Tea Party Latest (was Excitement over CNBC's Rick Santelli)

Amy Peikoff's picture
Submitted by Amy Peikoff on Fri, 2009-02-20 17:27

I hate to use the word hope, not only because of a certain politician's use of the word, but also because my grandmother always told me that "hope is just a little bit better than despair."

(She's followed "science of mind" for much of her life.)  Nonetheless, I ask the question: should we take it as a positive sign that Rick Santelli of CNBC, a self-professed Rand fan who has been boldly speaking out against all things government, has gained so much popular support in the past few days?  Just a few minutes ago, I saw some hard numbers.  Take a look at this poll:

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29301208/

 

Over 200,000 people have responded to this poll, 94% in the affirmative.  Does this mean something, or is it just wishful thinking on my part? 


( categories: )

ugh...

sharon's picture

 

I saw about five minutes of Gingrich's speech...I just can't stomach it.

 

 

 

Then why are you hanging around?

atlascott's picture

Look up "second-hander" and then take a long, hard look at yourself in the mirror.

And don't forget, Beck ASKED to be banned!

Scott DeSalvo

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

Go away for a few days...

Amy Peikoff's picture

And you miss a bunch of activity here on SOLO.  Well, believe it or not, Newt Gingrich gave a decent speech at CPAC (no, I wasn't there!):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

He focuses on the themes of lower taxes, limited government, plus puts Bush and Obama in the same category and criticizes both of them (which, as you can imagine, didn't go over well at CPAC -- you can see several people in the audience refusing to clap).  He never mentions religion once (well, except when quoting from the founding documents) and he's strong on foreign policy as well.  Obviously, no Objectivist, but if the republican party was to repurpose itself along the lines that Newt suggests, they could probably win and things would definitely look up.  I doubt it will happen, though... 

I see the second-handers....

Mike Schneider's picture

....have finally excommunicated tbe only thing that made this place worth visiting.

 

Sez you, Brant

atlascott's picture

"...took on a few survivors and left leaving a hole that is taking in copious amounts of water."

He rammed this fine luxury cruise ship in his rubber dinghy, did no damage, and then harangued us by screaming obscenities at us with a bullhorn when he wasn't getting enough attention. A few brainwashed souls who think posing and screaming and insults are persuasion, who were riding in the rubber dinghy with Billy, threw up lines, boarded the beautiful luxury liner, pretended to have been on the boat all along, and tried to prod legitimate guests to listen to the guy with the bullhorn. Then, they tried to get the guest to jump into the water without looking, and without answering what they had in store. One or two jumped in, and will promptly drown.

Meanwhile, the luxury cruise ship, with just the barest of smudges on her shiny white hull, continued on her way, as the rubber dinghy sank, with desperate, confused souls clinging to it as the air slowly leaked out of both the rubber dinghy, and the anarchists' arguments.

Scott DeSalvo

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

Is it time for the States to cede from the Union?

Marcus's picture

Mr. Hubbard

jeffrey smith's picture

On a separate thread link me to his posts here that prove otherwise? Otherwise bugger off, this is pointless.

I think his lack of respect indicated his general opinion; he felt for the most part this forum did not deserve respect.  (And maybe I'm showing my age, but the way I was raised, saying "bugger off" is foul mouthed and boorish.)

I have not been here long enough to point you to anything on this forum, but as far as off-site goes, here's the link

http://www.two--four.net/weblo...

If you wish, go judge for yourself

I can't believe

Brant Gaede's picture

how condescending you people are to Amy. This is a great thread. Give her the credit for starting it. It got off the tracks? SO WHAT? It's still great; she still gets credit after all.

Billy rammed this Objectivist showboat, took on a few survivors and left leaving a hole that is taking in copious amounts of water. Don't worry; you won't drown even though the boat only goes further and further down. You'll just spend the next fifty years saying the same Objectivist things the same old way as the last 50 years wondering why people are still buying Atlas Shrugged but you can't make any money.

Let's go back to the 1960s: "It's our job to say what Objectivism is. It's your job to say that it is." (More or less an exact Nathaniel Branden quote.) When that was published that was officially the beginning of Orthodox Objectivism which was turned into a home for the cultist feeble-minded and dazed, ignorant and otherwise compromised admirers of Ayn Rand. I don't claim innocence, but I always quested. Only Barbara Branden went against that with her course on "Principles of Efficient Thinking." Unfortunately, her course wasn't radical enough because everybody who took it probably thought they were already up to speed. I mean, they had already read and agreed with the great Ayn Rand. That had to have been 95% of what was needed. Fortunately, she's turning it into a book right now. Since the Orthodox will shun it on moral principle and obedience to the current Great Ape, the people who will read it will likely get a lot out of it.

Well, Objectivism without individualism, just for starters, isn't worth very much. This place is KASS? That's the biggest joke of all. Priests singing Ave Maria plus Objectivism = you'll take the world and give it change? Right.

--Brant

off to climb the Empire State Building with a beautiful broad in my hand

God I'm sick of this, and

Kyle Bennett's picture

God I'm sick of this, and the moron anarchists have completely derailed Amy's worthy thread.

Now you know how I feel when I see you morons pretending to be objectivists, hell, pretending to be rational. And worse, possibly convincing genuine seekers of knowledge that this is what objectivism is. You've derailed the most important philosophical work of the last century, at least.

Lindsay can ban me anytime he wants (or even just ask me to leave), until then, I have to assume that he thinks I am making a worthwhile contribution.

Its far from pointless, its just that the point has nothing to do with you.

God I'm sick of this, and

Mark Hubbard's picture

God I'm sick of this, and the moron anarchists have completely derailed Amy's worthy thread.

Finally, for all the Big Bad Billy Beck brigade, nothing you can say will hide his postings to this site, which, almost to the last post, prove him to be a foul mouthed, vindictive, often violent, boorish, nut-job. I rarely had any idea what he was on about. He might be some type of genius off this site (although the posts from those supporting him would make that seem hard to believe, especially Brant's mystical 'brianshines' which appear more often than not under the influence of moonshine): however, on this site, he was a destroyer, with no respect for the property of another.

On a separate thread link me to his posts here that prove otherwise? Otherwise bugger off, this is pointless.

I'm not claiming to be a born diplomat myself

jeffrey smith's picture

...I simply try to do it more elegantly than Mr. Beck.  However, I come onto a forum supposedly inhabited by people devoted to individualism and reason and find--well, mostly what I find from Michelle Malkin and Allahpundit--except that Allahpundit at least is witty. Oh, and there's Mr. Perigo's pontifications, which don't bear mentioning.  The man who offers Kol Nidrei as an example of life-affirming (in the way that Objectivism understands that term) music needs to learn a few things.

As for this:

Well, Jeffrey, put up or shut up. What are YOU doing about it, other
than coming onto this site to complain? Please, by all means, lead the
way.

Unless and until you start paying me a salary, I'm under no obligation to tell you anything.  I do what I think is appropriate and effective; that's all you need to know.

 

 

Scott:

rnikoley's picture

"(2) Claim their prophet, Beck can predict the future, and is infallible

"That is, he's pretty damn good at predicting the future through sound and relentless application of principles. "

"In all that time, I can't recall him ever boing wrong about something [in]substantial."

Look, I have no beef with you, don't want one, don't have time for one, wouldn't take any bait in any case.

I did what I did because I consider Billy a friend of mine. In a sense, philosophically, he's like a big brother. I love the man dearly, and if he needed me, I'd be on a plane to NY instanter.

That simple, man. Do you get it?

Now, you might think that insane, and so I'll invite you to visit my blog, read a bit about me, and judge for yourself whether I'm completely off my rocker.

http://www.freetheanimal.com/r...

(used to be a political blog, 2003 - Aug 2008; now entirely different)

http://www.freetheanimal.com/about.html 

Either way, I don't really care. But since you like Beck yourself, I can easily wish you the best. 

Brant, In regards to your

Jeremy's picture

Brant,

In regards to your war comments, I'm a Combat Infantry veteran.  As for the rest, your post proves my point.  

Jeff

atlascott's picture

"So, if you object to Mr. Beck's statement, then you are objecting to the idea that defense of one's self and one's property is justified. "

No, it is you who are dropping context, and thus depriving Mr. Beck's statements of their contextual meaning at the time they were uttered. Rationalizing, even.

You go on to admit that "...I admit that Mr. Beck is not a born diplomat" but then show your stripes with "...you're like a group of people fighting a five alarm fire armed only with teapots, and more interested in not breaking the teapots than dousing the fire."

Finally, you lament "[t]his country is going to hell on a rocket with no braking system, and what are you going to do about it? Are you going to whine about rock music like Mr. Perigo or do something more substantial than sending teabags that the politicians will give away to a charity as a PR gesture?"

Well, Jeffrey, put up or shut up. What are YOU doing about it, other than coming onto this site to complain? Please, by all means, lead the way.

Scott DeSalvo

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

"The Economist" on Atlas Shrugged sales

Ellen Stuttle's picture

The Economist draws a connection between current events and Atlas Shrugged sales:

 

 

~~~

Source

 

Ayn Rand
Atlas felt a sense of déjà vu
Feb 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition

 

The economic bust has caused a boom for at least one author

BOOKS do not sell themselves: that is what films are for. “The Reader”, the book that inspired the Oscar-winning film, has shot up the bestseller lists. Another recent publishing success, however, has had more help from Washington, DC, than Hollywood. That book is Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”.

Reviled in some circles and mocked in others, Rand’s 1957 novel of embattled capitalism is a favourite of libertarians and college students. Lately, though, its appeal has been growing.

[....]

Whenever governments intervene in the market, in short, readers rush to buy Rand’s book. Why? The reason is explained by the name of a recently formed group on Facebook, the world’s biggest social-networking site: “Read the news today? It’s like ‘Atlas Shrugged’ is happening in real life”. The group, and an expanding chorus of fretful bloggers, reckon that life is imitating art.

Some were reminded of Rand’s gifted physicist, Robert Stadler, cravenly disavowing his faith in reason for political favour, when Alan Greenspan, an acolyte of Rand’s, testified before a congressional committee last October that he had found a “flaw in the model” of securitisation. And with pirates hijacking cargo ships, politicians castigating corporate chieftains, riots in Europe and slowing international trade—all of which are depicted in the book—this melancholy meme has plenty of fodder.

~~~

 

Ellen

Yikes indeed! (Oops)

Ellen Stuttle's picture

Well, now I'm cracking up, Robert.

Went over my head entirely, but I do find it funny now you've explained it.

Ellen

"on those premises"

jeffrey smith's picture

Robert,  Mr. Beck was using that phrase in a very exact way.  Someone in his living room "on those premises" would be a government agent who was there for the presence of taking some of Mr. Beck's property.   Whether that person was Mr. DeSalvo or someone else would be irrelevant, because Mr. Beck would be defending his own property from a thief. (If you go back and read the comment in context, you'll see what I mean.) And, as far as I know, no one considers Mr. DeSalvo to be a government agent except in the technical sense that, as a lawyer admitted to practice, he's an officer of the court.  So, if you object to Mr. Beck's statement, then you are objecting to the idea that defense of one's self and one's property is justified.

I knew of Mr. Beck a long time before I heard of this site; I will in fact admit that I found about this place through his blog, and I've joined up here because I find instances of intelligent conversation among some (only some!) of the members, even though I'm not an Objectivist.  I will also admit that Mr. Beck is not a born diplomat, to say the least, but when he calls people out as idiots or whatever, he's usually correct.  In this case, you're like a group of people fighting a five alarm fire armed only with teapots, and more interested in not breaking the teapots than dousing the fire.

This country is going to hell on a rocket with no braking system, and what are you going to do about it?  Are you going to whine about rock music like Mr. Perigo or do something more substantial than sending teabags that the politicians will give away to a charity as a PR gesture?

Yikes!

Robert's picture

Sorry Ellen, that was a little bit of retaliatory ad hominem. I was commenting about the size of the target of the lobotomy. I think I'll leave the comedy to the professionals and get back to making vaccines.

After all, according to Brant, this politikal filosofy stuff is over my head. Having never been a soldier nor a guitar hero I know nothing.

Lobotomy

Ellen Stuttle's picture

Robert, just a point of information: a lobotomy isn't micro surgery. It's a crude procedure which severs -- or attempts to sever -- nerves to and from the prefrontal cortex.

(In the most frequently used types of operation, those which entered either through the tear-duct or through the eye orbit above the eye, the surgeon couldn't tell where the implement was being swished around and thus which nerves exactly were being severed.)

I checked a couple sources looking for the date range during which lobotomies were in vogue.

The current Wikipedia entry says:

"Lobotomies were used mainly from the 1930s to 1950s to treat a wide range of severe mental illnesses, including schizophrenia, clinical depression, and various anxiety disorders, as well as people who were considered a nuisance by demonstrating behavior characterized as, for example, 'moodiness' or 'youthful defiance'."

An article about Walter Freeman, who devised what's called the "ice-pick" procedure of going in through the tear duct says:

"In all, lobotomies were used on 40,000 to 50,000 Americans between 1936 and the late 1950s."

This doesn't make clear if it's talking about only the Freeman type or all types.

The whole lobotomizing fad is a black chapter in the history of medicine.

Ellen

Scott

sharon's picture

THE ANARCHIST BANNERS HAVE BEEN CALLED AND ANARCHISTS ARE ALL MIRACULOUSLY AND COINCIDENTALLY HERE TO DEFEND BECK. Beck, who has denied calling his banners to get people here to pollute this site, its principals, and its contributors in an ironic Anarchist Smear Collective.

LOL, YOU ARE A RIOT! LOL

 

I didn’t sign on to this site to support or rally around Beck. I didn’t know who he was until once here.

 

"They tried to lobotomize me in school."

Robert's picture

Not surprised that they failed, micro surgery wasn't invented until the 60s.

Ron

atlascott's picture

I have no earthly idea why I would want to contact you. You comport yourself in a much more gentlemanly manner than some, and that's great. If I had time, and we were in a private conversation, it would begin and end with me asking you what you think I should be reading that has you so convinced. I mean, obviously, persuasion must be at least some fractional component of why you are all here. Then, I'd read it, and do my own thinking.

I do my own thinking and nothing frosts my ass faster than someone trying to bully or insult me to their position. That may work with some people, but not me.

Other than small talk and chit-chat, which is a nice part of conversation but not particularly substantive and not particularly productive from a meeting of the minds standpoint.

You will note that I have ignored the sinister connotations one could attach to your requests for me to come find you. I assume that the purpose there is not to bleed me like a pig or any such thing.

Scott DeSalvo

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

Scott:

Ron Good's picture

"Nobody has been in a hurry to articulate it. ...They have no plan..."

Speaking  for myself, I have plans *for myself* but I have no plans for anyone else except that if I want some one else's cooperation (regarding what would then become a mutual plan) I will *ask* for it and not demand it.

"Beck adherents:...(1) Insist that you cannot understand anarchy...until you are transformed by an epiphany, and after which, it all makes sense."

Never wrote or said any such thing. Check if you wish; I'm sure you'll find that's true.

Please, and only if you wish, feel free to contact me privately anytime. As I noted. I'm easy to find.

 

 

Glenn Beck gets furious...

Marcus's picture

...over hypocrisy of politicians.

Your real complaint is this

Kyle Bennett's picture

Your real complaint is this is not an anarchist site, since logically it would be if the contradictions were removed. That's what I get from you.

No, my "real" complaint is that this is not a site where people check premises, its one where people defend premises, where dogma substitutes for thinking, and where shallow intellects gain false stature.

I do think that if the contradictions were removed, a stateless or near stateless conclusion would be drawn, but it's not about conclusions, it's about process. There is no final endpoint in the process of reason, there are only rest stops and concrete actions that then provide input into the next round. Forgetting that is where Objectivism, and Rand herself, went totally off the rails.

And I could be wrong about the conclusions. If so, I want to know about it. The tragedy for me is that these people, who should have been among the most philosophically prepared people in the world to cooperate in the process have abandoned the effort, and are thus no use to me whatsoever. If they say the sky is blue, I have to go outside and check.

All that's left is to do what I can to keep them from hurting innocent bystanders.

Mission accomplished

atlascott's picture

"They tried to lobotomize me in school. "

Evidently, they failed there, but someone else got to you.

Scott DeSalvo

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

No Plan

atlascott's picture

"Nobody has been in a hurry to articulate it."

They have no plan, and Beck has made no bones about saying so, despite his plans to brow beat and intimidate his neighbors into agreeing with his civil defense plans for his neighborhood.

They think that their argument from ethics is enough.

Scott DeSalvo

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

ghostsniper

atlascott's picture

"I mean, whats their backup plan if this one doesn't work? "

And YOUR plan is--what? Sit on the sidelines, do NOTHING, and criticize everyone who cares enough about their lives to act logically?

Scott DeSalvo

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

Re: Robert

atlascott's picture

"You have no idea what's going on or what will be possible and not possible."

Is that because Robert has not had a mystical transformation or epiphany in order to understand anarchy?

Scott DeSalvo

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

As Sargeant at Arms

atlascott's picture

of the ASC (Anarchist Smear Collective), one would hope that you would understand that Billy has been MODERATED, not banned, three times, and NOW appears to have bee banned at his own insistence.

Even very stupid people who cannot follow explicit rules can suss out that they are doing something wrong when they are moderated. Later the moderation is lifted, but Beck never learned.

Just another example of your integrity and honesty.

For someone who adheres to the Beck Perfection Principle and gets his panties in a knot when Beck is rightfully taken to task, you'd know alot about chanting mysticism.

Go back to cleaning your guns and praying to the Beck altar, y'all.

Scott DeSalvo

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

Great

atlascott's picture

Beck adherents:

(1) Insist that you cannot understand anarchy...until you are transformed by an epiphany, and after which, it all makes sense.
(2) Claim their prophet, Beck can predict the future, and is infallible

"That is, he's pretty damn good at predicting the future through sound and relentless application of principles. "

"In all that time, I can't recall him ever boing wrong about something [in]substantial."

AND NOTICE JUST AS WHEN IT GOT HOT WITH ME ON THE SARA PALIN THREAD, THE ANARCHIST BANNERS HAVE BEEN CALLED AND ANARCHISTS ARE ALL MIRACULOUSLY AND COINCIDENTALLY HERE TO DEFEND BECK. Beck, who has denied calling his banners to get people here to pollute this site, its principals, and its contributors in an ironic Anarchist Smear Collective.

A zebra always shows its stripes.

Scott DeSalvo

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

Jeremy

Brant Gaede's picture

Paraphrase is not dressed out with quotation marks. Nobody said it but you.

If I wasn't smarter than you and whoever, I'd kill myself. It'd be hard evidence of brain-damage.

I do concede, tho, if you live to my age, about 2047, you might be smarter than me now thanks to me now. Gratitude currently accepted.

If you wonder why I sorta now sound like BB, it's not emulation but consideration. LOOK! Look at the world. WHAT do you see? Can you see? Do you really understand WTF is going on? Try going to a bad-ass war with noble intentions as I did and almost get killed for SHIT! The most life-living joyful man I ever met got his legs blown off in 1967 and expired with the words "I'm sorry." Sorry because he couldn't live even tho everybody did all they could to keep him alive. RIP, Robert Johnson.  Another, a Dodge heir, got blown out of his jeep.

You just don't know. Lucky, lucky you. How few do. Unlucky them. I'm unlucky. They tried to lobotomize me in school. They failed. Too tough, too smart. I thought I was smarter than they were. I was. I couldn't countenance stupidity injected into my brain. Get this: It's not smarter than me--it's righter than me. Where the fuck is your right?

Get this also: It's ALL ad hominem until you really start using your God-damn brains!

And I'm not even a political anarchist! And Billy has not once flamed my ass for THAT! He's addressing what's in between your ears, not who the f. you voted for and why. That's because if you aren't an anarchist in your head you'll never be a free man!

Get it? I don't think so.

--Brant

I love humanity but can it rise?

Why do folks such as Billy

Jeremy's picture

Why do folks such as Billy and Brant say things like "You're in over your head" and "I'm better and smarter than all of you" (to paraphrase) and not actually have a foundation on which to base those proclamations?  I've seen or read nothing to make me conclude either are true, so assuming that we'll all take your acumen for granted is a bit presumptuous.

Anyway, it's far past time to talk of something else.

Oh, Robert

Brant Gaede's picture

You are a nice guy, but in over your head. A metaphorical 2 X 4 to get the mule's attention is not a death threat.

People like Billy and me don't advertise that we are going to or might kill anyone if that's actual intent.

And do you understand what Billy meant by his standing in his living room "on those premises"? And why that might change the metaphorical into something literal? What the fuck would anybody be doing in Billy's living room "on those premises"? Do you understand why someone might have to act in self-defense? Do you understand precision and exacitude in language?

You must think he's a moron, which is truly moronic. But you're not stupid by a long shot, so Think Twice.

--Brant

back to my cave

"deeply compassionate, caring human being"

Robert's picture

Billy Beck to Scott DeSalvo:

"If you were standing in my living room on those premises, I'd drain you like a pig and leave you out for the ravens."

I guess Scott (as a member of SOLOP) deserved that too.

The only contradiction here Brant is how you can assert that a person you've never met is a deeply compassionate, caring human being.

I'll leave the reader to figure out why you are contradicting yourself.

Enjoy OL. Don't hurry back.

Billy Beck

Brant Gaede's picture

is a deeply compassionate, caring human being. Highly educated and intelligent and perceptive, he kept giving SOLOP just what it deserved. The contradiction--that this place didn't deserve him--has been resolved. I'd rather read his blog, in any case, than read him here. Over there you can see the brainshine.

Well, back to Objectivist Living. If you need me, send out the signal. I don't want to help. I want to watch.

--Brant

Brant,

Robert's picture

You have my apologies for misrepresenting your political world view.

I make no apologies for the sentiments in the post you initially replied to. In my 34 years, I've never met a single significant endeavor that didn't benefit from forethought and discussion.

Having spent the majority of my adult life in a socialist piss-pot republic (New Zealand), I am confident that the USA will not sink beneath the waves after four or eight years of Obama. We are not yet in the Life-boat situation wherein instant armed-revolt without delay is called for.

If you want to effect a lasting change on this republic you need to do it the way the founders did. Talk first and figure out who to fight instead of just flailing wildly away at anybody within reach (The Beck Doctrine).

So yes, I see Rick Santani's little outburst as positive. Is it the decisive blow? No. How could it be. But as it happens more and more, people stop putting American Idol before politics and will start to listen. And then there will be an opportunity to reverse the situation, hopefully without resorting to wanton violence. And I would prefer that to the alternative.

Robert

Brant Gaede's picture

That's more KASS. The only problem is if you want to criticize me you have to read me first. I'm not a political anarchist. I have no Congress with Billy because there is no professional overlap of interests and if I were to meet him I'd probably not like him very much. I could meet him to find out if that were true, if I were passing by. His blog is interesting and he's a lot more pleasant there than he has been here. I don't wonder why; I know why. He's said why here over and over again.

--Brant

Brant...

Robert's picture

So you're annoyed that I'm not salivating at the thought of sacking Washington and putting the inhabitants to the sword. Sorry. My days of day-dreaming about 'Death or Glory' in last-ditch battles against an implacable enemy past when I reached my 6th birthday.

I'm not yet ready to take up a gun, not even close. One reason is that no one, not you, not Beck, not a single person here or in Washington has articulated a goal that is demonstrably better than what we have now - flawed and failing as it is.

And you can swear at me all you want. Not you, not Beck, nor any of his misanthropic minions are going to brow beat me into thinking otherwise (you could try reasoning, but first you'd have to unclench the fist y'all have been waving in my face). I value my life, and I'm not going to piss it away on some half-baked scheme dreamed up by some dope-addled roadie with a potty mouth and a gun.

That is assuming that you anarcho-Rambos have a plan. Nobody has been in a hurry to articulate it. Having met a few camo worshiping gun junkies in my time, I suspect that the big 'plan' amounts to buying a pile of really big guns, some ammo, some hard liquor and some hard porn and having a party in the woods near Fort Billy Beck. Just remember, if you don't have a chair when Billy stops playing - you get to "squeal like a pig."

No thanks. I'll take my chances with Obama et al.

Teabagging

ghostsniper's picture

 From the article: Americans are saying enough is enough to extravagant government
spending and throwing nearly 40 tea parties across the nation to
protest.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

And then what?

I mean, whats their backup plan if this one doesn't work?

Are they gonna (gasp) stop paying their taxes? OMFG!

If so, then why don't they just stop paying taxes to begin with and get on with their lives?

Oh, thats right, some people would rather throw tantrums that fall on deaf ears, than actually do something of substance, as long as there's a party involved. 

Its all about style......

"Grow food, buy gold and lots of ammo."

Onward.......

 

 

Insecurity Issues

ghostsniper's picture

Fawstin said this: but picking on "my" woman...

+++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Written like a 15 yo about his first girlfriend.

She'll be kicking your pantywaist ass to the curb directly.

 

"Grow food, buy gold and lots of ammo."

Onward.......

 

 

Robert

Brant Gaede's picture

You have no idea what's going on or what will be possible and not possible. "Velvet Revolution"! Good God! What a pussyfied thread this is! KASS my ass!

--Brant

Kyle

Brant Gaede's picture

Your real complaint is this is not an anarchist site, since logically it would be if the contradictions were removed. That's what I get from you.

--Brant

"A bunch of talk"

Robert's picture

Amy, take heart as I do, from remembering that righteous and effective action always begin with "a bunch of talk."

The reason that the American Revolution endured while the French and other revolutions did not, was that people spent ten years chewing over the issues before they started cutting throats.

Yes. Rick's rant may come to nothing. So may the rants of fifty others that follow him. But the cumulative effect will eventually lead to some form of revolution. "People are deceived en masse and convinced one at a time" as Richard Brodie likes to say.

I look at how the Czech Republic emerged from the clutches of one of the most murderous and repressive political doctrines ever to blight man. And I am confident that if we continue to speak, the time will come that we to can effect our own Velvet Revolution.

Not Again

Kyle Bennett's picture

Isn't this like the third time Billy's been banned here? Maybe I'm thinking of some other forum.

...how [d]o you get the philosophy ... truly into the battle?

Oh, you pathetic losers. Here's how: use it.

Ah, but you can't, because it would mean giving up your chanting mysticism.

There's not one person here (OK, one, maybe) who shows any sign of being willing to use reason. Here's a quick start guide: find a set of premises that don't contradict. Apply them to the real world and eliminate the ones that contradict it. Repeat... forever.

Y'all can't even get past the first step. You've got your cherished premises, and as soon as anything - or anyone - comes along to contradict them... blank out. The wording of the question I quoted above is exhibit A. There's a premise in it that none of you have ever checked, nor will ever check.

My answer to that question is: you can't. You can, however, all go to hell via your faulty premises and mindless faith.

Now, put your hands over your ears and eyes so you can't hear or see me anymore, and go back to teabagging each other. You're all Lenny's children, in spirit at least.

Richard

Brant Gaede's picture

Substantial, insubstantial. Right, wrong. Reverse ad hominem is only an argument from authority. That's what Billy brought to the table here, his authority which he repeatedly referred to to explain why he wouldn't engage people who themselves brought nothing to the table in his opinion. He hates this place because he thinks it pisses all over Objectivism and the real legacy of Ayn Rand. You are saying he was substantially right about that along with everything else. I have my different opinion which is neither positive nor negative. However, his illogic was only part of his commentary. He always knew when he was being fallacious--just another way of giving people the finger.

--Brant

Correction: Beck

rnikoley's picture

"I can't recall him ever being wrong about something SUBSTANTIAL."

Answers

Ron Good's picture

"And why do you only ever appear to defend Beck?"

Because what counts is what *I* think of him. And what I know of him.

"Are you a real person?"

This is not a blustery challenge or a threat in any way, Scott...just a simple gentle statement (and a personal invitation if you care to take it that way):

Yes, I am. I use my real name anywhere I post and I'm easily found/contacted by anyone who cares to do so.

Billy; Events this weekend

Amy Peikoff's picture

I trust that Lindsay banned Billy because he wanted to, not as some "sacrifice" to me.  I would have been grateful for the moderating, and didn't even ask for that, but it seems that Billy would have just redirected all his abusive language at Lindsay.  In any event, probably Billy is quite smart, and he hadn't yet been rude to me, which is why I was engaging him in the beginning of this thread.  But I gather this is not the only thread in which he's been so rude and foul-mouthed, that any intellectual content was overshadowed by it.

 In any event, my main purpose for writing today is to post news of events going on this weekend.  There's a World Net Daily article that one of the groups is sending around on FB.  It's here:

 http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90055

No, I'm not sure whether any of this will lead to anything.  But it would be nice if things didn't have to hit rock bottom, if Americans could use their conceptual faculty to see what's coming before it gets here.  We'll see...

 

 

 

Beck

rnikoley's picture

I've known him since USENET days, 'round '95ish. Met his very charming self a coupla times as he was out for gigs in SF (I hope that happens again, soon).

In all that time, I can't recall him ever boing wrong about something insubstantial. That is, he's pretty damn good at predicting the future through sound and relentless application of principles. He knows well that the chief antagonism is individualism vs. collectivism and that observation goes every which way -- top to bottom and wall to wall.

You may not like the messenger or the way he delivers his message, but that, in itself, is merely a predictable consequence of someone being right, someone being wrong, and the party in the wrong refusing to acknowledge reality.

Beck is right. It's that simple.

His banning was an inevitable consequence; in a place like this. 

Ron, have some self-respect

atlascott's picture

Honest to goodness, denying Beck's ugliness damns you as a Kool-Aid drinker.

And why do you only ever appear to defend Beck?

Are you a real person?

Scott DeSalvo

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

Oh get off the grass Ron.

Mark Hubbard's picture

Oh get off the grass Ron. Jesus.

I could never tell if Billy had an intellectual capacity or not: there was so much noise. If he does have the ability for rational thought, then in the way he chose to deport himself he was a moron.

His mouth, and the way he chose to use it, was an abuse of Linz's property - this site. If he came into my house and acted in a boorish, and just plain insane, fashion like that, in front of my family, then he would have got his arse kicked straight back out, with the only hesitation being on my behalf, wondering if I should ameliorate my reaction because be might be some sort of retard.

Good on Amy for calling him what he was: an ingrate and a destroyer.

His behaviour was, according to any definition of what he may have been trying to achieve, that of a moron, at best, a monster at worse. Whatever his beliefs are, and who would know, he was doing them no justice (or perhaps he was). If that's anarchy, then he confirmed my thoughts on that movement.

Just a couple of

Ron Good's picture

Just a couple of comments:

regarding Billy: "But I won't act like your entire routine isn't based on getting people
to ignore the beastly the face you present and look deeper to the
ideas, so that you truly know they care about your ideas"

Wrong. His face, the way he presents himself, has never looked beastly to me. Not in the slightest. He's never written a single word that offended me. I haven't had to look past anything, and Billy has always known fully that I care about his ideas, regardless. I don't mean this as an insult (it's just a nod to your evident inexperience with him) but you haven't a clue about Billy's "entire routine".

regarding Billy: "In Beck-istan, one does not indulge in philosophical discussions with anyone below their intellectual rank"

Wrong again. I'm far from stupid, but I'm not as intelligent as Billy, nor as well-read. For that matter, nor as disciplined, nor as rigorous--but those are my failings/limitations--and I''m honest enough and intelligent enough to recognize and admit (and fight) them. (Also, as it happens I came to *my* understanding of individualism at least two decades before I ever heard of Billy or he ever heard of me). In short: I *am* below Billy's intellectual rank--and he's never done anything but treat me well, and he has never refused to discuss anything with me.

regarding Billy: "Billy's behaviour is entirely congruent with the anti-values of headbanging caterwauling".

Wrong, again, and still.

Re the Santelli fuss: "I wonder if it's just a bunch of talk that won't lead to anything because politicians won't let it."

For the foreseeable future, Amy, if you factor in the complicity/support of those feeding at the trough as well: very sadly--that's what it is: "just a bunch of talk that won't lead to anything." I'd love to be wrong about what you wrote, but all the evidence I see says I'm not. But please, prove or make me wrong, with my blessings.

As it happens and similarly, I also expect that what I've just written isn't going to change anyone's already held opinion of Billy. Same-same. Wishes are not horses.

Ah, Sharon,

Brant Gaede's picture

someone I can talk to. You didn't give me a chance to do that youtube that ....

Just a little slack; I'll be back.

--Brant

evil human beings, huh?

sharon's picture

 

I cannot be a political anarchist because governments pop spontaneously into existence out of chaos and bloodshed which I see as anarchical soil governments grow in...

Do you have any examples?

It seems to be in the human DNA.  

This would include government officials as well, I take it? ;]

Keep trying, Brant.

 

Linz

Brant Gaede's picture

You sacrificed your site to Amy. Beautiful, intelligent--and a Peikoff.

I hope she has a long, productive, happy life. Her man too. But I can engage neither.

You are truly chivalrous!

--Brant

Your words are taken to

Bosch Fawstin's picture

Your words are taken to heart, Lindsay, thank you.

http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

Again ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... the point is missed that Billy's behaviour is entirely congruent with the anti-values of headbanging caterwauling. His boorishness towards Amy was the last straw. It warmed my heart to see Bosch's old-fashioned chivalry in response. I was urged, and tempted, to keep Billy on just so we could all see Bosch's re-rendering of Billy's visage. But I figured Bosch could do that anyway, via Pigman. Smiling

Well,

Brant Gaede's picture

I have to admit he wanted to destroy this place. He was actually having the opposite effect. Quo Vadis SOLOP?

Not my motivation, which is--you'll have to figure that out for yourselves. I did wonder, whether in the servers' xchange Solo might never come back. I like that when you now use the Track function it no longer grinds on seemingly forever.

Billy, when you first said you had friends here, then said that didn't matter very much, then invited everybody here to go to hell, it made me wonder, or think, you're a narcissist with an exceptional, finely honed mind occasionally revealed in spite of such declamations.

Two questions qua political anarchy: How do we get there from here? And what will we find and how do we know that that is what we will find? I see it as a moral, individual issue which most people will forever default away from. Human being is usually tribal being. But the point is since morality is really paramount we won't know what is there before we get there becuase "there" has yet to be made.

BrantGaede@aol.com

I also read your very good blog. Contrasting the two makes me think your behavior is more dependent on where you find yourself than narcissism.

--Brant

A love-note I couldn't resist ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

A private SOLO-Mail from Billy:

You nerveless piece of shit: if you had the courage of your convictions, you would just ban me outright and say so.

Done!

Don't be confused.

atlascott's picture

Just because I said I liked you on a gut level DOES NOT excuse alot of the other things about you that I am just too tired to talk about. I also said I wasn't going to rehash it here, and based on your performance, I don't have to. It is all pretty much on public display.

It does not excuse any of the behavior or any of the thinking.

I profoundly disagree with you about your estimation of me, obviously, and of people on this site, and even of yourself, but that is pretty obvious, too.

Scott DeSalvo

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

Amen!

Robert's picture

About bloody time.

In Beck-istan, one does not indulge in philosophical discussions with anyone below their intellectual rank.

"And I might discuss it with you if you weren't such an ignorant and impertinent snot."

The problem is that Beck considers everybody to be an impertinent snot or worse.

Such wisdom as has been wrung out of the twat has come at the expense of being showered in caustic epithets and quasi threats of violence.

Scott may be right, he may indeed have some redeeming features. But you have to ask yourself, are the nuggets of wisdom worth the price paid in patience?

And quite frankly, there are other places to get the intellectual cool-aid he drinks without having to expose yourself to his verbal cholera.

Not for the first time ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... I've placed Billy under moderation. His gratuitous abuse is fouling up the place. He's welcome to post, and KASSly, but not to abandon every semblance of civilized values in the process. He should confine such abandonment to his headbanging "music," among consenting "adults." Eye

Sharon

Brant Gaede's picture

I'll watch the youtube link on anarchy I just noticed you put up for me when I get some time. However, I cannot be a political anarchist because governments pop spontaneously into existence out of chaos and bloodshed which I see as anarchical soil governments grow in. It seems to be in the human DNA. Likewise, if you raise a society of humans without language and then let them go they'll invent complicated and sophisticated language very quickly. I do think they are analogous re social need and mental and physical capacity of the organism naturally exploited.

--Brant

Four things for Billy

Amy Peikoff's picture

1.  You joined this thread; I did not ask you to.

2.  I have done nothing to deserve your rudeness and you know it.

3.  I need not "put you in your place" because you've done it yourself on this thread.

4.  I will not be talking/writing to you again.

Fawstin

Billy Beck's picture

"Picking on a woman who doesn't deserve it is bad enough, but picking on my woman is quite another, Billy Speck. Now, I've read bits and parts of your self-loathing screeds against others, and it never much bothered me, but to unnecessarily call out Amy in the way you have, even as a warning, is way out line, and if you said the same words to her in my presence, you'd end up uglier than you are."

I know what I'm doing.

Thanks anyway. We will all carry on, now, to include you.

Picking on a woman who

Bosch Fawstin's picture

Picking on a woman who doesn't deserve it is bad enough, but picking on my woman is quite another, Billy Speck. Now, I've read bits and parts of your self-loathing screeds against others, and it never much bothered me, but to unnecessarily call out Amy in the way you have, even as a warning, is way out of line, and if you said the same words to her in my presence, you'd end up uglier than you are. So don't You ever address Her again, and get the hell off of her thread, you've contributed Nothing.

http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

Check Your Stupid Premises

Billy Beck's picture

"Beck, you treat the people I admire here like shit."

Good.

Fuck you.

Beck, you treat the people

Jeremy's picture

Beck, you treat the people I admire here like shit.   Are you expecting me to placate you?  Coddle you?  Act as if speaking the way you do to these people is ignorable?  Should I be impressed by your straightforwardness? (Which I would definitely say is not any kind of candor but a reflex mechanism against you actually enjoying the company you keep on here.)

I have no doubt that you have some startlingly insightful ideas.  But I won't act like your entire routine isn't based on getting people to ignore the beastly the face you present and look deeper to the ideas, so that you truly know they care about your ideas.

I don't care about your ideas. Unlike Scott, a great guy in my opinion, I don't like you.  Never have.  Speaking the way you do to people you allegedly loathe but are not forced to interact with is the least of my problems with you.

You don't really seem to have anything against me other than the facts that:

1) I happen to be young (I'm nearly 30) 

2) I speak my mind(which can be a notoriously fatal crime in Becksylvania, especially for the young)

3) I won't ignore the gibbering monkey in the corner and can say some pretty harsh things to people that insult me or others, explicitly or otherwise, and that pisses you off. (which can be immensely enjoyable for me)

I've seen what happens when people agree with you, or treat you with some respect.   

I prefer my brashness, and my impudence (the true watchword of tottering old tyrants with funny beards) What ideas haven't I grasped or at least explored that make me ignorant?

The idea that BILLY BECK should not be messed with?  Fuck that.  We agree on a metric shit-ton of things, but never that. Don't you know that?  

/\Sorry for disrupting the thread, won't happen again/\

 

edit: yes I will, for just a second:

 

And you and everyone else here can take note of this:

I am here on the attack. I have a few friends here now, but that is
of no serious consequence to me. I am here to point out the genuine
tragedy of just how abjectly useless Objectivism has been in this
fight. For a philosophy that espouses mind/body integration that
Objectivism has so well, I would not have imagined such a herd of inert
brains-in-vats, so content to watch this whole project going to hell
while they whistle
"Ave Maria". (Yes: I'm going to make that a focus-object of the derision. Perigo will always deserve it, the flubber-spined slob.)

Amy Peikoff, my dear, do yourself a favor: don't ever address me
again
, or -- at the least -- take extreme care if you ever do, because
I'll put you in your place.

See my rage. Understand: I am an extremely dissatisfied customer. I
think the original manufacturer did some of the most important work of
the whole twentieth century, but her wholesale and retail organization
is one of the lamest things I ever saw. And when I consider the times
and what they call for, this is an outrage that I will never tolerate
peaceably. You people can go straight to hell with the rest of us, and
I will take particular
delight in it -- yes: that's what I said
and mean -- because of the mantle that you presume and of which you're
not worthy by the smallest fraction.

I can't stand frauds, and that's what this place is. And if I can burn it down, I will count the work well done.

-------------

Nuff said.  Couldn't have weaved a better rope myself, Beck.  I will never insult you again, because you've done it so well here that I just couldn't do you justice.

/golfclap

 

Flying The Flag

Billy Beck's picture

Joe: "I rarely see people outside of the south wearing American flags,...

I once walked into a bar in Strasbourg, France, wearing my A-2 bomber jacket. This thing is my memorial to heroes: SAC command shield on the right breast, 11th Fighter Wing on the left; left arm with the 174th Fighter Wing roundel ("The Boys From Syracuse" -- and someone should get a leash on The Slob because this has nothing to do with Rogers & Hart), and the right arm with the 99th Bomb Wing "River Rats/MiG Killers" patch and the 30th Anniversary B-52 patch ("Someone Over Thirty You Can Trust").

I casually strolled up to the bar and asked for a beer. That guy looked me up & down and shook his head, without a single word.

I never would have thought that I would have been so proud to be kicked out of a bar.

I walked out of that joint like a king.

You Don't Know What "Hope" Is

Billy Beck's picture

"If there is hope, the hope is in a coalition of people who believe in core fundamental values--not only those who have it all 100% right, not those who can recite from OPAR (as much I wish we all could), not just anarchists."

What has not penetrated your thinking yet is that we're the ones leading the way on principles, and we're right. Think hard about it, Scott: to reject any given government is first an application of ethics. "This government is not a value to me, and I will not have it." This is what the human individual is built by nature do do: make up his own mind about his values, and that includes government.

I'm the one who's consistent in all this, Scott. You are never going to see me turn around and endorse any government and its presumed authority over anyone's mind. Conversely, you're the one with the integrity problem in this. Anyone with a decent grasp of history must understand that what you're seeing right now is a final fulfillment of constitutional design together with the advent of Pragmatism in action over the past century or so. You are so heavily invested that you cannot see any of that.

"Coalition"? {Hah!} I've said it before: you bring nothing for me to work with.

What is required are principles, son, and you don't have what it takes.

I'm not here to be mean to you. I'm telling you what I see, and I have been seeing farther than you for nearly as long as you've been alive.

As for this:

"I state a simple and plain fact. I REALLY LIKE Billy Beck."

I know you do. I always have. Anyone with a brain in their head, would. Let me tell you something:

It has been the experience of my whole life (really: since I was very little) that people either love me or can't stand me, just about on sight. Anecdote: when I was in the eighth grade, my brother's girlfriend hauled-off and spit in my face one day, right straight out of the blue and within less than five minutes of meeting me. It was a horrifying episode for everyone involved, and not least Pam, who could not explain why she did that.

I puzzled over that for years. Along the way, I took close account of various peoples' responses to me, and came to my own conclusion, which is that the thing that some people can't stand about me is that I make no bones about who I am. I don't play social conventions -- except on my very own terms -- and I don't care what anyone thinks about me, because I'm the only one who counts, to me. (There is a trap there, Scott: don't step in it.)

It doesn't matter whether you like me. It never has.

What matters is what I think of you.

And you and everyone else here can take note of this:

I am here on the attack. I have a few friends here now, but that is of no serious consequence to me. I am here to point out the genuine tragedy of just how abjectly useless Objectivism has been in this fight. For a philosophy that espouses mind/body integration that Objectivism has so well, I would not have imagined such a herd of inert brains-in-vats, so content to watch this whole project going to hell while they whistle "Ave Maria". (Yes: I'm going to make that a focus-object of the derision. Perigo will always deserve it, the flubber-spined slob.)

Amy Peikoff, my dear, do yourself a favor: don't ever address me again, or -- at the least -- take extreme care if you ever do, because I'll put you in your place.

See my rage. Understand: I am an extremely dissatisfied customer. I think the original manufacturer did some of the most important work of the whole twentieth century, but her wholesale and retail organization is one of the lamest things I ever saw. And when I consider the times and what they call for, this is an outrage that I will never tolerate peaceably. You people can go straight to hell with the rest of us, and I will take particular delight in it -- yes: that's what I said and mean -- because of the mantle that you presume and of which you're not worthy by the smallest fraction.

I can't stand frauds, and that's what this place is. And if I can burn it down, I will count the work well done.

Bloody Foolishness

Billy Beck's picture

"Santelli was on CNBC this morning, and he worried me because his comments indicated he hasn't got the economic theory wherewithal to get this protest to where it needs to be."

I saw that, too.

The rotten premises, the extemporizing of crummy principles and theory (we should call it that), the confusion and utter ignorance made me conclude: "Check. It all figures. This clown is in about ass-deep with no way out."

"I'm hopeful, I do think there is a sea change in parts of America occuring, but how to you get the philosophy and the economic theory truly into the battle?"

It's too late for that. Remember when Rand said, "It's earlier than you think"? Well, it is now later than you think.

And anyone pinning hopes on Santelli or what he said is bound for a broken heart, and a lot worse.

Your Words, Jeremy: Not Mine

Billy Beck's picture

"In essence, Beck, there's nothing that can be done, no matter who believes in the right ideals. Just say it."

No, Jeremy: I wouldn't say it because it's not true. And I might discuss it with you if you weren't such an ignorant and impertinent snot, although I will condescend to this much for you: nothing worth a damn will be done.

There will be no stopping this socialism in my country until it becomes another object-lesson of history.

That's my conviction.

And there will be no discussion of it with you.

Why?

Jmaurone's picture

"WHY on Earth would we want to emulate what they are doing on any score?"

  Well, there's that dangerous word, "we." I suspect it has to do with "our" long tradition of getting our ideas from Europe. And there's a certain moral superiority involved, "free" health care and what-not; the assumption is that the Europeans are more "progressive." But on a more personal level, I've known many people, usually younger, who talk of going to Europe, and how great it is, compared to us "American" philistines. I rarely see people outside of the south wearing American flags, but proudly wearing British Flags, or international soccer shirts, with pride. 

 Usually, these same people are the ones who make Amsterdam their first destination...Eye This is not unrelated, though. The "liberal" attitude of Europeans is probably an attractive lure...

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

Euro-Statist

atlascott's picture

Looking at Europe, and with all due respect to the wonderful people who live there, WHY on Earth would we want to emulate what they are doing on any score?

You make a good point, Joe, here: "Are we not on the verge of being a "European" statist society, if not already there? "

A dedicated few can change the course of history, so they say.

I think one of the reasons that we are all so agitated is that what the Obamination is doing is contrary to core American values. Collectivized mortgages, government stakes in private industry, collectivized medical system, central government database of individual health (and other)information; and before Obama- The Patriot Act (secret survielance and seizure of American citizens without cause or a warrant).

We are, right now, moving visibly and emphatically away from American values.

Scott DeSalvo

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

Scott

Jmaurone's picture

 I didn't single you out on purpose, at least not in a "gotcha!" way; it was more a reaction to your mentioning your commitment to your work, which is why I asked if I could ask.  No harm intended; thanks for answering. 

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

Frank Answers

atlascott's picture

You know, I considered posting this in a separate article on SOLO, but just never got around to it.

Billy Beck is intelligent, talented (I have never seen him work lights, but have listened to clips of his guitar playing (and it is TIGHT) and read some of his articles on lighting, and I have a good bullshit detector, with a great incompetence detector--I tell you, he is generally competent, and if anyone around here knew me better, you would know how few people get that description). He has real integrity in the way he lives his life. None of that ought to be denied by any intelligent, honest person.

I state a simple and plain fact. I REALLY LIKE Billy Beck. I like that he is uncompromising. I like that he has done alot of thinking, and it shows. He has so many laudable qualities, many of which must be INFERRED by what we do know of him, because certain attributes go together, but I'd be willing to bet the farm on the truth of it. He is well read, and studies constantly, and that is a discipline only shared by people who really understand the role of knowledge and the mind in man's life.

I am not going to say a single negative thing about Billy. I have done enough of that elsewhere.

I have also said that I think that Beck may well be RIGHT about his DIAGNOSIS and PROGNOSIS. Even if the mortgage deal is flushed, what real change from the Obama Road have we made? A start, sure. But remember, Health Care is next, and that is popular enough to pass. The bailouts WILL continue because the Socialists hold Congress and the White House. These people are the first to hold their positions in the United States with an ideological commitment to collectivism and they are not going to rest until they have their Revolution. Their Revolution, our blood and money.

The net result is movement ever closer to Socialism. And remember the Lefty's response to Santilli. Don't be surprised if Santilli isn't audited by the IRS, and hassled by every other branch of government. When the collective is all that matters, one little individual life is but a drop in the bucket to the GRAND PURPOSE, right?

If there is hope, the hope is in a coalition of people who believe in core fundamental values--not only those who have it all 100% right, not those who can recite from OPAR (as much I wish we all could), not just anarchists. People who understand that government is WAY too big, taxes are WAY too high, career politicians are a BIG mistake and no logner give a fiddler's fart for their constituents. Like, no kidding, 5 issues or central tenets, max. Build a political coalition around that and there is your Revolution.

It still might not work. Collapse may be inevitable. Desperate despots have been known to murder or disappear thousands of people to cling to wealth and power. Just because it does not generally happen here, do not forget that this routinely happens elsewhere, and this country is an historical aberration in that regard. Or the pigs at the trough may have their faces so far in the muck that they don't "look up" soon enough, consumed with keeping their trough full of your productivity.

If there is a Tea Party, I promise you, if I can walk, I will be there.

Joe poses this question:

"Scott, if I may ask, are you willing to walk away from your practice, if need be?"

I do not think that it is fair to single me out like this. But then again, I am honest, and I trust your motive.

The biggest question about your query is this: walk away under any circumstances, or under specific circumstances?

Under a general collapse, the answer is easy, and I'd have no choice. That's no choice at all.

Under the present circumstances, I live my choice every day. I have invested alot of time and money. I am smarter and harder working that just about anyone, have some talent at trial, and have spent 12 years trying to get good at being a lawyer while simultaneously being a human being first, and the last 6 excruciating years slowly building my business. Stats say that the next 10 to 20 years are going to be the profitable ones. It would take real motivation for me to walk away, because my standard of value is: ME.

If my tax rate hit 50%, this business would no longer be profitable, and I'd walk away in a heartbeat.

If a bunch of us wanted to move somewhere WITH A CONSTITUTION, found a new nation, then, yes, I would close down, and walk away from it all.

Scott DeSalvo

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

1776

Jmaurone's picture

Incidentally, Rand had a comment that I should post as a "companion" to the one I just posted about the Free State Project. From Ayn Rand Answers:

"Q: Is a major revolution necessary to solve our country's problems, or is the solution to be found piecemeal?"

"A: Neither. The major revolution happened in 1776. You don't stage a revolution against a country still following its basic principles. But neither is the solution to fight piecemeal. The only way to fight for a cause it intellectually-that is, philosophically, which is to say in terms of fundamental principles. When you fight in this way, it's as if you're an intellectual wholesaler rather than a retailer. You cover a whole field by means of appropriate principles, instead of fighting piecemeal, which is what activists today are trying-and they're failing."

 Now, again: ""If the founding and flourishing of this free nation did not demonstrate to the world for all time the superiority of capitalism over all other systems, can you really believe [they] will do the job?" 

The question is, is this country still following its basic principles? Rand wrote: "So long as a country is not yet under a dictatorship, the culture can be turned around peacefully. It would be harder in Europe, where they are traditionally statist." 

 Are we not on the verge of being a "European" statist society, if not already there? 

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

A question of Ideas...

Jmaurone's picture

 Mark: "I'm hopeful, I do think there is a sea change in parts of America occuring, but how to you get the philosophy and the economic theory truly into the battle?"

 That is the question I've been pondering in the shower. Actually, the answer is easy: say it. The real question is, what happens when it goes unheard...or ignored?

 Most other revolutions had numbers on their side. Fighting a war of ideas when the other side is using force is futile, if all you have is the idea alone, without action. It's like a professor trying to reason with Mike Tyson in the ring. You don't reason with the unreasonable. It always reminds me of the Brady Bunch: Peter tries to reason with the bully, gets a black eye. Mike tries to reason with the father, gets a black eye. Finally, it comes down to Peter knocking the kid out and giving him a lisp; only then does a THUG try to reason. 

 But sticking to your question...I had asked a certain Objectivist his opinion about the New Hampshire Free State Project. The response was terse, but on-point:

"If the founding and flourishing of this free nation did not demonstrate to the world for all time the superiority of capitalism over all other systems, can you really believe [they] will do the job?"

 It's not the answer I wanted to hear. But is it wrong? Santelli is kind of like the FSP. He's only saying what the Founding Fathers already said. Do you think the Obama admin, or the Republicans, for that matter, are ignorant of what you're saying should be introduced? They know it, they ignore it. They are fighting it, they are destroying it.

 Now what? 

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

Santelli was on CNBC this

Mark Hubbard's picture

Santelli was on CNBC this morning, and he worried me because his comments indicated he hasn't got the economic theory wherewithal to get this protest to where it needs to be.

One of the announcers asked '... so we just let the free market rule, and all the foreclosures happen, Americans losing their homes'.

On that Santelli allowed himself to go on the defensive, worse, his line of argument was simply that the worst of the foreclosures were over.

Wrong, and I think what he should have said was something along the lines that 'we do not have, and never have had, free markets, that is precisely what caused this mess'. This is a battle which really does have to be won on the level of ideas, and by not challenging the existing system on this basis, no protest will achieve anything meaningful.

I'm hopeful, I do think there is a sea change in parts of America occuring, but how to you get the philosophy and the economic theory truly into the battle?

Hrmm....

Jmaurone's picture

 Jeremy writes: 

 "In essence, Beck, there's nothing that can be done, no matter who believes in the right ideals.  Just say it. 

That's what you believe, so say it.

Ram those needles home right now, Black Sheep, there's no use in fighting.

Resistance Is Futile."

 

The inevitable pileup on Billy has begun, but Scott posts a similar sentiment:

 

 "Airhead America Has Already Won." 

 "Santilli backed down and he should not have."

"No one but corrupt fucking politicians want this bailout."

(Really? REALLLY?) 

Meanwhile, I get my ass up every day and run my business, employing 3 other people, scratching to survive. And these motherfuckers are spending half of my earnings, from now until eternity." 

 "Let the politicians have Washington. The rest of us should tell them to go to hell. See what they are capable of producing for themselves without businessmen. Have do-nothing government parasites try to fend for themselves and see what happens."

 

  Can we put aside the fighting, just for a moment, to acknowledge that the possibility that this may go horribly wrong? How else will you prepare for it if you don't acknowledge it? I did respond to Scott's post to defend Santelli; since Santelli is NOT John Galt, it's not fair to put the battle on his shoulders alone. He gave us an opening, an opportunity, but it's going to take a lot more than one person. It's going to take action that others would consider sacrifice (but shouldn't be sacrifice to a freedom-loving person.) Who is ready and willing to give up their gilded cages, if need be?

 I know they're not exactly on the same page, but the idea is the same: the "tea party" is doomed before it starts. Well, if it doesn't go beyond a symbolic gesture, they're both right. Is Billy right? Will April 15th come and go as it always does? Is Scott right, that Santelli went timid? I admit to a small flicker of hope with the recent development, because I want something to convince me that they're still time. Because even though Obama won with a majority, if there's still enough outrage to change things peacefully, I'm for it. But does anyone really think the Obamanation is just going to roll over?

 But we all know what it means if that's not possible...only, how many Americans are ready for that next step? How many Objectivists are ready for that next step?(Scott, if I may ask, are you willing to walk away from your practice, if need be?) Or, thanks to "democratic process," are we going to see Socrates drink the poison willingly in exchange for breaking their "social contract?" 

 Go ahead, click on the link below...

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

In essence, Beck, there's

Jeremy's picture

In essence, Beck, there's nothing that can be done, no matter who believes in the right ideals.  Just say it. 

That's what you believe, so say it.

Ram those needles home right now, Black Sheep, there's no use in fighting.

Resistance Is Futile. 

The Metaphysical And The Man-Made

Billy Beck's picture

"That at least a few thousand more people in the world might turn from the bad path because of reading Atlas Shrugged makes me happy.

That's because you're a twit. Your "few thousand more people in the world" are going to end up in the meat-grinder with everyone else.

"Seems to me that one doesn't constantly have to have an ulcer about the world."

I get along with "the world" just fine, kid. It's the assholes in it that will probably have me jamming heroin straight into my eyeballs before this is over.

Don't worry, Sharon.  Beck

Jeremy's picture

Don't worry, Sharon.  Beck can walk on water, too.  One of his many talents.

  I feel as if I am in a

sharon's picture

 

I feel as if I am in a sinking boat with others, preparing to put on a lifejacket while others are dipping their limited little bucket into the gushing water coming through the hole filling the boat and then tossing it back into the sea --while calling me a “pessimist.”  

 

 

Insert Clever Title Here

Jeremy's picture

Nah, Beck.  It's Truckin' and On the Road Again, followed by Pearljam's Elderly Woman Behind the Counter... to finish it off that makes me happy.  Oh, and pissing you off. Smiling

While I don't share some folks' giddiness about the facts at hand, I do feel a bit at peace.  That at least a few thousand more people in the world might turn from the bad path because of reading Atlas Shrugged makes me happy.  Seems to me that one doesn't constantly have to have an ulcer about the world.

But I guess it might be the lot of all messiahs to be perpetually agitated, so have at it.

 

edit: That's Canned Heat's On the Road Again, not Willie Nelson.  I ain't no hillbilly.

Limited Intelligence

Billy Beck's picture

"Everybody, rub your lucky rabbits foot."

Hmm. I think they'll be a lot happier if they run "Ave Maria" over and over in their iPods.

  limited government

sharon's picture

 

 

Everybody, rub your lucky rabbits foot.

Haven't heard of a White House visit yet

Amy Peikoff's picture

But saw this story:

 

http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/scottott/EPA-arrests-CNBCs-Rick-Santelli-40212122.html 

Please take the discussion about anarchy elsewhere

Amy Peikoff's picture

This is a thread about whether the current popularity of Rick Santelli -- and probably more importantly, the jump in sales in Atlas Shrugged -- means that our country might be ready to move away from totalitarianism and towards a system of limited government, like one that Rand or the Founding Fathers would support.

Comment viewing options

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