Category Archives: Atlas Shrugged

The Fountainhead, part 1, chapter 7

Howard Roark has begun his new job at the source of all evil, Francon & Heyer. As a condition of taking the job, he asked to do structural rather than ornamental work, and Keating kept his end of the bargain. Even so, it gnaws at him:

The lines he drew were to be the clean lines of steel beams, and he tried not to think of what these beams would carry. It was difficult, at times. Between him and the plan of the building on which he was working stood the plan of that building as it should have been. He saw what he could make of it, how to change the lines he drew, where to lead them in order to achieve a thing of splendor. He had to choke the knowledge. He had to kill the vision.

Like any good Randian protagonist, hes tormented by the burden of having to be so much better than everyone else. While he bends over his desk, he inwardly cries out to know why all his colleagues are incompetent subhuman slugs who refuse to bow to his unsurpassable genius:

But the pain remained and a helpless wonder. The thing he saw was so much more real than the reality of paper, office and commission. He could not understand what made others blind to it, and what made their indifference possible. He looked at the paper before him. He wondered why ineptitude should exist and have its say. He had never known that.

Ayn Rand believed herself the supreme devotee of reason above all. Yet it comes through here, possibly even more clearly than in Atlas Shrugged, that her characters dont act like rationalists at all. Roark is a case in point.

Even though it bothers him that other people dont recognize his talent, it never occurs to him that he might be doing anything wrong, or that there might be other means of selling himself and his ideas that would work more effectively. He never tries to learn about human psychology, interpersonal relationship skills, or marketing tactics. He never even considers departing from his usual approach of plopping a set of blueprints down in front of someone and staring unblinkingly at them until they give in and acknowledge his greatness.

A true rationalist wouldnt act like this. If your beliefs fail to align with reality, the proper course of action is to adjust your beliefs, rather than crossing your arms and waiting for the world to change so that your initial hypothesis becomes correct. Being a rational person means considering your own fallibility before all other possibilities; but as in Atlas Shrugged, the only lesson Roark needs to learn in this novel is that everyone else is even more evil and worthless than he had thought.

Meanwhile, Peter Keating, who does understand the concept of asking for advice, keeps calling Roark into his office to help with his designs:

Keating produced sketches from a drawer and said: I know its perfectly right, just as it is, but what do you think of it, generally speaking? Roark looked at the sketches, and even though he wanted to throw them at Keatings face and resign, one thought stopped him: the thought that it was a building and that he had to save it, as others could not pass a drowning man without leaping in to the rescue.

Its hinted that this was Keatings real motive for getting Roark the job, so that he could exploit Roarks architectural genius. But even if thats true, so what?

Were meant to view this as a villainous act. But thats because Rand believes all creation is inherently individual, so asking someone else for help amounts to parasitizing their genius. In reality, the lone genius is the exception, not the rule.

Its absolutely normal for people working in a creative field to collaborate. When Roark wasnt working there, it was different, but now he and Keating are employees of the same company. As long as Roark is paid fairly for his work, he has no cause for complaint. Hes not being exploited; hes just doing what he was hired for.

The logical step would be for Keating and Roark to go into business together. Their skills really do complement each other. Keating, who has a knack for compromise but is too eager to go along with the crowd, would have his spine stiffened by Roarks stubbornness and nonconformist spirit. Conversely, Roark badly needs someone with people skills, like Keating, to sell clients on the virtue of his designs. Of course, if you expected this book to propose or even consider this patently obvious solution, it wouldnt be an Ayn Rand novel.

Then he worked for hours, sometimes all night, while Keating sat and watched. He forgot Keatings presence. He saw only a building and his chance to shape it. He knew that the shape would be changed, torn, distorted. Still, some order and reason would remain in its plan. It would be a better building than it would have been if he refused.

Now hold on just a minute!

On the surface, this seems like a reasonable way for Roark to think. He can console himself that hes making a contribution. Even if his designs are mangled in committee, he can still improve the final product relative to what it would have been otherwise.

But this is precisely the way Roark doesnt think in any other situation in the novel. In every case where hes not helping Peter Keating with his homework, he refuses to make the tiniest concession, even when that means he loses all influence over the outcome. Whenever a client so much as asks him to put a bunch-of-grapes design over a door, he storms out in a huff, even though that means hell lose the commission and the building will be designed by someone else wholl festoon it with urns and cherubs from top to bottom.

The reason for this inconsistency is that Roark isnt a character, hes a philosophical principle, and yet his author cant decide which principle she wants him to be. Is he Artistic Integrity, who refuses to compromise his vision no matter the cost? Or is he Prometheus Chained, who gives freely of himself to sustain the world but is only punished for it? The solution Rand hits on is that he switches back and forth from one scene to another, depending on the needs of the plot.

Other posts in this series:

Go here to read the rest:

The Fountainhead: Selling the Dream - Patheos (blog)

Ron Hart

As Obamacare predictably collapses and the Senate decides how to vote on the House repeal, here is a column I wrote in March, 2010:

Obama says we have been debating the Obamacare bill for a year, and now its time to ram it through in a down or up yours vote. Democrats view this bill as a cure-all elixir, Republicans view it as a suppository.

In the first tough interview of his presidency, he told Fox News that we would know what is in the bill 72 hours before the House tries to pass it. Obama seemed frustrated that the vast majority of the country is against his bill. It turns out that president-ing is harder than community organizing.

Well worth reading, the Obama Administration was foretold in "Atlas Shrugged," which is 1,300 pages long. It took me two weeks to read and it was well-written. This healthcare reform bill runs 2,000-plus pages and is written in cryptic Washington-speak. No one understands it. It feels like we are getting the last-minute hard sell, like the one from a car salesman when he gets you in that little room with the closing guy, starts shoving documents at you to sign, and tells you not to worry your pretty little head over it.

What we saw in the past year was the Democrats having to bribe, using our tax dollars, their own supermajority party to pass this massive takeover of one-sixth of our economy. President Obama said all aspects of the bill are agreed upon except, of course, minor details like how to pay for it, whether it covers illegal immigrants, and how to cover more than 30 million more people who currently do not have health insurance, all without adding doctors and/or rationing care. Other than that, Pelosi and Reid seem to have it done.

Since our representatives have not read the bill, I will not read the bill for you and tell you what it says.

1. There is a provision in the bill to hire all Democrats booted out of office because they voted for this bill. Where? In the government monstrosity they just created. As Representative Billy Tauzin of the politically honest state of Louisiana found out when he championed the Bush Medicare prescription drug entitlement disaster, there are $2 million-a-year jobs with pharmaceutical companies waiting for you once you leave Congress (a.k.a. the scene of the crime).

2. Obama has promised not to stump for Democrats who vote for this bill. Political pundits and the Congressional Budget Office score this as being worth 12 points for any Democrat who can keep Obama out of his district.

3. One of the more egregious deceits of Obamacare is that it front-loads the goodies: Adults up to age 26 and preexisting conditions would be immediately covered. Costs and regulations were pushed to the back end, 2017, when Obama is gone. Simple economics tells us that you cannot get something for free. Premiums and deductibles will rise as insurance companies price in all the government mandates. Obamacare seems like a flimsy hospital gown; you seem to be covered up front, but youre very exposed from the rear.

A syndicated op-ed humorist, award winning author and TV/radio commentator, you can reach him at Ron@RonaldHart.com, Twitter @RonaldHart or visit RonaldHart.com

Go here to see the original:

HART: Obamacare bill: A game of hide and seek - News - The ... - Walton Sun

As Obamacare predictably collapses and the Senate decides how to vote on the House repeal, here is a column I wrote in March, 2010:

Obama says we have been debating the Obamacare bill for a year, and now its time to ram it through in a down or up yours vote. Democrats view this bill as a cure-all elixir, Republicans view it as a suppository.

In the first tough interview of his presidency, he told Fox News that we would know what is in the bill 72 hours before the House tries to pass it. Obama seemed frustrated that the vast majority of the country is against his bill. It turns out that president-ing is harder than community organizing.

Well worth reading, the Obama Administration was foretold in Atlas Shrugged, which is 1,300 pages long. It took me two weeks to read and it was well-written. This health care reform bill runs 2,000-plus pages and is written in cryptic Washington-speak. No one understands it. It feels like we are getting the last-minute hard sell, like the one from a car salesman when he gets you in that little room with the closing guy, starts shoving documents at you to sign, and tells you not to worry your pretty little head over it.

What we saw in the past year was the Democrats having to bribe, using our tax dollars, their own supermajority party to pass this massive takeover of one-sixth of our economy. President Obama said all aspects of the bill are agreed upon except, of course, minor details like how to pay for it, whether it covers illegal immigrants, and how to cover more than 30 million more people who currently do not have health insurance, all without adding doctors and/or rationing care. Other than that, Pelosi and Reid seem to have it done.

Since our representatives have not read the bill, I will not read the bill for you and tell you what it says.

1. On the issue of how we are going to cover the predicted 30 million-plus new Obamacare enrollees, Dr. Ahmed Patel of Manhattan, Kansas has agreed to see these patients. While he readily admits Manhattan was not quite the place he saw in the pictures before he moved to our country three years ago, he thinks the additional 30 million patients will be good for his business. He says hes centrally located in Kansas, making him convenient to all Americans, and is willing to expand his waiting room.

2. There is a provision in the bill to hire all Democrats booted out of office because they voted for this bill. Where? In the government monstrosity they just created. As Representative Billy Tauzin of the politically honest state of Louisiana found out when he championed the Bush Medicare prescription drug entitlement disaster, there are $2 million-a-year jobs with pharmaceutical companies waiting for you once you leave Congress (a.k.a. the scene of the crime).

3. Obama has promised not to stump for Democrats who vote for this bill. Political pundits and the Congressional Budget Office score this as being worth 12 points for any Democrat who can keep Obama out of his district.

4. One of the more egregious deceits of Obamacare is that it front-loads the goodies: Adults up to age 26 and preexisting conditions would be immediately covered. Costs and regulations were pushed to the back end, 2017, when Obama is gone. Simple economics tells us that you cannot get something for free. Premiums and deductibles will rise as insurance companies price in all the government mandates. Obamacare seems like a flimsy hospital gown; you seem to be covered up front, but youre very exposed from the rear.

5. Obamas Julius Caesar haircut should serve as fair warning of his ultimate goal; making sure this idea blows up and forcing us to single payer. As you know, Julius Caesar overthrew the Roman Republic in a series of bold power grabs and set in motion the end of the once-proud Roman Empire. Consider yourself notified. Entitlements, once given, are hard to take away.

6. The South will not buy into Obamacare. Since we Southerners value our self-reliance, southern governors will continue to fight this law. Keep in mind, we still do Civil War reenactments and thats for a war we lost.

A syndicated op-ed humorist, award winning author and TV/radio commentator, you can reach him at Ron@RonaldHart.com, Twitter @RonaldHart or visit RonaldHart.com.

Continued here:

Obamacare Bill: A game of hide and seek - Columbia Daily Herald

As Obamacare predictably collapses and the Senate decides how to vote on the House repeal, here is a column I wrote in March, 2010:

Obama says we have been debating the Obamacare bill for a year, and now its time to ram it through in a down or up yours vote. Democrats view this bill as a cure-all elixir, Republicans view it as a suppository.

In the first tough interview of his presidency, he told Fox News that we would know what is in the bill 72 hours before the House tries to pass it. Obama seemed frustrated that the vast majority of the country is against his bill. It turns out that president-ing is harder than community organizing.

Well worth reading, the Obama Administration was foretold in Atlas Shrugged, which is 1,300 pages long. It took me two weeks to read and it was well-written. This health care reform bill runs 2,000-plus pages and is written in cryptic Washington-speak. No one understands it. It feels like we are getting the last-minute hard sell, like the one from a car salesman when he gets you in that little room with the closing guy, starts shoving documents at you to sign, and tells you not to worry your pretty little head over it.

What we saw in the past year was the Democrats having to bribe, using our tax dollars, their own supermajority party to pass this massive takeover of one-sixth of our economy. President Obama said all aspects of the bill are agreed upon except, of course, minor details like how to pay for it, whether it covers illegal immigrants, and how to cover more than 30 million more people who currently do not have health insurance, all without adding doctors and/or rationing care. Other than that, Pelosi and Reid seem to have it done.

Since our representatives have not read the bill, I will not read the bill for you and tell you what it says.

A syndicated op-ed humorist, award winning author and TV/radio commentator, you can reach him at [emailprotected], Twitter @RonaldHart or visit RonaldHart.com

View original post here:

Obamacare Bill: A Game Of Hide And Seek - The Daily Caller

I confess, yet again, this Spring, no institution of higher learning has asked me to deliver words of wisdom and inspiration to its graduates. This is surely an oversight but an oversight that has been repeated and repeated, for decades. How can that be?

Ahhh, but this year, this time around, there may be some departures, some vacancies at commencement rostrums. There may be discoveries about heretofore committed speakers; who have financial or personal misdoings in their past. Or there may be speakers whose views make some very vocal students uncomfortable and who are thus banished from podiums, so as not to upset or offend finer sensibilities.

Unabashed opportunist that I am, I am, even at this late date, willing to fill the void or the vacuum or the vacancy, whatever.

If I were to be tapped for a cap-and-gown gig I would waive a big hunk of my three-figure speaking. However, I would stipulate that my appearance would be made entirely via video. And not a DVD of me speaking.

Nope. Instead, on the assembled twenty-somethings (and their financially-responsible parties: past and present tuition payers), I would confer a montage of scenes from films that I believe convey sound work-place advice, life instruction, and cautionary tales.

Who knows many of the grads and their guests might be relieved; even entertained.

Free of what might be thought of as the artificial intelligence of academia, these movie clips would register more vividly than most pompous podium-pronouncements from many a big-day dais. Alliterative tongue-twisting, yes. Thus the video clips.

For the thousands graduating from business-school programs, Id show Wall Street (1987), Tin Men (1987) and the recently-released bio-pic The Founder. And as pre-ceremony required reading, Id assign Arthur Millers All My Sons (1947).

In The Founder, viewers will be impressed with the behind-the-counter-at-the-grille innovations of the McDonald brothers, who choreographed burger-assembly. Theres the square-dance-like quick-step-marching-band staging, sequencing, and time trials, which are rehearsed for speed and efficiency on a chalked tennis court that serves as the mock-up for the synchronized assembly stations.

For the McDonald brothers, rectitude is its own reward. Not so for Ray Kroc, the salesman who wont take No for an answer as he promotes, schemes, and undermines. His mindset: If a competitor of mine was drowning, Id stick a hose in his mouth and turn on the water.

Theres something of Gordon Gekko in that portrayal of Ray Kroc. Gekko, a Wall Street corporate raider, who takes over souls on his way to taking over companies, is a seducer, a corrupter, a betrayer. He manipulates people so he can manipulate markets. He knows a Faustian bargain when he can engineer one. Money is the way to keep score; self-worth is measured by net worth. Value has nothing to do with values. Early on he must have had a scruple-ectomy.

Wall Street is well remembered for Gekkos oration at a stockholders meeting. At that forum, he justifies his engineering of a hostile takeover:

greed for lack of a better word is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all its forms has marked the upward surge of mankind.

The aluminum-siding salesmen of Tin Men buy into that creed, though at the huckster level where they take advantage of the gullibility of middle-class homeowners who they con into beautifying their modest facades. Shamelessly, they exploit, scam and defraud.

One hopes that the job-seeking graduates of 2017 will be able to resist offers to join any such schemes. And not succumb to cold-calling for investment hustlers or hawking for house-flippers, or plotting for spammers and phishers, or soliciting for bogus charities.

Maybe, the 1992 film version of David Mamets Pulitzer Prize play Glengarry Glen Ross is sufficiently vivid and chastening to demonstrate what desperation can lead to.

For Political Science majors, thered be excerpts from Atlas Shrugged (1957) and a full screening of On the Beach (1957).

Sixty years ago, reviewers described Atlas Shrugged as a fable, a thriller, a profound political parable, and a philosophical novel; part science fiction and polemical fantasy, part thesis and diatribe dissertation (running to almost 1,200 pages); a philosophical and psychological detective story; an allegory of self-interest and a catechism for entrepreneurial free enterprise.

There would seem to be a fair amount of currency to the work, which declares government and politicians to be the enemy of talent, innovation, and, thus, the true good. The work condemns social-consciousness and do-goodism.

Ayn Rand described professors as thought-cripplers, the soft, safe assassins of college classrooms.

In its review, The New York Herald Tribune ventured that a thorough comprehension of the novels massive reaches would be roughly the equivalent to mastering a Ph.D.s knowledge in the separate fields of ethics, economics, political science, physics, and psychology. I would add Religious Studies and Comparative Religions, for Atlas Shrugged is the gospel according to Ayn Rand.

Of special and frightening relevance is Nevil Shutes On the Beach. The 1957 film adaptation is haunting, sobering, as it depicts Earth as doomed, not by CGI extraterrestrials, but by Earthlings nuclear warhead bravado and stupidity. More science than fiction, misunderstandings, failures to communicate, and folly on a galactic scale have made Earth an incomprehensibly vast morgue.

On Earth, there is no future, there is no reprieve. Humankind is done for as radioactivity makes its way from the wholly annihilated Northern Hemisphere down to the southernmost parts of the Southern Hemisphere. The story is a sermon without pulpit sermonizing. Its down-to-earth, literally.

This elegiac chronicle of ultimate extinction is a literary and cinematic crusade for sanity in what was, even then, sixty years ago, a dangerously armed-up world.

International Relations majors would have to contemplate Lost Horizon (1937), along with a full screening of On the Beach (1957).

For those burped from Communications programs hoping to make their mark in Public Relations or Journalism Id show all 96 minutes of Sweet Smell of Success (1957).

The antecedents (arguably, the precedents) for todays celebrity news tabloids and TV programs were the Times Square, Broadway gossip columnists of the 1950s, who relied on the scheming press-publicity agents who cross-pollinated the rags with titillations, smears, and scandal.

Sweet Smell of Success takes viewers to smoke-filled nightclubs and Broadway back alleys, where the odious and sordid twists and turns of faked news stories (1950s style) are fabricated and fed. The malice aforethought and intentional infliction of emotional distress are purveyed by a megalomaniac gossip columnist; having been served up by a contemptible publicist, who will do just about anything for a few lines of ink in the formers regrettably influential column.

With a jazzy nighttime pace, the film lets us in on the connivings that can make or destroy a reputation, and a career. In its June 28, 1957 review of the film, The New York Herald Tribune held that the slimy trade produced a world of the promise and the payoff, the threat and the reprisal.

The dialogue (screenplay by Clifford Odets and Ernest Lehman) is switch-blade edged:

The gossip columnist says the unscrupulous publicity agent is a cookie full of arsenic. When the publicity agent fails to manufacture a scandal for the gossip columnist, the latter condemns him: Youre dead, son. Get yourself buried.

The publicity agent squirms in his desperation as the columnists dog-collar turns into a noose.

Struggling to maintain some freedom, the publicity agent can only respond that the columnists manipulations have more twists than a barrel of pretzels.

Cynically, the columnist cautions, Dont remove the gangplank, you may want to get back on board. He adds, Youre in jail. Youre a prisoner of your own fears, your own greed and ambition.

That what-it-takes-to-succeed scenario is a capstone lesson for this years grads to contemplate, perhaps along with the aphorisms and maxims of Dale Carnegies How to Win Friends and Influence People.

That self-help compendium of ingratiation tactics, and its gospel of playing to a colleagues ego or a rivals vanity, has been influencing since 1937. There are indeed sound commonsense advisories, delivered through anecdotes, and still more anecdotes.

With grudging admiration, Psychology and Sociology majors might be inclined to retitle the work How to Flatter, Beguile, and Persuade so that Opponents Adopt Your Views as Their Own, Without Arousing Rancor or Resentment.

For those headed to the occult worlds of Computer Science and Information Technology, and to the sensitive world of Human Resources, Id screen Desk Set (1957) which celebrates the triumphant facilities and resourcefulness of human minds, which best an electronic brains capacities and tolerances. The films lightly contentious banter is made all the more interesting by Katharine Hepburns deft parrying and jousting with Spencer Tracy.

Tracy is a methods engineer hes the updated version of an efficiency expert, and the forerunner of the IT pro. Hes bent on modernizing the entire company.

Hepburn, the heroic foil, is incomparably capable. She has a photographic memory, can effortlessly recite stanza after stanza of long poems, and has an uncanny ability to make word and mathematical associations that confound (but also astound and impress) the methods engineer. Her intelligence is artful, not artificial.

The New York Herald Tribune film review (May 16, 1957) observed that Hepburns head of research-and-reference disarmed the methods engineer with feats of memory and thrusts of wit.

The plays set and the films scenery, themselves, tell a story. Calls are made from bulky black phones and connect with operator-assistance. The researchers take messages with sharpened yellow pencils. They are flanked by a duplex of floor-to-ceiling bookcases.

The electronic brain (approved by the all-male law department, executive suite, and board of directors) is a ginormous steel gray encasement, whose flashing lights signal the digesting of punch cards. The operators console (also gray steel) is the size of church organ in a mega parish. Its dials, switches, levers, buttons, and keys would confound a premier organist. Its mission: improve the work-man-hour relationship and thus, annually, save 6,240 man hours in the all-female research-and-reference department.

The methods engineer offers that maybe just maybe people are a little bit outmoded.

The head of research-and-reference quips, Yes, I wouldnt be a bit surprised if they stopped making them.

Well, okay, Desk Set is an artifact. Ill strike it from the syllabus, even as the film, along with the play on which its based, were of their time: women occupied subordinate (though crucial roles) in the research-and-reference department of the International Broadcasting Corporation. In the film, they are equally crucial to the Federal Broadcasting Company.

Somewhat true to the time, the women are concerned with shopping (for dress-up dresses); with being asked to a country club dance; and with becoming wives. Those occupations aside, they are intelligent, articulate highly-resourceful researchers, who care about true facts and accuracy. They take their job functions seriously, and are to be prized way beyond what they are paid. In their efforts to stave off obsolescence, they rise to research challenges. The moral which is timely and topical If you cant join em, beat em.

This beat em thinking is put forward with seriousness (no laughing matter) in Atlas Shrugged. Dagny Taggart, who at Taggart Transcontinental Railroad is todays equivalent of the strong-minded and strong-willed Chief Operating Officer. Plus (Rands calculating dividend), shes depicted as attractive.

And for the truly strong-willed those who thought Theatre Arts and Fine Arts would be worth student-debt obligations I would skip the thoroughly enjoyable La La Land, and have these hopefuls view Sunday in the Park with George, which was recently reprised on Broadway.

The story and its lyrics are thought-provoking; they are about priorities and choices; trade-offs and fulfillment; dedication, disappointments and regrets. They tell of obsessions and obsessiveness, which put the creation of artwork above (and to the exclusion of) a different kind of gratification: a meaningful relationship with another person, as the prime example.

Stephen Sondheims lyrics and James Lapines book came about as a result of a kind of obsession, which wound up being rewarded with the 1985 Pulitzer Prize for Drama. The productions which have audiences inspect their own efforts to take in the sweet smell of success were acclaimed with Tony Awards, Drama Desk Awards, and Olivier Awards.

Sunday in the Park with George is cross-disciplinary, multi-disciplinary. The story moves from the struggles of a painter in 1884 (theres no life in his life) to the struggles, in 1984, of the discouraged creator of what he hoped would be an art-museum-worthy light-projection-installation. The latter realizes that to make his art, in his times, he must be a businessman, a salesman, a marketer, a fundraiser, a publicity agent for himself, a politician, a promoter, a relationship manager, a hustler someone who can win over well-placed well-heeled potential patrons while, at the same time, being able to favorably influence art critics and museum directors.

Moving, sad, portending in its way, its lyrics and dialogue would leave graduates and their tuition-payers with more echoings than most graduation speeches. The book and the lyrics sound many notes of wisdom, and caution and hope.

a blank page or canvas so many possibilities.

More:

Addressing Commencement: a valedictory via videos, for graduation-day takeaways - Huffington post (press release) (blog)

LISTEN TO TLRS LATEST PODCAST:

By Caleb Coggeshall

The libertarian movement is still in need of converts, no doubt. However, some who try to spread the message might not always the most qualified to do so. Libertarians themselves can mess the process up and inadvertently turn people away. There are certain donts for the liberty movement and its crucial to keep a few of them in mind.

Note: I am probably as guilty as any fellow libertarian of committing a few of these transgressions.

This person believes that if you take one step out of line, you arent a true liberty lover. Dont like Murray Rothbard? Youre not a real libertarian.

You dont believe that we should completely do away with drivers licenses? Then you dont know what the liberty movement is about.

The purist can also have a knack for deterring potential newcomers, in that they immediately go straight to recommending daunting works such as The Fountainheador Atlas Shrugged.

Unfortunately, this is the one libertarian that sometimes gets the most attention in our society. They advocate legalizing just about every drug under the sun, but shrug their shoulders when asked about the market, individualism, self defense and healthcare. This guy is the reason that many libertarians are falsely accused of just being a bunch of potheads.

I first became familiar with this term when I was in college and one of my classmates described himself as such. This was before I made the move to the liberty movement myself, but even then I remember thinking: What exactly is that? Isnt there just libertarian? Left libertarians muddy the waters when it comes to the freedom movement: theyre pro-gun, to an extent. Theyre pro-market, to an extent. Theyre anti-government, to an extent. Depending on who you talk to, Gary Johnson could be considered as such a person (though I personally think hes just a progressive republican). The man doesnt know how to explain the libertarian movement because he doesnt know what it truly is. He knows it has something to do with freedom (or something like that) and legalizing marijuana.He has managed to confuse people rather than convert them.

When people think of this particular dude, they probably think of V for Vendetta: blowing up government buildings, hacking into the pro-government news channels and murdering politicians. Now these are extreme examples, of course, but nevertheless, there are those in the modern freedom campaign that believe all government programs should immediately be defunded and done away with. And right after that they want the entire government abolished. Now these are not all necessarily bad wishes, the problem is that the burn-it-down person thinks it will all happen overnight. Progressivism took a century or so to take complete hold of our government and society, it will probably take more than one year to eradicate it.

The reason I write this list is because I have experienced infighting within liberty oriented groups and the constant squabbling has done nothing to promote freedom. Sometimes individuals get into petty spats, trying to see who is the more libertarian. People can become so preoccupied with the details that they forget its all about a simple concept: self-governance.

ayn randGary Johnsonleft libertarianismlibertarianismV for Vendetta

Follow this link:

Don't Be THAT Libertarian: How Certain Strains Muddy the Message - The Libertarian Republic

OSHKOSH Ben Ganther isnt Jewish.

But no one would blame you for driving past his familys business Ganther Construction and assuming he is.

On the top of a flag pole on the sprawling grounds of the construction and architecture firm just below Old Glory itself waves an Israeli flag.

The flag is just one of several notable items adorning the grounds of the 117-year old business things that give you a window into the worldview of Ganther, the companys president.

Seated next to the flagpole is a gleaming statue of the Greek God Atlas an homage to Ayn Rands classic novel Atlas Shrugged.

Ben Ganther

Ganthers friend, Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, who lives in Oshkosh when he is not in Washington, D.C., paid for the base of the statue, which reads Fight to Be Free.

A few steps away, towards the entrance of the business, is a granite slab etched with the Prayer of St. Francis.

The Atlas Shrugged statue might give motorists a look into Ganthers political philosophy the prayer a window on his Catholic faith but the Israeli flag is meant to make the many Jews whoGanther says he knows fully aware that he stands with them and the state of Israel.

We have a lot of Jewish clients. I put the flag up to honor them and support Israel. I consider myself a Catholic Zionist, he said.

Ganther has Jewish business clients here in the U.S. but also in Israel. Hes been to the country 13 times.

The business website features an Israeli flag that acts as a digital toggle switch that can translate the site into Hebrew.

Ganther supports a single-state solution to the troubles in Israel and believes that the U.S. Embassy should be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

The businessman also belongs to the Friends of the Israeli Defense Force, through which he has donated money to put an Israeli soldier through college, and to create a USO-type building for Israeli troops.

Hes taken his daughters on tours of the country and to study at the celebrated Batsheva Dance Company, and his best friend lives in Bat Yam.

A devout Catholic, Ganther credits his faith for fostering his affection for the Holy Land.

In Genesis, God is talking to Abraham, and says you are my people, and I am your God. (In that chapter) God himself is telling everyone they should be friendly to the Jewish people, Ganther said.

He also feels for his friends in Israel and the horrors they have witnessed, he said

There is an Israeli phrase about dancing at two weddings, (You cant dance at two weddings), but I wear a Friends of the IDF band on my wrist and in my pocket I keep a finger rosary, Ganther said. Israel needs all the friends it can get.

See the original post:

Not Jewish, but flying an Israeli flag in Oshkosh - The Wisconsin Jewish Chronicle

Wheres the key, and how far can we throw it?

Suspects in a North Philadelphia neighborhood have been arrested after holding a 13-year-old girl against her will and prostituting her to over a dozen perverts over a two day period.

According to Fox 29 - Philadelphia:

According to police, Fantasia Gale and the others lured the teenager in with promises of a better life, but within hours she was being offered up to paying customers through an online advertisement.

Police say she was driven from house-to-house in two cars now at the police impound lot.

Since I cant stand people that do things like this, the following are the names of the sex traffickers, which is too polite a term for these wastes of oxygen:

You would think the one female in the group might have felt some remorse about pimping out a child, but Gale was the one who posted the online ad offering up the girls services.

Typically, the city of Philadelphia charges people in cases like this (over 100 since last July) with trafficking, conspiracy, rape and sexual assault.

I would say that these piles of excrement should get the book thrown at them, but even Atlas Shrugged isntbig enough to justify the punishment these people should face.

If you have any information regarding the fifth suspects (Romero) whereabouts, please contact the Philadelphia Police Department.

For video of the story, watch below:

Thank you for supporting MRCTV! As a tax-deductible, charitable organization, we rely on the support of our readers to keep us running!Keep MRCTV going with your gift here!

See more here:

13-Year-Old Girl Sold for Sex Over a Dozen Times in Two-Day Period - MRCTV (blog)

From the time of its announcement, Absolutely Anything sounded like a comedy fans wet dream. Its a new feature from Monty Pythons Terry Jones (who directed their Life of Brian and Meaning of Life, and co-directed Holy Grail), starring present-day Python torch carriers Simon Pegg and Eddie Izzard, plus vocal performances by Jones and his fellow surviving Pythons John Cleese, Eric Idle, Michael Palin, and Terry Gilliam, and Robin Williams in his final (off)screen performance. (He recorded his dialogue a mere three weeks before his death in 2014). It began rolling into theaters in Europe and Asia in August of last year, but has been weirdly MIA from American screens.

Thatll change this month. Deadline reports Atlas Distribution Co., a boutique distributor best known for (gulp) the Atlas Shrugged movies, will release Absolutely Anything in U.S. theaters on May 12. It is the first non-documentary film reunion for the Python crew since the groups final movie, The Meaning of Life, back in 1983 (though in recent years, theyve appeared together on stage and at film festivals); it will also likely be the last for this iteration of the group, as Jones announced shortly after the films British release that hes been diagnosed with a rare form of dementia.

So with all that talent and legacy in play, why has it taken Absolutely Anything so long to reach our shores? It could be the brutal reviews it received elsewhere; The Guardians Peter Bradshaw called it just depressing, a sub-Douglas Adams sci-fi comedy which looks like mediocre kids TV with a dismal script and cheapncheerless production values, and Varietys Peter Debruge noted, Its devastating to think how far Jones has fallen in the four decades since Holy Grail, in which he got more laughs banging a few coconuts together than he musters from his entire movie. Still, whore we kidding, its a Monty Python reunion with Simon Pegg and Robin Williams Im gonna see it anyway.

Heres the trailer:

See more here:

The Monty Python Reunion Movie with Robin Williams's Final Performance Has a US Release Date - Flavorwire

"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," President John F. Kennedy declared in an inspiring 1961 inaugural address. Many Americans stamped this challenge on their hearts. Patriotic citizens swore by it when they applied for the Peace Corps.

Others swore at this challenge to share our national prosperity, such as free-market advocate Ayn Rand. Siding with her, GOP economist Milton Friedman in the first sentence of his book, "Capitalism and Freedom," slammed Kennedy. Rand and Friedman warned that such an ethic of benevolent lending and sharing pushed America towards socialism. Rand went so far as to write an essay in which she linked Kennedy's and Hitler's speeches, which she thought led citizens to sell their souls to state-sponsored Peace Corps types of service.

Many 1960s conservatives praised Rand. They treated her book, "Atlas Shrugged" (1957) as a secular Bible. Still widely read today, this best-seller pits free-market capitalism against Russian communism.

Rand hated communism and Christianity because both weakened self-reliance. Russian socialism practices political slavery in which each citizen's self is sacrificed for what the government demands. Rand accused Jesus and Roman Catholic President John F. Kennedy of the same blunder. They sacrificed a firm reliance on self to serve the needs of others, she griped.

"I want to be known as the greatest champion of reason and the greatest enemy of religion," Rand asserted at the end of her first entry in a 1934 journal of philosophical musings.

Most GOP conservatives in the 1960s looked the other way when she attacked Christianity. Embracing her free-market capitalism, conservatives put up with Rand's anti-religion diatribes.

"Like Nietzsche, Rand intended to challenge Christianity," reports biographer Jennifer Burns. "She shared the philosopher's belief that Christian ethics were destructive to self-hood, making life 'flat, gray, empty, lacking all beauty, all fire, all enthusiasm, all meaning, all creative urge.' She also had a more specific critique, writing that Christianity 'is the best kindergarten of communism possible.'" Rand treated Christianity as the seedbed in which Communism grew.

Christianity teaches that devotion to God is derived from placing communal good before self. This is the duty Christians practice. Conservatives opted to follow Rand rather than Jesus.

"Christianity taught believers to put others before self, an ethical mandate that matched the collective emphasis of the group over the individual. Thus, a new system of individualist, non-Christian ethics was needed to prevent the triumph of Communism" (Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right, pp. 42-43, 2009). Because Christianity replaced bloated self with humble service toward others, Rand rejected it.

Her fingerprints are all over the American Health Care Act Trump withdrew, along with its updated versions. Who are medical insurance winners? Citizens who work hard, benefit from free-market economics and earn enough to pay premiums. Why aren't the wealthy asked to pay more, so those of less financial means are able to get health care?

Who are the losers? Older Americans who must pay higher premiums, others cut down by deteriorating health and still more poor citizens whose Medicaid benefits are slashed.

Who idolizes Ayn Rand? Her philosophy shaped House Speaker Paul Ryan in his youth. He ignores the fact that his Roman Catholic faith contradicts Rand's brand of philosophy she called Objectivism.

Because the self is most important for Rand, citizens must take care of themselves through individual effort that brings financial rewards. House Speaker Ryan promotes Trumpcare health policies, sounding like the title of Rand's second non-fiction book, "The Virtue of Selfishness." She warns against "the draining, exploitation and destruction of those who are able to pay the costs of maintaining a civilized society, in favor of those who are unable or unwilling to pay the cost of maintaining their own existence." Let the little guy go without health care if the state provides it, is Rand's bias.

Let's unpack this selfish view. Hangers-on stay on the government's dole, but self-made citizens who utilize free-enterprise pay their own way. Health care goes to those who help themselves.

Paul Ryan and born-again GOP colleagues need to read the Bible as if for the first time. The Gospel challenges Christians to help vulnerable people. Jesus washed his disciples' feet prior to his crucifixion. He instructed them to help the weak, the disabled, the elderly and the needy. "If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash another's feet," taught Jesus (John 13:14).

As they re-design Trumpcare, House Speaker Ryan and his Christian friends would benefit from a "come to Jesus" conversion. Health care is more than a privilege the wealthy afford.

"Health care may not be a human right," concludes George W. Bush's speech writer David Frum in the March 24, 2017 issue of Atlantic magazine, "but the lack of universal health coverage in a wealthy democracy is a severe, unjustifiable and unnecessary human wrong."

Retreat from Rand and Ryan. Rivet your sight on Jesus. Ask what you can do for others.

The Reverend Dr. Jack R. Van Ens is a Presbyterian minister who heads the nonprofit, tax exempt Creative Growth Ministries, (http://www.thelivinghistory.com), which enhances Christian worship through dynamic storytelling and dramatic presentations aimed to make God's history come alive.

Read more here:

Who wrote the book on Trumpcare? - Vail Daily News