Don't fall for Greenspan's I mistakenly followed Rand and believe the self interest of the banks was to preserve the system bullshit. The bankers did exactly what was in their best interest. The system was preserved right up until the time the partnerships paid out and the banks became public. It was in the self interest of the bankers to keep the system working when they had shares in a partnership and it was in their self interest to create a big a fraud as possible and payout huge bonuses. they found a way to sell premium for a few billion in bonuses and they cost the world trillions. And they will do it again. And liberals want to control government as commies and socialists so they will destroy us with taxes and debt. Its in their self interest. I am not sure what rand says - but you can't blame greenspan on any one. He was the perfect figure head for the bankers who own shares in the Fed reserve banks. he did what was in their self interest.
Reminds me of the story where the woman finds a snake on the road half dead. She takes the snake home, feeds it and heals it. The snake turns and bites her, as she lay there she asks, "why did you do that after everything I did for you?" the snake replies, "because I'm a snake bitch".
Honest question man...why are you so obsessed with this pedo thing? Your position is well known. You think Z10 is a pedo. We got it already. Let hapa hunt him down if there's a real beef...or not.
http://exiledonline.com/atlas-shrie...-killer-who-stole-ayn-rands-heart/#more-18512 http://www.slate.com/id/2233966 ...The newspapers were filled for months with stories about serial killer called William Hickman, who kidnapped a 12-year-old girl called Marion Parker from her junior high school, raped her, and dismembered her body, which he sent mockingly to the police in pieces. Rand wrote great stretches of praise for him, saying he represented "the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatsoever for all that a society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. A man who really stands alone, in action and in soul. ⦠Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should." She called him "a brilliant, unusual, exceptional boy," shimmering with "immense, explicit egotism." Rand had only one regret: "A strong man can eventually trample society under its feet. That boy [Hickman] was not strong enough."
For when you have time to listen if you want to. Very interesting to me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWN7wyDfAoI
Clarence Thomas is a Howard Roark fan? You're shitting me? Roark was an Individualist. Has Thomas ever written a dissenting opinion? Has he ever disagreed with his majority? Has Thomas ever disagreed with Scalia in a professional OR social situation? Has Thomas ever uttered a word of original thought? Thomas loves the Fountainhead is almost the funniest thing I've heard all day.
Thanks for the link! Great clip! I seem to get a sense from the clip that they interpreted evolution as a process to create the best genes within the specie. Maybe I misinterpreted it. Regardless, I just wanted to point out that evolution is not about creating the best genes within the specie, but it's about creating variation of genes within the specie so that changes in the environment won't cause a complete wipe out of that particular specie. With that mentioned, we can see that we are in the an evolutionary process where peoples have variety and various extend of selfishness and "altruism". I put the word "altruism" in quote because there isn't really a true altruistic action. All actions are done for the benefit of self in the natural selection process. Since female ultimately make the natural selection decision, our selfishness and "altruism" behaviors are needed to ensure our genes continue on in the natural selection process.
" All actions are done for the benefit of self in the natural selection process." When someone sacrifices their own life for others, say a soldier falls on a grenade to protect others... How the hell does that benefit their blown up self?
She called Hickman a 'degenerate', and your blatant smear-jobs are not credible sources. Neither one of these 'articles' can go two paragraphs without telling outright lies. Seriously, you <i>really</i> should know obvious bullshit like this when you see it. From your 'credible source': __________ "She poured these beliefs into a series of deeply odd novels. She takes the flabby staples of romantic fiction and peppers them with political ravings and rapes for the audience to cheer on. All have the same core message: Anything that pleases the Superman's ego is good; anything that blocks it is bad. Her heroes are a cocktail of extreme self-love and extreme self-pity: They insist they need no one, yet they spend all their time fuming that the masses don't bow down before their manifest superiority." ___________ Is there even a need to bother pointing out all the lies? If anyone can be convinced of <B>anything</b> by articles like these, I pity them for their simple-mindedness. All of you 'Ayn Rand worshiped a serial killer and here's the proof' fools are the left-wing equivalent of those 'a professional con man says he had gay sex with Obama, so it must be true' types. Really, I see no difference between you.