A.S. had a profound impact on my life. I only wish I had read it in my 20's. Your idea is excellent.
You could also donate to the Ayn Rand Foundation, which provides scholarships as awards for an essay competition- that might be less expensive.Comment Posted By lionheart On 11.02.2009 @ 06:57
Rick, you have the best blog on the web- not only because you are a good writer, but because you are read and commented on by very smart people. Even the guys that I disagree with regularly, I admire- they usually don't spiral down into idiotic talking points. Guys like Michael Reynolds, who I have rarely agreed with, usually have cogent, original arguments. Guys like Chuck Tucson, who I think is an idiot, would probably kick my ass in a debate. Retire05 is long-winded, but capable. Sara-in-VA is clever occasionally. You've accurately pointed out other very insightful analysts in this post- and I agree.
I've pretty much stop commenting, since these guys say pretty much what I'm thinking (one side or the other).
What I haven't seen are any comments on the amazing similarity between what is going on today, and the plot of "Atlas Shrugged". I read this book about 8 year ago, and read it again recently, because the current economic crisis kept reminding me of something... the "banks" are to big to fail... the good of society supercedes capitalistic interests... even Obama's election by the press reminded me of the State Science Institue's blackballing of Reardon Metal... the demand of wider powers for government to protect us from the "greed" of capitalism.
I'm not sure that there is a John Galt or Dagny Taggart to save us. Jim Hussein Taggart might win this time.Comment Posted By lionheart On 10.02.2009 @ 16:58
I can't believe I agree with Chuck (first time for everything). I don't get the distinction between "oversight" of how the bailout money is spent, and decisions about how it is spent. Oversight without authority is not oversight (unless I misunderstand the term). Oversight with authority equals decision making (or at minimum, influence on decision making).
Of course, I disagree with the bailout in general, but now that they are standing with their hands out, they need to be accountable to me (and you). If they pay their own way, let the stock holders decide if it's too much.Comment Posted By lionheart On 4.02.2009 @ 14:53
First, I don't see how you can say that Gingrich "never concerns himself with solutions" when he has created an excellent website called, ironically enough, "American Solutions".
Second, I disagree with your premise that visionaries make poor executives. On the contrary, my 25 years in the workforce supports that the BEST executives are visionaries. Getting involved in the details of implementation is best left for your operations division, and the visionary must be smart enough to ensure that the ops team is accountable to a set of visionary goals.
Even if I were to agree with you that he doesn't follow through with solutions (which I don't), I would say that he is miles ahead of any other politician in that regard. I think one would be hard-pressed to submit any candidate from any party that has done what you are criticising Newt for. In fact, most of them don't even get the big picture, much less follow through with solutions.
I do, however, agree that he is probably not the best candidate for 2012. He is (as you pointed out) a lightning rod of polarization, he has significant personal baggage (divorced his sick wife, lead the charge for impeachment while engaging in his own extra-marital affair, etc.).
Is there a difference between "visionaries" and "conceptualizers?" A subtle one, yes. A visionary sees the future. A conceptualizer sees mostly the present and is able to break down what he sees into a clear, articulated concept - a way of looking at things that no one else can do.
How vigorously is Newt pushing those "American solutions?" The point against him is that he is fine at proposing what needs to be done but lousy at actually doing it.
ed.Comment Posted By lionheart On 2.02.2009 @ 14:51
Just for the record, even when my comments are stupid, I read every word. That said, this entire post is "preaching to the choir". The people that actually read your posts already know that ONLY the revenue model failed, not PJ media. The idiots that don't read it, won't read this one. Sad but true.
Maybe if you could start drawing little cartoons for the lefty morons that think they can glean the content of the entire post from the title...Comment Posted By lionheart On 1.02.2009 @ 13:30
Well put, Rick. I suppose statism is inevitable in a democracy, as voiced by Lord Tytler's famous quote some years ago. At some point though, Atlas will shrug, and that depresses me.Comment Posted By lionheart On 28.01.2009 @ 16:43
The most important question to ask is... do you really think Bill is porking Hill? I can't know, but methinks that act came to a halt about 29 years ago. Just wonderin'.Comment Posted By lionheart On 23.01.2009 @ 13:29
I have always believed that our greatest presidents were Lincoln, then Washington, then Reagan. Having just completed "John Adams", and assuming it's accurate, John Adams would have jump to (near) the top of the list.
Where Bush stands will be debated forever (as are all lists), but for anybody to say that he is the "worst president in history" shows incredible ignorance, and probably derangement. I think history will be much kinder to him than even his current apologists, and whereever he ends up in the list, it will almost certainly be ahead of Bill Clinton.
With respect to his IQ: Bush is a miserable communicator, and fools like Levi in comment #1 are too obtuse to understand that poor communication presents the facade of stupidity. There are numerous examples of above average intelligence, not the least of which is a degree from Yale (his GPA was nothing to really brag about, but it's a hard school, he partied his ass off, and he certainly outscored that gargantuan of intellect Al Gore).
You are correct, Rick, that Bush is no Lincoln. He's no Filmore either.Comment Posted By lionheart On 16.01.2009 @ 16:12
Warentless wiretapping is an erosion of our civil liberties, plain and simple.
Not according to the Federal Appeals Court: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/washington/16fisa.html?hpComment Posted By lionheart On 16.01.2009 @ 08:27
I've got $20 that says Retire05 can kick Chuck Tucson's ass in a cage match. Any takers?Comment Posted By lionheart On 15.01.2009 @ 14:36