Freedom is the distance between Church and State

Why be born again when you can just grow up?
AUGUST 11, 2012 5:38PM

Should Obama Send Romney a Thank You Note c/o Paul Ryan?

Rate: 1 Flag

 

Perhaps it’s not as lame as the ‘Barbies for War!’ Wasilla huntress wannabe Vice in Go-Go Boots Sarah Palin, or as dumb the 'Hatred of God' Is Curse Of Russia, Dan Quayle, but it’s a Stunning, Terrible Choice in any event. In the Daily Beast Michael Tomasky writes,

Paul Ryan? Really? It’s a stunning choice. A terrible one too. By making it, Mitt Romney tells America that he is not his own man and hasn’t even the remotest fleeting desire to be his own man. He is owned by the right wing. Did I write a couple of weeks ago that Romney was insecure? Well—Q.E.D.

And what a demonstration! Frankly I’m only surprised Tomasky is surprised. A stunning, terrible, choice? Perhaps that all depends on which side you are on.

The companion pieces are wonderful and, while Michelle Goldberg’s report on Ryan's Extreme Abortion Views is no surprise to anyone I commend you to her far more relevant report on the free-fall of David Barton whom Glenn Beck once called “the most important man in America”. Thomas Nelson publishing company has decided to cease publication and distribution of David Barton’s controversial book, The Jefferson Lies: Exposing the Myths You’ve Always Believed about Thomas Jefferson, saying it has “lost confidence in the book’s details.

“Lost confidence in the book’s details”? Well, that’s putting it mildly. One can wonder how Thomas Nelson Publishing could even consider such a travesty from a garden variety Ignoramus Americanus after Harvard's renowned legal scholar Alan Dershowitz put such legal and historical Blasphemy to rest long ago. Thomas Nelson’s decision to publish such intellectual rubbish in the first place is a perfect example of the late Christopher Hitchens’ wonderful 1983 Harper’s essay titled “Goodbye to All That: Why Americans Are Not Taught History”.

In light of Romney taking to the tainted bait with a rusty hook sticking out, Michele Goldberg’s analysis of Paul Ryan, juxtaposed to her marvelous report on David Barton’s free fall, certainly causes me to re-evaluate my prior notion that the sinister beliefs of tub-thumpers, sinister windbags, and other improvident and volatile preachers and palpable frauds, won’t again play a role in this years election. Clearly Romney will have more questions to answer than just those about his tax returns and off-shore tax havens —and please notice (as the spin-scum conflate off-shore with out-source) how no one is talking about that issue. Not even the Democrats are willing to pull the scab off that festering wound. After all, it is axiomatic that those who seek equity must do equity and come forth with clean hands but even human rights activist and U2's front man Bono is accused of succumbing to the same hypocrisy by robbing the world's poorest people when he stores some of his wealth in a tax haven. So, since there are few cleans hands willing to come forward to seek equity I doubt we’ll be hearing much about that issue this election year. Just know, they are at it again!

But frankly, from Obama’s point of view, I suspect Romney's blundering capitulation to America’s nastiest faction will be a gift to Obama.

In the spirit of Chicago ‘vote early and vote often.’

Cheers,

Francois Arouet


Copyright © 2012

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
With all the talk we hear about Ayn Rand why has no one noticed what should be obvious: Ayn Rand unequivocally endorsed and defended domestic terrorism by self-righteous misfits.

This rather brainless infatuation with Ayn Rand's ruthlessness has always troubled me. People's inability to see the obvious is telling testimony to both poor reading skills and an abysmal lack of critical thinking.

Why does no one notice that Howard Roark (Rand's Fountainhead hero) was a misfit lunatic terrorist who blew up the Cortlandt housing project and destroyed the homes of thousands of poor families. Why? For money? No. He was already making plenty of money! For recognition? No. He had already gotten plenty of recognition despite the conspiracy against him. And what was the conspiracy him?! MONOPOLY of the few who controlled the media and manipulated the mob as well as monopoly of one business entity that dominated the market. Sound familiar?

Did Roark conspire to blow up the housing project for the poor because he did not get credit for it's creation? No. He forfeited credit to allow others to realize his vision! If he got a good lawyer he could have protected that agreement and enforced that contract! What? We are to believe he would trust the honor and integrity of the very people who he knew were out to destroy him? Well then add the word ‘fool’ to terrorist!

He blow up the housing project for the poor purely to satisfy his own insatiable ego and to be RIGHT. I can think of no greater definition of a self-righteous asshole than Ayn Rand's hero who was willing to resort to actual terrorism and destruction of property and risk of life with Rand's ruthless, sanctimonious, blessing.

And remember, the equally ruthless Dominique Francon (his co-conspirator) and lover was almost killed in that terrorist act. So Roark was willing to destroy not only property but life too, as well as others' contributions to the poor, merely because one small minority with power and virtual monopoly bastardized his vision. Sound familiar?

That Rand and her followers should glorify the self-righteous terrorist ruthlessness of Roark and D. Francon and not even notice the willful nihilistic destruction they defend has always mystified me. The theme of this book was not merely the disdain for helping others (altruism which Roark ridiculed) but the willful deconstruction of what others built FOR others and the egotistical selfish willingness to denying the poor homes just because one smug, sanctimonious, self-righteous, architect would not allow his "vision" to be tarnished and so he was willing to conspire in a* terrorist act* to destroy property and even life if necessary to satisfy his insatiable ego.

What an horrific and despicable heroism Randians worship. And they speak with the unwitting revelation of the personalities we see in Browning's 'personae' poems where the speaker unwittingly reveals the evil he does as an exercise in virtue.
Well, at least the Ryan choice should expose the faultlines between the two parties. It will make the VP debate especially interesting, though I don't think they ever effect the outcome.