Huh? Was this directed at me, and if so, what do you mean?
You, in the sense that anyone could find Palin’s astonishment at not being able to talk about whatever she wanted to and her irritation in having to answer direct questions about statements she herself made, during an interview, “quite interesting”.
Some more interesting stuff: Video link.
You are a fucking idiot. You are correct that it is BASIC knowlege, and it is obvious you know nothing beyond that.
Also, thanks for the suggestion that I pad my bills. That is consistent with the thought of many of the more loser variety of poor people that rich people got that way by cheating.
Kind of like the tendency toward self-aggrandizment that is typical of Rand fans?
FWIW, I don’t think you pad your bills. I think you’re so full of shit that you squeak. Given that I’ve never met a Randian who wasn’t either a freshman or sufficiently intellectually and emotionally stunted as to merit the same consideration, I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re a liar, and not a grown-ass man who should know better.
You’re either a fervent disciple of St. Ayn, or a Trotskist provocatuer working to incite class war.
I assumed Rand Rover was just a fan of the maps.
What exactly do you mean by “I should know better”?
I think the only difference between me and most other people like me is I haven’t let people like you make me feel ashamed of my views. Also, most people like me don’t post on message boards, so you mopes should consider yourself lucky. 
What I found “quite interesting” was that even in that interview with Fox, she failed to bring her points, if there even are any, across. She claimed to want to talk about what she would bring and what values she holds, but instead attacked Obama.
I would have liked to hear her actually talk about something relevant, and found her failure to do so interesting. Perhaps ‘telling’ would have been a better word?
Oh, I do, very much so. You are the best propaganda point a lefty like me could ever wish for.
*most people like me don’t post on message boards *
No, they’re to busy posting all-capped rubbish to youtube.
Remember those Tonight Show segments where they ask current events questions to random stoned teenagers on the street?
Those facts are easily found on any news website and on the Department of Labor website. I won’t wait for an apology, you condescending little prick. Go fuck yourself.
As far as opinion goes, Rand is pretty much an orphan huddled against the storm. Well, other than the net, of course, where any lunacy can find a home. His avid suck-rich-cock McCain right-wingery doesn’t find much favor among economists either.
He’s also become a bit of bore. Greedy hardass, dazzled by his own excellence. Just not much material there for agreement, much less appreciation.
For a while I wondered whether Rand was just an unusually clever lefty provocateur but nope, he’s actually serious in his wingnuttery.
Nah, he’s just a troll. And a stupid motherfucker to boot.
In other words, you are unable to craft an argiment that they are facts and not opinions, so you resort to insults.
Hey, hey, hey. I’m not a mope. I’m a jamoke. Get it right.
Of course, you’re a tweezerdick yahoo, so I guess it’s all a wash.
Sorry, that was cricetus who said what I attributed to you. My apologies.
It’s really sad and telling that you think an idea as simple as “the government should not take money from the rich for the purpose of making cash handouts to the poor” is some far-out nutty thing and how dare I have the temerity to hold it. Shows how much of a far left echo chamber the SDMB really is.
FTR: Rand Rover has yet to comment on Friday’s unemployment report. Headline: 159,000 Jobs Lost in September, the Worst Month in Five Years.
Insults aside, I’ll note that armchair libertarians often have a pronounced aversion to matters empirical. This is not the case for all libertarians though: the Cato Foundation may use crude methods at times, but they do keep an eye on data as well as the actual practices of government.
What a stupid motherfucker.