Obama's Friend and Funder William Pol Pot Ayers

Lindsay Perigo's picture
Submitted by Lindsay Perigo on Wed, 2008-10-29 04:41

May the lovers of America-hater Obama examine their consciences, if they have them.


( categories: )

You're on to it Scherkster

gregster's picture

And about time you acknowledged Osama as an America-hater.

Good man.

Lovers of America-hater Obama

William Scott Scherk's picture

A new poll out by America-hating USA Today/Gallup notes a surprising result to the question "What man living today do you admire most?"

Most Admired Man:

1. Barack Obama ------ 32%
2. George W. Bush ---- 5%
3. John McCain ------- 3%
4. Pope Benedict XVI*- 2%
Billy Graham --------- 2%
Bill Clinton --- 2%

The story notes 'It's the first time a president-elect has topped the annual survey in more than a half-century.'

The comments on the story run some 2,210 deep.

President-Elect Barack Obama takes a group photo with Marines after his workout at the Kaneohe Bay Marine Corps Base in Kailua, Hawaii, on Monday. (Photo: Lawrence Jackson, AP)


In 1938 Hitler wanted to

Aaron's picture

In 1938 Hitler wanted to annex the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia, i.e. the areas with over 50% ethnic Germans, and had the (very thinly veiled) threat of doing so by force if it wasn't willingly handed over. Neville Chamberlain was prime minister of the UK at the time, and did not resist Germany's demands, coming to an agreement in Munich for UK to stand by as Germany took over the Sudetenland. Given context, what he actually did was not so disgraceful as what he said. If England went to war with Germany in 1938 it would have been to prevent areas with >50% of the people wanting to join Germany from doing so. That would have been an incredibly unpopular cause, getting virtually no support within the nation, let alone other nations even within the British empire. England was also far weaker militarily in 1938 than in Sept 1939; despite what he said publicly, he didn't trust Hitler enough not to start significant military buildup after Munich. Given that, I don't fault Chamberlain as some would for not taking UK into a more lopsided, ally-less war in 1938. However, there's no excuse for acting as if Germany were anything but a bully in the Munich payoff, for not publicly recognizing the fact that Hitler was an untrustworthy megalomaniac, that England was arming herself and recommend others do the same. Instead, following Munich Chamberlain didn't voice his distrust of Hitler, and made the now-infamous speech declaring 'peace for our time'.


Just google ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... something like 1938 Munich Agreement, or Appeasement. I'm sure that'll yield rich pickings.


Kasper's picture

The lesson of Hitler and Chamberlain. Can you point me to where I can educate myself about that please?
My parents think that it is a good idea to negotiate unconditionally otherwise you just have genocide. I need armor man!!!!

In the classrooms!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

While the parents weren't looking.

Airhead America is older than we think.

Robert's picture

Linz, how do you think the young got to be the way they are if it wasn't at their parent's knees?

Dinner tonight ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... Chez Lanza with a veteran broadcaster, 50 years old or so, and his wife. Ex-member of the USLP. Hates Big Government, so he says. Supporting Obama. Couldn't explain why, except to say he loved the idea of sitting down unconditionally with enemies. When I asked what he thought the lesson of Hitler/Chamberlain was, he did not know what or whom I was talking about (!!!!), and said he didn't worry about history. Unbelievable. Airhead America is older than we think.

Obama is a symptom

Suma's picture

as many have noted.

But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. - John Adams

Linz:"Big questions, and

Jmaurone's picture

Linz:"Big questions, and maybe I'd be better off not getting exercised about them, since I can't do anything anyway, but it breaks my heart to see what's happening."

 Well, you can stop being upset about it once others STOP advocating for other countries to have a vote in our presidential election. As Holzer stated in his letter, there are forces trying to turn THIS country into a country like those in socialist Europe...so if they can advocate for that, by all means, PLEASE keep speaking, even if you can't vote...




....A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile...

Ha, Nephew!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Visceral reaction is understandable when a man before a cheering crowd ahead in electoral polls comes right out and pisses on the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers, and everything that made the United States worth living in. Fuck ANYONE who can't see that!


But who's worse - the man doing the pissing or the cheering crowd lapping it up and egging him on? My visceral reaction was, at bottom, stupid. Wouldn't get to the root of the problem at all. At some point, though, I suspect freedom-lovers are going to have to repair to arms to get it back.

I honestly don't know, Luke ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

That's very rational of you.

Rationality should never be equated with equanimity in the face of outrage. As Bros. Vardo and Maurone have noted, what Obama is proposing is outrageous, and folk should be boiling mad. Instead, Airhead America is buying into it in a way it never did before. At what point does it become irrational for freedom-lovers to continue putting up with it? What would constitute the equivalent of the "abuses and usurpations" that drove the Founding Fathers to arms? Is America already past that point? Big questions, and maybe I'd be better off not getting exercised about them, since I can't do anything anyway, but it breaks my heart to see what's happening.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Visceral reaction...

mvardoulis's picture

...is understandable when a man before a cheering crowd ahead in electoral polls comes right out and pisses on the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers, and everything that made the United States worth living in. Fuck ANYONE who can't see that! I'd say you should hide here at my place until your flight home, Linz, but I'm afraid the police are a regular visitors so it won't be much of a hideout. Eye

My 'inner anarchist' loved your comment for which you are now taking back (which alone is probably a good indicator that it should have been taken back).

No lynching for Obama

William Scott Scherk's picture

Lindsay Perigo: My Mussolini/Obama thing was reckless, thoughtless and wrong [ . . . ] I retract and repudiate my statement that he deserves the fate of Mussolini

Smart move. It's good to know that reason has had its way with you.

We all make mistakes; an honourable man admits error and moves on . . .



Matty Orchard's picture



Luke H's picture

Good on you Lindsay.  That's very rational of you.  Smiling

Yeah. Still ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... on reflection I have to concede that my ardent fans on O-Lying got this one right, even if their motives have little to do with the actual issue. My Mussolini/Obama thing was reckless, thoughtless and wrong. Without in any way diminishing my contempt for Obama and his agenda of enshrining "positive rights" constitutionally, which is what set me off, not to mention his sleazy connections and all the rest of it, I retract and repudiate my statement that he deserves the fate of Mussolini even before he's been elected. Again I say, the last "official" statement on the election is the press release that's already up: Airhead America Achieves What the Soviet Union Couldn't.

And let's hope I get proved wrong on that tomorrow!

I went over there

atlascott's picture

"...it's all about nailing me because I dared to cross Barbara."

I went over there some time ago to read for myself. Their site is more about Lindsay Perigo than this one is.

You're absolutely right.

And might I say that the more I read Robert, the more I respect Robert.

Scott DeSalvo

FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!


Lindsay Perigo's picture

(And now that I think about it, I think the comment made back then by Barbara was a call to "bomb Mecca." If it was meant out of a "spur-of-the-moment" frustration at the time, that makes this issue all-the-more ironic...).

Make no mistake, the issue here is not the justifiability of assassinations or bombings. It's Get Linz. I know you think I over-estimate my own importance, but go to O-Lying, as I just did, and tell me if I'm wrong. They're salivating at the thought that they've got me. They couldn't care less about Ayers, or when the right of violent overthrow of tyranny as stated in the Declaration kicks in: it's all about nailing me because I dared to cross Barbara. There are folk there denouncing me whom I don't know from Adam and who don't know me from Adam. It seems, not content with having me dumped from speaking at a TAS Summer Seminar that none of them subsequently bothered turning up to, they're now trying to get me jailed for sedition while here in America. Extraordinary! I'd truly forgotten how SOLO/Linz-obsessed that site is.

I saw that stuff only because I'm here with Chris Lewis, who took me through the Alexa rankings of the various Objectivist sites as he took me to them. It seems SOLO is second only to the ARI, and breathing down their neck. And way ahead of O-Lying—not that that could truly be called an Objectivist site—RoR, Forum for Ayn Rand Fans, TAS, et al. As Ronnie would say, "Not bad. Not bad at all." But perhaps it helps explain the hatred of SOLO on those other sites. Me, I don't follow the ratings. We're here for the reasons stated in the Credo, not to win a popularity contest. But if we do, I'm not going to complain. 180 thousandth in the world really isn't too shabby. Look at poor old TAS, ranked below a million.

And btw, PC's blog, though NZ-orientated, does staggeringly well at around 240 thousandth. Stunning!


Jmaurone's picture

 Linz, I know what you're feeling. I'd be surprised at the Objectivist who DOESN'T feel that way. What else are we supposed to feel? Understanding and compassion???? Truth and toleration????????

 And if the "offended" don't realize it, there are those on the left side of things who feel just as strongly about Bush, if not more so; I can point to much worse depictions of our CURRENT president, not to mention Reagan...and I've had my own encounters with pro-Obama people who are ready for violence at the drop of a hat. (And let's not forget that the left has no qualms about equating Bush with Hitler...). The thing is that we're supposed to be "better" than that, fighting ideas with ideas...fair enough. And Obama is not the cause, but a symptom...But there's something coming...again, olive branch and sword...and any Objectivist worth his salt better be ready to wield it, should the time arrive...


(And now that I think about it, I think the comment made back then by Barbara was a call to "bomb Mecca." If it was meant out of a "spur-of-the-moment" frustration at the time, that makes this issue all-the-more ironic...). 


...A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile...


Lindsay Perigo's picture

I agree with your comments, and stress again that when I said Obama was a Mussolini who deserves the same fate I was expressing a personal spur-of-the-moment view as opposed to the official SOLO view in the press release. I forget that there are folk on that site watching my every move, waiting to pounce on anything at all to discredit me personally, which seems to be more important to them than the issue involved.

Pre-emptive strike?

Jmaurone's picture

"As this is written, Communism is in disarray worldwide and, in the estimation of many, dying-though I, for one, will not feel comfortable till I see it buried at a crossroads with a stake through its heart..."

-Ronald Merrill, THE IDEAS OF AYN RAND, 1991 

 We saw the the fall of communism, and yet Merrill was right. Back in the 90's, I saw people wearing caps with hammer and sickle and the year of the fall. Now, the hammer and sickle (along with Che Guevera) are the new brands. I saw a guy on Halloween wearing an Obama shirt with a Soviet flag cape. On other days, I see just the hammer and sickle. 


 IF it's overkill to call for the head of Obama, Merrill had the right idea: give me a stake, because we've got some vampires running around... 


...A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile.....

type and addendum

Jmaurone's picture

 It was originally a typo, which I fixed, but apparently not clear enough. I meant I can't outright condone the sentiment, but I can't fully condemn you for it, as Barbara would have. 

 I was going to add as well, before it was replied to:


 The only clear-cut answer is if actions ARE taken against freedom, then action in retaliation is required. But I just don't know how far people SHOULD be allowed to advocate for anti-freedom...shunning and boycotts are one way to deal with it non-violently, but should such anti-freedom ideas be up for a vote? It may be overstating it to say that that's what this election is, since it's not any specific laws being voted on, only a man...  


As for the mosque comment, yes, that's the irony...but again, I don't have the comment, as that site is gone, and I don't remember what she wrote, only that I condemned her for it at that time, while now being more sympathetic to it now.(If I'm wrong on her view at that time, I'm sure she'll correct it...). Anyway, I'm less interested in lynching her for it than using it to point out that this is not an easy issue, and I don't see the man or woman with an easy answer... 


....A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile...


Lindsay Perigo's picture

I'm confused. Did you misread something? From Scherk's quotes it's clear Barbara does not support my comments re Obama. But I'm puzzled that you say she called for the bombing of mosques. This is the very thing she condemns the ARI for.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

Here's a link to the transcript of the interview no longer available on YouTube:


Jmaurone's picture

  I made a comment about "smashing" an Obama campaign office on my corner, as a "Temptation," and qualified it as only a "temptation," but claiming the moral right to fight those who would advocate for dictators...realizing that doing so would be an overstatement as long as Obama's "talk" remains "talk..." that I have to fight ideas with ideas until those enemy ideas become action...

 That said, I can't condone, or condemn, Linz's comment as Barbara would have us do (and I find this all ironic, having a memory of calling her "Hitler" on WE THE LIVING years ago after 9.11 when she called for the bombing of mosques..I don't remember her  comment now, whether my assessment was accurate or not at that time...she accepted my apology later, so this is not to attack her, but I do find the irony inescapable here, and a good example of the quagmire Objectivsts are now in...). But after what I said about the temptation to smash a campaign office, I can't disagree with his sentiment, either...even if I wouldn't go as far as that sentiment...

 At what point do we draw the line in a free society against agitators for dictatorship? Obviously, Obama is not so "openly" out as one, compared to Mussolini or Hitler...but then, were Mussolini and Hitler so openly out in their rise?It's easy to advocate time travel to shoot Hitler ahead of time, not so easy during the rise...

 If Obama really is such a threat, it's only a potential at this point. He is NOT Hitler or Mussolini, not yet, anyway...he does possess free will...Objectivists are NOT determinists, even if some people believe that we are determined by our ideals...we can act against our ideals...for that reason, I can't condone the suggestion of seeing Obama strung up...on the flip side, his threat still exists, and does need to be fought...if there's a clear-cut line, someone please tell me...but since we are not "pre-cogs," we'll have to wait and see...Our quagmire is that we are right, but our own morality prohibits us from striking first, and the "pre-emptive strike" is a risky suggestion here...we're not going to have a clear-cut point at which to "act" in retaliation; if it comes about, it's either going to be "too early," or "too late"...either way, it's messy...

 All we have is the olive branch and sword, baby...

 ...A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile...

Exactly: fuck them

Robert's picture

and the horses they rode in on.

As for Scherk, he'll get his wish on Tuesday night. And we'll see who laughs last about that one. His beloved candidate seems to think that he can tax America out of the recession, all while inflating the money supply with freshly minted fiat dollars. So we'll be lucky if we collectively have a pot to piss in soon enough. That should put OL's obsession into proper perspective.

Tuesday seems like an excellent time to polish off the last half dozen beers in my fridge. Might as well be happy as the country goes to hell in a hand-basket.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

You forget, and I forget too, that the folk on O-Lying, along with Mr. Scherk, who says he doesn't go there any more, are ever-vigilant for any statement by me that remotely resembles a mis-step, which they then seize upon as evidence that I am drunk ("tired and emotional"), maniacal or whatever. I suppose I should be flattered, but I'd really rather prefer to get that degree of scrutiny from someone who mattered.


Robert's picture

since when does a hope or a wish constitute incitement to anything?

Incitement being: persuading, encouraging, instigating, pressuring, or threatening so as to cause another to commit a crime.

Is it a sentiment that I agree with? No, but only because it would violate his right to trial. Prior to Linz's outburst, I'd already opined that every bastard who signed that unconstitutional Bailout bill should be tried for the capital offense of Treason.

But let us utilize 'WSS's new Englush defunusuon' of Incitement and extend it to its logical conclusion:

Obama will swears to uphold the constitution of the United States sometime after Tuesday? His express wish is to fundamentally alter that document for the worse. Should we accuse him of incitement to sedition?

And isn't that the fucking point?

Shot and hung upside down == disinvitation to TAS

William Scott Scherk's picture

Newberry counsels Perigo that calling for Obama's lynching is somehow an invitation to murder.


It's not like the US authorities take the ravings of internet extremists seriously. Oh, wait . . .

I mean, until Obama establishes his fascist autocracy, it's not likely anyone monitors internet traffic for death threats or anything. Oh wait . . .

I mean, come on, the US doesn't really care about New Zealand Objectivists who overstay their welcomes, you know?

Oh, wait . . .

In any case, what could possibly happen if a New Zealand personality somehow runs into trouble with their big fat mouth? It's not likely that a New Zealander will be detained for a month and then deported, is it? Oh, wait . . .

In any case, the US state doesn't yet have a Patriot Act, or an offshore detention facility or an ominously named Homeland Security department or the ability and desire to intercept and flag off-colour internet communications. I mean, these things are likely to happen under the Obama dictatorship, but in a Republican America? Come on, Newberry.

Oh, wait . . .


PS - I would be happy to respond to Lindsay's charge that I have repeated Barbara Branden's lies about him. If he could fork up an instance, that is . . .

Oh for goodness' sake!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

It's hardly new or surprising the folk on O-Lying are attacking me. Believe it or not, I don't give a twopenny damn about their opinion. Ms. Branden has told the most atrocious lies about me, repeated here without scruple and with amplification by Scherk—whom I tolerate in spite of his being a revolting, malicious creep—and has shown no inclination to be honorable and admit she was wrong.

Folk seem to forget that America was founded on the basis of violent revolt, and the time when a repetition was justifiable has long past. This man about to be elected president is friends with a monster who wants to kill 25 million Americans. That said, what I've said as a poster on this thread is simply a personal view. The official SOLO stance on the election is in my press release.

Perigo: "I devoutly hope

Newberry's picture

Perigo: "I devoutly hope Obama is shot and hung upside down by liberty-lovers (as opposed to communists) before he gets the chance to win office."


This is an incitement to murder.

I don't know the legal issues involved but I found this: The ICTR found that  instigation (other than of genocide) involves (1) direct and public incitement to commit a proscribed act: but (2) only where it has let to the actual commission of the instigated offense...

This is from International Law Reports: Volume 132 by Elihu Lauterpacht, Christopher J. Greenwood page 309.

I repudiate your statement.


Michael Newberry



"Let's shoot some Nazis . . . "

William Scott Scherk's picture

Currently languishing in Federal detention are the last two white power fledglings who called for Obama's assassination, Daniel Cowart and Paul Schlesselman.

Lindsay Perigo is believed to be at large in California, where his search for the One True American has yet to bear fruit.

Real Clear Politics has yet to put Lindsay's Airhead America editorial on the Front Page. Surely the assembled anti-Obama crew here can do better than that . . .

Weighing in on Perigo's call for Obama to be shot and strung up in public is military veteran, if not war hero, Brant Gaede**:

The man has come terribly close to committing a US Federal felony. He had better get good legal advice before visiting here again. In NZ he may not even be able to board a flight to the US now. You can be sure what he said has already been nailed down by computer surveillance. Obama = Hitler? Sorry. No. One had a moral right to kill Hitler once his Brown Shirts started physically attacking his political opponents before he became Chancellor. The way our government is set up, 1/3 of the vote won't make you President. You can't set up a government the way you do under a parliamentary system and just pass any law you like and make it stick just by virtue of making it law; there's a higher law under our Constitution. One big danger, among many, with Obama, is the Democrats get 60 votes in the Senate and nothing can be blocked legislatively. However, even if that happens, the Democrats are likely to fracture and fight each other. A wet-behind-the-ears US Senator is now President!? Can't you see the envy, jealousy and surpressed rage bubbling to the surface?


** while Brant Gaede was fighting communism in Korea, Lindsay was still a hardcore communist, albeit a very young one. Although it is somewhat difficult to see Obama as both a communist and a fascist, Lindsay manages that feat with ease . . . your mileage may vary.

Barbara Branden supports the call to lynch Obama (NOT!)

William Scott Scherk's picture

Over on Objectivist Living, where the US election is a big topic, Barbara Branden has caught wind of a tired and emotional Lindsay Perigo's call for Obama to be shot and hung up in public display. Here are her comments:

[Quoting Lindsay Perigo:] "Obama is a special brand of evil. He is Pol Pot in benevolent guise. I hope he meets the fate of his soulmate Mussolini, only before he ever wins power."

And one person on Solo -- only one -- protested Perigo's call for a lynching.

Good God! We have supposed Objectivists -- Craig Biddle et. al. -- recommending that we bomb mosques and schools in Iran, and now a self-styled Objectivist hoping for the murder of a presidential candidate. We have supposed intellectual allies -- at ARI -- editing out of Ayn Rand's work what they prefer she had not written; we have excommunications worthy of a religious inquisition; we have Objectivists rewriting the history of the movement and the life of Ayn Rand; we have a self-anointed intellectual leader denying the reality of human error and substituting "evil" for "error"; we have a cult of personality and its membership of fanatical true believers .... the list goes on and on. It is profoundly depressing.



Love that clip, Sandi!

mvardoulis's picture

I've been using the LA Times for toilet paper since I was a kid. About time someone had the 'balls' to call the paper out for what it is! Now THAT'S free speech! Eye

Still, my Libertarian/Objectivist stomach turns with the 'country first' motto everywhere around the McCain/Palin campaign.

The candidates of both major parties (and this year, all the 'minor' ones also) are IMO unsupportable based on what they say in public let alone by any associations they may have had or still have or whatever. Obama *does* have the distinction of being the most openly, grotesquely anti-liberty, while the others seem to come close with some of their statements as well. And my 'fellow' Airhead Americans don't seem to notice or care.


mvardoulis's picture

...even if you can dismiss ALL of the questionable stuff and people surrounding Obama, what Barack has overtly stated has GOT to be enough to avoid supporting him in any way! Seriously, it's FUN to abstain from voting for a Presidential candidate, it's not that different from voting for the US Libertarian Party candidate which I've done in all previous elections.

From a self-preservation standpoint...

mvardoulis's picture

...you are absolutely correct, Joe. Take what what I have to say with a former anarchist grain of salt... and be comforted that the most sincerely violent desires ever heard expressed (though similarly not to be put into practice) were expressed by a gentleman of similar complexion to Mr. Obama...

Though maybe you could have timed it with the world series victory riots and it would have been okay....

Keep those blood vessels in place...

mvardoulis's picture

Hold on there, Matty... Eye

I came back to the discussion a little late, but you wrote:

... "I'm still totally lost as to how you can argue that supporting the other ticket is a matter of supporting liberty while supporting Obama-Biden is a concession to out right fascism."

I personally have NEVER suggested supporting McCain, nor would I ever, in spite of his choice of running mate who at least has a distant, hazy, religiously-overtoned, superficial-at-best understanding of the importance of individual liberty (more so than the tragic irony of McCain who seems to have forgotten what made the country he fought and suffered for the great nation it once was). Yet another difference between myself and my cult leader Lindsay Perigo...

Obama is brazen enough to spit on the notion of individual liberty publically (he's not even a 'stealth' Marxist, as I incorrectly identified him on another thread), which other politicians do so only by implication. Don't support either ticket, Matty, as I refuse to do. I may like aspects of Sarah Palin (she's the most un-political major politician since Jesse Ventura first came on the scene, which is another minor positive), but ultimately that is not enough for me to vote for her ticket.

And as for surviving another few years, BELIEVE ME, I don't really know how I'm going to survive into December so I get that! But Barack Obama isn't going to help either of us survive any longer than John McCain. Neither one of them are going to make anything better for the 'average American' they are so desperate to court for votes any time soon.

Ah, Mike...

Jmaurone's picture

 If I thought that was the best option, it'd be done by now..first, I'd be labeled racist, for one (I'd vote for Obama if he was talking O'ist language in a heartbeat)...then I'd be labeled a sociopath...charged with hate crime...I'd certainly be no better than the skinheads accused of an assassination attempt...(or that phony who claimed she was beaten by Obama supporters)...

 And yet, because we DO live in a democracy, we are expected to put our rights up to a vote...I'd be MORALLY right to "smash" an attempt to vote away our freedoms, and yet, here we are...

As long as it's just "talk," I have to restrain my smashing to the smashing of ideas...as long as it's just "talk"... 

....A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile....

Ah, Joe...

mvardoulis's picture

...Pittsburgh is no better in its union-driven state-worship, just like every major city here in California with the possible exception of San Diego. You should feel free to smash away! That would be KASS.... Eye


Sandi's picture

Either your ego believes that (I) as a reader of this thread is remotely interested in your private messages, or you fail to understand the difference between a public forum and a private one.

There is a word that you might consider to take heed of.


The intellectual sloven and his Fatwa/Assassination appeal

William Scott Scherk's picture

A tired and emotional Lindsay Perigo, former communist and current Principal of New Zealand's premier Objectivist forum, calls for his friends to heed his dire warnings, and to compare his words against the vile, inexpressibly evul William Scott Scherk.

Having discovered that William Scott Scherk uses the free private messaging service to issue hypnotic commands to his cabal of butt-licking Obamanatronic treasonauts, Perigo wields his greatest weapon: reason, tempered by thimblesful of Shiraz.

It is true that I have used the private messaging facility of my host to issue hypnotic commands. It is true that I seduced Matty Orchard into the Church of Evul with a hypnotic command. In this case, the hypnotic command was transmitted via thought beam, as Matty and I have not actually interacted electronically since he gave me some stand-up comedy advice over nine months ago.

Still, this doesn't excuse me from my vile seduction of his innocence.

With respect to the Libertarian candidate Howison, again Principal Perigo's charges are true. Through a combination of hypnotic thought beams and secret hand signals, I have convinced him to doubt the Principal.

This is treason, of course, or at least treachery. As Lindsay -- in a tired and emotional yet reasoned tirade below - explains: this is his house, where one is free to challenge the reigning ideas in an honest and upfront manner -- but not by hypnotic thought beams or stand up comedy.

From now on, I will publish here the content of my thought beams and my hypnotic fascist commands to support Obama's campaign to destroy the world.

Here follows the text of my most recent communiqués:


Dear [Comrade B],

Yes, I do think Michael Stuart Kelly is an idiot, and an intellectual lightweight, who flails in deep water and pretends he is a lifeguard. As you note, he, Barbara Branden, James Kilbourne and the other dwindling crew at OL are all about opposing Obama, and yes, I note that it seems as if all of them are reading from a less-deranged Perigo Playbook.

No, I don't think Perigo considers this a victory. Although, yes, the vast majority of OL public posters urge support for John McCain and Sarah Palin, they still are guilty of "lynch mob behaviour."

You ask how Lindsay can call OL a sewer-dwelling cabal of lynch mobbers for asking Ed Hudgins and the wobblies at TAS to rescind their speaking invitation. You ask me to spell out how pressuring TAS to rescind is lynch mob behaviour.

All I can say is that calling for Obama's lynching is 'different' than calling for Lindsay's lynching disinvitation. One is a First Amendment issue, the other is a reasonable call to assassinate the spawn of Satan.

As for the reasons why the named folks in my earlier hypnotic message to Lindsay left OL in disgust, it was because of the implied message that to counter the sloppy and ill-researched postings of the OL Emperor makes the critics bad, stupid, intimidating cliquish haters of Objectivism.

Which is different, completely and utterly different from calling those critics inexpressibly Evul scumbags in leaque with the Devul. Somehow. In any case, MSK bans and moderates people and insults/exasperates others into leaving (Wayne Simmons, Nick Otani; Ellen Stuttle, James Heaps-Nelson, Laure Chipman, William Scott Scherk, etcetera).

Lindsay Perigo does not ban or moderate or insult/exasperate people into leaving (except for, oh, Phil Coates, William Scott Scherk, Rick Giles; Ross Elliott, Jody Gomez, Marnee, etcetera). There is a difference between sleazy insinuations of disloyalty and clear-cut charges of, um, pomowankerism and, um, Evul, Scherk-seduction, and um, whatever.

Do I see SOLO building upon the success of Lindsay's latest Fatwa against Obama?

Yes, I do. If by success you mean a continued dwindling readership and a burgeoning reputation as a rest home/bingo parlour for tired and emotional intellectual slovens.


Hi [Comrade D],

No, our next meeting will be held in the psychic realm. Lindsay is monitoring all traffic for signs of pomowankering seduction and traitorousness, so I must again open up the super secret private channel at http://www.vdoc.ca/chat -- as I have noted before, this is the exact same chatroom program as used by SOLO, with the sole exception that mine works and SOLO's doesn't. See you for the next secret meeting at 2100 hours. The agenda, "Seduction of the Innocent, Part Nine."

You ask if my definition of intellectual slovenliness includes calling the same man a fascist and a communist.




Dear [Angry Maniac],

Yes, I do understand that anyone who leaves SOLO voluntarily is a 'Flouncer'. Yes, I do understand that everyone who has been banned or moderated at SOLO is a dishonest thug who called into question Lindsay's good faith.

You also ask if I am Ted Keer. No. As has been explained in a thread initiated by Mr Keer, and in another that commented upon Lindsay's serial banning of people who contested the banning of my alter ego, William Scott Scherk.

Ted Keer lives in New York City, where he conducts a campaign against Evul Satanic Socialist/Fascist Barackula Hussein.

I live in a 500 man work camp near Christina Lake, Alberta, where we use gravity-assisted steam to extract petrochemicals from oilsands, and then pump the products to America -- where the profits are siphoned off to support the campaign of Barackula to turn the US into a socialist hellhole like, um, Canada.

Thanks for your questions.


Dear [Comrade J],

Why don't I spell out my actual political convictions? Hmmm, that's a good question.

The main reason is no one has asked. At least on SOLO. On SOLO and at the other lists, it is assumed that my politics are a mix of Satanism, Fascism, and Socialism/Communism. In truth, I belong to no party, and tend to disdain the wobbly rhetoric of Canada's soft-core socialists, the NDP.

I vote strategically. In the last election, I came to support the current Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, who heads a second Conservative minority government. What tipped my soft support for Harper was the treatment he gave to Quebec's separatists, and his recognition of Quebec as a nation within Canada. Not that this has any legal standing, but it cut the separatists off at the knees.

Am I a postmodernist?

Um, no, but only if you consider my longstanding opposition to critical theory, cultural studies, feminist standpoint theory, the postmodernist muck of Steve Fuller and the many idiots profiled in Intellectual Impostures, and the book by Koertge, Levitt and Gross, etcetera.

I find deeply ironic and richly satisfying that Lindsay considers me a POMO. A cursory, one-fingered poke at research would turn up a few posts on evolutionary psychology, or my many posts on psychotherapy lists on Usenet . . . wherein one would find that I have an implacable disdain for the bullshit that goes under the name of postmodernism.

I hate most postmodern art, postmodern architecture, film studies, cultural anthropology, women's studies, contemporary new history, all new poetry, all postmodern literature with the exception of Jeannette Winterton, all music of all types except Dusty Springfield, the PC correctness of the current gay studies mainstream, queer studies, Social Text, and so on.

I cut my critical, skeptical teeth on the postmodern bullshit surrounding recovered memory therapy and its associated bullshit postmodern energy therapies, victimology, and on and on and on and on. I am a skeptic in the modern, rational sense of the word, as exemplified in the Skeptic and Skeptical Inquirer and Free Inquiry magazines.

You might ask why I don't counter Perigo's slovenly insistence that I am a Pomo. Well, I have been patiently waiting for him or one of the other mouth-breathing SOLOist claqueurs to actually seek out and challenge their own premises.

You see, there is actually no content in Perigo's use of the word "pomowanker." It refers to those who refuse to kiss his ass and fall into line with his hare-brained labelling machine. Each time he wields the word, it underlines the vacuousness and slovenliness of his research approach. He would rather find or imagine instances that reinforce his bigotry and bias and bile. Gawd forbid he be wrong.

While I utterly reject the cowardly appellations of Perigo as a drunk or an alcoholic, I sometimes wonder if chugging back the Shiraz impairs his thinking. Probably not, his thinking would be impaired no matter what.

I am too busy composing my next hypnotic seduction to answer your other questions about my personal history and my psychological assessment of the Principal. Best leave it said baldly . . . human, all too human. Read Carol Tavris' book on Mistakes Were Made and we can discuss at the secret cabal meeting next month.


Hi [Comrade M]

What most troubles me about Obama is the 'all things to all people' tone . . . but I counter my own cynicism by a further cynicism: this is politics. And then I consider that he inherits a troubling recession, an empty treasury, a financial system in chaos, and a governing system that is mostly distrusted by a great majority of citizens. Oh, and two active wars, a constant threat of terror attacks at home and abroad, and a sagging international confidence in America global leadership.

Plus a resurgent Russia, a waffling Europe, and a Middle East in its 60th year of unsettled, powderkeg political and military stalemate.

My heart aches for America. Which is why I think you make the right choice to give this man a chance to govern.

I too listened to the NPR programme. Holy bejeezus but the guy knows his constitutional law. He pays attention. He actually sounds like a member of our governing Conservative Party, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister.

Which makes him a communist, or, to quote Lindsay, a fascist .

Or whatever . . . can you believe his call to kill Obama? This from the guy who thinks OL scumbags led a lynch mob. If pressuring the addled Hudgins and Co to rescind their invitation (which I opposed) is calling for lynching, then calling for Obama to be shot and strung up is . . . well, is exactly what? The mind boggles.

I read SOLO and Lindsay's tirades with a certain grim attention. I still associate Objectivists and Objectivist-ish people with a hard and principled insistence on Self-interest, Capitalism, and Reason. And I respect that, and the principled positions it leads to, and the principled arguments it supports.

But reading the Kill Obama the antichrist stuff just makes me wonder: what the heck is Lindsay's second act?

In summary, I don't think he is any longer in control of himself. Although he pretends to be amused by my patter, I think it actually makes him nuts.



Palin Slams The LA TImes

Sandi's picture

to release the tape of Obama toasting former terrorist spokesman Rashid Khalidi. She calls the LA Times, "Obama's pet newspaper."

Palin: "Politicians would love to have a pet newspaper of their very own"

Source: Gateway Pundit


Marcus's picture

"He should have stabbed him or something?"

No he should have said, 'fuck off and stay away from me and my campaign you traitorous scum!'

But of course Obama hates confrontation, doesn't he Matty, which is why you love him so much. He's willing to sit down and whisper sweet nothings to murderers and dictators without pre-conditions.


Robert's picture

But I'd have respected him more if he'd turned his back on him.

I'd have respected Obama even more if he'd come out and repudiated Ayers the second the issue came up.

I'd have respected Obama more if he'd repudiated members of his own party who:

(1) Broke into Sarah Palin's private E-mail account and posted it's contents online.

(2) Induced State employees to perform an illegal search of 'Joe the Plumber's' official records after Joe embarrassed the fuck out of Obama on TV.

(3) Wax lyrical about reintroducing the 'Fairness' doctrine to censor private Talk radio stations. 1st Amendment anyone?

(4) Wax lyrical about cutting the defense budget by 25% (Barney f---ing Frank, maggot from Massachusetts) while America is fighting two wars.

(5) Wax lyrical about the Haditha Marines being murderers, and then not apologizing when all but one (who has yet to be tried) is cleared. This same piece of excrement (Jack off Murtha from Pennsylvania) also stated that is constituents wouldn't vote for Obama because they were racist rednecks. BTW, This fuck is the biggest purveyor of earmarks in the Congress.

(6) Banned reporters from three newspapers from his campaign after those paper published editorials backing McCain. Shades of Helen Clark?

(7) Wax lyrical about removing the requirements for anonymous ballots in Union elections.

I could go on, but I'm feeling ill.


Matty Orchard's picture

He should have stabbed him or something?

Yeah right Matty...

Marcus's picture

Obama bumps into the guy, who by Obama's own admission was involved in disgusting acts, one and half years ago and says something like - 'how's it going old buddy' ?

Either Obama is a naive idiot or an evil bastard!


Matty Orchard's picture

Yeah he probably hasn't. Allegedly they ran int o each other in Chicago by chance 1 and a half years ago. I don't see how you prove a relationship didn't run deep. Surely the onus is on accusers to show that it did. You can't demonstrate a lack of something.

He served on a board with him and a range of other people of various political stripes, attended a fund raiser at his house once where someone introduced him, saying he planned to run for state senate (or 'launched his political career in his house' if you want to be facetious)

There is no evidence Ayers was ever a personal adviser of any kind.


Marcus's picture

"I dispute your assertion that the Ayers/Obama relationship ever ran deep..."

O'Reilly took Obama to task on this last month and Obama said that he has not seen Ayers in one and half years.

Wow! That's really convincing that he have no deep association with Ayers!


Luke H's picture

Linz, the video linked in your original post has been removed due to a terms of use violation.  Have you got a replacement or a transcript?


Matty Orchard's picture

I dispute your assertion that the Ayers/Obama relationship ever ran deep and presented you with evidence for that stance which you passed on reading. Either check your premises or quit winging.

Your hospitality which I appreciate and made very clear that I appreciated has nothing to do with anything. Had you made it clear that your hospitality depended upon my agreeing with you and continuing to agree with you on absolutely everything I would have politely declined.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

You're not paying attention. Your pin-up boy's friend, Ayers, said 25 million deaths might be necessary. Obama buys into the Ayers/Wright/Islamofascist world view. He proclaims that "speading the wealth around" (theft) is a good thing. He says he'd sit down unconditionally with Ahmadinejad and his filthy ilk. This is the man you support. You, who presented here and to me personally as a libertarian, accepting my hospitality and all. Barf!


Matty Orchard's picture

Benito Mussolini is responsible for the slaughtering of 10s of thousands. To draw comparisons between him and Obama (KASS as it may be) is an affront to Mussolini's victims. It is my prediction that Obama's presidency will not be much worse than Clinton's and that the world will still be perfectly in tact by the end of it. He might even be able to shrink he deficit a little. You can write that down and hold me to it if you like.


Luke H's picture

Oh no, you and Elijah have discovered my secret: I'm actually a University-trained Labour mole!  <gasp!>

Even using Scherk's terminology, Luke

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I hope you, he, Matty and Barack are very happy together. Just stop pretending to be libertarians, all of you, please.

Barackula Obama

Luke H's picture

Barackula "Mussolini" Obama: Nazi Muslim Terrorist, bent on genocide!

Looks like we need to call in ... TEAM AMERICA!!!

Sticking out tongue

*You* get some perspective

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Obama certainly *is* a Nazi, whom one should shoot.

My getting laid or not makes no difference to that fact.

Godwin's law

Luke H's picture

Give me a gun and a time machine and I'll shoot Hitler myself.

I just disagree with you that all our socialist opponents are Nazis.

Get some perspective.  Stop being an angry old man for a few seconds and go and get laid or something.

You're being stupid.

Lindsay Perigo's picture

As a way of evading the fact that you're saying one shouldn't have shot Hitler.


Luke H's picture

What you're saying, Luke, is that someone who tumbled to what Hitler
was up to before it was too late shouldn't have shot the bastard.

You're saying someone should shoot Lineberry?  Sticking out tongue

No, I'm not joking

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I devoutly hope Obama is shot and hung upside down by liberty-lovers (as opposed to communists) before he gets the chance to win office. As a conscientious neo-Marxist Gramscian, he knows exactly what's he's advocating, and is seducing millions of useful idiots, like you and Matty, into signing on and signing up for tyranny. America without the constraints of the Founding Fathers and "negative rights."

What you're saying, Luke, is that someone who tumbled to what Hitler was up to before it was too late shouldn't have shot the bastard. That's about what I'd expect from PC wet-wimps like you and Goode.


Luke H's picture

Lindsay: Obama is a special brand of evil. He is Pol Pot in benevolent guise. I hope he meets the fate of his soulmate Mussolini, only before he ever wins power.

Wikipedia on Mussolini:  "In late April, 1945, with total defeat looming, Mussolini attempted to escape to Switzerland, only to be captured and summarily executed near Lake Como by Communist Italian partisans. His body was taken to Milan where it was hung upside down at a petrol station for public viewing and to provide confirmation of his demise."

Urgh. This is a bit violently right-wing of you, isn't it Lindsay? 

I mean, you clearly aren't joking on this one.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

McCain promised to buy up all the bad mortgages, you called that disgusting and still support him. I'm putting my ideals aside and you're not? There's a gaping hole in that logic. Calling them confused doesn't get rid of that contradiction.

I'm not putting my ideals aside; I'm saying given your boy's full-on frontal assault on them, which is *way* more fundamental than a mortgage buy-up, I'd vote for McCain just to buy time for them. But *you* support Obama in his full-on frontal assault. Informed by his Jeremiah Wright/William Ayers butt-licking. That's the part that is truly unfathomable.

She doesn't understand the 1st amendment. That's self evident. You can't just assume she's talking about potential hate speech laws when she doesn't so much as make an illusion to them just because it suits you. She's using the exact same logic the left uses when an owner of a restaurant asks some jackass not to swear on his property. She's confusing the right of free speech with the right to say whatever you want without criticism from the press.

"Allusion." I didn't take that from it, but your interpretation could be right. Which would be depressing. Still doesn't make her an anti-free speech fascist of the type Obama has clearly shown himself to be. Just shows she can be a dumb bitch sometimes. But compare that with Obama's comments about the Founding Fathers and negative rights in the Constitution.

Palin is something I've never seen before in American politics (I mean that in a really bad way) and McCain is a 72 year old cancer survivor who must be losing his mind.

That's just silly.

But fine, don't support McCain/Palin. There are plenty of reasons not to. But to support Obama??!!


Matty Orchard's picture

McCain promised to buy up all the bad mortgages, you called that disgusting and still support him. I'm putting my ideals aside and you're not? There's a gaping hole in that logic. Calling them confused doesn't get rid of that contradiction.

"I've no idea what your problem is with the Palin comments you quote. I
take her to mean it'll soon be deemed a "hate crime" or some such to
call your reprehensible pin-up boy on his totalitarian associations and
agenda, thanks to pressure from the Obama-crazed, left-infatuated
mainstream media. She's right."

That paragraph is gob-smacking. She doesn't understand the 1st amendment. That's self evident. You can't just assume she's talking about potential hate speech laws when she doesn't so much as make an illusion to them just because it suits you. She's using the exact same logic the left uses when an owner of a restaurant asks some jackass not to swear on his property. She's confusing the right of free speech with the right to say whatever you want without criticism from the press.

"And supporting the other ticket is not "supporting liberty"; it's
giving it some breathing space. This has been made clear a thousand
times. Why do you pretend not to know that?"

I don't know that. I actually reject the notion! Obama-Bidens policy proposals aren't much more than Clintonian. Palin is something I've never seen before in American politics (I mean that in a really bad way) and McCain is a 72 year old cancer survivor who must be losing his mind. 


Lindsay Perigo's picture

At least you admit you're putting your ideals aside for this one. That was already obvious enough, but you've hitherto pretended you were upholding them. I call putting one's ideals aside treachery, even though your pomo-friend Scherk, who thinks nothing of William Ayers' genocidal ambitions, thinks that's "hysterical."

I've no idea what your problem is with the Palin comments you quote. I take her to mean it'll soon be deemed a "hate crime" or some such to call your reprehensible pin-up boy on his totalitarian associations and agenda, thanks to pressure from the Obama-crazed, left-infatuated mainstream media. She's right.

And supporting the other ticket is not "supporting liberty"; it's giving it some breathing space. This has been made clear a thousand times. Why do you pretend not to know that? Palin and McCain are not vicious fascists, like your heroes; they're confused, but life-loving, America-loving and liberty-loving in their own doddery way. Confused is not the same as evil. And Palin has a terrific sense of life. Look at her. Then look at Scherk.

I'm close to bursting a blood vessel

Matty Orchard's picture


As a libertarian I can't really. I can as someone who for now will settle with just surviving for another eight years. I'm putting my ideals aside for this one. Now, you CAN argue that I should not do that but I'm still totally lost as to how you can argue that supporting the other ticket is a matter of supporting liberty while supporting Obama-Biden is a concession to out right fascism. How can you keep a straight face?

Check this out from ABC News:

" In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.

Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution,

Palin said.
"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media." "

So Obama is Mussolini and deserves to be killed but Sarah Palin has a great sense of life and you profess to, 'love her.'




Lindsay Perigo's picture

HOW AGAIN IN ANY CONTEXT COULD ANY RATIONAL LOVER OF LIBERTY SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA!?!? I'm sorry, I'm just a helpless follower of Lindsay Perigo, so maybe I just won't be able to figure it out.

I'm a helpless follower of Lindsay Perigo, too, and I definitely can't figure it out.

I got more than my RDA of chortles this morning from Mr. Scherk's latest love note to me, but I'm afraid there's absolutely nothing in there to diminish the import of Obama's remarks about the constraints of the Founding Fathers and negative rights. No wonder Mr. Scherk is taking his stand-up routine for Obama backstage. That's where he spends much of his time anyway. And like all socialists, he forgets who's paying for it.

Object Lesson

Jmaurone's picture

 Michael, I wish I could argue with you, but since I grew up in the Jerseyian backyard of Philly, I know what to expect of Philadelphians...and with Philly being a union-town anyway, this is a sad, microcosmic object lesson of what's in store Nov. 4th...

 (Though I have to admit, I am sorely tempted to smash the windows of the Obama office on the corner of my street...) 

...A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile....


mvardoulis's picture

...as a life long Pittsburgh fan (never been there, mind you, just raised by one if its former residents), I could say something smart-ass and tell you I'm not surprised with all the looting and rampaging as that is what one would expect from a Philidelphian... Eye

But I don't go for all that tribal my city vs your city thing ultimately. Clearly, a celebration ceases to be a celebration once someone's property is damaged involuntarily. Which is why I won't be celebrating no matter who 'wins' on Nov 4th...

heh, not me...

Jmaurone's picture

I'm too introverted for crowds of that magnitude; I like my personal space...but I'm happy for the team, and the city...but not for the driver of the smashed cab, or for the local businesses who suffered broken windows and looted merchandise...but this is a pro-Obama town, so I guess those stores were paying the price for being too selfish to share their peanut butter and jelly...(Really, what makes people think a sports team's victory justifies looting and destruction??? These weren't Linz's American Airheads, but American savages...)

....A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile....

Nail on the head, Joe...

mvardoulis's picture

...And in the coffin of any rational justification for supporting Barack Obama.

And btw, I hope you attended at least a few World Series vicotry parties out there in Philly... Eye

Virtue of Obama's Selflessness

Jmaurone's picture

  Exactly, Michael, on the  benefit of the doubt issue. Even if we put aside the Muslim/Ayers/Wright issues, this one statement alone should be enough:

 "John McCain and Sarah Palin they call this socialistic. You know I don’t know when, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness."


 No Objectivist should have any question about where to stand on Obama, let alone any libertarian-minded person. 


...A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile....


Premises and Context, Mr. Scherk?

mvardoulis's picture

Even with the strictest of contextual analysis which you describe, who in their right rational mind can actually support Obama? Since when is it rational to say, "Ah, well, the temperature of HELL Barack Obama is going to bring to America is far closer to one million degrees than the one billion his detractors on SOLO have 'cherry picked' into suggesting," I mean, DAMN, even if you give Obama a few DOZEN benefits of the doubt and put him "into context" isn't he scary enough NOT to support?

McCain's war record, while absolutely heroic, was never enough to get me to support him as a political candidate. But surely, even in the best possible, objectively-studied light, Barack Obama is not worthy of any support by anyone who claims to love liberty.

And calling Lindsay Perigo an "ex-Marxist" is like calling him (or anyone) an "ex-child" --- and for that matter, the tactic you accuse Linz of using "skim, denounce, skim, denounce" in the right context WORKED LIKE A FUCKING CHARM becuase the Marxists-socialists for all purposes HAVE WON! OBJECTIVISTS, LIBERTARIANS AND LIBERTY LOVERS SHOULD TAKE NOTE - WE ARE NOW ON THE OUTER FRINGE ONCE OCCUPIED BY THE SOCIALISTS AND FASCISTS IN THE 19TH CENTURY. Only now, the socialists and fascists have won, and if we don't adapt some of their successful tactics they will extinguish liberty from the planet in the most dystopian nightmare this side of 1984 and Anthem.

I make no apologies for being part of Linz' 'Bingo Club' as you put it, though I wish it involved money and I could pick up some extra cash 'cause I'm not a bank and no one is bailing my bony white ass out of anything. And while I may be playing Bingo with Linz, I'm certainly not in agreement with EVERYTHING Mr. Perigo says, case and point a recent "jazz versus classical music" debate, and my lack of support of the lesser of two unthinkables, etc.

HOW AGAIN IN ANY CONTEXT COULD ANY RATIONAL LOVER OF LIBERTY SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA!?!? I'm sorry, I'm just a helpless follower of Lindsay Perigo, so maybe I just won't be able to figure it out.

The ghastly pomowanker's truly evul orbit

William Scott Scherk's picture

SOLO Principal Lindsay Perigo in full froth is a wonder to behold. In this thread, fresh from calling for Obama to be lynched a la Mussolini, he utters dire imprecations against his friend Matt Orchard and his evul seducer, me . . .

If Lindsay were serious, it would be funny. Since he isn't serious, it is pathetic. But a former communist ideologue like Lindsay finds it hard to step away from the Marxist two-step: skim, denounce, skim, denounce.

The intellectual slovenliness would be astounding in a real opinion leader. But since Lindsay has no illusions about his influence beyond the borders of his fief, no worries. The slovenliness with be unremarked by his claquing courtiers.

In this instance, as usual, what is missing is context. An hour long interview with three legal thinkers on Chicago Public Radio. An hour of discussion of civil rights and the courts. Dred Scott, the difference between the Warren Court and its precedent panel. The commerce clause as a tool to enforce Brown vs Bd. The DOJ efforts to enforce the Brown decision. Why court decisions like that 1954 edict cannot be effectively implemented if the states drag their heels and ignore the law. The mistake of thinking a court decision on segregation or equal schooling will be implemented by fiat, not on-the-ground struggle. The tragedy of a generation of education rights activists wasting time pursuing high court justice, where the gains of Brown's aftermath were the result of community push. Why Mississipi's shittiest of the shitty black-majority schools will not be magic-wanded into equal quality by SCOTUS. How a desegregated army vet, negro, might wonder what the fighting Nazi racist filth was all about if he comes home to the coloreds-only bench and exclusion from whites-only schools for his free children. How redistributive justice as in 'bussing' led to bureaucratic overkill, racial redlines, heartache and disillusionment. The history of the fourteenth amendment.

And so on.

I would ordinarily, in an intelligent discussion, post the results of my research. I would post the link to the MP3 of the entire show, from which Drudge gleaned the talking points.

But when dealing with slovens, you know that no amount of tools will compel a cleanup. The smug, slightly pungeant know-nothing will continue to wallow in its effluvia.

In this case, the avidity with which former Marxist Perigo slurps up the gleanings of other piebald Barackula-fearing hysterics, the glee with which he trumpets the ignorant talking points of other witless cut-and-pasters, the alacrity with which he wields the bingo-dauber of his ire, all these signals of slovenliness and intellectual torpor tell me that posting analysis is fruitless.

Under the B, pomowanker. Under the G, unspeakably vile. Under the O, traitor. Daub daub daub, slurp slurp scratch.

Here at SOLO, it is always Bingo night.

For those who actually would like to read the full transcript of Obama and interlocutors, or listen to the full broadcast from which the dishonest cherry-picking was performed, please drop me a line backstage, whence I will seduce you into the full-scale treason of examining context and checking ones premises.

Be warned, even if you do not fact-check, your inability to cluck in unison with Lindsay will be noted. You will then slide down the greasy runnel into America-hating post-modern smart-ass inexpressively evul, um, Evuuuullll. And if you are hypnotised into actually comparing third-hand slogans against raw reality, get ready for the carefully selected hot-pink, Shiraz-scented Dauber of Doom.

For those who flounce from one desperate Chicken Little operetta to the next, charge up your own daubers. Barackula is going to suck the blood out of America, the evul socialist scum. And only you, the loyal SOLO bingo biddies know the truth.


You better not show this news-item to WSS and Matty...

Marcus's picture

...they may both drown in a pool of tears! Smiling

From The Times
October 31, 2008

Barack Obama lays plans to deaden expectation after election victory

Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.

The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of “hope” and “change” are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.

One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, “so there’s not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair”...


Ah, again, Mr. Scherk ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

That's all fine, except you have regularly accused me of similar behaviour to the ghastly Michael Kelly's. Which ain't true.

In the cause, among other things, of Babs's smears, which are even less true.

Latterly, you've been defending the unspeakably disgusting Obama, with assistance from the naif, Matty, whom I fear you've seduced with your awful smart-assery, since he's so young, and even though you're so old. Nearly as old as me.

So naturally, inquiring minds and decent souls are mightily concerned.

Bottom line, Mr. Scherk: pomowankers notwithstanding, sincerity and decency do count for something.

The blowtorch of truth

William Scott Scherk's picture

Lindsay Perigo and I occasionally exchange private messages on SOLO. I did let him know I had stopped posting at OL.

He can't imagine why? Um . . . here is the text of my private message to which he refers. Perhaps I need to expand on my reasons?

Please give my best wishes to James V when you see him -- hope he will soon be back jousting with the pomowankers on SOLO.

By the way, I have retired from Objectivist Living, following Ellen Stuttle out the door. Michael is such a fucking idiot, a phony intellectual, with the depth of mind of a sand flea, and the self-awareness of aluminum siding. The crux was a series of posts in which he laid down the Kelly Doctrine: the Emperor's line must prevail. Gah.

That makes about four of us who have been finally disgusted by his imperious stupidity: Laure, JHN, WSS, Ellen, etc

Anyhow, enjoy the California sun. Land of Pelosi and other socialist hags. What a hellhole, huh?

-- thanks to Michael Moeller for the response to my last post in the Colin Powell is a Traitor thread. I will take the time to read the links he has provided, rather than flouncing past them, as is Lindsay's wont.

Working on 10 hour+ 7/7 shifts on a five-week stint in the great Albertan oilfields, my day is full. I promise to be a bit more respectful of Lindsay's requirements for non-flouncing behaviour.


Not only that

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Mr. Scherk seems to have removed his photo, which usually indicates a flounce. The blowtorch of truth got too hot? I expect he'll be denouncing me and SOLO on O-Lying, if anyone can be bothered checking, though he actually told me privately he'd flounced from there as well. (I can't imagine why, since that's a marriage made in Brandroid Heaven.)

In any event, the naked evil of his apologetics for Obama is now inescapable. Perhaps even to him?

Isn't it interesting that Matty and WSS...

Marcus's picture

..normally always turn up here to tell us that Obama cannot be brushed with the same tar as people he has associated with or that we should not believe the evidence of right-wing critics.

However, when it comes directly from Obama's own mouth they suddenly go silent and conveniently ignore it. The term 'useful idiots' comes to mind in this instance!

complete with Obama's own

Lance's picture

complete with Obama's own comments about the "tragedy" of the Supreme Court not "breaking free from the constraints of the Founding Fathers" as to what government can do as opposed to what it may not.

"Rise up brothers and sisters and free yourselves from the shackles of liberty!"

Doesn't really have a ring to it does it? But just wait and watch while people rush to do exactly that.

After all freedom is slavery! What can individuals achieve on their own without submitting to a larger group? We're all in this together and no man person is an island. The only true freedom a person has is the freedom to submit themselves to the will of their peers.


The Glenn Beck...

Marcus's picture

...piece hasn't been removed form youtube.

Too little, too late?

"After several weeks of John McCain’s campaign attacks on Barack Obama’s tax plan and idea of “spreading the wealth around”, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds voters trust McCain more than Obama on taxes, 47% to 45%."

"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote nationwide while John McCain earns 47%. This is the first time McCain has been within three points of Obama in more than a month and the first time his support has topped 46% since September 24."


Removed from Youtube

Lindsay Perigo's picture

As reported by Tracinski in TIA Daily and viewed by me before its removal, it was a "1982 documentary on Ayers' organization, in which an undercover police officer who infiltrated the Weather Underground describes its plans to overthrow the government, herd dissidents into re-education' camps, and liquidate as many as 25 million people—the full blueprint of a totalitarian reign of terror."

A mere trifle in the pomoworld of Scherk et al. Likening Ayers to Pol Pot is "hysteria," according to such pomowankers. Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?

Text of Obama's comments

Lindsay Perigo's picture


"But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties ... And one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change ... The Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day ... The Framers had that same blind spot ... the fundamental flaw of this country."

Get that. "The fundamental flaw of this country": it isn't Marxist. The constitution of which he speaks is the constitution he will have to swear to uphold, defend and protect, while his real agenda is to overturn it so that it accommodates "positive" liberties and "redistributive change" [theft].

He's a traitor. Again I say, may he meet the fate of Mussolini, only before he ever gets elected.

Youtube censoring again?

gregster's picture

"This video has been removed due to terms of use violation."

I trust ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... both Matty and Scherk listen to the Glenn Beck commentary, complete with Obama's own comments about the "tragedy" of the Supreme Court not "breaking free from the constraints of the Founding Fathers" as to what government can do as opposed to what it may not. Which kinda was the whole point of the Founding Fathers. Piece of Marxist shit. Scherk won't learn anything, since he's consciously wedded to Obama's vile agenda, and thinks he can negate opposition to its evil simply by being a pomo smart-ass and mis-spelling "evil" as "evul." Not to mention dismissing Beck as "hysterical," no doubt. If there's any "tragedy" here it's Matty, being lured into this ghastly pomowanker's (Scherk's) truly evil orbit. But it's instructive to have the whole spectacle out there, for all decent folk observing this debate.


gregster's picture

I was unduly harsh to you. On matters of Osama you draw that from me.

I don't think you would have looked silly you just didn't see the hyperbole for what it was. "I would have looked silly seeing as Linz was not suggesting any such thing despite the fact that I thought he may have been."

"You mean he will tax the rich disproportionately? Or you mean he plans to commit acts of genocide? "

Yes to both. He'll look the other way as the UN allows genocides. We'll see, (if McCain doesn't win Sad), then I could look silly.

Even if not...

atlascott's picture

Even if he does not have a consciously-held much more Socialist and totalitarian outlook (strong reason to think he does), we know where this ends, Matty.

We know where collectivism ends. At the point of a gun and in death--which is what happens everywhere Socialism and totalitarianism takes root.

Scott DeSalvo

FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Dr. Peikoff was right

atlascott's picture

His Ominous Parallels is dead on.

We are headed to a Socialist totalitarian regime.

And the enablers are those who stand on the sidelines and do nothing.

Between a Muslim childhood, concerns regarding his citizenship, belonging, for 20 years, to a blatantly racist church, associating with Ayers, a domestic terrorist and traitor, LYING ABOUT IT, and advocating Socialism openly, HOW CAN ANYONE EVEN CONSIDER THIS GUY?

I mean, seriously? Dazzled by the pretty lights that shine off his teeth when he smiles, or the twinkle in his eye?

This, against a man who was injured and TORTURED in defense of this country and our Constitution?

How can this even be a choice?


Scott DeSalvo

FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!


Matty Orchard's picture

"You seem to be suggesting that Obama may have a secret agenda..

Learn to write with clarity or not at all."

What? By putting 'seem' and 'may' in there I'm avoiding clarity? Is that your position? I put IS and a QUESTION MARK in there because it would be unfair of me to simply attribute that position to you without asking you to confirm such a position.

Same logic applies to the question I posed to Linz. I could have phrased it this way,

are suggesting that Obama does have a secret agenda.."

I would have looked silly seeing as Linz was not suggesting any such thing despite the fact that I thought he may have been. I'm happy to find out that he wasn't. What is your problem with my initial wording?

"As for Obama's genocidal inclinations- of course -the son of a bitch will take down anyone who's successful."

You mean he will tax the rich disproportionately? Or you mean he plans to commit acts of genocide? Please forgive my lack of clarity with those questions.

Glenn Beck's final warning of...

Marcus's picture

...Obama's pro-communist agenda. Very frightening!!! Halloween is coming late on the 4th of November this year!!!

Part One

Part Two

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.