Intellectual dishonesty

So the Canadian people want the right to choose private healthcare, along with our Supreme court declaring that prohibiting this choice to suffering Canadians is immoral. Add to this hundreds of years of historical evidence of socialist aims, their documented cultural stagnations, their predictable shortages, endless famines, wars and misery. And now the latest body to speak out against socialized medicine; the general council of the Canadian Medical Association voted to approved private healthcare. Decreeing that doctors are unable to give proper attention to their patients, in the under funded, mismanaged, bureaucrat ridden public system. Doctors are now telling us that the Canadian system is failing Canadians, that Canadians are needlessly suffering for a collapsing ideology.

And what are the leftist retorts that I’m reading
“Well this just shows that doctors are greedy” and
“It makes sense, of course doctors just want more money too” and
“of course doctors want a private system they stand to make the biggest gains”

Enough. I won’t tolerate these arbitrary statements. If you want to have intellectual arguments, ideas must evaluated on their merit, which means their logical premises, and then the drawn conclusions from those premises. It is the mark of a cowardly intellectual who in defense of an idea attack s the opponent who presents the idea; instead of the "idea".

Example:
Man 1: Price controls cause shortages.
Man 2: You are greedy and stupid!
(and then the left turns to the polls to see won the argument… where‘s the logic “well more people think that the earth is round, so that make me right“… ahh moral relativism)

Anyway, this quote from Dr. Leonard Peikoff regarding intellectual dishonesty should sum up what I think about the left in general. www.http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=objectivism_fv&printer_friendly=1

"Now we must note that falsehood does not necessarily imply vice; honest errors of knowledge are possible. But such errors are not nearly so common as some people wish to think, especially in the field of philosophy. In our century, there have been countless mass movements dedicated to inherently dishonest ideas—e.g., Nazism, Communism, non-objective art, non-Aristotelian logic, egalitarianism, nihilism, the pragmatist cult of compromise, the Shirley MacLaine types, who "channel" with ghosts and recount their previous lives; etc. In all such cases, the ideas are not merely false; in one form or another, they represent an explicit rebellion against reason and reality (and, therefore, against man and values). If the conscientious attempt to perceive reality by the use of one's mind is the essence of honesty, no such rebellion can qualify as "honest."
The originators, leaders and intellectual spokesmen of all such movements are necessarily evaders on a major scale; they are not merely mistaken, but are crusading irrationalists. The mass base of such movements are not evaders of the same kind; but most of the followers are dishonest in their own passive way. They are unthinking, intellectually irresponsible ballast, unconcerned with logic or truth. They go along with corrupt trend-setters because their neighbors demand it, and/or because a given notion satisfies some out-of-context desire they happen to feel. People of this kind are not the helplessly ignorant, but the willfully self-deluded."
Yours tryly,
Angry roughneck