 |
Comments |
|
 | Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 11:10:53 mst
Comment ID: #1
Name: Jonathan Blaze
E-mail: jon(at)blaze.com
Kinda reminds me of kids who don't want to obey their parents. Guess what, the government is responsible for just about everything. I bet the school you work for gets tons of government financing. God knows how much Medicare money your husband takes home every day. Oh, and this little Internet thing you use to spread the opiate of the rich known as "Objectivism"? It was created...wait for it...BY THE GOVERNMENT.
Ahh, but now that you have money and security, thanks to the government, you don't want to give back. You want to take and take and take, but not give back. See a problem here? |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 11:34:40 mst
Comment ID: #2
Name: KPO'M
E-mail: ka84796(at)comcast.net
It's a somewhat moot point now that Specter is switching parties. Once Franken is seated the Democrats will be able to block filibusters. In any case, though, it is still very bad precedent. It means that there will be little debate at all, and that "health reform" will be rushed through, much like the bailout bill and stimulus. |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 11:47:21 mst
Comment ID: #3
Name: Jennifer Crosby
E-mail: jenkitay(at)hotmail.com
Jonathan,
one can hardly make a move these days without the government being involved. Think of how much better (and cheaper) our health care and medical technology would be without government stifling it, and if we didn't have to pay for all the bureaucracy. Yes, the government is responsible for our public education, so what does that tell you?
As for the nonsense about "opiate of the rich", do yourself a favor and educate yourself on the topic.
Diana, great blog. |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 12:39:16 mst
Comment ID: #4
Name: Michael Labeit
E-mail: logician169(at)yahoo.com
URL: http://unit-perspective.blogspot.com
"God knows how much Medicare money your husband takes home every day."
Oh yeah, nothing says money like Medicare payments...*cough*... Paul's straight gangsta pimpin, son!!!
If government puts one in a situation where government intervention is inexorable or unstoppable, this does not necessarily mean one should abandon such a position. Should cops unanimously quit the job merely because they are paid with extorted money, i.e., tax dollars? |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 18:36:54 mst
Comment ID: #5
Name: Jonathan Blaze
Medicare pays a fair amount of dough to doctors, thanks to strong medical lobbying of the government. Don't get it twisted.
It's because of the government that we are able to simply enjoy our lives and worry about things like what we feed our dogs. For example, people love to complain about welfare. Well if it wasn't for welfare, the poors would take to the streets, rioting, robbing, and ruining our comfortable little bubbles. Essentially, the government is taking a portion of our income in exchange for insulating us from the ugly side of humanity. |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 19:11:53 mst
Comment ID: #6
Name: BrianS
Gotta love the old sow of a false alternative the altruists always trot out 'You a choice - either the govt steals from you or private individuals steal from you. Take your pick'.
Defense AGAINST theft? What's that? Such a concept is ignored by them entirely. It doesn't even enter their 'minds'. |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 20:27:36 mst
Comment ID: #7
Name: Michael John Neibel
E-mail: mjneibel(at)comcast.net
URL: http://www.mikeseyes.blogspot.com
Diana:
I liked your comment to the Senators so much I'm going to send a copy to my senators. |
|
| Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 21:37:41 mst
Comment ID: #8
Name: James
E-mail: ja_wadsworth(at)yahoo.com
Dear Senator Hagan,
I am quite disturbed by the prospect that Congress may try to "fast-track" through some form of socialized (to include mandatory health insurance) medicine.
By using a legislative technicality to ram through healthcare reform that will affect the everyday lives of Americans is underhanded at best, and probably unconstitutional.
HEALTHCARE IS NOT A RIGHT! Any supposed "right" that requires someone else to provide some value against their will is, in fact, a violation of real rights.
Our healthcare system is already overburdened with regulations, and entitlement programs from the government; more of them same will only make things worse. Only a free-market in healthcare is innovative and nimble enough to provide all of the latest and varied wonders of modern medicine at the lowest price.
Senator Hagan, please have/find the moral fortitude to do the right thing by opposing the fast-track to socialized medicine.
Your Constituent,
James A. Wadsworth
Student â€" UNC Chapel Hill
[Note to Noodlefooders: This letter was written after the consumption of alcohol.] |
|
| Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 0:57:47 mst
Comment ID: #9
Name: Jim may
E-mail: Seerak(at)gmail.com
Blaze sees the government as the provider of all, which must be obeyed without any backtalk -- but those of us who want to be free of paternalism are the children.
Right.
Tell us another one, Johnny! |
|
| Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 10:11:10 mst
Comment ID: #10
Name: Jonathan Blaze
E-mail: j(at)blaze.org
Damn straight Jim. When I was a child I used to hate that my parents would make me go to bed at 9:30. Now I realize it was FOR MY OWN GOOD. Objectivists whining about the government is basically the same thing. But unlike kids, they've got fancy college degrees and well-paying jobs, so now they *really* think they know everything. :rolleyes:
Objectivists are generally people who have "succeeded", at least from a material standpoint. They've worked the system, got cushy jobs, and generally have enjoyable, low-stress lives.
But the one thing they lack is a purpose. They are far too intelligent to subscribe to any myth-based organized religion. To fill this emptiness that religion normally fills, they turn toward the Ayn Rand religion. Why? Because all it does is boost their ego under the guise of a self-congratulatory "philosophy". They begin to think "I've succeeded in life so far. I don't need this stupid government telling me what to do! I'm so successful and content, obviously my way is the right way!"
And just like that, Objectivists bite the hand that has fed them. They don't realize that their material success, the very reason they espouse "selfishness" in the first place, was completely created within the framework of the government. This Internet platform that Diana uses to badmouth the government is itself a government creation! O the irony!
It is the goverment that provides our lives with order and structure. Even pure innovators, such as inventors, need government protection in the form of patents. Government copyright laws ensured that Ayn Rand became rich off of book sales. Drug dealers may seem to operate outside the government, but they simply profit from government prohibitions, so they too owe their 'success' to the government.
But unsuprisingly, the know-it-all Objectivists think they know better than the government, and that they should pick and choose the rules of society. It makes sense, because the very core of Objectivism is the belief that "I know what is best for everyone." But all that is is a shared delusion. |
|
| Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 10:31:27 mst
Comment ID: #11
Name: KPO'M
E-mail: ka84796(at)comcast.net
The government is our servant, not our master. They are entrusted by the people with the powers of force solely to protect the people from the harms that people might inflict on others, and not to save us from ourselves. Too often people in government forget that.
That infrastructure such as the network that evolved (with significant private investment) into the Internet often emerges from legitimate government activities (in this case defense spending) is an ancillary benefit, and not a raison d'etre for government. We shouldn't ignore such benefits (much that many modern European cities still use infrastructure first laid down by the Romans), but we shouldn't be dependent on them.
Had there not been an infrastructure, undoubtedly the private forces that had already established communication systems such as bulletin boards, WANs, and similar mechanisms would have evolved. It wouldn't have looked the same as the current Internet, but it's pretty clear PC revolution (brought on mostly by the private initiatives of companies like Intel and Apple, rather than the self-deluded influences of NASA as is often claimed) would have happened anyway. |
|
| Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 11:53:54 mst
Comment ID: #12
Name: Jonathan Blaze
E-mail: jon(at)blaze.com
It is the government that provides the framework for private companies and corporations to exist and operate in the first place. |
|
| Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 14:14:57 mst
Comment ID: #13
Name: KPO'M
E-mail: ka84796(at)comcast.net
The government provides the framework, which Objectivists accept (and many libertarians do not - which is one significant difference), and naturally the corporation is a creation of the government (i.e. an artificial person created to enable individuals to associate with limited liability). However, sole proprietorships can and do exist without the explicit act of the government. Again, the role here is protective. Most of our legal principles evolved over centuries, protected by a series of governments, many of which no longer exist (the Tudor dynasty, for instance). Governments can be replaced, and are not immune to the laws of nature. Companies and businesses can and do survive changes in governments. |
|
|
Post Your Comment |
|
|
|
E-mail Diana Hsieh
Comments
