I met her when She and Branden were still together. My son, and I met Barbara Branden some years later. Met several members of the "collective" over the years. But it was the novels, and the ideas that were life-changing.

congratulations, sir! I met Rand at 15, and my life
changed -- focused, with her help. and yes, our
rabid administration should be quarantined like
the ebola nations ... Remember, Folks, that the
CDC is a government agency!!! -- j

I was 14 when you were born.
If it were up to me I would put dogs in charge. Come to think of it, the "rulers" in Washington are nothing better than a pack of dogs with rabies.

It is most difficult to find someone in this world with whom you can agree with to such a high percentage.

and I thought that this nation was deranged for
electing, and then re-electing Slick Willie........... -- j

66 this december, and damned glad to make it
this far, sir!!! -- j

p.s. we have a part-aussie, and his
neutered condition would be preferable!

Well, he did fulfill one promise - hope and change... He changed us from a free nation to one oppressed, and gave us hope that he and his ilk would vanish... the sooner the better.

If no one votes for something other the Status-quo monoparty system (two names, one party?) then we are never going to break the hold the monopoly holds on us, and we delve deeper into the morass of totalitarianism and serfdom.

Having voted Libertarian for quite a while (except my bleak and misguided leftist years, when I voted indy or green) my not voting for either the RP or DP has not made one whit of difference. People tell me "You're throwing your vote away by not voting such-and-such"... I tell them by voting for more of the same-ol' same-ol', under the guise of "the lesser of 2 evils" THEY are...

...For the lesser evil is still... evil.

Oh,no doubt. Perot’s run was responsible for putting Clinton in office.

Howdy Doody?
You must be as old as me.
I suggested my beagle. One bark for yes, two barks for no. I'll bet she'll do better than the BHO regime. And by the way, she IS a bitch.

I would vote for Howdy Doody if I was convinced
that he would help to prevent the BHO/VJ machine
from continuing to take over the courts and the nation. -- j

I love this man. his insight is worth soooooo much! -- j

You and I both! He is an amazing man.

I do agree with what you said. Yes, absolutely the candidate who is a proven constitutionalist is the one who SHOULD, if there were any brains left, win. I'm looking at Tom Foley, weasel, as the conservative candidate here, tax and overspend Malloy as the socialist, er, democrat incumbent, or Tea Party backed Joe Visconti. He is my choice by a long shot. The problem is if he pulls viable votes away from a non democratic candidate running in opposition to the thieving crony Malloy. He isn't generating enough momentum at this point to overtake Malloy, and this is the quandary. The best person to be governor is Visconti. Will he have a snowballs chance in hell here? No. This state is already crippled with taxes, and so far upside down fiscally, we rank dead last in the country. But the moochers don't want that money train to stop. Problem with that though, is the money is LEAVING the station...

Many voters wanted "O" because they felt a change was needed but didn't know that change isn't always for the better.I voted twice for Ross Perot even knowing he couldn't win and as an independent canadate he got just 18% of the vote and did not get even one electoral vote. He did far better than any other third party man ever and spent millions to do it. I believe it altered the results of the election.

BTW -- I have great respect and admiration for Dr. Sowell!

It all depends on who runs. Should I vote for a person I don't really like on the theory that anyone on the right has got to be better than any lefty? Or, should I vote for a 3rd party candidate because he is closer to my ideals, even though it might put an Obamaite back in power? Very tough decision. I have to think that any track other than the ones followed by the left is better. True, it might wind up almost as bad, but if all you want is a sure thing, vote on the sun coming out tomorrow. One thing is for sure, though. If the Obama crew gets back in it will definitely be more of the same which is the path to eventual complete destruction of the American experiment.

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Thomas Sowell should know this (and I am pretty sure he does). Does the gradual decent into total evil any better than a less gradual decent? It seems to me the gradual decent may actually be more dangerous in that it allows one's sensitivity to change in that direction much the same way our sense of smell works.

Yes I know...there aren't any of those." I'd have to differ in that opinion. There is one possible candidate that would rather not run, but will if he feels he would be the most likely to actually put the constitution back into the government, and probably say goodbye to Obamacare, Obamacore, Michellefood, and other unnecessary and unconstitutional programs. Anyone at this site has got to know who I'm so far actually impressed with. He also seems to listen and actually respond to what was said, not just respond with trash. And he seems to have solutions to many of our issues. Hell, he even stated that he would listen to advisors, even listen to the military professionals, and others. Questioned why he thought he would be a good president, having no experience in politics, he said that political experience is what is wrong with politics today, they are nothing more than politicians. I even doubt he would seek a second term if he got a lot straightened out in one term. He is not a politician by anyone's definition. Wasn't that somewhat the way Ronald Reagan was, good heart and good mind, made for a good president?

Votes that go to 3rd party candidates, that may cause another party to lose an election can influence the losing party/politicians positions/platform.

Possibly just as much, or more, than casting your vote to the lesser of 2 evils.
It can also encourage more 3rd party candidates, and those with your views to more likely to run for any party.

Also - I think that the election of the more evil of 2 evils may also accelerate change for the better. (Depending on just how different the evils really are).

It is not so obvious to me trying to elect the lesser of two evils is the best approach
(especially between two typical demicans and republicrats).

At least you voted, which I look upon as a patriotic duty. I considered voting for ho-hum Romney to be the best chance of derailing Obama, who I consider to be dangerous for several reasons. Unfortunately, Romney is too ho-hum for too many people.

I choose not to vote for the evil, or lesser of. I voted for a 3rd party candidate. That was my way of protesting.

I keep having to do that. I'd like to feel really enthusiastic like I did with Ronald Reagan.
Voting against Obama amounted to voting for ugh1 and ugh2 but it was my patriotic duty.
To sit at home as many did because they did not like the choice of Mitt Romney is outside my scope of reasoning. Hey, that's a socialist who doubled our debt in the White House over there! Not to mention having done and doing other bad things--

thanks for pointing that out. I also disagree with that

Agreed, and that is the problem. You are forced to choose the lesser of 2 evils.

Before any candidate can make a difference in our messed up political quagmire they have to get elected. Most third party can't get enough votes and only water down votes for republicans no mater how great that third party person may be.Even if they get into office their agenda will be overlooked.