Of course you JUDGE no surprise!

You have an appreciation for Ayn Rand that many conservatives here do not.

Likewise for the Kavanaugh hearings and Google claimed to be a CIA Plot, the German Green movement claimed to have been "installed" by Rockefeller, and several other such pronouncements made here.

But his statement characterizing posts on this forum as "Peopel who have promted themselves to the level of our liberal lords and masters, to be able to determine YOUR post is a conspiracy theory, but MY post is truth, and then proceed to have an entire series of rants about how they know all, see all and you know nothing" is a gross smear with no basis and deserves no respect. Categorical disagreement with it is not enough.

I am not "unhappy". I judge his personal attacks for what they are.

Your vicious personal attacks on me when you first pronounced that you refused to read what I have written were the result of your intolerance towards explanations of the right of abortion contrary to your religion. It was not "for good reason". That is 'closed minded". It was not "respectful".

No one here "spouts chapter and verse" of Ayn Rand and the explanations and arguments here are not "trump cards" and not "narow minded". Your continued snide smears and insults are not "respectful", as you just demonstrated.

"our liberal lords and masters, to be able to determine YOUR post is a conspiracy theory, but MY post is truth,"
I respectfully but categorically disagree. Not all claims are equal. There is nothing wrong with dismissing extraordinary claims in the absence of extraordinary evidence. Claims like the idea that the ancient Greek story of Atlantis is related to aliens under the Bermuda Triangle should be dismissed out of hand. It's a straw man to equate dismissing bizarre conspiracy theories with being an overlord acting as an arbiter of all truth.

I'm sorry you are unhappy.

It been ages since I've seen a post from you, with good reason. I'm not sure who dinked with the settings but maybe something has changed.

Closed minded. Those who refuse to hear anything but what they elect to believe. You would say I am closed minded. Yet, I am here, and came here, around Objectivists to discuss the similarities of my Conservatism and the philosophy of Rand. Those conversations, years ago when this site was populated primarily by heavy hitter Objectivists, we're heated and, most often than not respectful. I'm still here. I'm still respectful. I still speak my mind and argue my points without berating people.

The closed mind spouts chapter and verse (Biblical or Rand makes no difference in this context) expecting that to justify a position and anticipating it as a trump card to shut down the discussion. The closed minded cannot, or perhaps stubbornly refuses to, see the reasoning of the other side of the argument because it doesn't align with that narrow view of how things 'should' be.

It for this very reason you've been the only person I've ignored in the 7 or so years I've been here.

(I didn't take the point)

Do believe you are talking to a pair of shoe laces. Me just a dino could be wrong, but I don't think so.
It's just something about yesterday's switcheroo ExistenceUniversity troll attack timing.
Hmm, the term "carpet bombing" comes to mind.
Perhaps, the end game is supposed to be this board's death from a thousand cuts.

The comments of one person do not "upset an entire community", nor would that necessarily be the source of the problem, nor is the goal necessarily to "create disharmony". It is true, however, that there are such militants here on a crusade, and they aren't here to support Ayn Rand's philosophy of reason.

There is no "why he did it" excuse for Dobrien's personal attacks, either that one or all the rest.

I would hope it's slightly right of center, it would be objective to advocate for big government.

Why was this post 'downvoted', just to confirm mminnick's point because some angry nihilist likes it that way?

The hit and run 'downvoter' illustrates what mminnick is talking about. How would the hit and runners like to explain downvoting admiration for and recommending Ayn Rand's nonfiction?

If the comments of one person can upset an entire community, then you have a problem. Ask why did that person strive to create disharmony? Did he/she accomplish his/her goal?

The hit and run 'downvoter' illustrates what mminnick is talking about. So is nickursis's smear.

You should have seen why he did it!

The hit and run 'downvoter' illustrates what mminnick is talking about, and so does exceller's smear.

The hit and run 'downvoter' illustrates what mminnick is talking about. How would the hit and runners like to explain the "ability to attain the impossible"?

The hit and run 'downvoter' illustrates what mminnick is talking about. How would the hit and runners like to explain the false quote?

There is a lot to learn that is very interesting in Ayn Rand's nonfiction. Even when discussing politics, she had a unique, philosophical approach making her work timeless.

That certainly does happen, but what kind of "mantra" and "closed minds" are you referring to? The "Objectivist core" certainly is missing from this forum, in part because so many have no interest in or understanding of what it is.

This post is itself a misrepresentation and a smear. Dobrien's posts are notorious for personal attacks on those who reject his opinions, as if no one has a right to counter what is promoted on a public forum and as if no reasons have been given. When promotions are rejected as contrary to the purpose of an Ayn Rand forum it is not without reason and not because they are "questions", which they are not. The personal attacks in response, substituting for discussion, most certainly do not belong here at all.

+1
Well said

Some people get almost hysterical about politics! I can't do that. I spent too many years in D.C. and oftentimes I couldn't tell a Democrat from a Republican. Conservative vs Liberal, yes! Mostly nice people, but some real stickers.