nvdaily.com link to home page

Traffic | Weather | Mobile Edition
Archives | Subscribe

Opinion arrow Letters to the Editor

| 0 | 86 Comments

Romney hands over intellectual leader job to Ryan


Editor:

Mark my word, if and when these preachers get a hold of the party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. The government won't work without it. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them." Those were the all too prescient words of Barry Goldwater before he passed away in 1998.

If one takes a look beyond the etch-a-sketch Mitt Romney to his pick for vice president and the Republican platform, one can easily see just how alarmingly prescient his concerns were.

Romney has all but handed over the job of intellectual leader of the Republican party to Paul Ryan, who, like his hero Ayn Rand, views the government as the enemy not the solution. Unfortunately, this puerile vision has become the operating philosophy of the Republican party. The sad part is that Ryan's basic philosophy on how government works has been tried and proved a failure. His budget calls for drastic cuts in taxes for the rich by eliminating taxes on capital gains. The result would be that millionaires like Romney would have a tax rate of less than 1 percent. This is supply side economics, the theory that cutting taxes produces jobs. Reagan tried it in 1980 resulting in a huge hole in the deficit that forced him to enact the largest proportional tax increases in American history. It didn't work for George W. Bush either. By contrast, Clinton raised taxes and we had the largest sustained economic boom in the nation's history.

On social issues, he is in complete agreement with the religious right by voting to defund Planed Parenthood, and co-sponsoring a fetal personhood amendment that would outlaw all abortions and most forms of contraceptives.

Ryan's Medicare proposal shows his utter lack of compassion for the elderly by forcing them to make difficult market choices in the most complicated, opaque markets around. His Medicaid proposal would eviscerate long-term care for the poor.

This from Joe Klein, writing in Time, "These policies are a revision to a more brutal, less humane state of nature. It is an 'idea' whose time has gone."


Gene Rigelon, Front Royal


86 Comments



Romney's recent comments about the (so-called) 47% who will vote for Obama anyway should alert everyone to the true character of this man: his condescending remarks clearly show how he regards many Americans who are struggling to survive. This rich man is not only out of touch, he's scary!

Romney/Ryan and the Republican Party are all about money, power, control, and greed. More, more, more for the rich man and the corporations who own them. If these Republicans make it to the White House; they may make the George Bush years look like the "golden age".

WE MUST NOT LET THAT HAPPEN.

Amen, Diana, AMEN!

In 1964, I voted for Barry Goldwater. I was unaffiliated with any national political party.

Today, I still regard myself as an Independent, widely touted to be the deciding factor of the upcoming election for President. But I also believe other minority groups such as women, Latinos, Blacks, and the economically disadvantaged are equally important factors. The Republican Party seems to be bending over backwards to disenfranchise all of the minority groups I mentioned.

Romney and the religious fanatic far right wing of the GOP Tea Party who want to mess with my Social Security (I paid into the plan for over 50 years) and my Medicare health insurance (I pay $109 / month automatically deducted from my Social Security check) have convinced me my vote in November will best serve my best interests and America by voting for the Democrat candidates at the national, state, and local levels.

Once again Mr. Rigelon states his opinions a priori. Ayn Rand never promoted this type of government. What she did promote was Laissez-faire capitalism, which is an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from tariffs, government subsidies, and enforced monopolies, with only enough government regulations sufficient to protect property rights against theft and aggression. Mr. Rigelon's futile attempt at understanding objectivism, has only exposed him for the intellectual fraud he purveys himself to be with his half-cocked opinions of other philosophies. Let us get the facts straight shall we? Paul Ryan may have brought the philosophy of Ayn Rand into the Republican party, but they ignore the fundamental principles, i.e. personal and economic freedom. Paul Ryan even said, “Don’t give me Ayn Rand,” to the National Review. “Give me Thomas Aquinas.” Do you even read the news?

Ayn Rand for all her noise went broke fighting cancer and resorted to Social Security and Medicare before her death. Tends to make all her noise complete and utter BS from someone who never had to deal with real life, huh?

btw, nice to meet you William, another fellow was quoting National Review round here, but his past spiels caught up with him. Maybe you two know each other...

People are forced to pay into SS and Medicare......why can't someone have it back? That is right, it should have gone to less fortunate people on welfare. Here is a good read for you....I think you are like Mr. Rigelon....uninformed.

http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2011/10/lying-about-ayn-rand-and-social.html

Seems like you and Fuddy Duddy are pretty close......word around town is you both are a bunch of drama queens with nothing to do but sit on the internet all day and cause trouble. Specifically, you call people out when they do not their research, but here is a prime example of your inadeptness. You barked up the wrong tree this time.....go back under the porch.

Katybug - "Ayn Rand for all her noise went broke fighting cancer and resorted to Social Security and Medicare before her death."

Rand when she was young and healthy, she did not need government help; however, when she needed help, she did not hesitate to take advantage. That in itself makes her ENTIRE life a mockery!

The blogger who got and posted her FOI requests on Ayn's hypocrisy...

http://www.patiastephens.com/2011/01/27/ideas-matter-more-on-ayn-rand/

Darn the U.S. Government for keeping records ad allowing the public to have them. Must of sucked for poor Ayn to be in the 47%.

No surprise Paul Ryan would proclaim a preference for Thomas Aquinas over Ayn Rand -- a religious fanatic over a drug addled wench -- clearly a choice between the lesser of two evils.

"I am a man of one book." THOMAS AQUINAS

Aquinas half believed in astrology, and was convinced that the fully formed nucleus (not that he would have known the word as we do) of a human being was contained inside each individual sperm.

Thomas Aquinas once wrote a document on the Trinity and, modestly regarding it as one of his more finely polished efforts, laid it on the altar at Notre Dame so that god himself could scrutinize the work and perhaps favor "the Angelic doctor" with an opinion. (Aquinas here committed the same mistake as those who made nuns in convents cover their baths with canvas during ablutions: it was felt that god's gaze would be deflected from the undraped female forms by such a modest device, but forgotten that he could supposedly "see" anything, anywhere, at any time by virtue of his omniscience and omnipresence, and further forgotten that he could undoubtedly "see" through the walls and ceilings of the nunnery before being baffled by the canvas shield. One supposes that the nuns were actually being prevented from peering at their own bodies, or rather at one another's.) However that may be, Aquinas later found that god indeed had given his treatise a good review -- he being the only author ever to have claimed this distinction -- and was discovered by awed monks and novices to be blissfully levitating around the interior of the cathedral. Rest assured that we have eyewitnesses for this event.

Now, what does Rush Limbaugh see in Ayn Rand? A prophetess? If it spills over Limbaughs lips, it must be trash.

"Ayn Rand is one of America's great mysteries. She was an amphetamine-addicted author of sub-Dan Brown potboilers, who in her spare time wrote lavish torrents of praise for serial killers and the Bernie Madoff-style embezzlers of her day. She opposed democracy on the grounds that "the masses"—her readers—were "lice" and "parasites" who scarcely deserved to live. Yet she remains one of the most popular writers in the United States, still selling 800,000 books a year from beyond the grave. She regularly tops any list of books that Americans say have most influenced them. Since the great crash of 2008, her writing has had another Benzedrine rush, as Rush Limbaugh hails her as a prophetess. With her assertions that government is "evil" and selfishness is "the only virtue," she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters. So how did this little Russian bomb of pure immorality in a black wig become an American icon?"
Reference:
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2009/11/how_ayn_rand_became_an_american_icon.html

For a more scholarly treatise of Ayn Rand, you may consult Stanford University's Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/

Jennifer Burns' Goddess of the Market and Anne C. Heller's Ayn Rand and the World She Made, are two durable biographies that go into eyebrow-raising detail about Ayn Rands drug abuse (amphetamine), lax personal hygiene, bouts with depression, Stalinist-like intolerance of dissent, and pathetic and manipulative sexual behavior.

"The mad philosopher Ayn Rand, a woman who in real life did take and keep a number of younger male disciples, running them ragged until an advanced stage of the game. She wasn't as old as she felt... by the time she had finished she was as old as they felt." The Evening Standard, 8/24/99

"Nathaniel Branden, it turned out, had been having a torrential affair with Rand, of which both their spouses knew and approved. But then Rand discovered that Branden was having yet another sizzling relationship with a much younger woman. In an epic fury, she covered Branden's face with weals, excommunicated him from the cult, and put a twenty-year curse on his penis." Vanity Fair, December 2000


Just to finish it off completely, Paul Ryan's love fest speech to Ayn Rand complete with audio file:

http://www.atlassociety.org/ele/blog/2012/04/30/paul-ryan-and-ayn-rands-ideas-hot-seat-again

And for anyone more interested in Ryan's flip-flop cover my bases lie about giving him Thomas Aquinas past TGFMAA's information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas

I LOVE the age of information!!

This whole Romney to Ayn Rand has got me confused as heck. I guess its another one of them nights here. I guess the election is approaching, thus gettting me confused as heck.

Nothing is so infectious as example. - Francois de La Rochefoucauld


Looked into who the 47% really was and I have a question. Was Romney just giving his "private" audience what it wanted to hear(like most of them will do)? Or is he just that stupid? Either way he sure does look stupid today.

It was inconclusive that she ever got it. What is your point? Oh you have none....just like the rest of your post on here.

Oh yea, you really put the nail in the coffin with that one. All of your post are copy/paste from the internet, and have proved absolutely nothing. Let alone hearing any intelligible comments or reasons from you to support your weak-minded opinions. Let Mr. Rigelon defend his own words. Your name should read TROLL.......

Ayn Rand's Atheist philosophy bumps heads against the "we must use government to institute religious law" of the extreme* right. Up until his VP position one Mr. Paul Ryan touted her wares like the traveling vacuum salesman, even to the point of "heavily stressing" to his office workers to read her works and giving said works as holiday gifts. Noting as well her lifelong criticisms of the very programs she depended on once she ran face first into the brick wall of reality in her own life. Of course, once picked as VP Ryan has tried to distance himself from his idol worship publicly, thus his invocation of the Saint.

The point? William* was trying to sidestep Ryan's well documented idol worship and pretend it has no bearing on the train of thought going on withing the Republican party atm.

Actually you are very mistaken, and I can speak for myself thank you. You just need to be able to understand. The Republicans have a distorted epistemology, so does Mr. Rigelon, and apparently you. That is the point. And to be honest, a lot of people around here do. What train of though could possibly occur if you do not understand that Philosophy? How could anyone bring anything worth of value from ANY philosophy they fail to understand to a certain cause? You still have made no sense with anything you have posted. You flame me, then copy/paste a bunch of articles, and then to top it off, you try to win an argument by setting up a straw-man. If this is the intellectual elite of Front Royal, the world is in trouble.


Dear William Polhamus,
What are the chances you and Dan Flathers are clones, or perhaps one and the same? Your sentence composition, rhetorical, rebuttal, and insult styles are identical.

For anger management assistance, I suggest both of you should consult with Roy A. Stokes, our resident anger cleansing guru extraordinaire. He's got what you need... even better if you actually crave it. I hope you are not afraid of heights or allergic to petroleum jelly. The UFO ride should be fun if you can relax and enjoy the exploratory probing. Somehow, I know you will.

ROFLMAO

That is called Reason. Try it sometime. Trolls, taking up for other Trolls, taking up for other, well Trolls. WOW! Do you go to the Baptist Church with @Katybug? Your comparison of my grammatical and debating styles to other people, only shows that you have failed to think of anything original to say. You silly irrational people. When are you going to learn?

Yeah, copy and paste is just awful! ESPECIALLY when you can prove someone wrong with the words coming right out of someones mouth. In this case Ryan's.

I'll give you this, *NO* I haven't personally read Rand. (loud and clear enough?) In this wonderful age of technology I can go online and view her television appearances and read enough about her to know that I have zero interest in her view of the world. Her position in pre-death makes that assumption complete. If Paul Ryan wrote a book about what they call "entitlements" I wouldn't be interested either knowing he put himself through college off his fathers social security. I don't like hypocrisy. I do my best not to live that way in my own life. I try to see and understand situations even though I haven't personally dealt with them. I try to account for others points of views and only get frustrated with people that only see the world in their own version of black and white.

No, I'm not an "intellectual elitist" thank God, I'd probably be pretty darn boring. But I still got to piss you off enough simply by providing more factual information to have you attack me personally. The biggest signal of a failing argument one can give is to stop defending ones point and attack the opposition personally. Cheers ;)

Mysticism can be a bad thing for the mind. Look at all the trouble it has brought you now. But that is not what matters here. What this is about to you is getting the better of someone....you have been caught in your own snare, and the funny part is you don't even realize it! Now that is hypocrisy at it's finest. You started out your conversation with me the very way you condemn. Can't you think of anything on your own? Takes a lot more than some stay at home mom on P90X to piss me off. And for the record, you are boring, trite, and insignificant. I reserve the right to have reasoned conversations with people who can handle being an individual. You are a hippocrite. You purvey yourself out to be some intelligent person, but it is really intellectual impotence that is your downfall. I don't need to defend myself against irrational people like you, you take care of that for me. Besides, I needed some entertainment for the evening.

WP: "Do you even read the news?"

Of course he reads the news, Mr. Polhamus, as all concerned citizens are doing at this critical time in our history. Do YOU read the news? U.S. bishops led by Cardinal Timothy Dolan have described Ryan's budget as unjustified and wrong. Ryan's budget recommendations hardly seem to be in accordance with Catholic social justice standards. For example, Ryan recommended cuts and restrictions to Medicaid would hurt the poor, the chronically ill and the disabled. These cuts would also devastate families of the middle class who, after spending down nearly all of their assets, must then rely on Medicaid to pay for nursing home care.

Rand has been Ryan's role model until this year...

http://thecommanderguy.blogspot.com/2012/05/evolution-of-paul-ryans-philosophy.html

"Paul can still quote every verse out of Ayn Rand," his brother Tobin said in a 2009 interview.

YESTERDAY...

"I grew up on Ayn Rand," Ryan said at a Washington, D.C., gathering seven years ago honoring Rand. "The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand."

"I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are and what my beliefs are. It's inspired me so much that it's required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff." –Paul Ryan in a 2005 speech to a group of Rand devotees called the Atlas Society

TODAY...

"I reject her [Ayn Rand's] philosophy. It's an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview. If somebody is going to try to paste a person's view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas. Don't give me Ayn Rand." –Paul Ryan, National Review interview, April 2012

TOMORROW????

Mr. Polhamus, searching 'freestudent" source, funding, copyright, etc., found nothing So please tell me how I can verify that it is NOT just another "disinformation" site? If you want to quote an established liberal site, try this one.

"However, it was revealed in the recent "Oral History of Ayn Rand" by Scott McConnell (founder of the media department at the Ayn Rand Institute) that in the end Ayn was a vip-dipper as well. An interview with Evva Pryror, a social worker and consultant to Miss Rand's law firm of Ernst, Cane, Gitlin and Winick verified that on Miss Rand's behalf she secured Rand's Social Security and Medicare payments which Ayn received under the name of Ann O'Connor (husband Frank O'Connor).

"As Pryor said, "Doctors cost a lot more money than books earn and she could be totally wiped out" without the aid of these two government programs. Ayn took the bail out even though Ayn "despised government interference and felt that people should and could live independently... She didn't feel that an individual should take help."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ford/ayn-rand-and-the-vip-dipe_b_792184.html

Katybug: "traveling vacuum salesman"...Ryan? Great analogy...only when he dumps the dirt on your carpet, it sticks.


Dear William Polhamus,
At the Mensa meetings, are you the one telling fart jokes?
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
Are you the "Crazy Uncle" no one wants to see at Thanksgiving dinner?
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
Does modesty prevent you from telling the world just how great you really are?
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
Is that your picture in the dictionary right next to "megalomania"? No, wait, it's in there a second time, right next to "a$$hole".
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
All of the above was strangely arousing in a weird man-love kind of way. Would you be so kind and touch your toes while I snap another picture if I promise posterity will remember you this way always?
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
There is a petition circulating to name the new Front Royal Sewage Treatment Plant in your honor. Can I have your autograph?
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
All is not well in conservative land.... just like we planned.
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
You're slipping. And as you know very well, as in dogsledding, if you're not the lead dog, the view never changes.
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
Are you always first in line for free prostate exams?
ROFLMAO

Dear William Polhamus,
I speak the truth (usually). I enjoy getting in the face of pompous a$$holes and proselytizing Tea Party ignoramuses.

Do you respect those who speak truth to power? In this case it means you are ignorant, bald, deceptive, and overpaid.

Do you respect me yet, or should I keep going?

ROFLMAO


ROFLMAO you are really over the top on this one! Does anyone hear your point of view after this kind of language? What's with these personal attacks? You are making a jackass out of yourself, anonymously of course.

You do nothing to help convince the misguided people that they are being bamboozled by the Republican Party.

Just started a new book: BOSS ROVE (Inside Karl Rove's Secret Kingdom of Power) by Craig Unger. Katybug, you'll want to read this one. Maybe ROFLMAO can put his energy into reading and commenting on the real issues in a civilized manner.


Dear Diana,
You are absolutely correct.... I do absolutely nothing to advance forum discussions towards a mutual exchange of on-topic opinions. Guilty as charged, your honor, and I throw myself on the mercy of public opinion... well, at least those with a sense of humor.

So, when someone like Flathers or Polhamus or Stokes has their argument fall apart and disrespectfully reverts to slander, I kindly return the favor, ridiculing tit-for-tat, and hoping those intellectually better equipped than I can convince the slanderer to change their slanderous ways. When you succeed, my work will be done here.

When I grow up, I wanna be just like you. Go get'um, Tiger.

I do not stand with Republicans or Democrats. I am an atheist myself. And I don't see any comments that even pertained to my argument that the Republicans have NOT adopted Objectivism as their Philosophy. First comment, "Ayn Rand for all her noise went broke fighting cancer and resorted to Social Security and Medicare before her death. Tends to make all her noise complete and utter BS from someone who never had to deal with real life, huh?" That is the straw-man and posting a bunch of links from the internet is not debating. If you look back through the thread, katybug was the first one to revert to slander. And you are accusing me of doing that? What a complete and utter joke! You are obviously upset that someone that is not in SASH would post something against Mr. Rigelon. You people did not even give him a chance to respond before attacking me. Humanist trash.....go make the world a better place.....find a tall building......then JUMP!

Sorry Diana, I guess I got Dilliam's feathers ruffled by pointing out his likeness. Then worsened the crime by providing direct links to information for those that may be interested in literally hearing for themselves Paul Ryan's own words on his hero.

I could post/debate/say anything I like but it really matters not if I cant prove it. There are some voters that will never take the time to inquire things on their own. Prime example being the Romney campaigns current distraction of using an edited clip from 14 years ago to claim that Obama wants to "redistribute wealth". How many voters are going to take the time to see the whole clip vs how many will keep telling others Romney's lie? It would be hilarious if you didn't see people everyday that that continued to pass along the MISinformation.

I really don't care if my copy and paste of information so that voters can check things out for themselves bothers those that just fall in line with "trust me". I will keep it up right until hopefully President Obama sends Mitt back the way he came on his wife's horse. Even knowing round these parts it is almost a lost cause, just the possibility of opening one voters eyes to a little more information makes it worth it.

And you do so very well not proving anything except your daftness. Do you get that from ROFLMAO? You pointed out nothing in regard to what my argument was, and you still continue to do so, none of you have. Your crime is not thinking.

Dear William Polhamus,
At the Mensa meetings, are you the one telling fart jokes? Yes, the one in which your mom had her mouth open.

Dear William Polhamus,
Are you the "Crazy Uncle" no one wants to see at Thanksgiving dinner? Of course!

Dear William Polhamus,
Does modesty prevent you from telling the world just how great you really are? The world sees my greatness, I just sit back and put out the vibe.

Dear William Polhamus,
Is that your picture in the dictionary right next to "megalomania"? No, wait, it's in there a second time, right next to "a$$hole". No that is actually Katybug and Diane.

Dear William Polhamus,
All of the above was strangely arousing in a weird man-love kind of way. Would you be so kind and touch your toes while I snap another picture if I promise posterity will remember you this way always? Do you know how I know your gay?

Dear William Polhamus,
There is a petition circulating to name the new Front Royal Sewage Treatment Plant in your honor. Can I have your autograph? As soon as your wife is done with my pen** cil.

Dear William Polhamus,
All is not well in conservative land.... just like we planned. I am not prejudice, I hate everybody.

Dear William Polhamus,
You're slipping. And as you know very well, as in dogsledding, if you're not the lead dog, the view never changes. I am always the car, or in this case the lead dog.

Dear William Polhamus,
Are you always first in line for free prostate exams? After your mom.

Dear William Polhamus,
I speak the truth (usually). You couldn't identify reality if if hit you in the face.

I enjoy getting in the face of pompous a$$holes and proselytizing Tea Party ignoramuses. Me too! We have one thing in common.

Do you respect those who speak truth to power? You come to me without why. Without power. Fail.

In this case it means you are ignorant, bald, deceptive, and overpaid. AAS-Liberal Arts, full head of brown hair, deceptively delicious, self-employed

SMB

DF: Is that your picture in the dictionary right next to "megalomania"? No, wait, it's in there a second time, right next to "a$$hole". No that is actually Katybug and Diane.

YOU, Polhamus, have no class at all!

No worries Jane, if anything or anyone was the epitome of hilarious its Dilliam. Just look at the metamorphosis. The only other laughter I had online was seeing Romney's somehow browner face when speaking with the Latino's ♥

I do however feel bad for Diane as she was only genuinely trying to soften the blows upon him.

To the strains of Kid Rock’s “Born Free,” Mitt Romney took to the stage at a minor league baseball park in Nashua, N.H., on Sept. 7 flanked by his wife, Ann, and delivered a standard — albeit slightly longer — version of his stump speech.

Romney says Obama “said by now [unemployment] would be down to 5.4 percent.” But Romney is referring to a speculative report issued at the beginning of Obama’s presidency containing projections — not promises. Those projections relied on prevailing economic models that quickly proved to have underestimated the depths of the recession at that time.
Romney says median family income dropped $5,000 under Obama. That’s an exaggeration. The true loss of inflation-adjusted, median family income was $3,290 during Obama’s first three years. Romney’s figure is based on a report that covers a period that includes 13 months before Obama took office.
Romney says health insurance premiums have gone up $2,500 under Obama. The actual increase has been $1,700, most of which was absorbed by employers and only a small part of which is attributable to the health care law.
Romney blames Obama for the cost of gasoline doubling, but that’s misleading. Gasoline prices happened to be unusually low when Obama took office due to the recession and financial crisis.
Romney cited a Chamber of Commerce survey as evidence that small-business owners are less likely to hire because of the health care law. But experts warn not to place too much weight on the survey because it was an opt-in, online survey.
Romney said Obama “cut Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare,” but these cuts in the future growth of spending prolong the life of the Medicare trust fund, stretching the program’s finances out longer than they would last otherwise.
Romney said the health care law is “killing jobs in small business.” But CBO says the law would have a “small” impact on jobs, mainly affecting the amount of labor workers choose to supply. Those getting subsidies, for instance, might work less hours since they’re paying less for health care.
Romney said he would bring health care costs down by “finally deal[ing] with malpractice costs,” but experts say medical malpractice doesn’t make much of a dent in health care spending.
There are other misleading claims — including bluster on the Keystone XL pipeline and a claim that Obama has lived up to a “promise” about “skyrocketing” energy costs. And, of course, no Romney speech is complete without a reference to Obama’s comment, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that,” a quote that has been lifted out of context.

Factcheck.org

The joke of Clarke County is the new BBQ place in white post, that has the anti Obama sign on its building!

No thanks, I'll still go down the road and buy overpriced bbq down the road from you!!!

Thanks Katybug, but I'm tougher than that. ;) This kind of idiotic name calling and nasty stuff is the only thing WP can come up with. We never get any information just immature reactions from people like him.

This individual gives us an example of the hate & ignorance that the Republican Party is counting on, but Romney/Ryan will not win anyway and I'll be sitting up all night (if need be) for those results.

Your information is interesting and you bring the source to us, but for some even that requires too much effort to click on and read. Anyway I LOVE your spirit. . . and I do get a chuckle out of it. Yesterday Kaine and Allen debated. Can't imagine why they ran it at that hour but I was able to catch it. Kaine won that debate hands down and it will run again on Sunday at noon, channel 4.

You people are remedial. I make a comment. No one can counter my argument, I point that out, and they still avoid the argument. Assume that I am from a certain political party, which I am not. The only person who said anything valuable was @ThankGodForMakingMeAnAtheist. You people like to hear yourselves talk.....not surprising considering the locale.

Well the seniors at the AARP didn't take Ryan's intellect so well...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/paul-ryan-gets-booed-at-aarp-conference/2012/09/21/c1baf038-0413-11e2-9b24-ff730c7f6312_video.html

Don't know if its because they don't want VoucherCare or if they didn't like being likened to moochers who don't take personal responsibility for themselves.

National Review btw, can hardly be called un-biased when they take a picture from the DNC of people holding up "FORWARD" signs and alter the signs to say "abortion" and place it on their cover with the title "The Obama Democrats".

I don't know which is worse, their action or that anyone would take them seriously and admit it.

WP: "What she did promote was Laissez-faire capitalism, which is an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from tariffs, government subsidies, and enforced monopolies, with only enough government regulations sufficient to protect property rights against theft and aggression."

Mr. Polhamus, Would you be kind enough to give me the names a few nations that have adapted Ms Rand's philosophy of capitalism.

Jane said, "YOU, Polhamus, have no class at all!"

So TRUE, Jane! After getting home from a week vacation and reading through this thread, I am struck by not only "no class" but the absolute immaturity and childishness of this "Polhamus" person, more than in any other poster I have read all the times I have been reading comments on the NV Daily.

He then makes the mistake, near the end of the thread, to try to imitate ROFLMAO and not being anywhere near as clever as ROFLMAO nor with ROFLMAO's sense of humor-----and ROFLMAO is one of the few who can achieve a tongue-in-cheek commentary, best appreciated by those with a good sense of humor----Polhamus falls flat and comes off as the egocentric, arrogant and terribly immature person he shows himself to be.

Welcome back. song98, Trust you had a great holiday.

When I first started posting here, someone (maybe Diane) commented that I didn't insult people but that is no longer true. Some of Flathers remarks dealing with our foreign policies and reactions have driven me right up the wall. He just throws words out, and it is so apparent he hasn't a clue. So my criticism of Polhamus is like the 'pot calling the kettle black' (to quote my grandmother).

That was the point I was trying to make in the first place! Mr. Rigelon stated that this was the philosophy of the Republican party, and then goes on to say something entirely different. Is that not easy enough to understand? This is the problem with Bike Shedding debaters like Jane Mackie, Diane, Katybug, ROFLMAO, song98 whom refuse to think on their own. You sheeple just keep on doing what you are doing, you are the like uncontrolled growth of abnormal cells in the body. Funny that it is this same group of people on here that have a majority of the posts, and when someone else makes noise, they have no idea how to respond to it. I was not imitating ROFLMAO, he asked questions, I answered them. If you think that was humor, then you and all the others here prolly like Dane Cook as well. I use reason as my only means way to knowledge, you people are moral cannablists. Several people here, apparantly act on emotions that they do not understand. Rationalizing emotions with your mind is such a terrible waste....and you are only setting yourselves up for a fall.

Katy, Jane and Song have appointed themselves as the Ministry of Truth.

Well Debt, if people stopped telling lies, pulling "truths" out of their rear and so on there would be no need. Maybe for entertainments sake I should get a bunch of people to mail in letters about Romney and the planet Kolob...or other such nonsense.

Does it not bother you in the least that there are businesses and commentators(on both sides) who make money off intentionally misleading the public? That those lies, twists and misrepresentations while making them money has voters passing along the BS for free? Or that large corporations are paying MILLIONS in lobbying and sinking MILLIONS into campaigns so officials or would be elects tell you the voter what the corporations want you to believe?

Can you honestly say America is better off having a large amount of voters walk into the booth completely misinformed?

I can't.

Ted Koppel on the media spin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmXNVdAsudQ

Does anyone remember honest journalism?

WP: "not surprising considering the locale. "

Is that different than....say...

Paw Paw, WV?

Ah, Thank You, Debt. I would rather deal in facts on any given day than someone's 'opinion' or 'interruption' of what that speaker 'believes' them to be. So, yes, you have described me perfectly.

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams


WP: "What she did promote was Laissez-faire capitalism, which is an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from tariffs, government subsidies, and enforced monopolies, with only enough government regulations sufficient to protect property rights against theft and aggression."

Mr. Polhamus, Would you be kind enough to give me the names a few nations that have adapted Ms Rand's philosophy of capitalism.

Look, what Mitt Romney has said is he has released, and I quote, "all that's necessary for people to understand something about my finances." Now, the something is a pregnant word. And people are going to say there's -- the cost of not releasing the returns are clear. Therefore, he must have calculated that there are higher costs in releasing them. ~ George Will

“The cost of not releasing the returns are clear,” Will said. “Therefore, he must have calculated that there are higher costs in releasing them.”

Republicans may have found their Michael Dukakis, a technocratic Massachusetts governor who takes his bearings from “data” (although there is precious little to support Romney’s idea that in-state college tuition for children of illegal immigrants is a powerful magnet for such immigrants) and who believes elections should be about (in Dukakis’s words) “competence,” not “ideology.” But what would President Romney competently do when not pondering ethanol subsidies that he forthrightly says should stop sometime before “forever”? Has conservatism come so far, surmounting so many obstacles, to settle, at a moment of economic crisis, for this? ~ George Will

I do not recall saying that any country ever had, so you can quit begging the question. I really abhor circular reasoning as such. America is the freest, and has progressed the farthest with(a form of)capitalism, but that is being destroyed with government interference and control. Looking back into U.S. history, it was the capitalistic North that ended slavery. And actually, I meant locale as in a scene.....a bad scene, or were you asking where I live so you can visit?

So, I'mdebtfree, are we to believe by your remark that you do not feel truth is important? Or maybe you think everyone should just sit back and let untruths flourish---in particular those of us you claim "have appointed ourselves Ministry of Truth".

There are far too many lies, exaggerations, untruths flying around, seemingly worse this election cycle than ever before. Some lies are so far "out there" it is almost hard to believe that people are that gullible. (The high numbers of Republicans who still believe the fringe "birther bunch" claiming Obama was not born in the U.S. in spite of all the proof beyond a doubt that he was born in the U.S. And the silence of far too many Republican leaders allowing such ridiculous nonsense to flourish is actually an embarrassment for the entire country in the eyes of the world.)

Everyone has every right to express their opinion-----and we sure see different opinions here on the NV Daily. But no one has a right to state something that is blatantly false without someone on here correcting them.

Replying to the Paw Paw comment... Nothing wrong with Paw Paw, I am offended. My uncle is my brother. Bottom line. I can't help it. My love for my uncle is like brother. And my love for my mother is kinda weird. She is my sister too. They say imbreeding aint sposed to happen but I am glad it did or I would not be here. Wished I was born in regular family. And my butt hurts. I was at the cosmos station with Roy with folks earlier and got real sleepy. When you get unbearably sleepy why does your butt have to feel violated and sore when waking/walking? Aliens no doubt. I dare anyone say I am crazy as that is ignorant!

The locally accepted method to know when you have arrived in Paw Paw is the pickup trucks have vomit streaks down BOTH sides.

Even with a night watchman on duty while you are sleeping, sore butts and chapped fannies seem to be inevitable when Roy is in the room.

Guess who is living rent free between Roy's ears?

ROFLMAO

"But no one has a right to state something that is blatantly false without someone on here correcting them."

You have got to be kidding me!

So you have a right to do that but not other people? Mr. Rigelon was wrong, he is still wrong, and you people could not handle it(but it is more likely that you did not comprehend it). So you bashed me, avoided the question, made fun. So who is childish and immature here? But really, I would just say that was being unreasonable and irrational, because you people live in your own little bubble of
distorted reality. Have fun with your pseudo-intellectual rantings........


An emotion that clashes with your reason, an emotion that you cannot explain or control, is only the carcass of that stale thinking which you forbade your mind to revise. ~Ayn Rand

Perhaps you should google “Ministry of Truth” and see what Wikipedia says. And you said “thank you” LOL.

"Dear William", please go back and read what I have written. You quoted me, "But no one has a right to state something that is blatantly false without someone on here correcting them." And in response you said, " So you have a right to do that but not other people?"

I stand by my quote, but note I never said only "I" can push back on someone's blatantly false comment-----anyone can and indeed they do on here.

I don't believe I have ever said that anyone should be restricted in their right to comment or even what they comment on, but that does not mean me or anyone else will not then give our opinion. You, me, and everyone else can give our opinions----say what we want----but then be prepared for the next person to come along and have their say.

I also have tried to not attack someone personally unless they have demonstrated that they have no problem with attacking me or others personally for our comments. In that case, they are responsible for "opening the door".

I prefer Dean Koontz for pleasure reading. From nano technology gone wrong to escaped government engineered killers. While highly entertaining, I'm guess I am just too logical to believe there are engineered killers in the woods because a book of fiction tells me so.

Although I do have to admit while I already enjoyed Dan Brown, recent discovery of text giving the possibility that Jesus may have in fact been married makes the Da Vinci Code look more interesting. But word is still out on the validation as far as I know.

In case anyone hadn't heard about that discovery...
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/09/was-jesus-married-ancient-papyrus-mentions-his-wife/

WP: "You people like to hear yourselves talk.....not surprising considering the locale."

Ah, William, Please don't be mad; after all, you were the ONE who first mentioned 'locale', right?

And as you sounded as if you like/support her world view, I asked about Rand and nations adapting her notions; you don't believe that was a fair question for me to ask you?

DEBT: "Perhaps you should google “Ministry of Truth” and see what Wikipedia says. And you said “thank you” LOL"

Sorry, Debt, missing the point you are trying to relay.

Wikipedia: "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2008)" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Truth

The input refers to "falsification of historical events." If you believe that to be true of my postings, I welcome--in fact encourage--you to challenge any and all of my postings. It is not my desire to purposely mislead anyone.

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.”

I don't know who is credited for the above quote, but I do know that I agree. Lying means one has to remember that lie forever or it will catch up with them. Just too much work! My husband and I both adhere to this principle.

Okay for shites and giggles let's look at the novel "1984".

It was first published in 1949. Do you believe that in 1949 anyone actually had a clue as to the technology that would be available to us today? Television wasn't even common place in households until the 50s. Do you think that anyone imagined that you could sit back in a recliner with your laptop and pull up a 14 year old video in a matter of seconds, when someone claims "14 years ago, so and so said this"? Or that with a simple cell phone, the world would see a man standing at a 50k a plate dinner calling half the country he wants to be President of moochers who will not take personal responsibility? Do you think they imagined that literally within minutes of a candidates wife proclaiming "Stop it, this is hard" it would be twittered and Facebooked out to millions?

One could stretch it and say, well the government does control its own websites, so they can control which information the public gets. True enough, except for those pesky FOIAs that keep showing things like GWB had a whole lot more intel on what Bin Laden was planning then he admitted publicly. If "big brother" could totally control the media, then there would never be anything negative about the government in the media whatsoever. There wouldn't be 1 television station they are the light and the rest of the world is lying. It wouldn't even be allowed if there were such a "big brother" situation, because if the government had the technology to "control" 99% of the media, do you REALLY believe they would just sit back and let the 1% operate freely??

Do you think a few days back when Fox Spews repeatedly used a 3 year old picture to tell its viewers President Obama met with a Pirate instead of taking the time to meet with Netanyahu, that its viewers noticed the later admission of misleading them? But everyone else is lying right? Its all a "1984" conspiracy.

*Whole Fox lies about the pirate is of course googleable.

No Katy I didn’t say the government was doing this just you, Jane and Song by your selective use of information you obtain from your left wing propaganda sites. You have approved the selected web sites where we may obtain information as factcheck.org, politifact or snopes. I have found through my own reading and research that they distort some of the information they present so it has the result they intend.
“Mr. Polhamus, searching 'freestudent" source, funding, copyright, etc., found nothing So please tell me how I can verify that it is NOT just another "disinformation" site? If you want to quote an established liberal site, try this one.” Jane. I guess Mr. Polhamus didn’t know yet that any site he used in posting had to be approved by you “The Ministry of Truth”.
“btw, nice to meet you William, another fellow was quoting National Review round here, but his past spiels caught up with him. Maybe you two know each other...” – I guess that other fellow was Jane.
You flip flop all around to twist your arguments.
“The governments ONE and ONLY responsibility is to ensure that you have the free practice of whatever belief you have, whatever belief others have, or lack of belief one may have. No more, no less.” Katybug
“The role of Government is to serve ALL the people, not any one group.” Katybug
“Government serves to do what is best for ALL constituents.” Katybug
So which is it?
“Mr. Beavers the role of government in the United States is not to fortify your faith for you, or force that stubborn belief that yours is the only way on every other American citizen.” Katybug
“Ayn Rand's Atheist philosophy bumps heads against the "we must use government to institute religious law" of the extreme* right.” Katybug
Then Jane argues we should have Government run healthcare because it’s the Christian thing to do.
Jane also slams Ryan’s budget using a quote from a U.S. bishops that the recommendations hardly seem to be in accordance with Catholic social justice standards.
Again – which is it? No government interference with religion or is it only OK for the left and not the right?
Katybug immediately dismisses Ayn Rand but also claims she has not read any of her work nor has any interest in doing so. Jane pipes in with selective quotes about Ryan and Ayn Rand. I’m sure the Daily Kos has helped you along with your information. Jane, many have read Rand’s works and are influenced by them and then go on to look at the work of economists Mises and Hayek. So Ryan praised Rand while addressing the Atlas Society – what did you expect him to do? Then “Rand has been Ryan's role model until this year...” Jane writes. So you try to paint as Ryan as reversing his position when this is what many people who read Rand but are also practicing Christians believe. So what are you trying to say?
“So you bashed me, avoided the question, made fun. So who is childish and immature here? But really, I would just say that was being unreasonable and irrational, because you people live in your own little bubble of distorted reality.” William Polhamus. You are absolutely right. I’m sure they will be twisting themselves into pretzels to argue with what they said.

No, Debt I only need to untwist the pretzel of your creation..
(I'll let Jane decide whether to ignore you or not on her own)

I don't recall Jane using National Review, after their photoshopped cover, I'd be pretty surprised if she did. That said, if you didn't pick up on the rather obvious similarities between ole William and another poster, I'll just chuckle and let you keep trying to figure out 1+1=?

The governments ONE and ONLY responsibility....(right here is where "I" screwed up, the next words should have been "in regards to religion" is to ensure that you have the free practice...... I am once again caught in the position of having assumed that while responding to a piece on religion the intent was clear, and not making it crayon friendly enough. Even though I jest, I really have done my best to keep it plain as I myself would prefer. So to answer which is it? as clearly as I can..

The governments ONE and ONLY responsibility (in regards to religion) is to ensure that you have the free practice of whatever belief you have, whatever belief others have, or lack of belief one may have. To not make laws enforcing any one belief system, only to protect the rights of ALL people to practice whatever they wish in their personal lives.

The next two paraphrases of mine you didn't question only state to try to blend with Jane's I guess. But I will say on Jane's post that I wholeheartedly agree. Not only is helping the less fortunate have healthcare the more christian thing to do, its just the right thing to do morally with or without religion. A healthier nation is a stronger nation, therefore the right thing to do for ALL.

"Katybug immediately dismisses Ayn Rand but also claims she has not read any of her work nor has any interest in doing so." ---Katybug also admitted to having read enough about her and watched videos of her to know I wasn't interested in learning more in the very next sentence. (But hey we are only bending and twisting specific sentences)

You know Debt, I don't think picking single sentences out of longer commentary on NVD is going to get you a job with Fox Spews or anything. I know the sheep gladly passed along "you didn't build that" vs a whole speech, and tried to turn another 14 year old speech into a "redistribution" to cover Romney swiping at half of the country long enough to figure out how to whitewash it for him. But continually doing it here only serves to make you look silly and small. (as this is twice now *another chuckle at the idea of anyone saving every last word I say).

You know what I like about factcheck and politifact? They site their sources. So you can go see the study, gov info, television appearance, whatever...on your own if you don't take their word for it. I'll take that over photoshopped news, bald faced lies, made up conspiracies( did you buy Glenn Beck's volcanic cookware?) ANY DAY ;)

I forgot to ask, Just out of curiosity do you think if President Obama visited say... Strasburg, he might lighten his face like Romney darkened his for the Latinos at univision?

Katybug, Did Romney really tint his face for the Latino audience? I missed that! LOL

I will not qualify my posts here as there really is no value added to what was extracted by DEBT, but I do LOVE the new title which she has bestowed upon me...."The Ministry of Truth" is it? Rather catchy, don't you think?! Might actually consider using that as my new sign on.

Think of it this way, Katybug, we should relish in the fact that a few are actually focusing that much attention to what we are posting. Right?

Debt, it is clear from what you have said regarding your statement that you think some of us use " left wing propaganda sites" and your opinion of the non-partisan sites such as factcheck.org as "distorting some of the information to get the intended result" that the only sites you find believable are those that tell you just what you want to hear-----from a strong conservative, right-wing perspective. In other words, right wing propaganda sites. (Brings to mind the Romney Campaign saying "they would not allow fact-checkers to dictate their campaign".)

Debt, in my opinion you can read whatever you want and believe whatever you want whether it is correct or incorrect and you can live in your own little right-wing bubble world. I honestly don't care. There are other people out there with an open mind who read these comments and even if only one person then can look at different viewpoints, do some researching on their own and give it all some thought before going into a voting booth, I consider taking the time to write my opinion or correct someone's untruth that they threw out there, worth it.

Ah, DEBT, I said I wouldn't comment but your post, it is just too, too rich!

"Jane. I guess Mr. Polhamus didn’t know yet that any site he used in posting had to be approved by you." Well, hope he realizes it now. :)

And using these words to describe my posts: "Jane argues", "Jane also slams", "Jane pipes in",

DEBT, Did you ever attend GOPAC or receive their training memo called "Language: A Key Mechanism of Control"?

Really Katybug – this is the best you can do? Straight out of the left wing propaganda machine.
“The accusation was reported on by The Huffington Post, Gawker and Wonkette, among others, receiving thousands of comments on the sites combined. Here at ABC/Univision, we wanted to clear the air a bit and find out what really happened.
http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/mitt-romneys-tan-draws-media-fire-makeup-artist/story?id=17290303
Great post Katybug. You did exactly what you claim you do not do.

Song – if you consider the CBO, CMS, SSA or other government web sites to be giving strong conservative, right-wing perspective I guess you are right. Because I have gone to the government data sources and found how these “fact checkers” take things out of context.

Jane you just cannot comprehend that someone that has a different opinion then yours was able to educate themselves and form their own opinion. This concept is so foreign to you that you seem think anyone with a conservative or libertarian viewpoint must have been brainwashed.

Something I have noticed about 'Teabilly Debtfree'.... when his argument falls apart he abuses his adversaries. And since he can not provide any facts to support his assertions, he is a one man flaming machine fulfilling the troll roll he enjoys so much.

Teabilly Debtfree proves he is a self made man who worships his creator.

I only hope t gives silent readers as much of a chuckle.

I am fully aware of the campaign's official response to why Romney's face was an orangish-brown with a ring around it like a 12 year old girl trying to put on make-up 6 shades darker than she needs, and only his face.

Just like the campaigns official response to Romney calling 47% of America government dependents who wont take personal responsibility didn't really include the seniors on social security, veterans who earned their benefits, people who really just do need help. etc....he only meant the 3%(?) that actually willingly abuse the system... that's why he said half the country.

Hey Debt, did you see the pigs fly past the window this morning?

“When his argument falls apart he abuses his adversaries” Jacques Strappe. Jacques is that why you’re calling me ‘teabilly debtfree’ or “a one man flaming machine”? Or how about Katybug’s “did you see the pigs fly past the window this morning?” All are useless comments that do nothing to further your support of your opinions.
Although I do consider this comment a compliment “he is a self made man who worships his creator”.

NICE work around Debt ;) *first chuckle of the day, ty!

Let's be honest here, Debt. I have this-----oh, "crazy feeling"-----that the things that the non-partisan sites say which disagree with your conservative beliefs or support for your party and candidates, are the things that you claim the fact-checkers take out of context. Example: You probably will not admit it, but I bet your opinion of the fact-checkers---"they distort the information to get the intended results" as stated by you------was when they were working overtime showing how Paul Ryan's speech at the Republican Convention was filled with untruths.

I do not always "like" it when they go after Democrats, but these non-partisan sites like politifact, snopes and factcheck right now are the only places where we stand any chance at all of getting even a modicum of non-partisan, credible information. I also like the fact that they give their mulitple sources.

You say your "sources" are the CBO, CMS, SSA? Now we know that is not always the case. There have been things stated by you at times that sound like they were straight from the Limbaugh, Beck, Fox "Spews", right-wing handbook that were easily exposed for the untruths they were by others on these comment forums.

DEBT, As I posted at the beginning of my joining the NVD opinion site, I voted the Republican ticket UNTIL this country--that I love and served--invaded a sovereign nation and destroyed it and its economy/people (thus laying open more terrorists and Iran in the process); that is not what I thought we as a nation stood for. Whether you take my word or not really, sorry, makes absolutely no difference to me. In most of my posting I attempt facts vice opinion, and usually in response to another entry. Your mind is firm in you political choice as is mine period. If there are readers here that haven't decided on their vote and whether or not to vote at all, I hope that something written here will influence them. I will not influence you and you will not influence me...we are wasting each others time with this type of back and forth. Peace, okay?.

And I found it humorous that Mr. Strappe believes you to be male. Clearly not!

If you were Republican until the war I’m interested in why you choose Obama now instead of Ron Paul?

I would guess it is because you are pro big government and more government growth.

I know I will not influence you but I just wanted to point out some of the double standards that seem to occur here.


Just curious as to what you think on this, Debt., but would you acknowledge that today's Republican Party is not the same Republican Party of even just a few years ago? That it has moved sharply to the right? As I said, I was just curious as to where you stood on that.

Wow84 going onto 86 (post) comments. Maybe we should lay this baby to rests. :0

We could make it the everlasting commentary LOL or go play devils advocates in the public vs home school debate...


*kidding btw (for making it clears sake)



Leave a comment

What do you think?

(You may use HTML tags for style)

Comments

Comments that are posted on nvdaily.com represent the opinion of the commenter and not the Northern Virginia Daily/nvdaily.com. If you feel that a comment is objectionable, please click on the Report Abuse link above. We will review the reported comment and make a decision on deleting it if we feel that it contains inappropriate content.











top-jobs-logo.jpg



Opinion Sections

Carolyn Long Editorial Cartoons Editorials Jules Witcover Leonard Pitts Jr. Letters to the Editor Linda Ash Mary Sanchez Paul Greenberg Reader Commentary






News | Sports | Business | Lifestyle | Obituaries | Opinion | Multimedia| Entertainment | Homes | Classifieds
Contact Us | NIE | Place a Classified | Privacy Policy | Subscribe

Copyright © The Northern Virginia Daily | nvdaily.com | 152 N. Holliday St., Strasburg, Va. 22657 | (800) 296-5137

nvdaily.com
Best Small Daily Newspaper in Virginia!


nvdaily.com | seeshenandoah.com