caroljane

Sorry Philip, I meant anagram of course, not acronym. Been watching too much CPAC as Cancon on my CRTC-controlled CHRC-monitored TV.

[quote name='Robert Campbell' timestamp='1296956219' post='123695 But if the story is true, I'm not shocked that the Obama administration turning over information about an ally's nuclear deterrent to the Russians, even though said ally is not a party to the "New START" Treaty and did not plan to be. The treaty is 30 years out of date, constituting further proof, if any was needed, of Barack Obama's rigid thought processes. Konrad Yakabukski in today's Globe and Mail wrote about the New START treaty: "..in his ambition to render nuclear weapons extinct..Obama is truly Reagan's child...in late 1986, Reagan holed up in Reyjkavik with Gorbachov to negotiate the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. It was entirely Reagan's initiative; his closest advisors and supporters on the right thought him delusional...George Will later wrote: " Reagan accelerated the moral disarmament of the west by elevating wishful thinking to political philosophy." Obama faced the same derision...accused of 'indulging in a fantasy world that's nuclear-free.' "This goal will not be reached quickly, perhaps not in my lifetime," Obama said .."but we must ignore the voices that tell us the world cannot change." ..end full quote Looks like only parts of Reaganism are 30 years out of date around here.

Thank you! Did you catch the reference in the name of Ari's coauthor? Daunce is a name I made up to go with Lynam, my real (married)surname, to make an acronym in homage to an underappreciated writer I admire,(Canadian of course) And no it is not myself, WSS, Joel, Bob Mac, Tim or any other unsung Richlers out there.

What is "almost seventeen" in this context? Sixteen? (Since we're speaking of human individuals, I assume it's not something like 16.63.) JR Jeff: Lol. Yes, it refers to seventeen (17) individual humans out of the twenty-five (25) individual humans. Adam I would give Saidi my Syrian your email, except I would be picked up by CSIS and sent to the gulag. It's the suburb of Hamilton where Lady Black was kept chained to the furnace in the basement. I'm too ascairt to take the risk! Though on reflection, if it was a choice of Conrad or the furnace, I'd take the furnace.

It has recently come to my attention that the vile Catachresis, whom as you know I have long disliked while not knowing concretely that he was vile, just that he was boastful and nouveau-riche, is using his vileness to vilify a major integration of the Lyceum, the long-awaited clarification of my Generation of Animals, The Cuttlefishian Caper. As you know I provide the Prologue to this important work by Theophaestus, and I think you are aware of who I am. When Catty chose to bruit about the agora his ignorant denunciations of Theo's observations and conclusions of the derivation of baby cuttlefish from mother cuttlefish, and to spread his slanders afield even upon the newts and tree-toads, I could bear no more, being who I am. I am the heir of Plato who was the intellectual heir of Socrates who left all his money (hardly any)to his wife. Was it for Socrates to sit amongst schoolboys to be instructed in music whilst looking like a fool? Well yes it was, but that was Socrates. Was it for Plato to leave a comfortable home and go abroad trying to persuade tyrants to be reasonable at risk of life and limb? Only part-time. Is it for Aristotle and his colleague and possible intellectual heir to get wet and dirty trying to observe the base copulations of cuttlefish and newts? We reach our conclusions by Reason alone, and leave the inessentials to lower animals like Catty. Did Plato pass the Academy to me or his newphew Pseusippos? Well, Pseusippos, but who cares. Did he leave his money to me, along with the unpublished early tragedies that he told me to burn up but I didn't? Yes! I think you now remember who I am, the founder of this Lyceum, advisor to kings via my godcasts, the only true keeper of the eternal flame which burns within the cave of Plato. I expect everyone to behave accordingly. Just behave!

Hsieh has already given her thumbs down on the movie: "From what I've read, the movie seems to be a low-budget, haphazard rush. That means that it's sure to suck worse than I'd imagined. But perhaps, unlike a Hollywood blockbuster, they'll stick closer to the novel. I'm not hopeful, and I fear the movie could do more harm than good in terms of spreading Ayn Rand's ideas in the culture." Anyway, Carol, Noodlefoodler are much more interested in crucial 'living objectivism' questions, such as the screamingly funny 'morality of bread' question: 'Question 6: From Objectivist Answers: The Morality of Eating Bread: Since eating wheat is purported to be unhealthy due to gluten (and other stuff), is it immoral to eat bread? (Analogous to smoking being purportedly bad for you.) Since one has to eat something, it might be better to ask, “Is eating bread immoral when other food sources are available?”' I do expect that Diana will answer this question with a 'no, it's not immoral to eat bread,' even though she is currently the ObjectiPaleo high priestess. I had thought the OO.net folks were the most interested in wee, vexing questions, but it appears the Nooodlefood claque, or a portion of them, have adopted the Paleo diet as an article of faith, and thus need help in navigating its strictures. This is too lol coincidental. In my ESL academic writing class this morning, we were doing an anthropology article on gender roles in caveman times, and going offtopic as we often do, I explained the North American wonders of vegan, carnivorous etc diets, and told them about the Paleo diet! The ensuing conversation was amaziing fun. Btw I have one Syrian student, a merry engineer who wants to mention during every discussion on every topic, that we are all genetically identical and descended from a common ancestor with apes. His signature phrase is "my uncle is a monkey."He also vigorously espouses atheism, to the polite consternation of his classmates, one of whom was a Professor of Theology in a Turkish university. He asked me once what are the Pillars of Christianity that correspond to the 5 pillars of Islam. It took me until next day to remember the answer! Despite all my Sunday School prizes. What an oppo that class would have been for a Practical Objectivist.

Slight setback in the Big Billionaire quest. I got an anonymous tip that sounded hot, only to find that the information referred to the fact that the gentleman in question is 6'8". And not a pro basketball player.

WSS, You mentioned earlier that Ofolk are mostly silent on this complex and ever-evolving situation because of reluctance to get into emotionalist arguments. I suggest a second reason, an inability to analyze it without our usual frames of reference and bases of knowledge. I for one know plenty about Islam, a lot about Muslims, some modern mideast history and that's it. Everybody knows about Islamism and most here know about American foreign policy in the mideast. Your providing relevant background and specifics is much appreciated. You know I am not one to do any heavy scholarly or technological lifting when there are so many big strong men around.

Guys, please, this artillery display is not likely to attract vast amounts of women to the site, especially Canadian ones like I want. Haven't you noticed the boys are fighting something awful and not talking to each other and we might lose a couple? It's usually Sweet Reason here browsers, really.

Adam, the SEIU are here, surrounding me even as we speak. They are "the fastest-growing" local in Ontario, comprising nursing-home, homecare and food-service workers, over 70% women and many immigrants. Gord only knows what they are up to in the other provinces. BC being what it is, they are probably running the trains and radio stations out there. O Canada! Are we doomed to become even more Marxist than we already are?

sabotaged post. I name no names.

Aaaaaahhh, the police. I was thinking of the nurses and garbage collectors and so on...(my view being, the less anybody would want to do a job, the more you ought to pay them). Cops are chronically overpaid for one of the most statistically safe jobs anywhere, they are under-scrutinized,....G20, Ottawa, glub glub.... Firefighters, I don't know. That job is health-hazardous, and there are a lot of fires in California. If there were any way to freeze pay for every new intake of rookies for the years it would take to save the needed money, it would sure show who really wants to "serve and protect" and who just wants to wear the badge. Btw my brother-in-law was a cop as are four of my and my son's friends. They are wonderful.

Daunce, John Ridpath has money? Hmmmmm.... I may have to rethink my opinion of his views... Michael Well, I heard he had money....wait, you mean he doesn't, and I wasted a fan letter????

Of course I do not agree with "require" and "need"; you are projecting an argument I wasn't advancing. 1- the workers in the bad business may, or may not, attempt to unionize, for their own reasons. The requirement would be judged by them. I can only speak of the one workplace I knew where such happened.The place may go out of business, the boss might retire and somebody better take over, the workers could win the Lotto, anything may happen. I don't prescribe what should happen. Unionizing is one solution which has often worked. 2. - David Harriman called - he wants his title back! "The government" as an employer is as trustworthy and competent as the individual directors, managers etc are in their individual offices. Labour and management are not monoliths except to economists. I am sure you were a wonderful boss. Carol: Bad choice of words - require or need. Essentially, what I meant was that management/bosses who do not fall into that 5-15% do not provide the necessary soil fertilized by incompetence and corruption to permit a union to grow. Rand's Rearden Mills example. As far as government unions are concerned, I would like to develop this issue because: 1) it is overlooked by the citizenry; 2) government unions are literally breaking the financial integrity of the US, all 50 states, [or 57 as O'biwan claimed] almost every county, township, city, and village in my country; and 3) I think it is a valid question to ask as to why a government union is necessary or justified. Adam You are certainly right that the majority of nonunion workplaces are not broke and don't need fixin', due to good management. Your government union point is an important one, but I do not know the American situation, indeed I don't know the Canadian one in this sense -are our unions threatening the financial integrity of the country and all 10 provinces and 3 territories? And if so, is it necessary to prove that unions are not justified, to prevent disaster? I don't think so. It's a question of strict pragmatism, of working out a way of maintaining the economic structure without violating the rights of the individual worker (including the right to belong to a union). Who can do that, I have no clue.

Of course I do not agree with "require" and "need"; you are projecting an argument I wasn't advancing. 1- the workers in the bad business may, or may not, attempt to unionize, for their own reasons. The requirement would be judged by them. I can only speak of the one workplace I knew where such happened.The place may go out of business, the boss might retire and somebody better take over, the workers could win the Lotto, anything may happen. I don't prescribe what should happen. Unionizing is one solution which has often worked. 2. - David Harriman called - he wants his title back! "The government" as an employer is as trustworthy and competent as the individual directors, managers etc are in their individual offices. Labour and management are not monoliths except to economists. I am sure you were a wonderful boss.

Thanks for the clip. Yes, Paikin is good. The Agenda is on Mon-Fri from 8-9.We ought to be the best-informed voters in North America. I wonder how McKeever kept Ayn Rand's name off his lips!

Oh, I see. Good thing it wasn't him - no toyboy potential, and everybody knows Canadian Objectivists don't have any money, except for John Ridpath.

For many, I'll be charitable, say 15%. Since there are a lot of employers, that's still many people. Continuing in good faith, for some I'll say 5%. I was talking about why workplaces unionize initially, as I'm sure you know, and "A is bad but B is worse" is below your usual standard of discourse! I think everybody is interested in righting wrongs caused by longterm results/unintended consequences of righting past wrongs caused by righting even longer-past wrongs caused by... "but the 1820s Declaration....the common rights of Man proclaim" -the Corries (only appropriate folksong that occurs right now) Of course I meant "in the bad sense" to attach only to "exploitive", not to "honest", should have added a comma to make clearer,

XRay, come quick! "Bach Cariad" is Welsh for "Darling Boy"! Is that cute or what! And he doesn't want to pay for a new copy- pure McDuck! The treasure hunt continues....

Ah, but I must take issue with this, at least with the trade union part for now. As I've said before, there should be no need for unions. They only exist because of bad management. Unfortunately, most employers are not Objectivists, many are not moral or even sensible, and some are dishonest and exploitive, in the bad sense. Some consider injustice and discrimination to be a prerogative, however damaging it may be to their bottom line. Workplaces are unionized on a regular basis due to these factors. All union contracts are about money, of course, but the mantra of the workers who gather the courage to challenge the injustice is never "Better pay", but "Respect and Dignity". Don't make Adam bring back Norma Rae!

Sorry to elbow in Shayne, but whatever Brant drinks, I'll have what he's having. Green tea and Creamy Chocolate Ensure. --Brant Yessss!! My favourite!!

You had to push it, didn't you? Hey, it's all part of my Randucation. How to Make a Pun edits by:Jonathan E., Maluniu, Brandywine, Flickety (see all) Don't over-pun, punning too many times will decrease how punny your puns are. Don't learn so much material that no one will understand what you're talking about.Don't use specific subject puns on someone that you know wouldn't understand, for example, using a computer pun on someone that barely has a concept about what an operating system is.Make sure the pun is age-appropriate for the audience you're making it to. Making a perverted pun around a fifth grader will get you in hot water when their mother hears about it.Don't laugh at your own jokes when no one else is laughing. They probably didn't find it as funny as you did. Dear Madam: I know these rules, therefore I am qualified to break them. Yours coolly, Carol

Sorry to elbow in Shayne, but whatever Brant drinks, I'll have what he's having. (Except if it's rum, I hate rum) You are all great big grownup men, now get back to your Locke and Hume and take out the garbage.

I'd like to read your book, J Neil. Where is it available? http://pulpless.com/0606.html Jeez... you didn't even say, "Thanks for your interest." We appreciate your business. Due to the high volume of messages there might be a delay of up to 24 hours before a representative gets back to you. If you'd like a faster response time you may call our enhanced Customer Relations Hotline, but you will have to converse in Hindi. एक अच्छा दिन है. I guess that's why they call it "the Publishing Art"

(more targeted approach) I no longer care who's designing it, but I think Kate should wear a gown with a medieval-type gold-and-blue overskirt to tone in with William's uniform and revolutionize wedding gear (tho Catherine Clark did it first with her red-and white) and make Britannia cool again. I only care about fashion when royals get married and my own gown cost $13 off the rack and was picked out by someone else, but I love weddings. Uh, also philosophy of course, and money. Browsing ladies, are you in?