Wait, you said clearly that if the truth doesn’t help your case, it’s the right thing to do to lie, even under oath, only stupid people would tell the truth if it hurts their case. Now you think you have a leg to stand on calling someone a liar? Get a grip.

This points out in great clarity how biased and untrustworthy Rand Paul and most republicans are.

Investigations galore, multiple recounts, signatures were compared, over 60 cases tossed for lack of evidence, a few for lack of standing, only about what, +-70 votes actually in question for fraud now that the dominion lie has been quashed, far fewer prosecuted, and they were Trumpsters voting twice or more, the rest are cases of minor technicalities that Republicans thought meant since two people in one Republican county weren’t afforded the same help some people in other counties got like ballot curing or a chance to fix a signature that was missing or considered different from the one on file before election day (because the republicans in that county specifically disallowed it) they think those other counties must be discarded completely, a few million votes should be discarded to make up for two republicans that Republicans screwed over.

How many times did Paul lie about what Stephanopilous had just said? I lost count.

We had the debate, repeatedly. Paul is lying again.

We had thorough examinations in every state, full recounts in some, multiple in Georgia. Republicans are all liars who want to rehash the election in different ways and venues until they win, then stop the process. Too bad you lost so badly, in such a massive landslide with such a clear mandate across the board that no amount of rehashing, not an ocean of their tears could change the outcome.

The conservative Supreme Court heard umpteen challenges to election rule changes and found NONE to be illegal, Paul is just lying again.
If every single claim thrown out of court for lack of evidence was won by the right, Trump still would have lost bigly.

You are such a willing tool for the lying right. If lying were a crime, republicans would all be in prison for felony level dishonesty. Where you go one, you go all....into the mouth of madness.

I do like that you tagged this ridiculous lie fest from Paul as “lies”, and the reporting by Stephanopolis “news”. That’s a step back towards sanity.

The Ford computer (named for Hannibal Ford, of Ford Instruments--which itself apparently became part of the Sperry Rand company)---was a marvel.

It was the gunnery computer until the 1970s aboard USN ships---when computers took over.
And apparently, remained the main battery computer (augmented by drone spotting?) onboard the battleships...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_I_Fire_Control_Computer

Thanks for this footage.

Crime stems from poverty and deprivation (and greed, but those aren't the sorts of criminals Rand McRandface is talking about).

Poverty and deprivation can be addressed through social services.

Republicans typically gut social services.

I know in my state we'd be much better off with more useful social services and better-funded schools, but every damn time republicans get control of the Governor's office or the legislature, they cut social services statewide. So the areas that most need those services suffer regardless of who they may have elected to local leadership. When dems manage to get back into control they reform things a bit to provide extra funding to social services, and things improve for a bit. Then republicans get back in, etc yadda wash rinse repeat.

So yeah, democrats tend to be elected in population centers, because for the most part they seem to actually want to help people. The current Republican philosophy seems to be "lol shutup poor people are stupid figure it out fuckers." I'm perfectly happy to examine any evidence to the contrary (by which I mean policy positions advanced by republicans that actually help improve the lives of most people).

And the proposed republican solution to the problem is?

How could all of the country look like this when half the hobos have already hitch-hiked to Nancy Pelosis district (according to the video)? That kind of alleviates the problem elsewhere. Are the republicans going to spread them out more evenly? Is that the plan? Will the problem be solved by helping these people less, so they die quicker? Is that the plan? Is there a right wing conservative republican plan on what exactly should happen to sick stupid dirty homeless people who dont give a flying f*** about anything? Will they be gone like magic by April?

Maybe letting them wash is a good start?

Dont tell me republicans are going to help these people more? What would Ayn Rand think?

Look for better ways to pick a leader? Find ways to adapt their party policies to suit the day and age? Find actual goals for society to promote instead of just being conservative or ayn rand for the sake of it (or rather for the sake of their own pockets)? Make the rest of the party admit that old, sick, poor and/or non-white people are not expendable. America can be great if you pick the right things to be great at. Not just gloating and bad golf.

Its not impossible. There has to be a liberal, small government movement to counter all those "letter people" who only have demands. It has to come from the bottom and will take a long time.

@newtboy
@Drachen_Jager
@simonm
@bobknight33

You guys are letting him get away with too many ill defined terms.

@bobknight33 needs to define
Republican-
RHINO (dependant on Republican definition) -
Corrupt-
"Lose" in the political sense (as in "Trump does not back down or lose much")
"Back down" same comment
Swamp

--------------
From my point of view, the definitions would be as follows, but I doubt he would agree, so the definition s actually need to come from him if there's ever to be any REAL communication here.

Republican- Fiscal conservative, functional but minimal government, patriotic and supports the democratic process over communism, law and order, often (but not necessarily) religious

RHINO (dependent on Republican definition) - Ron Paul and Ron Paul Jr. - Libertarians in the thinking of Ayn Rand who actually consider themselves the "true republicans" but are outside the mainstream

Corrupt- Promoting self interest over that of the people you are meant to govern - in Trump's case, I'd say it means "anyone who doesn't agree with me"

"Lose" in the political sense (as in "Trump does not back down or lose much") - Not passing legislation with any staying power, being defeated in the Legislative Branch after something is passed (See the Affordable Care Act for the opposite example)

not "Back[ing] down" same comment - I'm going to break the law or established political norms


UNTIL WE CAN AGREE ON TERMS, THERE WON'T BE ANY ARGUMENT OF SUBSTANCE BECAUSE YOU SIMPLY WON'T BE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THINGS

The lizard people, in conjunction with the gay frog alliance, have, under the supervision of the Rand corporation, kidnapped millions of children to sell to the reverse vampires, paving the way for an invasion of the saucer people in a fiendish plot to eliminate the meal of dinner.

We're through the looking glass, people.
Beware the derp state.

I completely disagree with you about being inspired by her is like being inspired by Hitler. Hitler's philosophy was a complete sham on every level, and contradicts itself numerous times. Objectivism's foundation works well on many levels. Personal aspiration, bettering yourself, valuing logic and knowledge over emotions, those types of things are valuable to an extent.

Objectivism is ultra-logical in the end, very much the same as Social Darwinism. Fundamentally, those ideas have value in some situations and settings. A business for example, in the end, if an employee is not doing his or her job, it's not necessarily the business's job to figure out why unless it's within their self-interest to do so, and they shouldn't have to think that stuff through in every single instance. They should have the flexibility to fire someone in that instance without a second thought about the social ramifications.

It ultimately is a societal problem though that this employee be taken care of as a member of society, which is where Objectivism falls on its face, among other areas. Another one is Objectivism really has terrible implications in many aspects of parenting, to put it mildly.

I was personally inspired by Ayn Rand in high school quite honestly. She made me care about philosophy, about achieving the most I could achieve via hard work and self-determination, to learn how to critically think and use reason, to be OK to not conform necessarily to group think, etc. Just like every ideology, it's not perfect, and following it to a T just doesn't work, just like any other ideology and philosophy we may encounter and blend into our own as we age and grow. But it made me want to learn more, achieve more, and think more.

You can do a lot worse than that, IMO, you know, like Fascism. :-)

Already said everything I need to on Rand

I've never read Rand, but today's forgotten word of the day seemed apropos...

Chrematistics: the science of wealth. From the Greek chremata, wealth. -John Ridpath's home reference library, 1898

In short-Aristotle established a difference between economics and chrematistics that would be foundational in medieval thought.[1] For Aristotle, the accumulation of money itself is an unnatural activity that dehumanizes those who practice it. Trade Exchanges, money for goods, and usury creates money from money, but do not produce useful goods.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrematistics

I imagine Rand was not a believer in chrematistics.

Like any extremist philosophy Rand's writings contain elements of truth. The problem is that they offer a philosophical fig leaf for the rich and powerful to fully exploit their situation in business and politics without regard to the negative effects they may have on the rest of society.

A successful civilisation needs to understand the limitations of both sides of the argument and take the best of both worlds.

Your video, Trump's Brand is Ayn Rand, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I upvoted your video because I appreciate the fact you're trying to present a cognizant backing for a lot of the things you say and believe.

I don't know if this was your strongest card, 'tho. He's well-spoken, with impressive CV and an interesting argument. The problem is he's cherry-picking the entire video and sometimes even resorting to rank hypocrisy (it's anti-American to campaign to minorities with a grievance, yet pulling the same stunt got Trump elected when he did it with white people).

I notice he falls back on the Coastal Elite trope, as if being successful and having ideals is somehow an antithesis to all that's good and pure about corn farmers in Kansas. Somehow, it's all those darned people living in that magical wonderland of those who can smell sea salt from the front porch of their homes that fucked middle America.

No. Sorry. Wrong answer.

40 years of Republican-dominated rule, 40 years of a sick social experiment being run by the disciples of Any Rand, is what fucked those people. 40 years of tax cuts for the rich and excess taxation on the poor; 40 years of stealing from schools to pay for subs; 40 years of setting the wolves among the sheep in the form of stripping consumer protections; 40 years of historical revisionism; 40 years of the kind of government that should have landed the perpetrators 12 steps from 6 hooded men with 5 loaded rifles.

Republicans have been calling the shots since Reagan, but yet 8 years of the black dude somehow set the country on a frenzy of self-destructive idiocy unseen since the French Revolution?

Look, I appreciate that you're trying to raise the tone with videos like this. But if you're trying to intellectually shore up the dike, I've got bad news for you: the facts will rarely be on your side.