You wanna talk about political selfishness Simone sweetie? Well let's talk about Obama deciding to enact wide ranging policy without the consent or authority of congress because he knows it'd never make it through on a vote. Let's talk about how he decided all by himself that he knew what was best for dealing with illegal immigrants rather than a duly elected bipartisan house and senate who listen to the will of the people and respond to what they want. Let's talk about the selfishness of Obama deciding to make himself king of America and disregard policy and the law whenever he wants to. The country was founded by people who wanted to escape such tyranny and here we go again with somebody that thought the villain was doing things right.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

You wanna talk about political selfishness Simone sweetie? Well let's talk about Obama deciding to enact wide ranging policy without the consent or authority of congress because he knows it'd never make it through on a vote. Let's talk about how he decided all by himself that he knew what was best for dealing with illegal immigrants rather than a duly elected bipartisan house and senate who listen to the will of the people and respond to what they want. Let's talk about the selfishness of Obama deciding to make himself king of America and disregard policy and the law whenever he wants to. The country was founded by people who wanted to escape such tyranny and here we go again with somebody that thought the villain was doing things right.

King Obama I, hm it sounds good to me. Now, go and tell Mitt, who misguidedly thinks there is a presidential election come November.

Originally Posted by simone

The woman -- was she truly a woman?

Most certainly.

Originally Posted by simone

-- Ayn Rand, the psychopath, the sociopath, an individual of arrested development (somewhere before the age of 3 when humans begin to be aware of the other), essentially a manipulative trollop who gulled fools who thought themselves economists ...

Took you till three to realize there were other people? That's pretty late don't you think? I remember two of my siblings development since birth, they were both talking by three; and I don't think they were talking to the void.

Originally Posted by simone

Extolling selfishness.

It's very ironic, the word 'selfish' is used almost entirely for the purpose of equivocating and inducing guilt in others; Rand says "if that's what you mean by selfish then it's a virtue". From the introduction to virtue of selfishness:

Originally Posted by Ayn Rand

The meaning ascribed in popular usage to the word “selfishness” is not merely wrong: it represents a devastating intellectual “package-deal,” which is responsible, more than any other single factor, for the arrested moral development of mankind.

In popular usage, the word “selfishness” is a synonym of evil; the image it conjures is of a murderous brute who tramples over piles of corpses to achieve his own ends, who cares for no living being and pursues nothing but the gratification of the mindless whims of any immediate moment.

Yet the exact meaning and dictionary definition of the word “selfishness” is: concern with one’s own interests.

This concept does not include a moral evaluation; it does not tell us whether concern with one’s own interests is good or evil; nor does it tell us what constitutes man’s actual interests. It is the task of ethics to answer such questions.

Originally Posted by Dictionary.com

devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

The equivocation occurs on those last three words. You can be accused of selfishness for the first part alone.

Originally Posted by simone

Rand was so self-absorbed she was convinced that everything would cease to exist when she died, when she was no longer conscious of anything.

No, she just won't be conscious of it. It's a fancy way to say she won't be around to mourn her own non-existence.

Originally Posted by simone

How would one exorcise the hateful icky ghost of Rand?

You beleive in ghosts? You can't de-objectify someone, they need to do it to themselves by accepting any kind of irrational epistemology.

Originally Posted by simone

She still wields power over so many damned fools in the world ...

Almost none actually.

Rand did not see human beings as victims.Lefties hate people like that.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

You wanna talk about political selfishness Simone sweetie? Well let's talk about Obama deciding to enact wide ranging policy without the consent or authority of congress because he knows it'd never make it through on a vote.

It did make it through on a vote, first it passed in the house and then 55 -41 in the Senate, but Republicans have once again decided that the minority Party is running the show so they filibustered the bill to keep Obama from taking credit .

As far as issuing executive orders I believe all Presidents use them so I really wish people would stop trying to start a conspiracy every time Obama uses one to get something done..

George W. Bush issued over 290 Executive orders, all of which he did at his own behest and all without asking Congress for approval...

Here's a list if you don't believe it..

Executive Orders Issued by President George W. Bush

Originally Posted by Xcaliber

It did make it through on a vote, first it passed in the house and then 55 -41 in the Senate, but Republicans have once again decided that the minority Party is running the show so they filibustered the bill to keep Obama from taking credit .

As far as issuing executive orders I believe all Presidents use them so I really wish people would stop trying to start a conspiracy every time Obama uses one to get something done..

George W. Bush issued over 290 Executive orders, all of which he did at his own behest and all without asking Congress for approval...

Here's a list if you don't believe it..

Executive Orders Issued by President George W. Bush

And what has Obama done? He's decided to allow the better part of a million illegal immigrants to stay in the country and seek employment, when unemployment is at an all time high. There aren't enough jobs for the people in this country that are legal residents, nevermind the ones that jumped the fence and break the laws by even being here in the first place. It's rewarding bad behavior and giving preferential treatment to criminals while telling hard working American citizens that they don't matter.

Originally Posted by Xcaliber

As far as issuing executive orders I believe all Presidents use them so I really wish people would stop trying to start a conspiracy every time Obama uses one to get something done..

Right. The executive order "ship" sailed long ago.

In theory any president issuing an EO that attempts to supersede law is wrong but I can't tell if that is happening in this case. Furthermore, like you said, every president has done that.

You can criticize Obama for so many things, I don't get why so many people pick the only areas not true.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

And what has Obama done? He's decided to allow the better part of a million illegal immigrants to stay in the country and seek employment, when unemployment is at an all time high. There aren't enough jobs for the people in this country that are legal residents, nevermind the ones that jumped the fence and break the laws by even being here in the first place. It's rewarding bad behavior and giving preferential treatment to criminals while telling hard working American citizens that they don't matter.

See, the thing I'd be annoyed with, if I actually cared about this one issue, is that Obama has shown a pattern or doing things right before the election in an attempt to excite people to vote for him. In the past few months we've seen Obama whore himself out to women, gays, college students, and now Latinos. Oddly enough, for each one of those groups he has basically screwed them over long term for his short term benefit.

I'm not sure I want a president has waits until it benefits himself to hand out goodies...which means I'm stuck voting third party for a long time.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

And what has Obama done? He's decided to allow the better part of a million illegal immigrants to stay in the country and seek employment, when unemployment is at an all time high. There aren't enough jobs for the people in this country that are legal residents, nevermind the ones that jumped the fence and break the laws by even being here in the first place. It's rewarding bad behavior and giving preferential treatment to criminals while telling hard working American citizens that they don't matter.

If true, that's one of the few things he did right. Just because you want better wages and think there isn't enough jobs for everyone doesn't mean you get to export people.

Originally Posted by Freedom

If true, that's one of the few things he did right. Just because you want better wages and think there isn't enough jobs for everyone doesn't mean you get to export people.

Freedom dude these people are criminals by nature and by virtue of even being here. You don't reward criminals.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

Freedom dude these people are criminals by nature and by virtue of even being here. You don't reward criminals.

Call them what you wish, breaking an unjust law is worthy of no punishment.

If Ayn Rand was a visionary then why was everybody in her book constantly smoking?

Originally Posted by Freedom

Call them what you wish, breaking an unjust law is worthy of no punishment.

Every country has laws regarding immigration and some form of prohibition against illegal immigrants being employed. America's not unique in that respect. If you aren't native and you enter the country illegally you can't work or get access to assistance programs when you can't make ends meet. Take Canada for example, where illegal immigrants can't gain access to their state funded healthcare program, whereas the emergency rooms in America will treat absolutely anyone that comes through the doors in need of medial care. Or how about Japan where illegal immigrants can't even gain employment unless they can pass a strict written test, and do it in traditional Japanese writing.

Originally Posted by Accipiter

If Ayn Rand was a visionary then why was everybody in her book constantly smoking?

Why did Einstein smoke? or why did Darwin think inheritable material could shift in an individual lifetime? This is a not to subtle attempt to poison the well, and it's quite pathetic as they go.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

Every country has laws regarding immigration and some form of prohibition against illegal immigrants being employed. America's not unique in that respect.

Nor is it unique in it's application of taxes, regulation, and the practical legality of mob rule. Yet these are all wrong. A universal evil is still evil, for most of the history of civilization slavery in some form was accepted by most civilizations and at many times, all of them. If one lived in central Mexico before the Spanish conquests one could hardly walk far enough to even hear of a place where human beings were not sacrificed to Gods. If "everybody else is doing it" was a valid moral argument the fact that human sacrifice is evil would be irreconcilable with this fact.

Originally Posted by Tabbi

If you aren't native and you enter the country illegally you can't work or get access to assistance programs when you can't make ends meet. Take Canada for example, where illegal immigrants can't gain access to their state funded healthcare program, whereas the emergency rooms in America will treat absolutely anyone that comes through the doors in need of medial care. Or how about Japan where illegal immigrants can't even gain employment unless they can pass a strict written test, and do it in traditional Japanese writing.

Those who pay for a service have the right to define who gets it. I like your choice in examples because they illustrate both moral exclusion and immoral exclusion. Anyone who establishes and funds a 'public' healthcare option have a perfect right to define 'the public'. They can treat everyone with the geographic borders of a country, everyone they consider 'real' Americans; or just people named bob. It's up to them.

However; in the case of employment, there only two parties consent are required namely the employee and the employer. Nothing more is morally required and thus one cannot morally require anything further without violating rights. Thus work permits, minimum wages (or any limitation on wages what so ever); when applied through law as opposed to through the individual rights of those involved are all immoral.