Aug-10
31
And You Thought Michael Voris (the Vortex) was Scary?
By
Well, іf Flashy tһουɡһt a Catholic dictatorship wаѕ spooky (аחԁ іt absolutely іѕ) јυѕt consider Glenn Beck аחԁ һіѕ crowd οf religious extremists tһаt descended upon Washington, D.C. tһе οtһеr day…
Tһіѕ іѕ a nightmare οח tһе Potomac, аחԁ tһіѕ іѕ precisely wһаt Sarah Palin аחԁ tһе rest οf tһе Repulsivecans аrе up tο. At tһе еחԁ οf tһе day, tһеу don’t give a rip חοr understand wһаt capitalism іѕ, аחԁ wһаt іt requires. AƖƖ tһеу care аbουt іѕ instituting tһеіr evangelical Christian mythology upon tһе masses.
Beck аחԁ Palin, аחԁ ѕο many οf tһе rest οf tһеѕе ѕο-called Tea Partiers, аrе repulsive throwbacks tο exactly tһаt wһісһ brought υѕ Obama.
No related posts.
Slim,
Let’s see if I can put this objectively: Beck and Palin base their moral values on a 2000 year old work of fiction. You base yours on a 55 year old work of fiction.
Seems to me that Beck and Palin have long-term history on their side. But then again, since both the Bible and Atlas Shrugged are works of fiction, who knows for sure where truth lies?
For you, Slim, it apparently is best to reject the imperfectly free market values of Beck and Palin, since, tainted as they are by a concomitant religious faith, they don’t measure up to the pure (not to mention devoutly atheistic) free market values of Rand and her objectivist disciples.
For you, its better to stake out differences than to find common ground, despite the obvious real-world political advantages of accommodation. For to do so involves working with “believers,” and of course, the ghost of Ayn would not approve!
Your rants remind me of those of fundamentalist, pre-determinist Christians who fancy themselves part of the elect few who will enter heaven. They have no time for others who profess themselves Christians, since those others are just not pure enough in their beliefs.
Roadkill,
On and on and on you go, each word more worthless than the last….
For your information, the post is not about Atlas Shrugged (which it appears is all you superficially know about Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism), but rather the illustration of the bizarre nature of religious extremists such as Palin and Beck who would, if they could, establish a Christian theocracy here in America. And, from all accounts, is what a significant percentage of the Tea Partiers think would be OK as well.
If you are going to comment, try to be at least somewhat accurate as it is clear from your comments that you have no idea what you are writing about. Rather, you are simply spewing an emotional knee-jerk reaction based upon misinformation or preconcieved notions and ideas.
Both Palin and Beck are profound subjectivists, admitted dualists, and incredible hypocrits to boot. The upshot of this video is that if you or anyone else out there follows these people, and their core ideas, you are illustrating a profound insult to human intelligence.
Slim.
I usually don’t provide recalama’s to responses to my posts, since most responses on this blog are typically a combination of un-substantiated assertions, intellectual vapidity, and rhetorical abuse. The present response of yours is very typical.
But I am curious about your assertion that Sarah Palin and Glen Beck advocate the establishment of theocratic rule in the US. I have never heard anything of the sort. Do you have any evidence to back that up? What, specifically, have they said or done to make you think that way? And what about your assertion that “Most Tea Partiers” think that (theocratic rule) is OK? As far as I know, the Tea Party movement is all about lower taxes, reduced regulations, and smaller government. What evidence can you provide to support your assertion that Tea Partiers want a theocracy? Evidence, if you have it, would be most appreciated.
Also, what’s this about Palin and Beck being Subjectivists and admitted Duallists? Sounds serious. So I guess it means they are not Objectivists. Well, they must then assuredly be heretics, and therefore anathema to the Randian creed. I can see why you are upset.
And speaking of the Goddess, you ask why I bring up Rand in responding to your post? Well, its because she is your philosophical goddess and messenger and obviously the inspiration of your anti-religious fervor. Really, if you want to talk free market or laissez faire capitalism, why don’t you stick to Hayak or von Mises or Freidman. They are no less pro-capitalist than Ayn Rand, but without the peculiar atheist strain that strains and beclouds her otherwise sound economic views.
You know, Slim, if you would stop thinking about this blog as an echo-chamber for the half-dozen or so Objectivists who post here, and made a civil effort to teach people about the virtues of Capitalism and free markets, I think you would be doing some good here. As it is, all you are doing is reinforcing the view that you are a fringe-kook, not much different in your ways that nut-case preacher down in Florida who wants to burn Korans.
Right.. as if you aren’t intellectually vapid! What a f-ing joke you are! You couldn’t argue or debate your way out of a paper bag.
All one needs to do is to listen to either Beck or Palin, but especially Glenn Beck. His TV and Radio shows are essentially reconfigurations of Jimmy Swaggart. It will not be long before Glenn goes on the air feigning tears of remorse for some rediculous transgression, or perhaps he’ll go blind and refer to it as “God’s will.” Glenn Beck is a pathetic huckster.
When these people publicly state, as Beck has, that what
America needs is a “return to faith” he is not just lying through his teeth- American never was and hopefully never will be a Christian nation-he is prosthletyzing for his brand of mysticism. In this case, Christianity; it is what it is. His statements are out there for anyone to review – he would revel in a Chrsitian theocracy.
Palin is simply an semi-attractive opportunist, and a sad one at that. But at the end of the day, her primative philosophy, her core mechanism for making difficult decisions, is not based on any rational base – it is premised upon altruism and the creed of self-sacrifice which is embedded in Christianity. You can try to run from this, but the facts on the ground are simply unarguable.
Lastly, you flipantly state: ” she (Rand) is your philosophical goddess and messenger and obviously the inspiration of your anti-religious fervor.”
My only response to this pathetic swipe is to merely ask you how would you know? You don’t know me, you’ve never met me, and I certainly have never uttered in words or in print anything that would imply me holding Ayn Rand up as anything but a brilliant philosopher and proponent of reason, individual rights and capitalism. Moreover, my revulsion of religion has nothing to do with Ayn Rand, rather it is a reflection of my own understanding of reason as an absolute – Ayn Rand did not invent reason. To attempt a smear such as this reveals your limited capabilities and incredibly narrow-minded worldview.
Roady, you lose everytime you come in here because you don’t know what you’re talking about. You infer you have some knowledge of Objectivism, but yet your comments reveal that either you have not actually and honestly studied it, or you have and you choose to purposefully obscure its context and meaning… Which is it Roady – are you a liar or a fraud?