GWB under attack by his own party

I understand just fine the concepts of Objectivism. Just because the reality of Objectivism would not necessarily jive with the Republican party ideals does not mean they have not used it to promote their platform. See my post to Martin about this.....

 

correct. meaning folllowers of objectivism are not partisan hacks.

i am not sure you know what i mean when i call someone a partisan hack. i mean they pick one party and reflexively favor theirs over the other, regardless of actual logic or principle.

if someone has a guiding set of priciples, like objectivism, than that is the OPPOSITE of being a partisan hack. an objectivist might, for example, favor the efforts of ron paul to legalize drugs or the efforts of democrats to keep religion and state separated or the republican who favored lower taxes. so they would be guided by principle, not partisanship. and those choices would be guided by principle not a "republicans are bad LOLZ" attitude like the mindless lasalles of the world.

if you point is that the objectivist is also partisan in the sense that he is loyal to his principles, then that really isnt a criticism, is it?

and the word is jibe not jive.

 

I know exactly what you mean. My point is that just because you are a student of Objectivism, or any other -ism for that matter, it does not mean that you cannot be a partisan hack. There are people who call themselves Christians but they are also racists. There are people who call themselves lots of things who do not necessarily always adhere to the premises of their doctrine.

In all reality, I do not know Frogleg and therefore cannot say with 100% certainty that he is, or is not, anything. In that same vein, Frogleg does not know LaSalle so he cannot possibly know that he is a hack. In fact, I recall several instances where LaSalle has been critical of the current administration so I wouldn't be so quick to label him anything.

Objectivism alone is not partisan, but those who claim to follow it can be. You underestimate the complexity of human beings when you say that just because you are _________ then you must be __________.

typo

 

it certainly doesnt. but you dodnt really suss that out before you accused frogleg did you. for all we know he may be a rock solid totally philosphically consistent objectivist.

christianity is a not a consistent philosophy like objectivism or communism or whatever. it doesnt count. there is no such thing as a "real christian". but there is definitely a "real libertarian". because libertarianism is not a self contradictory myth.

which is why you were so stupid earlier and i called you out.

incorrect. lasalle always is critical of republicans for silly things. he ahs no consistent philosphy and does not hold democrats to the same standards.

you wouldnt be quick, but am smarter and have been here reading his posts for longer. defer to my judgment.

i didnt say that. presumably you are telling yourself this for your characterization of frogleg.

 

Or not.

You do not get to decide which philosophy is real and which is not. This kind of absolutism isn't surprising coming from you because it is the only way you can justify your thinking. As long as you get to make the rules then you are always right.

WRONG. I called out Frogleg for pointing fingers and calling names. You rushed to Froglegs defense. I cannot help it if the facts get in the way of the reality you create.

 

It is also becoming increasingly obvious that you and Frogleg are cut from the same mold since this all began with him calling LaSalle names and now here you are calling me names. This is how I can always tell when I am winning....because guys like you who say with their mouth that they are intellectually superior begin resorting to name calling when you lack the substance to defend your positions.

You continually claim that you have this concrete philosophy and that the rest of us are flailing in the wind, adrift from anything resembling reason or sanity, yet you have deprived us of this philosophy. I have never read a single post where you put forth one of your own ideas. Instead you lurk, waiting for something that you can be contrary about.

 

I was wondering if they were the same people just different accounts. Neither one can answer a question. Both wind up to name calling. The above reasons is why I can't deal with Martin and choose to put him on my ignore list. I had his number when he claimed to have won many spelling bees and managed to misspell every damn word.

 

of course i do. religions/myths are not like philosophies, because they are based on faith. the communist, while wrong, has flawed ideas, based on a misunderstanding of the world, but not on faith.

again, i am not the topic, am i.

i dunno man, we both know i was right and you didnt think things through. better luck next time, ok?

 

wut yoo talcin abowt mi spalling az purfact.

i do admit i do name calling, i believe i have called you darling and sweetpea.

 

i said you were stupid earlier, thats not really namecalling. thats saying that you were being stupid. stupid wasnt a name for you, it was a description of your opinions.

yeah good luck with that. i am saying things "with my mouth". dunno what that means really.

you should read more closely, as i have probably espoused more opinions here than anyone. but again, i am not the topic, am i. lets not get bogged down on how fascinating i am.