. ……..

 She not only sliced, diced and embarrassed her political opposition, she defeated the entire media elite and the “Beltway Insiders.” She left them all gasping for air, on their knees, pleading for mercy from the professional huntress. Palin’s speech was a verbal fusillade to the imaginary heart of every elite liberal snob in America.

 “The great community organizer” is on life support this morning wondering if anyone got the license plate of that Hockey Mom. …….

  From one S.O.B. (son of a butcher), small town boy, street-fighter, small businessman, home-school dad and citizen politician…to another- Congratulations Sarah for serving notice to the Hollywood, Manhattan and D.C. pompous, snobby elite class that it’s time for real change. I’ll see you in Washington D.C.

 Somehow, I think, from this moment on, things will never be the same. Real Americans have served notice: we are taking back America. And, to the Obamas and Bidens and old school boys, I say- “be afraid, be very afraid!”

 Note – Wayne Root is the Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee on the Libertarian Presidential ticket of Bob Barr/Wayne Root. His web site is:http://www.rootforamerica.com/

39 thoughts on “WARs comments on Palin Speech.

  1. Imagine a tough, intelligent, articulate woman like Maggie Thatcher, but with beauty-queen looks. ‘Saracuda,’ the ball-busting reformer, will transform conservatism in America. Question is: will it be more libertarian?

  2. I watched McCain’s acceptance speech on CNN last night. He’s no orator, but the substance was strong. There was a lot of small government, low taxes, less intrusion in it, and I liked it.

    Sarah Palin’s strength is to call Obama’s bluff. She’s young and inexperienced and she represents “change” too.

    I’ve been predicting a McCain victory all year and I still think I’m right. The Democrats will win back Congress though.

  3. David, it is a long shot but there are some really great candidates pushing hard to win it back, and the last time I looked Congress had about a third of the approval rating of Bush.

    There is some speculation that because of the strong campaigns in PA it could go to McCain/Palin, and the strongest Democrat, Jack Murtha could lose his seat.

  4. McCain just got himself a great cheer leader.

    From this speech;

    The line that sticks most in my mind is where she says (and I paraphrase);

    “there are those that use change to promote their career and then there are those that use their careers to promote change”.

    A clever kick at Obamas entire persona.

  5. On the latest Cato Institute Daily Podcast , Policy Advisor Mike Tanner analyzes the Sarah Palin record. He concludes that she’s been a great force for economic freedom in Alaska, but at the same time, has taken a very moderate stance on social matters. Tanner is particularly impressed by Palin’s opposition to pork barrell spending and her auctioning off of the Governor’s special private Jet on E-Bay.

    In their panic the Dems have started some of the most vicious attacks in living memory, a large proportion of which are directed not only at her but her family. These are pretty thoroughly debunked here .

  6. If Palin cannot teach her children at 17 that education is far more important then having a child it takes away from thier childhood.For petes sakes lady she is just a child having a child.You are sending a message to all young women that it’s ok to have sex at a young age. It scares me to think she could run our country one day. YIPS

  7. Melody – where did Palin say that she was pleased about her daughters get pregnant at age 17. And what do you suggest that she do about it?

  8. If Palin cannot teach her children at 17 that education is far more important then having a child it takes away from thier childhood.

    Even if Palin taught her children that, they are still free to ignore the lesson. It’s called disobedience.

    I suspect Melody doesn’t know the difference between education and coercion.

  9. Had Christ been sitting in the cheering audience at Palin’s pit bull acceptance, would the Lord cheer her ability to throw stones?
    “If ye salute your brethen only, what do ye more than others?”
    Is Palin putting the Kingdom first, or Karl Rove?

  10. The pro-Obama commentariat and bloggosphere have made a huge mistake in turning loose on Gov. Palin and her family with every piece of ammunition they could immediately lay hands on or concoct.

    At some level, they immediately recognised her as a threat that frankly I doubt the Republican supporters even realised themselves at first, while the Republicans tried to digest her wild card nomination.

    The Anti-Sarahs have managed to turn the mere fact of her nomination into one of the dominant campaign issues – at least right at this moment – and in doing so managed themselves to suck all the oxygen out of the Obama campaign launch.

    Long way to go until voting day and many a twist and turn before then, but if the Anti-Sarahs keep going the way they are now, they might as well put signs up on voting day directing the Hockey Moms straight past the Democrat pamphleteers and into the booths to vote McCain/Palin.

  11. She certainly seems a plain speaker and different from your average Washington politician, and has some libertairan ideas. I’m not sure I like her religious fundamentalism and extreme social conservatism however, and I don’t much care for her stances on creationism, abortion, etc. either.

  12. “If ye salute your brethen only, what do ye more than others?”
    Is Palin putting the Kingdom first, or Karl Rove?

    What rot. The day after she was announced the left came up with the despicable allegation that Trig was not in fact hers but was the child of Bristol. Since then they have attacked the baby as a mutant, genetically degenerate, mongaloid, and some stuff I won’t repeat. Some of the left even claimed it was the result of malnutrition, and inbreeding.

    Palin was justified in attacking his lack of experience, She has real executive experience.

    She was justified in ridiculing his ‘temple’. Even the press were dubious about it. Joe Scarborough said on MSNBC, “I don’t know that I would put Roman columns behind me if I had been accused of having a messianic complex.”

    There certainly nothing wrong with highlighting his sucking up to small town voters and then criticizing them as bitter clingers to guns and religion and suspicion of people not like them, (read black), when back in the city. I know he didn’t expect that to get back to the people he was talking about, but hell, shit happens.

    As for liberal ‘inbred backwoods gun freaks’ type comments Al Czervic summed it up well with, “I prefer a .270 Winchester 150 gr. for moose.

 For Dem’s it’s simply flypaper with a picture of Che Guevera printed on it.
”

  13. ARE WE REALLY ARGUING ABOUT WHO WOULD BE THE BETTER LEADER OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. FIRST OFF I WOULDNT EVEN VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN OR MCCAIN. HE IS JUST LIKE GEORGE BUSH, DO WE REALLY WANT THIS CYCLE TO HAPPEN AGAIN. AMERICA IS KNOWN TO BE A MELTING POT, THERE IS SO MANY RACES AND MOST OF AMERICA IS HAVING LITTLE OR NO MONEY, PEOPLE ARE NOT DOING RESEARCH MOST PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DONT EVEN KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN. MOST OF THE PROBLEM IS FROM DOWN SOUTH. THESE PEOPLE ARE STILL SO DAMN RACIST THEIR GOING BY COLOR NOW. LIKE OH MY FCUKING GOD WE’RE REALLY GOING TO CHOOSE RACE OVER WHAT THE POLITICIAN HAS TO OFFER TO THE TABLE. IF THIS IS HOW WE’RE GOING TO PICK A PERSON TO LEAD AMERICA THEN SO BE IT. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH DEMOCRATICS BECAUSE MOST OF US AMERICANS ARE MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES SO WE DONT EVEN QUALIFY TO CONSIDER OURSELVES REPUBLICANS THEIR TOO HIGH CLASS FOR US. MOST SOUTHERN REDNECKS ARE STILL RACIST SO THEY DONT EVEN CARE WHAT OBAMA HAS TO SAY. AS LONG AS HE IS BLACK THEY’LL REJECT HIM NO MATTER HOW GOOD HE IS. COME ON SERIOUSLY PALIN IS ANTI-GAY, ANTI-ABORTION. LIKE HOW IGNORANT IS SHE IM NOT GAY BUT THERE IS MANY GAY AMERICANS, LETS JUST HOPE THEY DO THEIR RESEARCH AND ACTUALLY REALIZED THAT HE IS FOR OUR YOUTH UP TO DATE. PALIN IS ANTI-ABORTION LIKE HELLO PEOPLE OPEN YOUR EYES IMAGINE ABORTION BEING IILEGAL IN AMERICA AND YOUNG GIRL GETS RAPED OR MISTAKENLY IMPREGNATED, THEY’LL HAVE THE CHOICE TO EITHER TAKE CARE OF THE BABY AND LIVE ON WELFARE, QUIT SCHOOL, OR DROP IT OFF AT BABY SAFE HAVEN OR PUT UP FOR ADOPTION. IMAGINE HOW MANY KIDS WOULD HAVE NO PARENTS OR HAVE A YOUNG PARENTS THAT STRUGGLING TO TAKE OF CARE OF THEIR KIDS. LETS BE SERIOUS AMERICA CANNOT HANDLE HAVING ABORTION ILLEGAL, THERE WILL BE WAY TOO MANY KIDS IN FOSTER HOMES. PALIN DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THE HELL SHE IS THINKING OR TALKING ABOUT. THERE IS NOT MANY PARENTS THAT IS LIKE HER THAT GOT MONEY AND IS ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THE GRANDCHILD. COME ON A WOMEN FROM ALASKA, DOES ANYTHING EVEN HAPPEN IN ALASKA SERIOUSLY IM FROM BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS AND I BET SHE WOULDNT BE ABLE TO HANDLE A CITY WITH SO MANY PROBLEMS. YOU SEE SHE WASNT EVEN ABLE TO HANDLE HER OWN DAUGHTER AND MCCAIN IS TRYING TO CLAIM THAT HE ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THIS CONTROVERSEY. SO BASICALLY MCCAIN IS TRYING TO SAY ITS FINE, THEN HE GOT ISSUES. LIKE IT HAPPENS A LOT HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS YOUNG GIRLS GETTING PREGNANT AND ITS AN EMBARESSMENT OBVIOUSLY YOU WASNT A GOOD PARENT. HOW WOULD FOREIGN COUNTRIES SEE PALIN AS A MOTHER. I AM HALF VIETNAMESE SO TRUST ME SHE’LL PROBABLY BE THE LAUGHING STOCK OF ASIA. THEY WOULD THINK HOW THE HELL DID THIS WOMAN BECOME VICE PRESIDENT IF SHE COULDNT EVEN TAKE CARE OF HER DAUGHTER PALIN SHOULD BE ASHAMED AS A MOTHER AND SHOULDNT BE SO PR0UD TO BE A VICE PRESIDENT. SHE IS ONLY GETTING BY BECAUSE SHE IS WHITE AND GOOD LOOKING. MCCAIN PROBABLY HAD THE HOTS FOR HER LIKE LETS BE SERIOUS A FORMER BEAUTY PEGEANT GIRL TURNS TO VICE PRESIDENT REALLY? LIKE COME ON MCCAIN ANOTHER GEORGE BUSH. PLEASE GIVE ME A GOOD REASON WHY I SHOULD VOTE FOR HIM????? HIS WIFE AND HIM IS RICH SHE GOT A RICH FATHER AND MCCAIN IS A WAR HERO. CONGRATS WANT A FREAKING COOKIE???!!! THE MCCAINS DONT THINK ABOUT THE POOR ASS PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. LIKE WHO WEAR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR HER HUSBANDS SPEECH. SHE FORCED IT LIKE IS IT NECESSARY TO EVEN BUY CRAP SO EXPENSIVE AND WEAR IT ON STAGE AND THE UNITED STATES CANT EVEN AFFORD HALF I MEAN MOST OF THE ITEMS WITH THE GOLD DRESS. ALSO IF SHE IS TRYING TO PROVE TO OTHER COUNTRIES THAT THIS IS HOW AMERICAN PEOPLE DRESS WITH EXPENSIVE CRAP, PLEASE THINK AGAIN. IF YOU SHOP AT WALMART OFTEN BECAUSE OF THEIR CHEAP PRICES, THEN YOU KNOW I MEAN. LIKE WHO REALLY BUYS $5,000.00 DRESSES. US REAL HARD WORKING AMERICANS USE $5,000.OO FOR A CAR. WELL I GUESS I GOT A BIT CARRIED AWAY BUT PEOPLE NEEDS TO REALIZE THAT IF YOUR RICH AND IS AGAINST PAYING TAXES THEN GO AHEAD. BUT IF YOUR LIKE MOST OF US AMERICANS THAT WORK EVERYDAY TO PAY FOR YOUR RENT AND TAKE THE TRAIN OR DRIVE A CAR MADE MADE IN THE 90’S PLEASE VOTE VOTE VOTE FOR OBAMA. HE EXPERIENCED BEING POOR AT SOMETIME IN HIS LIFE, HE GREW UP IN A CITY THAT WAS CONSIDERED GHETTO.HE IS STILL FAIRLY YOUNG UNDERSTANDS THE YOUTHS PROBLEMS UNLIKE MCCAIN HE IS ALL ABOUT WAR. WHERE IS NOT THE ANSWER AND ENOUGH OF OUR COUNTRY BULLYING OTHER COUNTRIES. ALSO WE LOST SO MANY OF OUR BRAVE AMERICAN MEN AND WOMEN. HOW MUCH MORE OF THEM WILL HAVE TO DIE UNTIL YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH OBAMA THAT ALL OF THIS WAR THING WITH MANY OTHERS IS A MISTAKE. ITS 2008 IS THERE NOT A BETTER WAY TO FIGHT TERRORISM? BELIEVE IN OBAMA AND UNDERSTAND THAT HE CARES ABOUT REGULAR MINIMUM WAGE AMERICANS. HE WILL BRING OUR ECONOMY BACK UP AGAIN. OBAMA SEEMS LIKE HE KNEW HOW HE IS GOING TO LEAD AMERICA, THIS BLACK MAN, BELIEVE OR NOT KNOWS WHY OUR ECONOMY IS GOING DOWN UNDERSTANDS WHERE THE STRUGGLING IS HAPPENING, ALSO WHERE THE RICH IS HAPPENING AND HOW TO SOLVE PROBLEMS PROBLEMS LIKE THIS.MCCAIN AND PALIN NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF THEY DO WIN THIS CRAZY RACE, ITS ONLY BECAUSE THE PEOPLE DOWN SOUTH AND THEIR IS A LOT OF RACISM AND YET POOR PEOPLE LIKE I MEAN POOR WHITE PEOPLE LETS SAY FOR EXAMPLE WEST VIRGINIA THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT GIVING A GOOD REASON ON WHY THEY WOULDNT VOTE FOR THEM EVEN THOUGH THESE PEOPLE ARE REAL RED NECKS LIKE THE TRAILER PEOPLE THESE REDNECKS ARE SAYING SOME BS BECUASE OBAMA WAS BORN IN AMERICA, HE’S MUSLIM LIKE SERIOUSLY HAVE THESE REDNECKS TRIED TO LEARN ANYTHING OR IS EVERYTHING IS BY COLOR ITS STUPID THESE PEOPLE DONT WANT TO ADMIT THAT THEY WOULDN’T VOTE FOR OBAMA IF HE’S BLACK. THEY CANT SAY IT BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT SOUNDS STUPID TO US BECAUSE REGULAR AMERICANS LIKE US UP NORTH WE ALL GET ALONG WITH EACH OTHER WE KNOW WE’RE ALL DIFFERENT BUT WE’RE ALL WANTING SOMETHING THATS THE SAME AND THATS FOR THE BETTER. SORRY ABOUT THE LONG CRAZY COMMENT I JUST WANTED TO GET MY POINT ACROSS THAT IGNORANCE FROM DOWN SOUTH WHO IS GOING TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN NOT BECAUSE THEIR RICH BECAUSE THEIR MIDDLE CLASS OR POORER FAMILIES BUT RATHER THEN VOTE FOR A BLACK MAN THAT IS GOING TO DO MUCH IN HIS POWER TO HAVE THE AMERICAN ECONOMY TO RISE AGAIN. NO OFFENSE THOUGH THESE POOR RACIST REDNECKS WANT TO VOTE FOR THE WHITE MAN MCCAIN, EVEN THOUGH HE IS A REPUBLIAN BELIEVING IN HELPING THE RICH NOT TO BE TAXED WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE. ALL OF THE VERY IMPORTANT TAXES THAT THESE RICH PEOPLE MUST PAY IS USED TO HELP PEOPLE LIKE ME AND YOU BASICALLY MOST OF AMERICAS.

  14. BUT IF YOUR LIKE MOST OF US AMERICANS THAT WORK EVERYDAY TO PAY FOR YOUR RENT AND TAKE THE TRAIN OR DRIVE A CAR MADE MADE IN THE 90′S PLEASE VOTE VOTE VOTE FOR OBAMA.

    I’m moving to America! I rent and drive a car made in 1996, and in Australia I’m comfortably middle class. In America AKITA P tells me that’s how the poor people live. What a land of opportunity!

  15. Shorter version of Troll boy AKITAS capital rant: “I hate all those weird southern bastard pricks because they just reflexively hate people who are not like them”.

    Now is this some sort of Turing test?

  16. Akita,

    I reckon as an American, you know fuck all about the place and yourself are very ignorant and bigoted. Perhaps you should do some research yourself.

  17. Palin is very dangerous IMO. When I saw a picture of her killing a caribou I thought, wow that’s cool. But now that I’ve found out just a little about her, I’m totally turned off.

    In addition, Palin’s selection may not be as good strategically as Wayne Root thinks.
    Because all the religious-right Republicans are already voting Republican – The Republican party may actually need to attract back some of its economically conservative, libertarian leaning supporters to win. But Palin probably won’t do this. Why?

    Because faith-based politics are her speciality.

    She does not respect the separation of church and state.
    And this is totally anti-libertarian at an absolutely fundamental level.

    1)Palin used to endorse the teaching of creationism in tax-funded schools
    2)She ardently opposes abortion, describing herself as “pro-life as any candidate can be”
    3) She has stated that it’s “God’s will” that she help build an energy pipeline
    4) She has stated that the Iraq war is “a task that is from God.”
    5) Political reform, Palin says, “doesn’t do any good if the people of Alaska’s heart isn’t right with God.”

    Faith is the opposite of thinking and reason, and the US in particular needs less of it. Personally I would be very tempted to vote for Obama even though the sight of him activates my gag reflex. He’s basically a communist with a very low IQ.

    But the Republicans cannot be trusted to be economically conservative.
    George Bush’s government has seen the federal budget grow continually. He has just bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And he does not have a good record on trade restrictions and tarriffs.
    McCain is also a supporter of the environment movement and has made some very worrying economic type comments eg/ about further regulating oil price speculation.
    In addition Iraq was a disaster. The US have failed at achieving security from terrorism, they have just wasted a heap of money and sacrificed their own soldiers and tax payers – Jesus style.

  18. Tim R… you been reading Daily Kos or something? Most of these claims have been debunked (though a couple of them are new to me). She isn’t as right-wing religious as she’s been painted.

    1. Teaching of creationism in tax-funded schools – she specifically stated that she wasn’t suggesting creationism be part of the curriculum, simply that discussion should not be prohibited if it arises (ie, there’s nothing secular about banning religious discussion)

    2. She has said she opposes abortion except in life-threatening circumstances. Her position on whether she would repeal Roe vs Wade is unclear… many libertarians feel the same way (inc. Ron Paul) – it all depends on your definition of when life begins.

    3. Never heard that one, but I suspect it was same as (4) below

    4. Iraq is God’s will? No, she never said that. She once said a prayer along the following lines:

    “Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”

    As a former Christian, this is pretty standard request… you pray that your leaders are making the right decisions.

    5. Haven’t heard this, but it sounds like it might be more of the part (4) thing… ie, “as a leader, I hope I’m doing the right thing, God’s will” etc…

    I am not (any longer) a religious person – but faith and reason do not have to contradict each other.

  19. Watch out, Fleeced!
    Tim R. is a hardline Objectivist! Now you can expect no rest.
    Of course, Objectivism does have a few skeletons in the closet. Leonard Peikoff once wrote a monumental book (I think it was even called ‘Objectivism’) about Ayn Rand’s philosophy, and made a few claims about the nature of reality, essentially repudiating the Big Bang theory of physics, and being incompatible with quantum physics.
    I also saw a fascinating documentary on Four Corners, years ago, about two steel companies in America. One was founded by a maverick from the other company, a man like Henry Rearden, and his company has a bad track record in terms of steel output, and people not wanting to work there.
    The other company was turned into a collective by an heir when his father died (which is why the maverick quit). This company is still around, and workers want to join it- they have waiting lists. They are still a collective, and they produce steel that people want.
    It’s almost as though reality contradicts objectivism!
    Also, in her book ‘Atlas Shrugged’, Ms. Rand had very uncomplimentary things to say about government research laboratories. Our equivalent, the CSIRO, is renouned for increasing agricultural outputs, and doing lots of good research. Reality goes against her, I’m afraid to say.

  20. Well, Fleeced, I hope you’re right that she isn’t as religiously motivated as my first impressions.
    But I still think the Republican party has been hi-jacked by the religious right for some time now, and that this is a very dangerous thing. They are not economically conservative and I would never vote for them (at the moment) if I was an American.

    I do think reason and faith contradict. Faith means believing without proof. Reason means demanding proof. It’s a direct contradiciton, and faith is dangerous for any culture.

    If people want to be religious, that’s their rightful choice, as long as they respect the separation of church and state and realise that this is an important and beneficial system. Think of the Dark Ages in Europe, or Islamic totalitarian countries. Separation of church and state is very serious stuff IMO, and fundamental to freedom and libertarianism.
    I think faith based reasoning in politics is much more likely to result in totalitarianism.

  21. Nicholas, I’m someone that’s philosophically minded, interested in ethics etc, because I think people’s ideology drives them. I’m not that knowledgable of the philosophy world but it’s something I look into in my spare time.
    Objectivism is the best system I’ve ever seen and I really like what I’ve discovered about it in the last 6 months – actually I think I should be more objectivist.

    The Big Bang is incompatible with the law of causality if you take it to mean that the universe was “created” from nothing. Something from nothing, that’s impossible.
    I think a common view these days is that the universe cycles through expansion and contraction, returning to a “singularity” whatever that is, prior to a big bang. I personally don’t see a problem with this idea.
    Also you have to remember theoretical physics is highly theoretical and speculative. How do you think they’ll ever prove string theory for example?

    If you are interested, the Objectivist David Harriman (M.S. in Physics), has written on the topic of science and physics fairly extensively although I haven’t had time to look into what he says in detail and his lecture series are quite expensive.
    Here’s a quick look at some of his thoughts: http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3147

  22. If people want to be religious, that’s their rightful choice, as long as they respect the separation of church and state and realise that this is an important and beneficial system.

    Well, I certainly believe that – however, with the issue of education – shouldn’t this be up to the individual schools (who would decide based on market forces?)

    The conflict of religion being taught in state schools can be easily resolved be removing the state… the founding fathers were right to include the separation of church and state – but the intention was clearly to prevent the state from mandating a particular religious observance.

    Mandating that religious discussion be prohibited seems to me to violate that principle. The courts in the US seem disagree with my interpretation, but the whole issue would go away if the state simply removed itself from education… hand out school vouchers if you must, but let the market sort out what is taught and how.

  23. You’re preaching to the choir – the real problem is state education.

    I do think private schools should be allowed to teach creationism.

    However I am obviously opposed to creationism being taught in state schools.
    It doesn’t meet scientific standards and it makes a mockery of scientific principles and the scientific method. It undermines science itself IMO.

    I’m not saying that theories that coincide with religious belief should be banned from discussion.
    Palin wanting to “discuss” creationism, is better than her wanting it taught. And ideally any discussion or examination by a school curiculum body would result in creationism being dismissed as arbitary by scientific standards.
    However, why would Palin want to discuss creationism in the first place?

  24. Yeah, but not in one sitting. My favourite chapters are Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Judges. I also think Revalations is quite entertaining.

    The reason I asked if you’d read Atlas Shrugged was because I don’t see how your comments about that steel mill has any significance to Hank Rearden.

    And I don’t see why the CSIRO doing good work from time to invalidates Objectivism.
    eg/ I bet there were some good farmers in the Soviet Union. But this wouldn’t validate communism.

    Personally, I don’t think we should have a CSIRO or equivalent. I think we should have privatised research and university research.
    I would have thought you’d share this opinion considering you are an anarcho-capitalist.

  25. Ayn Rand seemed to feel that only private research could ever produce useful inventions. I don’t see the CSIRO working on a Harmonizer.
    And I do believe that everything should be privatised. But this is not an objectivist ideal. I am close to Anarcho-Capitalism in my own beliefs, which I call PanSecessionism.
    As for the Bible, the best book is Deuteronomy. There, Moses gives the game away, openly talking, in chapter 5, to the people as though these are the same people who were at Mt. Sinai, even though earlier chapters of Deuteronomy had made it plain that those bodies were dying off. To those who noticed and asked questions, the sages replied that these were the same souls, in a later generation of bodies.

  26. Australia has the DSTO for our military weapons research. And Objectivists would in many contexts support such organisations (in their state run form) for self defense reasons, and in free countries.

  27. Re- the Big Bang. Causality is certainly a major function within our Universe, but can you apply it to conditions before the universe? Causality is linked to time, and time is one of the dimensions of our Universe, as Augustine mentioned centuries ago.
    If causality applies ‘outside’ our universe, then you might be onto something, but how are you going to prove that? (This is one of the hidden assumptions in the question ‘Who created God?’)

  28. The universe is as big as it gets. There’s no such thing as outside the universe by any proven scientific knowledge or by any perceptual or sensory experience.

    On the conceptual level (ideas inside people’s minds) many people have the notion that there exists another realm eg/ heaven or hell, but this idea has to be taken on faith.

    I’m sure the laws of physics are quite different (to the Newtonian laws we are familiar with) inside black holes or at the big bang.

  29. As for the Bible, the best book is Deuteronomy.

    No. You are lying. 🙂

    The best book is The Book of Job it’s both an entirely accurate description of God’s attitude to us and the first Great Jewish Black Comedy.

  30. “There’s no such thing as outside the universe by any proven scientific knowledge…”

    Neither can it be proven that there is not, which I guess is where the whole “faith” thing comes in.

  31. re: the big bang – perhaps you guys should check out pre big bang “quantam fluctuations” – Ojectivist commentators who say physics disobeys causality are wrong but also imply that causality couldn’t have started X years ago. They just don’t know this.

  32. Technically you can’t prove anything is “not”. This is why we say that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
    Proof requires empirical evidence.

  33. There is a hot new story on the way.

    After a week or so of the lefties promoting the idea that McCain would dump Palin from the ticket, it seems that the opposite is about to happen.

    A few days ago Biden ‘admitted’ that Hillary might have been a better pick. Joe has been so useless that nobody has paid any attention to him while Palin has grabbed the agenda by the throat.

    It seems now that with his campaign losing all momentum and McCain/Palin opening a handy lead, desperation has set in and Precious is about to drop Biden and put Hillary on.

    No nominee who has changed VP pick in an election has lost in less than a landslide, so perhaps he is seeing a chance to do something historic again.

Comments are closed.