"You did NOT vote democratic,"
No, I voted in the Democratic primary (with a capital D to distinguish it from the general adj meaning of or relating to democracy).

"You would raise money for Ron Paul, but you vote for obama and will for hillary clinton. That is a major contradiction. What is not a contraction between Paul and the other two? Please explain. "
I like Paul b/c he is the *only* mainstream candidate to get the issues of liberty on the table. That's a great reason to support/vote for him.
None of this is reason to alienate the mainstream political process. It would be purer only to support candidates who raise issues but won't win, and *never* to support mainstream Republicans and Democrats. If everyone did that, it would work. If not, it may or may not help more than having ties with candidates who actually win. There's also the self-interested reason of wanting to have some support among people who actually win to keep gov't off your back. Most of the people who win are not philosophers. They're personable and charismatic. I don't think they're anti-liberty. They go with what works.

You did NOT vote democratic, you voted democrat. Words have power and meaning, use them correctly.

You would raise money for Ron Paul, but you vote for obama and will for hillary clinton. That is a major contradiction. What is not a contraction between Paul and the other two? Please explain.

"Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. As atom is itself, and so is the universe; neither can contradict its own identity; nor can a part contradict the whole. No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge. To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one's thinking: to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one's mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality." - from Galt's speech.

I voted in the Democratic primary for Obama. Paul would be my first choice fundraiser to attend, but he didn't have any near me. He would be my first choice fundraiser to attend a) b/c there would probably be a lot of high-tech people and b) b/c he raises questions uncomfortable for those with a vested interest in the status quo. I remember thanking some Paul demonstrators as I walked out of a Hillary Clinton fundraiser.

Did you vote for, donate money, or campaign for Ron Paul?

"Both Obama and Clinton, and whole progressive thinking is collectivist/statist, in that it uses force to violate the rights of the individual by taking from those that produce to give to those that don't."
I would say that about any politician who accepts the bipartisan consensus, which does not follow the three main elements you mention.

Ron Paul was the only mainstream (i.e. in the debates) presidential candidate who didn't accept the consensus, at least from the clips I saw on the TV.

Thank you!

What a surprise, it took until after the election to find these emails.

Next up, the DNC realizes it's time to sacrifice O and the Kenya birth records are miraculously discovered.

Yepper.. Hey, Welcome to the Gulch :)

so, the love of my life is raped and pillaged, and
before I can succeed with a defense, Dinesh
D'Souza has documented her demise. . sickening. -- j

p.s. just channeling Rand a bit, also.......

Yep, that's the way I see DC and the MSM 'working' today. And not to our benefit at all.

isn't that the technique? delay until the scandal
has died down, and then release heavily redacted
versions -- no-good for evidence -- and grin....... -- j

Nah?!

Probably the only unredacted words will be "the", "and", "to", and "but". What, me cynical?!

Will anyone believe the emails after this obvious cover up and lie are the actual emails in question? I certainly will not. If the IRS with the full might of government behind them cannot treat their backups and emails as well as the smallest of private companies can and are required to do then something is of course very very wrong.

It is also amusing in a dark way that the NSA collects ALL of our electronic communication and keeps them for 15 years while the IRS can't keep track of its emails in even the most elementary way. Yeah, right.

Anyone that knows anything about computer systems, especially those under high accountability rules the government imposes on most all businesses, knows that it is impossible for emails to selectively and conveniently disappear from all legally required retention and normal backup procedures. Anyone that believes this is a legit excuse is simply ignorant. It is a blatant case of government big lie and refusing to abide by the law.

Eh, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE????

Actually I expected a higher number myself.

Between orders to minions, snarky gossip, and of course "cover your ass" memos and other activities multiplied by her time as a government 'crat...I expected at least 6 figures...;)

We are talking about the overreach of the IRS in this case, driven by officials like Lois Lerner and it appears the IT department as well as others as yet unknown, with a political agenda that is in alignment with the Obama administration. These are observable and verifiable realities.

You seem to miss many critical points in your understanding of Objectivism. One of those is your stated support, financially, with time and with your vote for Obama and your planned same support for Hillary Clinton. Both Obama and Clinton, and whole progressive thinking is collectivist/statist, in that it uses force to violate the rights of the individual by taking from those that produce to give to those that don't. That is the opposite of Objectivism. In the below statement of Objectivist political theory taken from the Atlas Society site, Obama, Clinton and the progressive agenda violates all three of the main elements of that theory.

The Objectivist political theory has three main elements, all of which draw upon the classical liberal political tradition. First, the foundation of the political system should be the fundamental right to live free from physical force. Second, government has the strictly limited function of protecting rights. Third, government power should be exercised in accordance with objective laws. Capitalism is the politico-economic system implied by these principles. http://www.atlassociety.org/objectivist_...

Yea, that is the problem......there will be so much redaction/editing that it doesn't matter what they "find". It will all be useless.

The most amazing part of this story is that there were THIRTY THOUSAND such e-mails.

It's all in the secret Presidential book. You know, the one we are not suppose to know about... Mr. Riley wrote about it in his book. LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly, but to me the question will now be: Who, at the IRS or anywhere else, really pissed off someone in the WH to the point that they could suddenly "find" the records... and who will be the designated fall-guy/scapegoat who'll be thrown under the bus...
Business, as usual, in DC, eh? Stay tuned.

AND, as I usually say, and said when the tapes were first reported 'missing in action,' Wait Three... days, weeks, months... for more 'truth' to surface. It works nearly 100% of the time! And everyone forgets that, every time, especially the breathless MSM...

That was funny!
Thanks!

Y'know, if those tapes haven't been destroyed, today's technology probably COULD tell what was under the 'hum and rumble.'
!

My understanding of Objectivism (from Fountainhead and AS) is it's about owning your life and what you create with it, it's about the sanctity of your own mind, examining the universe based on observation and reason, and rejecting shibboleths / orthodoxy / group identity. It's the complete opposite of what your rhetorical question represents.