Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: warchild9

Perhaps instead of attacking Rand, you can interact with the ideas. They do not depend on her choices. To not honestly confront ideas and focus on personalities is lame.


9 posted on 06/20/2013 12:57:44 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (Gone rogue, gone Galt, gone international, gone independent. Gone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: aMorePerfectUnion
To not honestly confront ideas and focus on personalities is lame.

It would be lame, if it didn't work so well. That's why it's on PAGE ONE of the leftist playbook. And that goes back BEFORE Alinsky.

13 posted on 06/20/2013 1:00:47 PM PDT by Maceman (Just say "NO" to tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Considering the personality cult that has risen around the woman, her personality is a fair target.

It’s like Limbaugh; he’s an execrable person. The Viagra incident alone casts doubt on his every word.

If a person is going to preach ethics, as the Randians claim she does, that person has to be immaculate.

And I doubt anyone on this forum has plodded more than ten pages into any of her awful writing. But it’s popular to say “She’s greeeeeeat!”

Claiming to read Hayek or even Rothbard doesn’t get one any pats on the back in peasant right-wing circles.

Call “lame” all you want. I’ll bet you don’t even know who Rothbard is. (Quick, to Wiki! “Murray Rothbard.”)


20 posted on 06/20/2013 1:07:02 PM PDT by warchild9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson