Free Capitalist
Members-
Content count
2,174 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Free Capitalist
-
-
I'm going to here save the article, exactly as it appears on the AP website, in case they'll change it later:What do you see in the photo that makes you think they'd want to whitewash something later?
It being a satellite image, from 1942?
-
Actually... that's a pretty interesting design. The reason they included gyroscopes in the legs, is so that the legs would move independently of one another, and allow the unit to overcome small rocks or minor impediments to one of the feet. The author is right, the unit wouldn't step like a human, but would have two independent gyroscope-controlled legs, so that one leg might go across a rock, while the other rolls by extended straight up. The only thing they're missing is a gyroscope in the body, to keep balance for the torso.
-
Hogwash. The LPPa Platform is an axiomatic system: all planks are logically derived from the Statement of Principles.What does that even mean? Is it itself a set of axioms, or merely derived from axioms? If it's the second you're conceptually unclear, and if the first you don't understand what an axiom is.
It is perfectly well organized. Also, there is nothing in the Platform about criminalizing animal cruelty. The 20-week abortion limit is scientific.I suppose the environmental stances of the LPP are scientific? Eugenics has also been called 'scientific'. Just because you call something scientific doesn't automatically make it so.
-
I'm going to here save the article, exactly as it appears on the AP website, in case they'll change it later:
Tue Jun 10, 8:32 PM ET This image released by the United Nations Environment Program shows a satellite image from 1942 of the capital of Senegal, Dakar, a small urban center at the tip of the Cap Verde Peninsula. The United Nations environment agency unveiled a new atlas Tuesday June 10, 2008 that shows what the agency says are the dramatic effects of climate change on Africa. The nearly 400-page publication features over 300 satellite images taken in every African country.http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Climate-Chan...951ac3100/print
-
It may be viable outside the womb, but it still is inside it. It still is a parasite.The fetus recapitulates three billion years of biological evolution. Only at the 20th week does it achieve human status: human brain waves are generated. Plus: the fetus at that stage is viable outside the womb
It may not need to be attached, but it still is.it doesn't need to be attached to another human being. -
There is nothing wrong with advocating lower taxes because that is a political principle. It is a fundamental political idea unlike, for example, cutting the capital gains tax by 50%. A platform, like a candidate's views, should not just be a collection of concretes.Ok, I see what you mean there, and completely agree with you.
But how does that comport with your earlier post, that the LP must mention a moral justification for liberty, or else violate the foundation of its platform? LP platform should mention political principles, like 'lower taxes'. I don't necessarily agree that it has to have philosophical statements, in order to have legitimacy. What needs to have philosophical statements is the libertarian movement, and that doesn't have legitimacy by being absent of them. The LP, as all parties, is an ad hoc organization, at the moment (and for the foreseeable future) overrun by people with views completely incompatible with political freedom.
-
A political platform shouldn't be expected to be a philosophical statement, should it?It should be the statement of a political philosophy.
What Ayn Rand said with regard to political candidates running for office is also applicable to the political platforms on which they run:
One cannot expect, nor is it necessary, to agree with a candidate's total philosophy—only with his political philosophy (and only in terms of essentials).A political platform should state the essentials of a political philosophy.
Then I don't understand the connection between that and her 'ad hoc' comment. What's wrong with voting for a party whose sole platform is 'to lower taxes', without any philosophical statement to that effect. AR expressed clear support such a party.
-
This image speaks for itself:
Construction of the world's tallest building, the Burj Dubai, has been delayed and will be completed only in September next year, the developer was quoted on Tuesday as saying.The tower, which is expected to reach a final height of 900 metres (2,953 feet), was due for completion in the bustling city state at the end of 2008.
"The luxury finishes that were decided on in 2004, when the tower was initially conceptualised, are now being replaced by upgraded finishes," developer Emaar said, according to the Gulf News.
The Burj Dubai had already become the tallest man-made structure on the planet, when Emaar announced in April that it has surpassed the 629-metre (2,063-foot) KVLY-TV mast in the United States.
Many building projects in Dubai, which is going through a construction frenzy, have been facing delays caused by shortage of building materials and skilled labour.
-
I read that document and I have to say it isn't Objectivist, not because of what it says, but because what is lacking. It lacks an explicit moral justification for liberty. Instead of providing a moral base for its political positions, it merely asserts them or makes feeble pragmatic / utilitarian arguments. Because utilitarianism is essentially altruism, that undercuts, rather than supports, liberty.The lack of a proper moral defense of individual rights is what renders this platform, as well as most L/libertarian and conservative positions and arguments, totally ineffective when it comes to persuading those who do not agree or effectively guiding the actions of those who do.
A political platform shouldn't be expected to be a philosophical statement, should it? As far as I know, political parties are just ad hoc organizations. The fundamental problem is not with the Libertarian Party, but with the Libertarian Movement -- which says that no justifications for liberty are necessary; that simply any justifications will do, that all are just fine. The problem with the Libertarian Party is incidental -- it is currently filled with cranks who believe environmentalism more strongly than even an insane person would, and believe US was attacked due to its guilt and interventionism. (Non-neo-con) Republicans are essentially classical liberals, and have a much more consistent political philosophy for government.
-
France's 1960s screen icon Brigitte Bardot received a 15,000-euro (23,000 dollar) fine on Tuesday for inciting hatred against Muslims.In December 2006, the film star-turned-animal rights activist wrote a letter to France's then interior minister, current President Nicolas Sarkozy, arguing that Muslims should stun animals before slaughtering them during the Aid al-Kabir holiday.
She outraged anti-racist groups by saying: "I've had enough of being led by the nose by this whole population which is destroying us, (and) destroying our country by imposing their ways."
Bardot, now 73 and suffering from arthritis, was absent from Tuesday's court hearing in Paris. She wrote to the court saying: "I'm sickened by how (these organisations) are harassing me."
She added: "I will not shut up until stunning is carried out" on animals before their ritual slaughter.
Bardot already has four convictions on similar charges. In 2004 she was fined 5,000 euros for inciting racial hatred in her book "Un Cri Dans le Silence" (A Cry in the Silence).
France is home to Europe's largest Muslim community, estimated at five million people.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=08...;show_article=1
-
"Only" major flaw? What about his generally statist philosophy and attacks on free speech in McCain-Feingold? Where have you ever seen him advocating the principle of limited government and individual rights? Leaving aside for the moment a comparison between McCain and Obama, don't those count as "major flaws" for McCain?"Major" is a comparative term. It's not an absolute term. Major flaws in Obama are socialism, and appeasement. These are major. There's no ifs or buts about it. McCain has flip-flopped and now completely endorses Bush's tax-cuts, and we all know he's been behind all the proper offensive actions in Iraq.
"So", as in "so what"? What makes you think he will only impose a "few" restrictions or that they don't matter? It matters to those who the government imposes them on and persecutes -- or didn't that occur to you? What makes you think they will be "simply undone" after he leaves office? How? By whom? How about telling us about all the previous restrictions that have been "simply undone" in a subsequent administration? Who got their property back from government takings? Who was compensated for jail time? How do you propose that any of this be "simply done" and how are the victims supposed to survive in the meantime?You're missing the larger picture. We have to deal with negatives at this point, and I'm perplexed that you're still demanding an Objectivist president. Not going to happen. Fine, one or two people may be arrested under McCain's environmentalist strictures. But a whole American soul will not be extinguished by socialization of medicine. He seems to genuinely endorse tax-cuts, and definitely endorses uncompromising measures in the Middle East. That's not so bad, as far as negative candidates go.
-
The Obamessiah has picked up another important endorsement:this one from the Left's adored mass-murdering poster boy, Fidel Castro:
see http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/05/28/ob...-americas-foes/
If McCain lets get away this sheer litany of vulnerabilities, then he's had it coming to him.
I recently had a thought experiment of 'what's worse' in my head. On the one hand is McCain, whose only major flaw in this election seems to be his respect for environmental issues. On the other hand we (most likely) have Obama, who acts like a clean all-American guy, but has a host of skeletons in his closet, most important of which is socialized medicine.
I think socialization of medicine will be in all ways such a huge blow to this country, to its doctors whose ground is currently worshipped by the whole entire world, that free medicine will have to move to a new country, and it will be totally tragic. I am dating a medical resident, and am up close and personal with the magnificent, larger-than-life, Medical Science of the West, centered in its last abode, America.
In that perspective, McCain's environmentalism is really not a big deal. He may financially penalize a random company here and there, but that's not a big deal, they can be given tax-breaks after he leaves office. So he'll impose a few restrictions, they can be overturned. Nothing of his view can't be simply undone after he leaves office. What I'm looking for is that here aren't any permanently fundamental fetters on the essence of America and American future well-being. A socialization of medicine, once it happens, can't be undone. Once it happens, it'll be a giant nail heading for the coffin.
-
Ray, Semper Fi indeed.
Nobody could mess with that guy in the first picture.
-
Once I got past the two sweet looking blonds, Uma Thurman and Evan Rachel Wood, I decided to read the rest of the interview.
I'm sorry to say, that Evan Rachel Wood is dating Marilyn Manson. The sweet girl she played in Across the Universe seems to be completely out of character; but her semi-Gothic paleness and black dresses might've been a giveaway. She stars in a music video with Manson where they hook up during a shower of blood.
-
I will add the following since I am just now learning about this issue. If McCain makes an issue out of James Webb's bill to provide educational funding for our military members and stands by President Bush's plan to veto the bill, than McCain will lose this November.Webb's bill says that GIs will receive full funding and financial assistance, after 3 years of service, while McCain is in favor of a gradual increase in benefits in proportion to the years of service. It's been a pretty striking misrepresentation on MSNBC and CNN that Webb has been in favor of helping GIs, and McCain's attitude was against this.
The reason for McCain's stance, so far as I can gather it, is that he fears Webb's bill will encourage short-term enlistment and en masse discharge as soon as the minimum enrollment is up. By the same token, only those unserious about serving in the military will sign up, hope to get the substantial GI Bill benefits, and run off as soon as possible. We want motivated men, not mercenaries, in our military. McCain's proposal is that we make financial benefits proportional, and thus an enticement only to people who are serious about serving in the military.
-
What point, exactly, is the writer trying to make?That, I think, we've become too cynical to build monuments of principle or untainted and sentimental value. The next sentence has it exactly right:
When the monument opened, "there were already glimmers of this, the habitual pooh-poohing of the modern debunker." Habitual, modern debunker, that's exactly right.
-
I regret just one thing -- that I have just one day per year to give birthday wishes to a friend!
Happy birthday! Salve, Amicus.
-
I'm afraid of what will happen in the UK.
-
Link to MSNBC news reel:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/24430144#24430144
Students in Texas high schools are building rockets. This year the rockets are expected to reach 100,000 feet, and the Airforce will have to help launch them.
-
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/f...icle3890080.ece
From The TimesMay 8, 2008
Church attendance in Britain is declining so fast that the number of regular churchgoers will be fewer than those attending mosques within a generation, research published today suggests.
The fall - from the four million people who attend church at least once a month today - means that the Church of England, Catholicism and other denominations will become financially unviable. A lack of funds from the collection plate to support the Christian infrastructure, including church upkeep and ministers’ pay and pensions, will force church closures as ageing congregations die.
In contrast, the number of actively religious Muslims will have increased from about one million today to 1.96 million in 2035.
According to Religious Trends, a comprehensive statistical analysis of religious practice in Britain, published by Christian Research, even Hindus will come close to outnumbering churchgoers within a generation. The forecast to 2050 shows churchgoing in Britain declining to 899,000 while the active Hindu population, now at nearly 400,000, will have more than doubled to 855,000. By 2050 there will be 2,660,000 active Muslims in Britain - nearly three times the number of Sunday churchgoers.
Coming just months after the Archbishop of Canterbury suggested that the introduction of aspects of sharia into British law was unavoidable, the report is likely to fuel calls for the disestablishment of the Church of England.
...
-
We're trying for overall diversity in the DC universe. We have strong African-American, Hispanic and Asian characters. We're trying to get a better cross-section of our readership and the worldThat's what I have a problem. That whole mentality is very, very wrong. If Roark was black, but still acted in the way that I understood and admired, I would admire him, and I wouldn't need a character to look like me!
What is wrong with these people, with the readership which emotionally demands it and the publishers who assent that the demand is proper?
-
This thread is great.
-
By contrast, a shotgun can aim at more than one target at a time. You don't have that much riding on any single shot. If this or that particular shot misses, you've got plenty of other chances. You can relax and let things fall where they may. And if you find that something clicks, you can then focus on getting to know that one lady. But you always know in the back of your mind that there are plenty of other women out there, and if things don't work out, you can move on.But, you have to be a lot closer to the action. Isn't that right? Have to put your neck in the noose, on the chopping block if you will. Which is where the men have always had it since the beginning of time. And there's no use bewailing it, just have to get that shotgun and run charging into the thick of it. Hiding and carefully scouting with that sniper gun from a mile away will leave a man cold and lonely in his hideout.
-
She doesn't have to be a philosopher, but frankly I grew up starved for people to talk to about the things I was interested in and I really want that in a partner. I could probably do without it for a short timeThis to me is the most important part of what you said. Howcome you equate a short time with zero time? Even if it's for a short time, you're experiencing happiness which is lacking for you right, and that's nothing to scoff at. Even if just for a short time, you're acquiring most invaluable experience of what women are like, what they want (will men ever figure out?), what they're interested in, what they can be realistically expected to be interested in, etc. As of now it seems you're scared off by a hypothetical, a hypothetical you haven't even a personal experience of to help you in matters of evidence on the subject.
Satellite image from 1942
in Environmentalism
Posted · Report post
The AP has a horrific history with photos. They have consistently doctored images from the Iraq war to make it look more disturbing and miserable, by photo-adding desolate smoke stacks, addint fires to the streets, photo-clipping desperate face expressions of the natives. etc.