Democratic lawmaker criticized for tweeting names of Trump donors

Objectively a false statement. Try addressing reality.

 

It's publicly available information. I wonder how much money is going to Trump under the table? And from foreign sources..

 

By not arresting them for criminal activity.

 

You know better than that

Its street thuggery by liberals

 

I am sorry the mention of God angers you so much, but that is entirely your problem.

You can also stop quoting Ms Rand.

If you want to thing rationality equates to morality, I'd steer you to the works of Paul Redeker from South Africa.

" Just think what mankind could accomplish if people would only shed their humanity"

The only person responsible for the El Paso shooting was the little evil bastard who pulled the trigger. You can disagree but that just makes you wrong but don't worry, you'll get over it..

God is real, He has done His saving work. It's each persons choice whether to take advantage of it. People are evil, it is not God's job to keep people from doing things they know are wrong. That's our jobs.

 

I have to admit I haven't read much at all by Ayn Rand, and am ignorant of all but her basic arguments.
This isn't excusable, because she has been the inspiration for some significant, intelligent people in US politics, so there must be something compelling about her arguments.

So let me just ask: does a Randian approve of forcing me to pay taxes for

....(1) the police (all levels, from the patrolcar to the FBI), and
....(2) public education?

 

It doesn’t anger me, it terrorizes me—has anything filled the rivers of blood with more bodies than religion?

I not only disagree with his actions, I am repelled and revolted by any who hold such abhorrent ideas as his. And appears that some here do. And only fault him for acting on his own instead of voting to do it under government sanction. Mad killer or killer government, WTK is the difference? The number of bodies?

His ideas are delusional, false, hateful, shameful, deplorable, without human value, depraved, and deadly.

 

Ayn Rand supports the Objectivist position, force only in self defense. And it’s not true because Miss Rand says so, Miss Rand says so because reason and reality are objective.


“Do not open your mouth to tell me that your mind has convinced you of your right to force my mind. Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins. When you declare that men are irrational animals and propose to treat them as such, you define thereby your own character and can no longer claim the sanction of reason—as no advocate of contradictions can claim it. There can be no “right” to destroy the source of rights, the only means of judging right and wrong: the mind.”—http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/physical_force.html

 

You are not terrorized by hearing about other peoples religion. So just stop with the drama.

As for the shooters ideas.
Do you believe corporations are destroying the environment?

 

Hmmm..... I wonder how Lefties will justify this charming new offering from Hollywood?

[ SOURCE ]

No doubt Lefties will laugh this off, or make a formalistic, dry, tepid repudiation of it.

But conservatives should draw a lesson here: this is how the liberal elite think about us This is their fantasy, what they would like to do in real life, but for the moment can only do as a video game.

Please wake up: we are no longer one nation. We must separate. We will separate, one way or the other, or we will face a very unpleasant reality in the not-too-distant future. In the meantime, get your AR15, a thousand rounds of ammunition, a dozen magazines and a flak vest, while you can.

 

The question is not what mankind can accomplish, but what can the creative mind do.

Mankind is a reflection of actions by independent actors, the creative mind is that independent actor. And the creative mind is the reasoning mind.

 

I take this to mean that you don't believe that there should be a police force supported by taxation. And the same for public education.

 

Hell no. I seen life before the capitalism and the industrial revolution, Fk that. I’ve been alive since the fifties, I can testify, GE does indeed bring good thinks to life. Capitalism, the businessman, the profit makers are not destroying the planet, but the environmentalist are sure hell bent on murdering capitalism, and with it, human existence.

Why would any rational person believe such idiocy as the “creators of wealth are the destroyers of life”, when all they have to do is turn on the lights in their air-conditioned home. get a roast beef sandwich from the refrigerator, pour a glass of Makers Mark, turn on the HD TV, and watch last year's romantic Carribean cruise?

I know--faith in the unprovable, fear of the unknown.

 

There is a way that seems right to man but on the end it leads to death.
Creativity is great but it doesn't lead to truth.

 

No forced doctoring, no forced schooling, no forced praying, no forced serving, no forced hiring, no forced buying, no forced wages, no forced anything.

 

What that hell does that mean? All paths lead to death, only one lets you enjoying living life to its fullest as a rational creative being, the path of reason. Else, what is life for? To be diner for others?

 

I take it to mean that you don't support having a police force or public schools supported by taxation. And I assume that goes for traffic laws as well -- no one would be forced to stop at a red light if he didn't feel like it. I don't want to attribute crazy views to you if you don't hold them.

So am I right that you are against having an official, tax-supported police force, public schools, laws governing how we drive on the roads?

 

Its a quote from someone who knows more than we do.

 

Have you seen the whole thing? If so, can you please provide a link? I wouldn't want to take a vicious killer's words out of context.

 

Did you ven watch the video you submitted? Nowhere did "Trump supporters scream about murdering illegal immigrants at Trump rallies and he laughs it off". Do you really believe that normal people would interpret anything like what you claimed? In fact Trump said "We don't do that. We can't do that" and when one person shouted out "Shoot'em", because the smugglers ogften have weapons, people laughed at the suggestion, as did Tump. Geez, Man, get a grip. You're hearing dog whistles everywhere.

 

In other words, you didn't even watch the video. At least try this time.

 

Trump said, we don't do that, we can't do that and i wouldn't do that.

Someone makes s comment , he makes a joke about it.. get over it.

What are half a dozen border patrol agents supposed to do against several hundred illegals rushing the border?

 

Of course I watched it,I even quoted from it. Can you point to the part where where "Trump supporters scream about murdering illegal immigrants"? You can't because, like most leftists, you have no respect for the truth. It never happened.

 

That seems to be happening, alright. Sanctuary cities would be a larger example.

 

Silly mortal, tricks are for kids. The purpose of government is to protect your right to buy Lucky Charms from a willing seller, not tell the seller how many marshmallows must be in the box, and not demand the name be changed because there are no such things as lucky charms, and it's offensive to the Irish.

What you are implying is that we can't totally be free because we would lose our reason and become a society of flies looking for a lord to rule us. Demented thinking.

“When I say “capitalism,” I mean a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism—with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.”—http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/capitalism.html

“If physical force is to be barred from social relationships, men need an institution charged with the task of protecting their rights under an objective code of rules.

This is the task of a government—of a proper government—its basic task, its only moral justification and the reason why men do need a government.

A government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control—i.e., under objectively defined laws.”—http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/government.html