I was cleaning out my junk folder when I found this Email.
QuoteDear Friend of Liberty,
As many of you know, the much-anticipated April 15th release of the Atlas Shrugged film is less than a week away! Based on Ayn Rand's classic novel which celebrates limited government, free markets and individual liberty, Atlas Shrugged is being called a made for Tea Party film.
Find a theater near you showing Atlas Shrugged!
Maybe that's because as millions of Tea Party supporters have rallied over the past two years, many have brought with them signs like those above—referencing Atlas Shrugged. As you rally on April 15th for your lo cal Tax Day protest, I urge you to go see this important film.
The film is set in a not-so-distant future in which government has taken control of the means of production, bureaucrats have impose harmful regulations on businesses and turmoil in the Middle East has sent oil prices skyrocketing. Sound familiar?
On April 15th, Atlas Shrugged will be released in 300 theaters across America—but even more theaters are lined up if we can demonstrate our support for this film.
Click here to see where the film is playing near you! If you can't find a showing close to you, demand that the film is shown in your town.
I urge you to take your family, friends, neighbors and coworkers to see this important film on April 15th. Many activists are already organizing to go see the film right now on FreedomConnector. Atlas Shrugged has the opportunity to introduce millions more around the world to the philosophy of freedom. But if that's going to happen—if this life-changing film is going to be shown in thousands of theaters—we need your help.
As thousands of liberty-minded grassroots activists gather across America for Tax Day protests on April 15th, go see Atlas Shrugged. If it's not yet being shown near you, demand that your theater shows Atlas Shrugged. Thank you for all your e fforts and tireless support.
In Liberty,
Kibbe Signature
Matt Kibbe
President and CEO, FreedomWorks
Im preparing to go to the theater with a camera and pirate it. Just for the principal of the act.
The free market demands it, after all, copyright is government interference.
Better take some morphine first. For the pain.
Movie might be better then the book...
it'll go by quicker at least.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 12, 2011, 12:21:04 AM
Movie might be better then the book...
it'll go by quicker at least.
Ayn Rand's foundation apparently is honoring her demand that no dialogue be changed in any movie.
The movie will never end. You'll die there, broken, old, and alone.
You know what... I think... I think... my principles demand that I pirate this film out of sheer spite.... and then burn copies and distribute them. And of course... I cannot inflict that upon anyone without first suffering the pain myself.... Sometimes I wonder if there's a better reason for doing things than spite. Not often, but this is one of those times.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 12, 2011, 12:21:04 AM
Movie might be better then the book...
it'll go by quicker at least.
Not a chance. It's part one of three. :lulz:
I cant wait for the directors cut.
QuoteNot a chance. It's part one of three.
The third part being just the 90 page speech at the end.
I like how people are supposed to "demand" that the movie be played in their town. :lulz: I think that the free market isn't gonna be on their side...
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on April 12, 2011, 01:02:25 AM
QuoteNot a chance. It's part one of three.
The third part being just the 90 page speech at the end.
I forgot about that. I wonder how they're going to pull that off now. I don't even have the patience for that shit let alone your average tea partier
Pshh, it'll give them such a boner that the aisles will be nastier than a strip club on Miracle Mile on Saturday morning. :lulz:
Why watch Tea Party wet dreams when I can watch a Rabbit shit jellybeans???
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
I think Atlas Shrugged is more about how Liberals want to shut down anything that's productive.
And some rape. It isn't an Ayn Rand novel without a little rape.
It occurs to me that if you really want to give a big fuck-you to Ayn Rand you could dub your pirated copy with commentary, Mystery Science Theatre 3000 style. Then upload it without any implication of your editing in the title or description.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 12, 2011, 01:23:02 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
I think Atlas Shrugged is more about how Liberals want to shut down anything that's productive.
And some rape. It isn't an Ayn Rand novel without a little rape.
But rape is okay if he's her ideal archetype!
Quote from: Jenkem and Bubble Baths on April 12, 2011, 01:29:49 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 12, 2011, 01:23:02 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
I think Atlas Shrugged is more about how Liberals want to shut down anything that's productive.
And some rape. It isn't an Ayn Rand novel without a little rape.
But rape is okay if he's her ideal archetype!
Or was it ideological ideal?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 12, 2011, 01:30:23 AM
Quote from: Jenkem and Bubble Baths on April 12, 2011, 01:29:49 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 12, 2011, 01:23:02 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
I think Atlas Shrugged is more about how Liberals want to shut down anything that's productive.
And some rape. It isn't an Ayn Rand novel without a little rape.
But rape is okay if he's her ideal archetype!
Or was it ideological ideal?
Ideal ideological archetype?
It's been about 10 years since I read it (and I have no plans to revisit it ever)
but I do remember it being anti-religious at least to a degree I came out of the book understanding that objectivism was indeed atheistic even without knowing anything about the philosophy previously.
I figure they will cut that part. It's technically not changing any of the dialogue if it isn't even there.
She also rejects families and family values completely. Figure that part might be cut out. Or maybe FreedomWorks actually doesn't realize who inhabits the tea party movement.
I think GS actually said it best when it came to Ayn Rand:
"That woman was nothing but a self-loathing feminist out to destroy the world that hit her with the ugly stick."
I guess that explains her rape fantasy fixation.
Quote from: Nigel on April 12, 2011, 01:49:53 AM
I guess that explains her rape fantasy fixation.
He had to read Atlas Shrugged and analyze her as an author. He told me he couldn't even get through the book. :x
I've been working on a scholarship essay from the Ayn Rand foundation. On the Fountainhead. :vom:
I got to the rape scene and gave up. Gotta love spark notes.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on April 12, 2011, 02:09:00 AM
I've been working on a scholarship essay from the Ayn Rand foundation. On the Fountainhead. :vom:
I got to the rape scene and gave up. Gotta love spark notes.
That the one with the $10,000 scholarship? They had it around when I was in high school.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on April 12, 2011, 02:09:00 AM
I've been working on a scholarship essay from the Ayn Rand foundation. On the Fountainhead. :vom:
I got to the rape scene and gave up. Gotta love spark notes.
I might look in to that. Im pretty good at pretending I agree with bullshit.
QuoteThat the one with the $10,000 scholarship? They had it around when I was in high school.
Yeah, that one.
April 15th? Sorry, busy, have to wash my cat.
Quote from: Luna on April 12, 2011, 04:17:51 AM
April 15th? Sorry, busy, have to wash my cat and release the infuriated furball into the theater.
Fixed.
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 12, 2011, 04:19:55 AM
Quote from: Luna on April 12, 2011, 04:17:51 AM
April 15th? Sorry, busy, have to wash my cat and release the infuriated furball into the theater.
Fixed.
I see you've met my cat. :lulz:
Quote from: Luna on April 12, 2011, 04:20:49 AM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 12, 2011, 04:19:55 AM
Quote from: Luna on April 12, 2011, 04:17:51 AM
April 15th? Sorry, busy, have to wash my cat and release the infuriated furball into the theater.
Fixed.
I see you've met my cat. :lulz:
I'm not sure "met" is the right word. (http://www.m0ar.org/4363).
edit: slightly improved joke.
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 12, 2011, 04:26:39 AM
Quote from: Luna on April 12, 2011, 04:20:49 AM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 12, 2011, 04:19:55 AM
Quote from: Luna on April 12, 2011, 04:17:51 AM
April 15th? Sorry, busy, have to wash my cat and release the infuriated furball into the theater.
Fixed.
I see you've met my cat. :lulz:
Holy fuck, the secret is out!
I'm not sure "met" is the right word. (http://www.m0ar.org/4363).
edit: slightly improved joke.
Quote from: Nigel on April 12, 2011, 01:03:26 AM
I like how people are supposed to "demand" that the movie be played in their town. :lulz: I think that the free market isn't gonna be on their side...
Indeed!
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
Hardly at all. Originally, James Taggart was going to be written as a conflicted, religious guy, but that was thrown out in favour of sticking to one dimension per character.
If you look at a lot of what Rand said, it's really, really obvious that she moderated her view of religion tactically through self-censorship to make Objectivism more saliable. :lulz:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTf6NK0wsiA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTf6NK0wsiA)
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
I read the Fountainhead and surprisingly enjoyed it, but I could not slog through Atlas Shrugged. I gave it the college try, and made it about halfway through, but it's just not fun.
In the half I read religion wasn't brought up very often. It's touched on in The Fountainhead, but still not much.
As for the copyright issues, I would imagine Objectivists are fine with it... it probably falls under property rights, which they are also heavily in favour of. Objectivists aren't anarchists.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 12, 2011, 01:34:05 AM
It's been about 10 years since I read it (and I have no plans to revisit it ever)
but I do remember it being anti-religious at least to a degree I came out of the book understanding that objectivism was indeed atheistic even without knowing anything about the philosophy previously.
I figure they will cut that part. It's technically not changing any of the dialogue if it isn't even there.
She also rejects families and family values completely. Figure that part might be cut out. Or maybe FreedomWorks actually doesn't realize who inhabits the tea party movement.
Um, how would that be cut out? It's basically Rearden's entire plotline.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
The rape scene is in the Fountainhead... Atlas Shrugged just has rough sex, and lots of it.
Rand herself didn't consider the scene in the Fountainhead as rape, though by todays definitions it definitely is. Hell even by definitions of rape in the 40s it probably was. Rand herself said that if the scene was rape it was "rape by engraved invitation".
But she herself admitted she wasn't a feminist by a longshot, and was of the opinion that a woman's rightful role was as a "hero worshipper".
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
That would be the more common reaction. Bear in mind Ayn Rand and her boyfriend were both married to other people at the time, and they had their spouses' permission to date each other. Presumably because Ayn gave the wife the crazy eyes and scared her into agreeing. Mr. Rand probably agreed so he wouldn't have to sleep with her.
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
If it's the character I am thinking of they were BOTH bags of douche, and should have been gassed in their sleep.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on April 13, 2011, 03:52:09 PM
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
That would be the more common reaction. Bear in mind Ayn Rand and her boyfriend were both married to other people at the time, and they had their spouses' permission to date each other. Presumably because Ayn gave the wife the crazy eyes and scared her into agreeing. Mr. Rand probably agreed so he wouldn't have to sleep with her.
It's my humble opinion and definition that if you've got permission, it's not "cheating." If your partner objects, it IS cheating. I've seen long-term open relationships that work for all involved, and I've seen them explode fairly spectacularly.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 13, 2011, 03:51:44 PM
The rape scene is in the Fountainhead... Atlas Shrugged just has rough sex, and lots of it.
Rand herself didn't consider the scene in the Fountainhead as rape, though by todays definitions it definitely is. Hell even by definitions of rape in the 40s it probably was. Rand herself said that if the scene was rape it was "rape by engraved invitation".
But she herself admitted she wasn't a feminist by a longshot, and was of the opinion that a woman's rightful role was as a "hero worshipper".
Atlas shrugged had the exact same scene, except she threw in a "yes" there, probably because of the crap she took from Fountainhead. :lulz:
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Blight on April 13, 2011, 03:52:09 PM
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
That would be the more common reaction. Bear in mind Ayn Rand and her boyfriend were both married to other people at the time, and they had their spouses' permission to date each other. Presumably because Ayn gave the wife the crazy eyes and scared her into agreeing. Mr. Rand probably agreed so he wouldn't have to sleep with her.
It's my humble opinion and definition that if you've got permission, it's not "cheating." If your partner objects, it IS cheating. I've seen long-term open relationships that work for all involved, and I've seen them explode fairly spectacularly.
I agree, just saying that there may have been some conflict to that permission that may have inspired that sort of thing.
Or, maybe I'm reading too much into it and go with the simpler explanation of Ayn Rand was a very fucked up woman.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on April 13, 2011, 04:14:52 PM
Or, maybe I'm reading too much into it and go with the simpler explanation of Ayn Rand was a very fucked up woman.
Bingo.
Today, me and some friends took a cab to the theatre to watch Atlas Shrugged for shits and giggles. We did nothing but mock Objectivism and Ayn Rand the whole way. I think the cab driver was an Objectivist, because his eyes popped nearly out of his head when one of my friends brought up "Ayn Rand's man hands".
But then it turned out that the theatre wasn't showing it. :( We fucked up the date, I guess.
Quote from: Jenkem and Bubble Baths on April 12, 2011, 01:29:49 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 12, 2011, 01:23:02 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 12, 2011, 01:17:49 AM
Ive never read Atlas Shrugged (tl;dr) but I know Ayn Rand was really critical of religion, especially Christianity. How often is that brough up in Atlas Shrugged?
I think Atlas Shrugged is more about how Liberals want to shut down anything that's productive.
And some rape. It isn't an Ayn Rand novel without a little rape.
But rape is okay if he's her ideal archetype!
Today I learned that Ayn Rand is also V. C. Andrews.
Also: Screw "Atlas Shrugged" I'm holding out for Thor on May 6th.
"Your Highness (http://www.yourhighnessmovie.net)" dropped this week.
Quote from: Telarus on April 14, 2011, 06:24:20 AM
"Your Highness (http://www.yourhighnessmovie.net)" dropped this week.
According to the free market this is a better film than Atlas Shrugged(We all know what the box office numbers are going to be).
I wish to hear an objectivist explain this.
The public adores mediocrity.
No really, that's the objectivist explanation for Hollywood.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 13, 2011, 03:54:34 PM
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
If it's the character I am thinking of they were BOTH bags of douche, and should have been gassed in their sleep.
All of them?
Actually it was Rearden.
And you know there actually was one decent human being in that book.
They leave him to rot in the collapsing world, without so much as a thank you. Really cheesed me off.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 14, 2011, 09:22:56 AM
Quote from: Hoopla on April 13, 2011, 03:54:34 PM
Quote from: Luna on April 13, 2011, 02:47:49 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 13, 2011, 02:45:49 PM
Yeah. I read it this year and the anti-religion angle wasn't very clear.
Neither was there anything that was obviously rape, although I recall one character being mighty proud of the fact that he wasn't murdering his wife, seeing as how she was being terribly unfair by being critical of his cheating on her.
:argh!:
He should have been down on his knees thanking all that's holy that she didn't geld him in his sleep.
If it's the character I am thinking of they were BOTH bags of douche, and should have been gassed in their sleep.
All of them?
Actually it was Rearden.
And you know there actually was one decent human being in that book.
They leave him to rot in the collapsing world, without so much as a thank you. Really cheesed me off.
I never finished the book. I can't imagine who that single person was.
And yes, all of them.
QuoteI never finished the book. I can't imagine who that single person was.
Think Placid is referring to Eddie Willers.
You know, the Galt torture bit at the end was actually kind of cool. Think about it as a kind of Anti Plato's cave, with each of the person's present standing in for the reader's, I don't know, "archetypes"? the voices you use to argue to yourself when you're thinking shit out. Galt telling them how to repair the torture machine was supposed to be like; "Why should I keep intellectualising, to myself, reasons to feel shit all the time?" I think Rand might have cut down on the speed and had a little talk with Nathaniel before she wrote that part maybe.
I mean, it's "good" compaired to the other six thousand pages. It's as "good" as like, the best episode of Dragonball Z or something.
http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/benefits_and_hazards.html (http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/benefits_and_hazards.html)
And it's not like the little lift you might get from that part compensates any for the torture every Objectivist has to endure within themselves by taking anything else that nutter said seriously.
Quote from: Nathaniel Branden, AKA John Galt
In the days of my association with Ayn Rand, we heard over and over again the accusation that we are against feelings, against emotions. And we would say in all good faith, "What are you talking about? We celebrate human passion. All the characters in the novels have powerful emotions, powerful passions. They feel far more deeply about things than does the average person. How can you possibly say that we are against feeling and emotion?"
The critics were right. Here is my evidence: When we counsel parents, we always tell them, in effect: "Remember, your children will pay more attention to what you do than what you say. No teaching is as powerful as the teaching of the example. It isn't the sermons you deliver that your children will remember, but the way you act and live." Now apply that same principle to fiction, because the analogy fits perfectly. On the one hand, there are Rand's abstract statements concerning the relationship of mind and emotion; on the other hand, there is the behavior of her characters, the way her characters deal with their feelings.
If, in page after page of "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged," you show someone being heroic by ruthlessly setting feelings aside, and if you show someone being rotten and depraved by, in effect, diving headlong into his feelings and emotions, and if that is one of your dominant methods of characterization, repeated again and again, then it doesn't matter what you profess, in abstract philosophy, about the relationship of reason and emotion. You have taught people: repress, repress, repress.
Slyph, love that quote in terms of literary criticism. That's great.
In truth I ended A.S feeling really up about it, and having enjoyes probably most of it from the end of that Galt speech onwards. The torture sequence is fantastic. But it doesn't begin to make up for the flaws.
Yeah, i couldn't remember the person, but it was Willers. He's loyal, kind and considerate and that bitch just leaves him to rot. No explanation. No happy ending. That company would have shit itself without him, and she discards him like a used tissue.
And they made Willers black in the movie version. That should make for some interesting film interpretation.
Quote from: Placid Dingo on April 14, 2011, 04:06:05 PM
Slyph, love that quote in terms of literary criticism. That's great.
In truth I ended A.S feeling really up about it, and having enjoyes probably most of it from the end of that Galt speech onwards. The torture sequence is fantastic. But it doesn't begin to make up for the flaws.
Yeah, i couldn't remember the person, but it was Willers. He's loyal, kind and considerate and that bitch just leaves him to rot. No explanation. No happy ending. That company would have shit itself without him, and she discards him like a used tissue.
The Free Market™ demands it.
Oddly enough, many working class folks (read: teabaggers) support the idea of disposable employees.
As the Generalissimo says, "Peoples are full of dumb."
Quote from: Hoopla on April 14, 2011, 04:41:35 PM
And they made Willers black in the movie version. That should make for some interesting film interpretation.
I've said before and I'll say again: a Black JOHN GALT would make for an interesting film.
A black Eddie, the character who is like, this well meaning lackey without the Genius of the main characters, this worker who "knows his place". Wow. Bad implications, really.
Quote from: Slyph on April 14, 2011, 06:39:03 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on April 14, 2011, 04:41:35 PM
And they made Willers black in the movie version. That should make for some interesting film interpretation.
I've said before and I'll say again: a Black JOHN GALT would make for an interesting film.
A black Eddie, the character who is like, this well meaning lackey without the Genius of the main characters, this worker who "knows his place". Wow. Bad implications, really.
...And entirely in keeping with this latest brand of "objectivists". Not all of them, mind you...But let's just say they know their audience.
Believe it or not, I think this movie is going to be a cult sleeper. We'll have dumbfucks dropping through the roof for 10 years quoting it.
i wouldn't mind actually, Rand is ridiculously easy to argue against (so easy in fact, that you can use her own arguments to do it). If the teabaggers start actually knowing what she wrote it'll make for some hilarious cognitive dissonance.
I would imagine, Requia, that you find it ridiculously easy to argue against anything. Including topics you've never heard of.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 14, 2011, 08:20:48 PM
I would imagine, Requia, that you find it ridiculously easy to argue against anything. Including topics you've never heard of.
Point.
But I can dismiss objectivism with 2 questions.
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Ive got my digital camera, my special jacket with secret pockets(for snacks) and a full tank of gas.
Im going to see if I can make it to opening night in Appleton, maybe get a few shots of some teabaggers.
QuoteDear Friend of Liberty,
On April 15, the film adaptation of Ayn Rand's classic novel Atlas Shrugged hits over 300 theaters across America. The film, Atlas Shrugged: Part One, celebrates values Tea Party activists hold dear: limited government, free markets and individual liberty.
In the film, the productive members of society or "Atlases" who hold up the world, slowly disappear and thus "shrug" from under the weight of a government that undervalues, suppresses and demonizes individual achievement.
Even though it was written more than 50 years ago, Rand's story shares ominous similarities with our nation today. Government bailouts of failing enterprises, crony capitalists perverting the free market and the skyrocketing price of oil—all newspaper headlines today—are themes ripped right from the pages of Atlas Shrugged.
And while the book and the film are fiction, the message hits home because when we look aro und at our floundering economy and hapless political leaders, one thing is clear: Atlas IS Shrugging.
To show this, we just released a mashup video and quiz showing the parallels between rhetoric used by Democrats today and government bureaucrats in the film. Watch it here and take our quiz:
Atlas Shrugged: Part One has the opportunity to introduce millions more around the world to the philosophy of freedom. Go see this film, and if it's not playing near you, demand that your theater shows At las Shrugged: Part One. If the message of individual liberty in Atlas Shrugged inspires you like it does me, please consider a donation to help us continue spreading this important message across America.
In Liberty,
Kibbe Signature
Matt Kibbe
President and CEO, FreedomWorks
Did you hear that? Its going to hit nearly a half a thousand theaters!
:lulz:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/atlas_shrugged_part_i/ First movie reviews are in apparently. Guess how many critics actually like it :lulz:
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 15, 2011, 02:13:31 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
NOW ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:06:43 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 15, 2011, 02:13:31 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
NOW ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
Yes he is? But I don't know for sure what the official Objectivist answer is.
Quote from: Lord Cataplanga on April 15, 2011, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:06:43 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 15, 2011, 02:13:31 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
NOW ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
Yes he is? But I don't know for sure what the official Objectivist answer is.
Well, according to objectivists, then anyone who has bad brakes should be arrested for attempted murder.
GAME ORVER. SIMPLISTIC WORLDVIEW LOSES.
:?
How does manslaughter lead to attempted murder? Or is this some Objectivist thing?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:09:54 AM
:?
How does manslaughter lead to attempted murder? Or is this some Objectivist thing?
:mullet:
No really, there's no relationship at all between manslaughter and attempted murder. In one you're trying to kill somebody, in another your trying to do something else illegal and an accident happens.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:16:04 AM
No really, there's no relationship at all between manslaughter and attempted murder. In one you're trying to kill somebody, in another your trying to do something else illegal and an accident happens.
:facepalm:
Oh right, we're just going to post pictures instead of actually explaining jack shit.
:sotw:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:51:55 AM
Quote from: Lord Cataplanga on April 15, 2011, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:06:43 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 15, 2011, 02:13:31 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
NOW ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
Yes he is? But I don't know for sure what the official Objectivist answer is.
Well, according to objectivists, then anyone who has bad brakes should be arrested for attempted murder.
GAME ORVER. SIMPLISTIC WORLDVIEW LOSES.
I saw that, but its a blanket statement, there's nothing there to justify why its true. If objectivists think anything that might lead to manslaughter should be attempted murder* say so.
*Which would be utter nonsense, as you'd essentially be claiming that any crime of any kind should be considered attempted murder.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:27:03 AM
I saw that, but its a blanket statement, there's nothing there to justify why its true. If objectivists think anything that might lead to manslaughter should be attempted murder* say so.
*Which would be utter nonsense, as you'd essentially be claiming that any crime of any kind should be considered attempted murder.
Really? You need your hand held through this?
So, you are aware that your brakes are faulty. You know that if someone is killed as a result of your faulty brakes its manslaughter. You proceed to drive anyway.
Quote from: Doktor Phox on April 15, 2011, 05:33:04 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:27:03 AM
I saw that, but its a blanket statement, there's nothing there to justify why its true. If objectivists think anything that might lead to manslaughter should be attempted murder* say so.
*Which would be utter nonsense, as you'd essentially be claiming that any crime of any kind should be considered attempted murder.
Really? You need your hand held through this?
So, you are aware that your brakes are faulty. You know that if someone is killed as a result of your faulty brakes its manslaughter. You proceed to drive anyway.
Yes and?
Requia, do you find your pedantry inhibits you from casual conversations?
"Hello, good morning!"
"Good is a subjective term, and experts have found in recent studies that qualifications for something being good differ highly between cultures and socioeconomic statuses! Oh, and did you ever find it weird that anything before noon is morning, yet anything afternoon could be afternoon, evening, or night, all distinctly separate?"
"Well...uh. Mighty fine weather we're having!"
"I'm confused about your use of mighty. This is a clear, sunny day. There's nothing mighty about a calm sky and seasonal warmth. What makes it fine, also, I mean, if every day was like this then eventually none would be, as all the plants would lack essential rain water to live! I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're having' after all, how are we having this day. The day is just happening and we are living through it, how does that make us having it any more than one has music by giving it a listen?"
"I don't, okay, so how is your family doing?"
"Family is being constantly redefined in modern social sciences to reflect the changing landscape of our daily lives! Whereas fifty years ago a family was a husband, a wife, and two point five children (a myth that is being debunked through rigorous sociological testing) it currently can include a number of gender identities as well as non traditional members."
"Fuck off"
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:34:19 AM
Quote from: Doktor Phox on April 15, 2011, 05:33:04 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:27:03 AM
I saw that, but its a blanket statement, there's nothing there to justify why its true. If objectivists think anything that might lead to manslaughter should be attempted murder* say so.
*Which would be utter nonsense, as you'd essentially be claiming that any crime of any kind should be considered attempted murder.
Really? You need your hand held through this?
So, you are aware that your brakes are faulty. You know that if someone is killed as a result of your faulty brakes its manslaughter. You proceed to drive anyway.
Yes and?
Nope, that's as far as you get your hand held. Figure it out, or leave it be.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 05:40:50 AM
Requia, do you find your pedantry inhibits you from casual conversations?
"Hello, good morning!"
"Good is a subjective term, and experts have found in recent studies that qualifications for something being good differ highly between cultures and socioeconomic statuses! Oh, and did you ever find it weird that anything before noon is morning, yet anything afternoon could be afternoon, evening, or night, all distinctly separate?"
"Well...uh. Mighty fine weather we're having!"
"I'm confused about your use of mighty. This is a clear, sunny day. There's nothing mighty about a calm sky and seasonal warmth. What makes it fine, also, I mean, if every day was like this then eventually none would be, as all the plants would lack essential rain water to live! I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're having' after all, how are we having this day. The day is just happening and we are living through it, how does that make us having it any more than one has music by giving it a listen?"
"I don't, okay, so how is your family doing?"
"Family is being constantly redefined in modern social sciences to reflect the changing landscape of our daily lives! Whereas fifty years ago a family was a husband, a wife, and two point five children (a myth that is being debunked through rigorous sociological testing) it currently can include a number of gender identities as well as non traditional members."
:lulz:
I still see no relationship whatsoever. The statement that an objectivist believes that such an act is attempted murder is equivalent to saying that an objectivist believes 100% of crimes are either attempted murder or murder. This is insane, even by objectivist standards.
Quote from: Don Quixote on April 15, 2011, 05:47:08 AM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 05:40:50 AM
Requia, do you find your pedantry inhibits you from casual conversations?
"Hello, good morning!"
"Good is a subjective term, and experts have found in recent studies that qualifications for something being good differ highly between cultures and socioeconomic statuses! Oh, and did you ever find it weird that anything before noon is morning, yet anything afternoon could be afternoon, evening, or night, all distinctly separate?"
"Well...uh. Mighty fine weather we're having!"
"I'm confused about your use of mighty. This is a clear, sunny day. There's nothing mighty about a calm sky and seasonal warmth. What makes it fine, also, I mean, if every day was like this then eventually none would be, as all the plants would lack essential rain water to live! I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're having' after all, how are we having this day. The day is just happening and we are living through it, how does that make us having it any more than one has music by giving it a listen?"
"I don't, okay, so how is your family doing?"
"Family is being constantly redefined in modern social sciences to reflect the changing landscape of our daily lives! Whereas fifty years ago a family was a husband, a wife, and two point five children (a myth that is being debunked through rigorous sociological testing) it currently can include a number of gender identities as well as non traditional members."
:lulz:
This. :lulz:
If an Objectivist accepts that a person who knows his brakes are bad and winds up ploughing into a bunch of people after refusing to fix them is responsible for the deaths of the dudes the his car hits, then:
A person who doesn't know fuck all about brakes, doesn't realise his brakes are bad, and winds up having his car plough into a bunch of people is as culpable as a person who is wilfully negligent. If anything he is more culpable, because the scale of his "evasion" is greater, making him more "evil".
Less explainationing, more complaining about Ayn Rand.
Quote from: Lord Cataplanga on April 15, 2011, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:06:43 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 15, 2011, 02:13:31 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
NOW ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
Yes he is? But I don't know for sure what the official Objectivist answer is.
Saying no, just so I can hear question two.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 05:40:50 AM
Requia, do you find your pedantry inhibits you from casual conversations?
"Hello, good morning!"
"Good is a subjective term, and experts have found in recent studies that qualifications for something being good differ highly between cultures and socioeconomic statuses! Oh, and did you ever find it weird that anything before noon is morning, yet anything afternoon could be afternoon, evening, or night, all distinctly separate?"
"Well...uh. Mighty fine weather we're having!"
"I'm confused about your use of mighty. This is a clear, sunny day. There's nothing mighty about a calm sky and seasonal warmth. What makes it fine, also, I mean, if every day was like this then eventually none would be, as all the plants would lack essential rain water to live! I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're having' after all, how are we having this day. The day is just happening and we are living through it, how does that make us having it any more than one has music by giving it a listen?"
"I don't, okay, so how is your family doing?"
"Family is being constantly redefined in modern social sciences to reflect the changing landscape of our daily lives! Whereas fifty years ago a family was a husband, a wife, and two point five children (a myth that is being debunked through rigorous sociological testing) it currently can include a number of gender identities as well as non traditional members."
PURE GOLD!
The stock reply to anyone trying to vex Randian moral philosophy with a thought experiment involving an emergency is "Man is not in a constant state of emergency, this is a delusion called "malevolent universe theory". " TIA
The most recent article (as of 15/4/11) on http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/ (http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/) is pretty good by the way. Rand's aesthetic rants are fucking hilarious.
Quote from: Slyph on April 15, 2011, 02:54:57 PM
The stock reply to anyone trying to vex Randian moral philosophy with a thought experiment involving an emergency is "Man is not in a constant state of emergency, this is a delusion called "malevolent universe theory". " TIA
That's retarded. Even if we aren't in a constant state of emergency, that has no bearing on the fact that accidents do happen and that Randian morality, applied to them, falls apart.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:16:04 AM
No really, there's no relationship at all between manslaughter and attempted murder. In one you're trying to kill somebody, in another your trying to do something else illegal and an accident happens.
I give up.
Fuck this shit. I'm not wasting my time arguing with you.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on April 15, 2011, 12:27:58 PM
Quote from: Lord Cataplanga on April 15, 2011, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:06:43 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 15, 2011, 02:13:31 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 14, 2011, 08:58:05 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 14, 2011, 08:55:34 PM
I always like this part.
WHAT ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS?
\
:nigel:
Question #1: Joe's brakes are bad. He knows this. One day, while driving, his bad brakes cause an accident that kills a family of 5. Is he guilty of at least manslaughter?
Question #2?
YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
NOW ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION.
Yes he is? But I don't know for sure what the official Objectivist answer is.
Saying no, just so I can hear question two.
Ask Requia. She knows everything.
Even if she can't seem to read a simple fucking paragraph.
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
1. That's because you don't actually read anything that people post.
2. Fuck off and die. Either you didn't read what I wrote, you read what you EXPECTED me to write, or you're a complete and utter moron. WHICH IS IT?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
The point isn't about being right or wrong here, Requia. It's that, while Roger's use of attempted murder may not be the legally exact definition that would suit a real life case like this, the term was still sufficient to get his point across in a conversational manner. Especially given he'd used the correct terminology earlier in the very same topic.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
The point isn't about being right or wrong here, Requia. It's that, while Roger's use of attempted murder may not be the legally exact definition that would suit a real life case like this, the term was still sufficient to get his point across in a conversational manner. Especially given he'd used the correct terminology earlier in the very same topic.
There's no fucking point, EoC. Requia doesn't read shit, she skims a bit til she thinks there's a chance to be right about something.
EVERY FUCKING DAY. NON-FUCKING STOP. IT'S 99% OF EVERYTHING SHE FUCKING DOES.
She HAS to be an expert on ALL FUCKING SUBJECTS, and she has to do it ALL THE TIME, even if it means not actually taking part in the argument at hand, but rather the one she THINKS is happening, because she DIDN'T FUCKING READ.
It is absolutely useless to try to have a discussion with her, so I'm not going to bother anymore. Period.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
SHUT UP.
JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP.
NONE OF US CAN STAND YOUR PETTY ARGUMENTATIVE 'HOLIER THAN THOU' BULLSHIT ANYMORE.
YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING.
YOU'RE A FUCKING WALKING WIKIPEDIA SURFER.
JUST.......STOP. FOREVER.
Right, I'm officially calling bullshit, you know jack all about objectivism, or any other kind of philosophy, and are completely unable to defend your argument with anything other than blanket statements that the other side is wrong and hurling insults.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
The point isn't about being right or wrong here, Requia. It's that, while Roger's use of attempted murder may not be the legally exact definition that would suit a real life case like this, the term was still sufficient to get his point across in a conversational manner. Especially given he'd used the correct terminology earlier in the very same topic.
I'm not talking about the legally accepted definition of murder, I'm talking about the lack of any kind of link whatsoever between his first statement and his second. Even if you leave out the whole murder bit, and just say 'then objectivists believe anybody with bad breaks should be arrested' it's *still* utter nonsense unless you say *why* that's the case. I'm fairly certain that there's no reason at all for that to be the case under objectivism at this point, and that Roger is talking out his ass, which is why he refuses to answer me.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:47:31 PM
I'm fairly certain that there's no reason at all for that to be the case under objectivism at this point, and that Roger is talking out his ass, which is why he refuses to answer me.
Listen, you pretentious little gob of shit: I won't be arguing with you about this or any other thing, period. Frankly, I don't care enough about you or this argument to explain a damn thing to you.
However, if you continue to talk shit about me, I shall take my bad day and hand it to you, every day, forever. I will fucking monster you from now til the next fucking decade. Just walk away, never speak to me or about me, and everything will be just fine. Or not. Your choice.
Requia's bullshit aside, do we get to know the 2nd question?
You won't be arguing with me because you're incapable of arguing, admit it, all you can do if challenged on a subject is resort to personal attacks. Oh and threats! You can do threats too.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 15, 2011, 04:52:17 PM
Requia's bullshit aside, do we get to know the 2nd question?
I posted it in the form of a statement, a page or so ago.
Too fucking pissed to continue this at this time. I'll try again later.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:53:05 PM
You won't be arguing with me because you're incapable of arguing, admit it, all you can do if challenged on a subject is resort to personal attacks. Oh and threats! You can do threats too.
Okay, does anyone here think I didn't give Requia adequate warning?
No.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:53:44 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on April 15, 2011, 04:52:17 PM
Requia's bullshit aside, do we get to know the 2nd question?
I posted it in the form of a statement, a page or so ago.
Too fucking pissed to continue this at this time. I'll try again later.
You haven;t posted a goddamned thing that wasn't an insult or a threat since page 5. That would require actually being capable of rational thought.
:popcorn:
30 pages.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:56:18 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:53:44 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on April 15, 2011, 04:52:17 PM
Requia's bullshit aside, do we get to know the 2nd question?
I posted it in the form of a statement, a page or so ago.
Too fucking pissed to continue this at this time. I'll try again later.
You haven;t posted a goddamned thing that wasn't an insult or a threat since page 5. That would require actually being capable of rational thought.
See, this is precisely why nobody likes you, and why you don't get invited to parties. It's why you don't have an SO, and why you'll die alone.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
I overreached a bit in the sand nags thread, decided to play it a little safer this time.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Oh, we have time. And I can pretty much guarantee that you'll stop having fun after the first 3 months, or so.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Possibly the most insensitive post ever made on a board that thrives on insensitivity. PD, bringing you new Levels of Low on a daily basis.
Quote from: Charley Brown on April 15, 2011, 05:05:09 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Possibly the most insensitive post ever made on a board that thrives on insensitivity. PD, bringing you new Levels of Low on a daily basis.
It's only fair. After all, it's just one more part of my bad day that Requia will have hung around her neck like an albatross for the next few years.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
:?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
:crankey:
What the
fuck Requia?
I was laughing at this thread up until this exact post.
Then I started laughing that
other way.
I would recomend a hell of a lot longer hiatus cause this cold assed douchebaggery will
not be soon forgotten.
Quote from: Payne on April 15, 2011, 05:28:25 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
:?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
:crankey:
What the fuck Requia?
I was laughing at this thread up until this exact post.
Then I started laughing that other way.
I would recomend a hell of a lot longer hiatus cause this cold assed douchebaggery will not be soon forgotten.
I think she's already fucked off.
Quote from: Charley Brown on April 15, 2011, 05:05:09 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Possibly the most insensitive post ever made on a board that thrives on insensitivity. PD, bringing you new Levels of Low on a daily basis.
THIS!
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 05:31:05 PM
Quote from: Payne on April 15, 2011, 05:28:25 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
:?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
:crankey:
What the fuck Requia?
I was laughing at this thread up until this exact post.
Then I started laughing that other way.
I would recomend a hell of a lot longer hiatus cause this cold assed douchebaggery will not be soon forgotten.
I think she's already fucked off.
He'll be back, and in greater
numbers faildom.
And we'll be waiting.
It's what The Terrible Old Man would have wanted (I assume).
Quote from: Payne on April 15, 2011, 05:34:22 PM
He'll be back, and in greater numbers faildom.
And we'll be waiting.
It's what The Terrible Old Man would have wanted (I assume).
Oh, yes.
I'm honestly starting to think we've come across a legitimate case of Aspberger's here.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 15, 2011, 05:36:21 PM
I'm honestly starting to think we've come across a legitimate case of Aspberger's here.
I've thought so for a while, actually.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Please keep it in this thread. For the the sake of record keeping.
shit, I was going to comment on the objectivist thing and then saw your post Rev.
by Terrible Old Man, you mean your father?
fuck I'm not going to possibly rile you up (good naturedly, of course) if that's the case.
Quote from: Khara on April 15, 2011, 05:31:37 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on April 15, 2011, 05:05:09 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
Possibly the most insensitive post ever made on a board that thrives on insensitivity. PD, bringing you new Levels of Low on a daily basis.
THIS!
Jesus fuck.
Requia, know this. I do not use this word as lightly as many (or almost everybody) around here does. You are a miserable cunt, and this is the most mean-spirited, miserable thing I have ever seen posted online. I don't give a flying fuck of you have Asperger's, if you're just pissed off because Roger made you look like a moron (not that you need his help with that), or what.
Crawl back into whatever hole spawned you, curl up, and die.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 15, 2011, 05:36:21 PM
I'm honestly starting to think we've come across a legitimate case of Aspberger's here.
Actually, I believe the correct term you're looking for is Assburgers, and I highly doubt you could have diagnosed it without a team of highly-trained shamans assisting you.
On a more serious note, I'm sorry for your loss, Roger :sad:
It's probably my lack of sleep talking, but what was so heinous about Requia's post (#117)?
Seems like she's resigned to her doom and regretting that it coincides with Roger's loss.
:?
Yeah Roger, sorry to hear it. :sad:
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 15, 2011, 06:17:04 PM
It's probably my lack of sleep talking, but what was so heinous about Requia's post (#117)?
Seems like she's resigned to her doom and regretting that it coincides with Roger's loss.
:?
Thats how I read it...
though I misread shit so much I could become a youtube atheist.
Ugh. Like this thread wasn't ass enough.
Requia, you dumbfuck. Why, man, why? Gah.
Alphapance, I'm pretty much in agreement, but still. I'm pretty sure she knew better. Net, that's not an answer to "going to bury my grandpa" and you know it. When Requia lost her grandmother, we were all there for her.
Fuck this noise.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 15, 2011, 06:21:20 PM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 15, 2011, 06:17:04 PM
It's probably my lack of sleep talking, but what was so heinous about Requia's post (#117)?
Seems like she's resigned to her doom and regretting that it coincides with Roger's loss.
:?
Thats how I read it...
though I misread shit so much I could become a youtube atheist.
Nevermind. Jenne beat me to it.
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 15, 2011, 06:17:04 PM
It's probably my lack of sleep talking, but what was so heinous about Requia's post (#117)?
Seems like she's resigned to her doom and regretting that it coincides with Roger's loss.
:?
The way to regret it coinciding with the fall of The Terrible Old Man would be to say just that. The way Requia phrased it, he made it sound like it was his
own loss - and that the postponement of a full on argument between them was to be regretted more than the death of someone ROger obviously respects deeply.
I know some people get pissed at Roger easily, and that when things are sliding towards a knock down argument with him they will take any opportunity to dig at him... But that was just weak and low and not worthy of any self respecting biped.
Yeah. To me it reads like, "My petty beef with you is more important than the loss of your father."
Roger's not the problem here. But Payne, ITA--there's some stupid law around here that Roger doesn't have feelings and so it's ok to be a total and complete SHIT to him anytime anyone feels like it.
I'm fucking tired of it.
Had, at any point, Requia made any acknowledgment or offered condolences of any type about Roger's loss, I might not be quite so pissed, and might be willing to accept that it was just poor phrasing. S/he didn't. Not in this thread, nor any other.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 15, 2011, 06:25:04 PM
Yeah. To me it reads like, "My petty beef with you is more important than the loss of your father."
Agreed.
Quote from: Jenne on April 15, 2011, 06:26:48 PM
Roger's not the problem here. But Payne, ITA--there's some stupid law around here that Roger doesn't have feelings and so it's ok to be a total and complete SHIT to him anytime anyone feels like it.
I'm fucking tired of it.
I'm well aware of that tradition, unfortunately.
I get pissed off at it anytime it pops up, but this time it's compounded by the utter lack of bipedalism evident in Requias post and I
will make a point of fucking with him over it.
Seems to me Rog rolls really well given the amount of "Fall Guy" action he gets. But this is just gaaaah I can't even say. Someone's dying in his family, he's on his way to say goodbye, and he gets THIS. THIS.
I'm just. :crankey: Unable, you know? Can't process. Excusing it with chemical disorderliness of the brain doesn't do justice because of the blatant hypocrisy and lack of redirect as Luna pointed out. I'm sure she knows she stepped in it but is too far gone down her well of poor Requia sackcloth and ashes martyrdom to give two fucks.
Quote from: Jenne on April 15, 2011, 06:35:13 PM
Seems to me Rog rolls really well given the amount of "Fall Guy" action he gets. But this is just gaaaah I can't even say. Someone's dying in his family, he's on his way to say goodbye, and he gets THIS. THIS.
I'm just. :crankey: Unable, you know? Can't process. Excusing it with chemical disorderliness of the brain doesn't do justice because of the blatant hypocrisy and lack of redirect as Luna pointed out. I'm sure she knows she stepped in it but is too far gone down her well of poor Requia sackcloth and ashes martyrdom to give two fucks.
Requia no longer exists.
Done.
Week-long self-exile isn't going to cut it.
Unless and until there is a public apology for the asshattery which Roger publicly accepts, there is no poster called Requia, here, as far as I'm concerned.
Quote from: Luna on April 15, 2011, 06:39:04 PM
Quote from: Jenne on April 15, 2011, 06:35:13 PM
Seems to me Rog rolls really well given the amount of "Fall Guy" action he gets. But this is just gaaaah I can't even say. Someone's dying in his family, he's on his way to say goodbye, and he gets THIS. THIS.
I'm just. :crankey: Unable, you know? Can't process. Excusing it with chemical disorderliness of the brain doesn't do justice because of the blatant hypocrisy and lack of redirect as Luna pointed out. I'm sure she knows she stepped in it but is too far gone down her well of poor Requia sackcloth and ashes martyrdom to give two fucks.
Requia no longer exists.
Done.
Week-long self-exile isn't going to cut it.
Unless and until there is a public apology for the asshattery which Roger publicly accepts, there is no poster called Requia, here, as far as I'm concerned.
Ditto.
Quote from: Jenne on April 15, 2011, 06:26:48 PM
Roger's not the problem here. But Payne, ITA--there's some stupid law around here that Roger doesn't have feelings and so it's ok to be a total and complete SHIT to him anytime anyone feels like it.
I'm fucking tired of it.
THIS X 10000000000%
You see it all the time. And it pisses me off to no end because in truth Roger is one of the really good guys.
Quote from: Luna on April 15, 2011, 06:39:04 PM
Quote from: Jenne on April 15, 2011, 06:35:13 PM
Seems to me Rog rolls really well given the amount of "Fall Guy" action he gets. But this is just gaaaah I can't even say. Someone's dying in his family, he's on his way to say goodbye, and he gets THIS. THIS.
I'm just. :crankey: Unable, you know? Can't process. Excusing it with chemical disorderliness of the brain doesn't do justice because of the blatant hypocrisy and lack of redirect as Luna pointed out. I'm sure she knows she stepped in it but is too far gone down her well of poor Requia sackcloth and ashes martyrdom to give two fucks.
Requia no longer exists.
Done.
Week-long self-exile isn't going to cut it.
Unless and until there is a public apology for the asshattery which Roger publicly accepts, there is no poster called Requia, here, as far as I'm concerned.
I ignore her 90% of the time anyway, this shouldn't be hard.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 15, 2011, 06:25:04 PM
Yeah. To me it reads like, "My petty beef with you is more important than the loss of your father."
Thanks.
(It's my grandfather, though.)
Really? Wow. That guy must have been tough. All my grandparents died in the 80s-90s.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 15, 2011, 07:35:50 PM
Really? Wow. That guy must have been tough. All my grandparents died in the 80s-90s.
Still is. He's not gone yet, but they've pulled the plug. He could last as long as 7 days, but he isn't expected to wake up.
I'll raise a glass to him tonight.
I still think it's more likely that Requia was trying to show some sympathy, but it just didn't come out right.
Speaking as an Asshat, beefing with Roger is likely to fuck with one's language abilities—and that's not exactly Requia's strong suit to begin with. She's bumbling, not vicious (as far as I've observed).
What's your take on this Roger?
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 15, 2011, 07:52:51 PM
I still think it's more likely that Requia was trying to show some sympathy, but it just didn't come out right.
Speaking as an Asshat, beefing with Roger is likely to fuck with one's language abilities—and that's not exactly Requia's strong suit to begin with. She's bumbling, not vicious (as far as I've observed).
What's your take on this Roger?
I think she's a complete shit, to tell you the truth, for reasons given above. My reaction to her grandparent dying was "Oh, shit, sorry to hear that." Her reaction to my grandfather's imminent death was "Oh, we'll have to argue later, BRB LOL."
Also, she has an amazing ability to ruin every conversation she touches, because her Dunning/Kruger pokes out, and she HAS to prove that she knows more about everything than anybody, including and ESPECIALLY people actually trained in a field she knows nothing about.
I'm new, but...
One thing I've noticed around here. People are horrible bastards of one flavor or another in this place on a regular basis... but when somebody is actually hurting, they don't get kicked when they're down. (Well, unless they beg for it.)
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 15, 2011, 07:52:51 PM
I still think it's more likely that Requia was trying to show some sympathy, but it just didn't come out right.
Speaking as an Asshat, beefing with Roger is likely to fuck with one's language abilities—and that's not exactly Requia's strong suit to begin with. She's bumbling, not vicious (as far as I've observed).
What's your take on this Roger?
Too much benefit of the doubt, Dude. Just saying.
Ok, I'm sold.
Requia's really dug herself into a hole this time.
Thanks for everybody's patience with me.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 07:56:19 PM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on April 15, 2011, 07:52:51 PM
I still think it's more likely that Requia was trying to show some sympathy, but it just didn't come out right.
Speaking as an Asshat, beefing with Roger is likely to fuck with one's language abilities—and that's not exactly Requia's strong suit to begin with. She's bumbling, not vicious (as far as I've observed).
What's your take on this Roger?
I think she's a complete shit, to tell you the truth, for reasons given above. My reaction to her grandparent dying was "Oh, shit, sorry to hear that." Her reaction to my grandfather's imminent death was "Oh, we'll have to argue later, BRB LOL."
Also, she has an amazing ability to ruin every conversation she touches, because her Dunning/Kruger pokes out, and she HAS to prove that she knows more about everything than anybody, including and ESPECIALLY people actually trained in a field she knows nothing about.
hadn't encountered that premise before, but it immediately made perfect sense and I recalled several times in my life where I've observed that quality in someone. Usually just before something bad happened.
I learned something new today. Thanks Rev. condolences on your old old man, you old man.
May the ghost of the Terrible Old Man find eternal fun, and may Requia choke on a pretzel. No class at all.
Sorry to hear about your grandad Roger.
No offense to Rog, but this was relevant to the OP and I didn't want to make a new thread.
http://exiledonline.com/atlas-shrieked-why-ayn-rands-right-wing-followers-are-scarier-than-the-manson-family-and-the-gruesome-story-of-the-serial-killer-who-stole-ayn-rands-heart/
SHE WAS SO FUCKING CREEPY.
Am i the only one who just learned requia was a she... im slow
Sorry bout your G-pa Roger
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:47:31 PM
Right, I'm officially calling bullshit, you know jack all about objectivism, or any other kind of philosophy, and are completely unable to defend your argument with anything other than blanket statements that the other side is wrong and hurling insults.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
The point isn't about being right or wrong here, Requia. It's that, while Roger's use of attempted murder may not be the legally exact definition that would suit a real life case like this, the term was still sufficient to get his point across in a conversational manner. Especially given he'd used the correct terminology earlier in the very same topic.
I'm not talking about the legally accepted definition of murder, I'm talking about the lack of any kind of link whatsoever between his first statement and his second. Even if you leave out the whole murder bit, and just say 'then objectivists believe anybody with bad breaks should be arrested' it's *still* utter nonsense unless you say *why* that's the case. I'm fairly certain that there's no reason at all for that to be the case under objectivism at this point, and that Roger is talking out his ass, which is why he refuses to answer me.
If you're so smart, why are you THE ONLY FUCKING PERSON IN THIS THREAD who didn't understand Roger's point?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 05:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 04:58:37 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:57:23 PM
30 pages.
There will be a 3-5 day hiatus while I go to bury The Terrible Old Man, but I think you can count on far more than 30 pages.
Dammit. That takes all the fun out of finally doing this.
I'm taking hiatus for a week, after that we can either pick up where we left off or wait for it to explode in some other thread.
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST REQUIA WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on April 15, 2011, 05:36:21 PM
I'm honestly starting to think we've come across a legitimate case of Aspberger's here.
Or a personality disorder. My money's on a personality disorder.
I already disliked the pendantic little shitweasel, but I tolerated her on the basis that she's probably an aspie and can't help herself. Thing is, I know actual aspies (rather closely related to a couple of them, in fact) who are vastly more sensitive than this stupid little fuckwit... especially when communicating via written word, where the inability to interpret nuances of body language is irrelevant.
Aspies have empathy... this creature doesn't appear to have any.
Quote from: Nigel on April 17, 2011, 02:48:40 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:47:31 PM
Right, I'm officially calling bullshit, you know jack all about objectivism, or any other kind of philosophy, and are completely unable to defend your argument with anything other than blanket statements that the other side is wrong and hurling insults.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on April 15, 2011, 04:28:57 PM
Nope, for one thing I still have no fucking clue how you got from A to B on this one.
I love that its now advanced to the point that asking for an explanation is useless pedantry though.
The point isn't about being right or wrong here, Requia. It's that, while Roger's use of attempted murder may not be the legally exact definition that would suit a real life case like this, the term was still sufficient to get his point across in a conversational manner. Especially given he'd used the correct terminology earlier in the very same topic.
I'm not talking about the legally accepted definition of murder, I'm talking about the lack of any kind of link whatsoever between his first statement and his second. Even if you leave out the whole murder bit, and just say 'then objectivists believe anybody with bad breaks should be arrested' it's *still* utter nonsense unless you say *why* that's the case. I'm fairly certain that there's no reason at all for that to be the case under objectivism at this point, and that Roger is talking out his ass, which is why he refuses to answer me.
If you're so smart, why are you THE ONLY FUCKING PERSON IN THIS THREAD who didn't understand Roger's point?
I didn't understand Roger's point either, but I decided not to mention it because it seemed unfashionable at the time.
WHat I've gotten from Objectivism previously, and what I believe Rog was referring to with his example was this:
Joes brakes are bad, he knows it, he kills a family when his brakes fail.
>
Joe is guilty of a serious crime, some degree of homicide (I'm not getting into the argument about WHICH degree, as this is entirely unimportant to the example).
Up to this point most non-Objectivists would be entirely in agreement.
>
Anyone else who knowingly drives with bad brakes is ALSO guilty of the same seriousness of crime as Joe, due to the potential consequences of doing so, not the actual consequences.
Now, this last part is the part which turns everything into black and white codification, which in many (most?) cases is entirely innappropriate to real life situations. We charge people for driving unsafe vehicles because they might be lethal, we don't charge them for murder before anyone has actually died.
If we were to start applying rigid black and white codified laws of this kind, then we wouldn't need a jury. Or a judge for that matter. We would just find the Law that best fits the situation and apply the prescribed punishment. We wouldn't try to weigh up circumstances or intent. We wouldn't offer mercy (or even harsher example-making).
The real problem with this of course is that the justice system, as "broken" as many seem to feel it is, is one of THE central supports of democratic society. Participation in the system and the right to have cases heard, debated and judged upon is almost as important (some would have it more important) as voting in elections. Justice isn't a dead tome with indentikit crimes and summary punishment, it's a living, breathing and essential part of what we in the west consider to be life.
haven't seen the movie yet. probably wont. some books should just never be made into a movie.
here's some decent commentary on it comparing contrasting it with Avatar as far as it's message and artistic value are concerned. The guy is in all regards a very rational conservative commentator I sometimes listen to.
His voice is kind of annoying though, IMO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ9xnYc8tkw
Quote from: Pickled Starfish on April 19, 2011, 09:38:27 PM
haven't seen the movie yet. probably wont. some books should just never be made into a movie.
here's some decent commentary on it comparing contrasting it with Avatar as far as it's message and artistic value are concerned. The guy is in all regards a very rational conservative commentator I sometimes listen to.
His voice is kind of annoying though, IMO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ9xnYc8tkw
When you said he had an annoying voice I thought it would be RedLetterMedia.
I was disapointed :(
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on April 19, 2011, 09:41:20 PM
Quote from: Pickled Starfish on April 19, 2011, 09:38:27 PM
haven't seen the movie yet. probably wont. some books should just never be made into a movie.
here's some decent commentary on it comparing contrasting it with Avatar as far as it's message and artistic value are concerned. The guy is in all regards a very rational conservative commentator I sometimes listen to.
His voice is kind of annoying though, IMO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ9xnYc8tkw
When you said he had an annoying voice I thought it would be RedLetterMedia.
I was disapointed :(
RedLetterMedia sounds like the guy from Idiocracy. Dax Sheppard? yeah, that's him.
Quote from: Pickled Starfish on April 19, 2011, 09:38:27 PM
haven't seen the movie yet. probably wont. some books should just never be made into a movie.
Sometimes, books shouldn't be made into books either
Sorry about your Grandfather, Roger. :sad: That really, really, sucks.
Also, come back soon, Requia. What you did is almost unforgivable, and merits one hell of an ass kicking. So come back soon.
Damn...really sucks.
Quote from: Dr. James Semaj on April 21, 2011, 01:47:53 AM
Sorry about your Grandfather, Roger. :sad: That really, really, sucks.
Also, come back soon, Requia. What you did is almost unforgivable, and merits one hell of an ass kicking. So come back soon.
Damn...really sucks.
Newsfeed?
Quote from: Mangrove on April 21, 2011, 01:17:47 AM
Quote from: Pickled Starfish on April 19, 2011, 09:38:27 PM
haven't seen the movie yet. probably wont. some books should just never be made into a movie.
Sometimes, books shouldn't be made into books either
Also newsfeed?
Some great snippets from the reviews of this film:
http://crooksandliars.com/matt-osborne/ayn-rands-new-religion-righteous
Quote from: Telarus on April 22, 2011, 06:30:19 AM
Some great snippets from the reviews of this film:
http://crooksandliars.com/matt-osborne/ayn-rands-new-religion-righteous
My favorite quote....
Quote"Now that I've seen the movie, I think I finally understand the appeal of Atlas Shrugged," (reviewer Timothy) Hulsey explained on Facebook. "It's basically Ayn Rand's version of the Rapture.
"Honestly," he added, "I've seen quite a bit of evangelical Christian cinema, and Atlas Shrugged generally reminded me of the Paul Crouch-Trinity Broadcast Network Omega Code movies. That's not to say I didn't like it — quite the contrary. What Atlas Shrugged lacks in financial resources, star power, and cinematic competence, it makes up in bats**t insanity."
:lulz:
I really don't want to re-read this book but from the reviews I'm seriously wondering if I am remembering it correctly... :? I mean it has been over 20 years but damn....
On NPR, a most tactful way of putting it:
"Her philosophy did not play well in reality. Not for her, and not for her followers."
So, this movie has bombed... yes?
Quote from: Hoopla on April 28, 2011, 02:48:13 PM
So, this movie has bombed... yes?
Totally.
I mean, what do you expect to come from a woman who looked like this?
(http://exiledonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/ayn-rand21.jpeg)
Quote from: Hoopla on April 28, 2011, 02:48:13 PM
So, this movie has bombed... yes?
The free market demanded it. :)
Quote from: Hoopla on April 28, 2011, 02:48:13 PM
So, this movie has bombed... yes?
Well...
Roger Ebert called it "the most anticlimactic non-event since Geraldo Rivera broke into Al Capone's vault."
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110414/REVIEWS/110419990
The book was boring, but the trailers made it look like one of those Kirk Cameron "Left Behind" movies... except without the unmitigated awesome that is Kirk Cameron himself.
Quote from: Suu the Infallible on April 28, 2011, 02:49:57 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on April 28, 2011, 02:48:13 PM
So, this movie has bombed... yes?
Totally.
I mean, what do you expect to come from a woman who looked like this?
(http://exiledonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/ayn-rand21.jpeg)
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=28833.msg1036349#msg1036349
*shudders* :vom:
Credit where credit is due, that is a nice haircut. I've always thought so. The first time I ever saw a picture of Ayn Rand, I thought, "That's kind of a nice haircut."
You know who else had a nice haircut?
HITLER
She kept the same damn haircut for 60 years. That's some Donald Trump shit right there.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 28, 2011, 03:01:03 PM
The book was boring, but the trailers made it look like one of those Kirk Cameron "Left Behind" movies... except without the unmitigated awesome that is Kirk Cameron himself.
If Kirk Cameron was casted to play John Galt and that Australian hack preacher he follows around like a dog ready to hump leg was casted to play Rearden I would have cummed myself.
Same.
I thought she had money out the wazoo, why did she keep those snaggleteeth?
Then she wouldn't be a victim of her own femininity and we wouldn't have any of her rape fantasies.
IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?
:argh!:
She makes George Sand look hawt.
(http://www.makara.us/04mdr/01writing/03tg/bios/Sand_files/GeorgeSand9.gif)
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
Yeah, I was going to mention that as well. Oh god, how will we live, now the productive people in society are going on strike?
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on April 28, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
How fucking funny is this year going to get? :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: Jenkem and Tomahawks on April 28, 2011, 08:43:33 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on April 28, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
How fucking funny is this year going to get? :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
I was kind of expecting the butthurt to come from the libertarians, but this works, too. :lulz:
That is the funniest thing I have seen in at least a year.
That's one thing I always respected about the Right Wing Christian Crusader nutjobs, at least more then the Ayn Rand fuckboys. You can bash them down but they keep fighting back. They don't take their ball, go home and cry in the corner because someone didn't like their shitty movie.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on April 28, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
OH MY GOD
This is fucking PRICELESS. You know what? THIS would make a good movie.
Quote from: Nigel on April 28, 2011, 09:43:53 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on April 28, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
OH MY GOD
This is fucking PRICELESS. You know what? THIS would make a good movie.
:lulz:
Is it terrible of me to be happy they are going to stop with part 1?
:lulz:Fuck no, tha tshit was going to be awful no matter what.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on April 28, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
:lulz:
Quote from: Nigel on April 28, 2011, 09:43:53 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on April 28, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
The producer is apparently so disappointed by the indifference of his intended audience, due mainly to obstructionist movie critics universally panning his movie, that he has decided to go Galt.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-producer-critics-you-won-hes-going-on-strike.html
OH MY GOD
This is fucking PRICELESS. You know what? THIS would make a good movie.
YES.
:this:
Isn't "going Galt" all about doing it and shutting the FUCK UP about it? It's meant to be a secret.
Quote from: Slyph on April 28, 2011, 11:09:41 PM
Isn't "going Galt" all about doing it and shutting the FUCK UP about it? It's meant to be a secret.
No, that's doing a Roark... doing a Galt is exactly that,
taking your ball and going home.
Quote from: Slyph on April 28, 2011, 11:09:41 PM
Isn't "going Galt" all about doing it and shutting the FUCK UP about it? It's meant to be a secret.
From the twitter #hipstershrugged
Who's John Galt? Oh you wouldn't have heard of him, he's really obscure.
'I stopped contributing to society way before going Galt was cool.'
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 15, 2011, 05:31:05 PM
I think she's already fucked off.
Nope, I won't be nearly as easy for you to chase away as Cram was.
I do apologize about the comment that proceeded my hiatus, it was not my intention to be insulting or unsympathetic or however it came off, I just wouldn't have felt right about fucking with Roger while he was in the middle of making plans of a funeral.
What a darling you are, Requia.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:18:34 PM
Nope, I won't be nearly as easy for you to chase away as Cram was.
Now you're insulting Cram? What the hell are you bringing him into this for?
Take a fucking hike.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 03, 2011, 09:19:59 PM
What a darling you are, Requia.
She's also the 2011 Back-Handed Apology Champion.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 03, 2011, 09:25:00 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:18:34 PM
Nope, I won't be nearly as easy for you to chase away as Cram was.
Now you're insulting Cram? What the hell are you bringing him into this for?
Take a fucking hike.
This is possibly the most magnificent twisting of words you've ever done you know. I attack you for chasing posters away and you make it look like I'm attacking those ex posters? Marvelous.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:38:57 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 03, 2011, 09:25:00 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:18:34 PM
Nope, I won't be nearly as easy for you to chase away as Cram was.
Now you're insulting Cram? What the hell are you bringing him into this for?
Take a fucking hike.
This is possibly the most magnificent twisting of words you've ever done you know.
Oh, I'm sure I can slide under that.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:38:57 PM
I attack you for chasing posters away and you make it look like I'm attacking those ex posters? Marvelous.
Yep. Cram left for reasons that may have or may have not included me, but by his own statement were primarily composed of boredom and a lack of any feeling of connection to PD. So he went off and started his own group, and he is doing just fine.
You, on the other hand, have portrayed him as some sissy that couldn't take the heat. In fact, the general statement you just made implies that many Discordians can't handle discord. How valiant of you to step up to speak for them, as they are obviously incapable of speaking for themselves. Aren't they lucky to have a genius such as yourself to represent their cause?
You fucked up little monkey problem. :lulz:
I don't know why she bothers here.
Oh wait, yes I do... she's been hounded out of every other corner of the civilized internet.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 03, 2011, 09:55:10 PM
I don't know why she bothers here.
Oh wait, yes I do... she's been hounded out of every other corner of the civilized internet.
She certainly made her name stink on IRC.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 03, 2011, 09:55:10 PM
I don't know why she bothers here.
Oh wait, yes I do... she's been hounded out of every other corner of the civilized internet.
I've come to believe that this is the ONLY civilized corner of the whole damn world.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:38:57 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 03, 2011, 09:25:00 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:18:34 PM
Nope, I won't be nearly as easy for you to chase away as Cram was.
Now you're insulting Cram? What the hell are you bringing him into this for?
Take a fucking hike.
This is possibly the most magnificent twisting of words you've ever done you know. I attack you for chasing posters away and you make it look like I'm attacking those ex posters? Marvelous.
Are you just drunk all the time, or are you really that stupid? You make yourself sound like a dick and an idiot.
I had actually forgotten that Requia was in this thread. I came back to it expecting to see some Rand-bashing, but this...
This...
:lulz:
Quote from: Jenkem and Tomahawks on May 03, 2011, 10:25:31 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 03, 2011, 09:55:10 PM
I don't know why she bothers here.
Oh wait, yes I do... she's been hounded out of every other corner of the civilized internet.
I've come to believe that this is the ONLY civilized corner of the whole damn world.
I AGREE with the Desert Flower of Despair.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:38:57 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 03, 2011, 09:25:00 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 03, 2011, 09:18:34 PM
Nope, I won't be nearly as easy for you to chase away as Cram was.
Now you're insulting Cram? What the hell are you bringing him into this for?
Take a fucking hike.
This is possibly the most magnificent twisting of words you've ever done you know. I attack you for chasing posters away and you make it look like I'm attacking those ex posters? Marvelous.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ViSYBAbMabw/SGO1k_CZ9cI/AAAAAAAAAbg/7sErgqcFE0Q/s400/laughing+Jesus.png)
Oh, happy day! I thought I was going to miss ALL the fun stuff. I just finished the last major assignment I had the rest of the semester.... and Requia comes back on the very same day! :fap:
Quote from: Doktor Phox on May 04, 2011, 12:29:35 AM
Oh, happy day! I thought I was going to miss ALL the fun stuff. I just finished the last major assignment I had the rest of the semester.... and Requia comes back on the very same day! :fap:
It's like a present just for youuuuuuu!
Quote from: Doktor Phox on May 04, 2011, 12:29:35 AM
Oh, happy day! I thought I was going to miss ALL the fun stuff. I just finished the last major assignment I had the rest of the semester.... and Requia comes back on the very same day! :fap:
SAY "THANK YOU, ROGER, PROVIDER OF ALL THINGS SPAG!"
Quote from: Doktor Phox on May 04, 2011, 12:29:35 AM
Oh, happy day! I thought I was going to miss ALL the fun stuff. I just finished the last major assignment I had the rest of the semester.... and Requia comes back on the very same day! :fap:
That is pretty good timing, I must say
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 04, 2011, 12:45:37 AM
Quote from: Doktor Phox on May 04, 2011, 12:29:35 AM
Oh, happy day! I thought I was going to miss ALL the fun stuff. I just finished the last major assignment I had the rest of the semester.... and Requia comes back on the very same day! :fap:
SAY "THANK YOU, ROGER, PROVIDER OF ALL THINGS SPAG!"
THANK YOU ROGER, PROVIDER OF ALL THINGS SPAG! :mrgreen:
YES, THANK YOU ROGER!!!
Popcorn, anybody?
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on May 04, 2011, 01:46:40 AM
YES, THANK YOU ROGER!!!
Popcorn, anybody?
(http://popcornboxes.net/wp-content/uploads/popcorn-boxes.jpg)
You might want to wash it down with this:
(http://www.buckshappening.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/beer-flight.jpg)
This was amazing!
Quote from: /b/earman on April 08, 2014, 01:57:01 AM
This was amazing!
Keep digging. Some of the stuff from 2006 and earlier is GOLD.
Requia. :lulz:
Quote from: The Suu on April 08, 2014, 02:01:37 AM
Requia. :lulz:
Remember when she banned me from IRC discordia? :lulz:
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 05:40:50 AM
Requia, do you find your pedantry inhibits you from casual conversations?
"Hello, good morning!"
"Good is a subjective term, and experts have found in recent studies that qualifications for something being good differ highly between cultures and socioeconomic statuses! Oh, and did you ever find it weird that anything before noon is morning, yet anything afternoon could be afternoon, evening, or night, all distinctly separate?"
"Well...uh. Mighty fine weather we're having!"
"I'm confused about your use of mighty. This is a clear, sunny day. There's nothing mighty about a calm sky and seasonal warmth. What makes it fine, also, I mean, if every day was like this then eventually none would be, as all the plants would lack essential rain water to live! I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're having' after all, how are we having this day. The day is just happening and we are living through it, how does that make us having it any more than one has music by giving it a listen?"
"I don't, okay, so how is your family doing?"
"Family is being constantly redefined in modern social sciences to reflect the changing landscape of our daily lives! Whereas fifty years ago a family was a husband, a wife, and two point five children (a myth that is being debunked through rigorous sociological testing) it currently can include a number of gender identities as well as non traditional members."
I still maintain...
this is some funny shit.
Quote from: /b/earman on April 08, 2014, 01:57:01 AM
This was amazing!
Wow...i missed this the first time around. Good find...now I see why Requia had such a reputation.
Also
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on April 15, 2011, 05:40:50 AM
Requia, do you find your pedantry inhibits you from casual conversations?
"Hello, good morning!"
"Good is a subjective term, and experts have found in recent studies that qualifications for something being good differ highly between cultures and socioeconomic statuses! Oh, and did you ever find it weird that anything before noon is morning, yet anything afternoon could be afternoon, evening, or night, all distinctly separate?"
"Well...uh. Mighty fine weather we're having!"
"I'm confused about your use of mighty. This is a clear, sunny day. There's nothing mighty about a calm sky and seasonal warmth. What makes it fine, also, I mean, if every day was like this then eventually none would be, as all the plants would lack essential rain water to live! I'm not sure what you mean by 'we're having' after all, how are we having this day. The day is just happening and we are living through it, how does that make us having it any more than one has music by giving it a listen?"
"I don't, okay, so how is your family doing?"
"Family is being constantly redefined in modern social sciences to reflect the changing landscape of our daily lives! Whereas fifty years ago a family was a husband, a wife, and two point five children (a myth that is being debunked through rigorous sociological testing) it currently can include a number of gender identities as well as non traditional members."
:lulz:
Also good Randite stuff here :lulz:
and how Suu was all LOOK AT HER FAAAAAACE :lulz:
Also up until now I wasn't sure who The Terrible Old Man was....I just assumed one of Roger's Elders.