I dare you to read Fountainhead.

Works of fiction have always been abused to justify beliefs (see: The Bible). But GEORGE ORWELL quotes are the real bread-and-butter of political hacks. Regardless of your ideology, you can always find a pithy Orwell quote to hide behind.

"Dickens is one of those authors who are well worth stealing." - George Orwell

By the way, in your capitalized sentence with all the exclamation marks it should be "YOU'RE" not "YOUR." The word "your" is possessive. It denotes ownership. The contraction "you're" is a contraction of a subject, "you," and the verb, "are."

Go on home folks.
Nothing much to see here.
Not one of your better efforts.

Patrick,
"Fiction is for escaping reality, not adapting to it." Tell that to the southerners in 1865 after "Uncle Tom's Cabin" came out in 1850. I think they might not agree that some works of fiction aren't about changing things.

Hi Pat,
Good article. And welcome to using Microsoft Word spell and not catching everything. They just like shooting the messenger.

At UNH we read both Atlas Shrugged (political science) and Lord of the Flies (sociology). Our conclusion of both was, entertaining but not reality. Neither could happen. Homo-sapiens can not, do not, form the group behavior depicted in either book. It doesn’t surprise me that conservatives come up with laws for a species that does not exist. And the simplistic thinking electorate just follows along. Look on the bright side. Liberals eventually win the issues. Always!

Is this aimed at our esteet Lakewood City Council? Could have fooled me...

I enjoy your creative writing, caps, grammer and all (sic).

I am amazed that someone would present commentary on a book they have never read. It would seem to me that the presentation is therefore grounded in ideology and speculation rather than facts. There is a bit of an intellectual flaw in such an effort.

Throughout the centuries there were men who took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision. Their goals differed, but they all had this in common: that the step was first, the road new, the vision unborrowed, and the response they received — hatred. The great creators — the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors — stood alone against the men of their time. Every great new thought was opposed. Every great new invention was denounced. The first motor was considered foolish. The airplane was considered impossible. The power loom was considered vicious. Anesthesia was considered sinful. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid. But they won.
—Ayn Rand

It seems fitting that Mr. Giusto would comment on a book he hasn't read, the same as he would misrepresent the position of Rick Santorium. He probably has never bothered to research the policy positions of Mr. Santorium, otherwise he would know that Senator Santorium has never advocated that his personal religious views become government policy. But then the left can't defend their own positions with any substanative arguments, so they deliberately mis-characterize the positions of Conservatives and argue against those. Someone on this post stated that Liberals always win. The times when they do win they don't do it in the arena of ideas but rather by mis-representing their poistion or by implementing their policies through the courts instead of through the legislative process. I'd like for any Liberal to tell me any Liberal policy in the last 70 years that has been a success.

Mr. Koch...read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals".

The fifth rule is: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

The thirteenth rule is: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

I think that is what we have here.

Well said Phyllis. Saul Alinsky's book is, after all, the manual for the current administration. That's not me saying this but the President himself. By the way, Saul's book is dedicated to Satan, again a fact, not a matter of opinion.

The tactics of Saul Alinsky, Barrack Obama and other community agitators are dishonest and immoral. They use class-warfare to convince groups of people that they are victims and the source of their victimization are those who are wealthier. Alinsky and his ilk operate under the premise that the ends justify the means, so lies and thugery are not beneath them. They, like the left in general, never judge the results of their policy and efforts, only their "good" intentions. The fact is that poverty, government dependence and crime have only increased in the communities in which Alinsky and Obama practiced their craft. But of course their results are never judged. They work to empower government to confiscate wealth from those who have earned it and give it to those who haven't. Abraham Lincoln said, "You can't make the poor man wealthy by making the wealthy man poor." The late economist Milton Freidman said, "The best remedy for poverty is wealth." That is why a free market operating within a few guidelines will create the most prosperity for the greatest number of people. Consider that most of the advancements in the last 100 years in medicine, technology and other areas of endeavor came from the American private sector. Thomas Edison, Alexander Grahm Bell and others didn't depend on government to fund their projects. Read more of my insights on my blog at: http://smallcraftadvisorychronicles.blogspot.com/

Thank you, Phyllis. I wish those on the left would see the truth of how Liberal government policy has destroyed the very people they claim to want to help. In the 1950s and early 1960s the black family had a higher rate of marriage and lower illigitamcy rates than most other segments of society. After 50 years of Lyndon Johnson's great society, what Daniel Patrick Moynahan feared would happen has happened, the government has replaced the father in low-income homes. Starr Jones wrote a very good book called, "Uncle Sam's Plantation". Starr was a welfare mother but changed her life and makes the point that Liberal policy enslaves people, especially her fellow blacks.

Great essay Patrick! One of your best. What I find most amusing about the tea party types is their reverence of Alisa Rosenbaum, aka Ayn Rand, a Jewish-born atheist. She grew up in Russia to well off parents who lost everything in the revolution, an experience which of course shaped her philosophy. The irony of the right wing Christians quoting her makes me laugh. I wonder how she would feel about being a hero of the Christian Conservatives. BTW, in late life when she had cancer she relied on Medicare because even with two successful books her medical bills would have wiped her out. All of which should make us all shrug.

Sonia, comparing Jesus to Saul Alinsky is a false analogy. To label Jesus as a community organizer is very close to blasphemy. You totally misinterpret the mission Jesus was sent to us to accomplish in the name of his Father.

Lynda practices Saul's fifth rule for radicals very well. Ridicule is a winner as it proves truth! LOL!

Sonya...I love old time proverbs! In Russia, when communism reigned, you are aware that farming became a collective, government owned effort and there was resulting poor worker productivity?

At least when the Czars were in charge, before the revolution, these farms could set the price for their produce, not the government, and there were people to buy their crops upon harvest. After the revolution they were all 'workers': 'FROM each according to his ability, TO each according to his needs.

And, Sonya, we can kill business enterprise in order to punish the rich, but it is these very entities which provide the jobs. Whether it be farmers and their employees, manufacturing and their employees, oil companies and the jobs they provide, and so forth...we can tax and regulate them out of existence. Then what do we have? No businesses, no jobs and no taxpayer money to fund schools, police, etc. Think about it.

Well, Sonya, sorry you were so personally offended by my comments. Mere disagreements in interpretations of Jesus and His purpose or message does not infer limits on free speech. Nor does a disagreement imply that one's choice heroes or villains is mandated by anyone or anything. Thus there is no threat of loss of free speech nor anyone forbidding you to worship a cactus or a pile of dirt.

As to 'Rules for Radicals', I think your attack on me fits nicely into rule 13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it. When you freeze your target, you disregard rational but distracting arguments, then as you carry out your attack. You have demonstrated 'your' conviction that all the angels are on 'your side' and all the devils are on the other. pps 127-134

Haha, "BAD GRAMMER?"

I think its all bout GRAMMAR/GRAMMER! LOL! Maybe its about Gramma?

Rule number 5 is 'ridicule' your opponent. I think ridicule is making fun of something or someone. I believe I disagreed and supported my disagreements with opinion or facts. I don't believe you ridiculed me, nor I you. We simply disagreed.

Phyllis,
Your bravery in the face of lefist attacks is inspiring. Those on the left instinctively use the tatics of "Rules..." evene if they have never read it. The reason for this is because they can't defend their positions in the arena of ideas. Watch the upcoming general election and notice how the Obama campaign will attack the republican candidate because he can't defend his record. For years I have asked those on the left for one example of a Liberal policy that has been successful, to date all I have gotten is ridicule and scorn, but no successful policy.

Thanks, Damon! I enjoy the 'exchange'. I enjoy seeing 'how minds work'. Although a lot of the time accusations from the left get personal and snarky and even sometimes downright nasty....I love it! LOL! By the way, I couldn't sign up for your blog as I don't understand the sign up and am wary of proceeding through the various entities such as google and so forth.