OT, of course.
Having fun on the Clinton thread? How's the godless, commie, pinko liberal holding up against the purveyors of "truth"? -VBG-
Occasionally it's sort of fun, but mostly it's exceedingly depressing. We have our disagreements, but I never meant to put you in the cheesy high school debate tricks crowd, I give you full credit for honesty. The purveyors of "truth", on the other hand, make me long for the relatively civilized Regimond techniques, where I was mostly just a "Microsoft hater". Them guys are mean. Not only that, I've been informed by the God squad that it's blasphemous to say they're mean.
Principles do matter.
Yeah, well, that's fine, but you're going to have to explain to me how Objectivist/Libertarian principles apply to that other political/legal matter, as Dowd would have it. Is there a secret Libertarian faction within the Republican party that's going to assert control once the coup is complete? Seems like the "Decline of the West due to Clinton" faction is looking pretty mainstream these days. Them guys don't look too Libertarian to me.
On Microsoft's legal matters, you can argue political philosophy if you want. You want to get moralistic about it, you got to take up Rand's creed on other matters with the new Republican mainstream. The legal process on the antitrust front seems quite straightforward and honest compared to the pseudo legal battle Clinton faces. Or do you want to take up the "Newt the non-partisan" flag? I'm a partisan hater for doubting that one, I've been told.
Cheers, Dan. |
