About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Post 0

Thursday, September 18 - 7:20pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Sorry to those who clicked the link hoping to see Ed's quote (and the rest of the article) -- but were brought to a page requiring a sign-up with the newspaper's website instead.

I got the link from being on the e-mailing list for The Atlas Society and, from my email account, I could link straight to the article without signing up. Next time I'll double-check the link from outside of my email -- before posting something as a news link here.

Ed





Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Thursday, September 18 - 7:22pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Well shiver me timbers.

You can get to the article -- without signing up with Boston Globe -- via The Atlas Society website. From the home page, click on "Hudgins Quoted in Boston Globe on John McCain" (under Recent Center News); and then click on "Boston Globe" in the first paragraph of the linked article.

Ed

(Edited by Ed Thompson on 9/18, 7:24pm)




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Thursday, September 18 - 8:10pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
It seems to me it just gets harder and harder for people to justify voting for McCain, no matter how strategic in stopping Obama. This year, "screwed" is the watchword.

Regards,
--
Jeff




Post 3

Thursday, September 18 - 10:05pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit

It seems to me it just gets harder and harder for people to justify taking chemotherapy, no matter how strategic in stopping cancer.



Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Post 4

Thursday, September 18 - 10:47pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Chemotherapy, cancer... those ARE two words that come to mind with McCain. Along with faith-based, big government, minimal grasp of free-market principles, no grasp of monetary policy, sacrifice and service instead of individual rights, kind of a continuation of the old disease, huh?



Post 5

Friday, September 19 - 4:21amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
It matters less who the President is than which party has a majority in the House and Senate, along with the party of the President relative to those. 

The Clinton years were a continuation of the Reagan Revolution. 

The mindset that focuses on the presidency is found in the Libertarian Party managers who organize the delegates to the convention in alphabetical order by state.

All politics is local.
The inverse-square law cannot be evaded.




Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 6

Friday, September 19 - 6:00amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Mike,

I realize the wisdom in the truism that all politics is local (you change the world by starting with yourself, your family, and your neighborhood), but the SEC just banned short-selling.

How in the hell is that local?

Ed




Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 7

Friday, September 19 - 6:26amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Steve, everything you just said applies with Obama in spades. The man is the worst socialist candidate we have had since FDR. If I had my choice, it would be a forbes/giuliani ticket. You can pretend that am advocating chemotherapy fror the fun of it. It is a fool who sees no difference between cancer and treatment. The choice is not whether or not McCain is ideal. The context is a choice between candidates. Are you unable to understand the analogy? I'll make it clearer - you can choose Obama's cancer, McCain's (hopefully) sublethal poison, or the feel-good faith-healing of a fantasy vote for the Libertarian party.



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Friday, September 19 - 7:18amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Might as well post the notice from our website which takes a few more shots at McCain (See below).

By the way, at the 2001 Summer Seminar I gave a talk on "Do Americans Still Value Freedom?" and gave a lot of examples about why both attitudes and practices with respect to freedom are so mixed. One of my points concerned a failure to think in principles, to take a Chinese menu approach to public policy and everything else. And I gave John McCain as an example of that sort of practice. Sigh, nothing has changed. But this isn't to say that socialist Obama wouldn't be far worse.

Ed Hudgins
-------

Hudgins Quoted in Boston Globe

Dr. Edward Hudgins, executive director of The Atlas Society, was quoted in a Boston Globe article on September 18, 2008 entitled Amid turmoil, McCain turns to regulation. This piece looked at the Republican presidential candidate’s recent advocacy of more government regulation in the face of the problems in the banking and housing markets.

 

Many observers quoted in the article criticized McCain for having a history of favoring deregulation and changing his position only in the past few days for political reasons. But the Globe reported that:

 

Edward L. Hudgins, former director of regulatory studies at the Cato Institute, and the executive director of the Atlas Society, a Washington-based free-market think tank, called John McCain ‘someone who is not a man with firm ideological or economic principles. It is not that he is not passionate. It’s that he doesn't have a rule that he could generally apply to any situation’.” \

 


In portions of the interview with journalist Farah Stockman not included in the article, Hudgins observed that McCain has always called himself an admirer of Teddy Roosevelt, the Republican president known as a “trust-buster” and opponent of big business. Hudgins also observed that McCain’s record on free markets has been mixed, criticizing wasteful government spending on the one hand but also opposing tax cuts on the other.

As with most elections, this one shows philosophical confusion and the desperate for a discussion in terms of clear, rational, moral principles as well as sound economics. This country needs the Objectivist perspective now more than ever!




Post 9

Friday, September 19 - 8:43amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Ted,

I agree that Obama would be the worse of the two evils - but we are only talking about these ridiculous choices because people won't vote for a candidate that DOES fit our principles AND is on the ballot. You go ahead and keep on making fun of Barr, and do the same thing next time, and next time, and watch - surprise, it will get even worse.



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 10

Friday, September 19 - 9:08amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Ted,

Steve has a point, as did Rand -- 47 years ago:

Ayn Rand's Message to the GOP Candidates

McCain's recent antics show us that not just little -- but nothing -- has changed in over four decades of voting for "lesser evils."

Ed




Post 11

Friday, September 19 - 11:50amSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Steve, if Barr weren't running on the Libertarian (read pacifist child-sex party) ticket he would probably be getting my vote. I live in NY and can afford to vote third party, since McCain can't win here. Does that count as picking on him?



Post 12

Friday, September 19 - 12:21pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Ted's got reasons for not wanting to vote for Barr - because of his affiliation with the Libertarian party. Fair enough. But people also have good - even better - reasons for not voting for McCain or Obama. If the argument holds for Barr, then it applies even more strongly to the other two candidates. So Ted, will you be joining my ranks as a non-voter this year! :-)

Regards,
--
Jeff



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 13

Friday, September 19 - 1:17pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
What astonishes me is that people call for more regulation in one of the most highly regulated business in the country. Why can't anyone in the MSM understand that regulation is the problem.

BTW - Stephen Hicks created a cute spreadsheet that plots the path to the collapse of Fannie-May and Freddie-Mac.



Post 14

Friday, September 19 - 1:43pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Ed,

Thanks for the link. That was about 4 years after the publication of Atlas Shrugged. She was so right!



Post 15

Friday, September 19 - 1:58pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
I reside in NY and will most likely not vote this year. Would there were a classical liberal Perot.



Post 16

Friday, September 19 - 2:47pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Steve,

In the video, Rand lists the three arguments today's (yes, "today's" -- it's still relevant, over 4 decades later) ... arguments today's conservatives use in order to justify capitalism:

(1) the Argument from Faith
(2) the Argument from Tradition
(3) the Argument from Depravity

Considering his recent statements about how greed is destroying Wall Street -- think about that statement for just a little bit of time! -- considering what he said about greed being the cause of our current crisis, I think McCain would have to be categorized as one of those misguided conservatives attempting to justify capitalism with the Argument from Depravity.

Would you agree with that analysis? Is he even justifying it at all?

Ed

(Edited by Ed Thompson on 9/19, 2:48pm)




Post 17

Friday, September 19 - 3:17pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Ed,

I watched the Ayn Rand video and heard her list the different arguments, but I only heard her describe the first two, faith and tradition. I didn't hear her description of the argument from depravity.

His justification for regulation is the Christian moral position on self-interest - it's greed, which is sinful, which government should regulate.



Post 18

Friday, September 19 - 3:31pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Steve,

You're right about the video, but probably on the wrong track with the arguments.

As I understand them, the Argument from Faith says that God blessed the USA, and capitalism was born here ... so ... so ... so God must approve of capitalism -- and you just have to have faith in that matter. What you described rings more true with the Argument from Depravity -- where we're all considered to be a bunch of sinners, forever tarnished -- requiring some freedom just because any imposed order would be imperfect (because of being man-made). Freedom to accidentally do some good in the world, because by accident is the only way we can ever do any good -- relying on the power of our own minds.

For Rand's full exposition of these three arguments, view the fourth entry here (from "Conservatism: An Obituary", CUI, p 196).

Ed




Post 19

Friday, September 19 - 3:50pmSanction this postReply
Link
Edit
Ed,

I see him making ringing, moral denunciations of greed. But that is just key campaign rhetoric for regulation or the financial markets. By calling for regulation, he is arguing for fascism or socialism so he isn't making a feeble, flawed argument for free enterprise - not here. He has jumped in bed with Obama and from different sides of the same bed they are shouting at the rest of us, "Vote for me! My regulations would be better than his!"

I don't remember hearing him justify capitalism - I don't think he ever does - he is a middle of road guy - not a conservative. He does justify lots of other things as arising out of faith and other things out of tradition.



Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page
User ID Password reminder or create a free account.