O'Reilly Baffled by Peikoff

FoxNews | today | me

[motzman]

O'Reilly baffled by Piekoff. O'Reilly cannot allow himself to face the truth that if we do not eradicate the Fundamentalist "Jihad", a nuke (or worse) will strike this country. Then and only then will he agree with the use on Nukes by the U.S.

Mr. Bill needs to check his premises.....

[syriacus]

I have lived on Long Island for 30 years, so I understand what you are talking about.

My husband's cousins lived in Levittown. I used the library there quite a bit. We shop there, etc.

I still wish O'Reilly would say he is from Westbury, if he is...some pretty ordinary folks like teachers and firefighters come from there, too. (including a family we have known for 30 years). Westbury even has some poorer families.

Why does he insist on the "Levittown" cachet, if it is not true? He seemed to me to say he is from the Levitt area of Westbury (I think in an article in Parade magazine---in one Sunday's Newsday)

I don't care what his background is, as long as he is honest.

[Accountable One]

"So who should we kill and what nations should we destroy?"

I leave that judgement to those in the military and civilian leadership who are charged to make those judgements.

The better question that you cannot answer is; define who "the responsible parties are, then retaliate against them and no one else."

Define your rhetoric in specifics...including how we would absolutely identify and attack only them and nobody else. How would that plan be implemented? What specifically would happen?

[lynn madison]

Do me a favor, don't lecture me as to what Piekoff intends to have people think. He certainly doesn't need you lecturing others.
Best, and goodnight.

No, he doesn't need it. People should understand that under the gun on the Bill O'Reilly show, one's formulations won't be as clear as they are in writing. But even though he doesn't need it, he does deserve it and appreciate it.

[lynn madison]

The most updated version, published as a full-page ad in today's New York Times, is already in another thread:

Here

[lynn madison]

But what WAS the deal with the tiddly-wink music?

She liked it. She grew up with it, I think. No big deal, really. She also loved Rachmaninoff. I'd love to see what type of music she would latch onto if she grew up hearing popular music of the 80's or 90's . . .

[Republicus2001]

I despise America-haters and evil-doers...and we're not the only freedom lovers under seige... RANCHI, India (Reuters) - A policeman was burned alive and five of his colleagues wounded by leftist extremists who attacked a police post in India's eastern state of Jharkand, police said on Sunday.

[HoustonKevin]

You are forgetting the Army Barracks in Saudi and the 2 US Embassies in Africa!

[lynn madison]

But what WAS the deal with the tiddly-wink music?

She liked it. She grew up with it, I think. No big deal, really. She also loved Rachmaninoff. I'd love to see what type of music she would latch onto if she grew up hearing popular music of the 80's or 90's . . .

[lynn madison]

No one seems to be able to find his purported PhD dissertation at NYU. As a scholar, he has published very little, and only in third-rate journals.

Now those pricey ARI "study guides" - that's "Dr" Payoff's forte!

As a "scholar" being the operative phrase. Writing a comprehensive, hierarchical presentation of Objectivism as he did seems to be incompatible with writing a lot "as a scholar," or at least it was when he was in the academic market.

Which pricey "study guide" are you referring to? And, one more thing, what particular axe do you have to grind? Smearing the person without discussing the content is getting old fast.

[lynn madison]

No one seems to be able to find his purported PhD dissertation at NYU. As a scholar, he has published very little, and only in third-rate journals.

Now those pricey ARI "study guides" - that's "Dr" Payoff's forte!

As a "scholar" being the operative phrase. Writing a comprehensive, hierarchical presentation of Objectivism as he did seems to be incompatible with writing a lot "as a scholar," or at least it was when he was in the academic market.

Which pricey "study guide" are you referring to? And, one more thing, what particular axe do you have to grind? Smearing the person without discussing the content is getting old fast.

[lynn madison]

Of course, Peikoff also wants to kill thousands or millions of Iranian babies too. War is hell, so let's make the most of it, eh!

Again, no, he doesn't want to kill babies, Iranian or otherwise. Babies, according to Objectivism, are morally neutral, so how could any Objectivist want to kill them? Get real. His point is that we shouldn't wring our hands about killing some babies in the course of doing what we have to do (and are morally justified in doing) to defend ourselves. There are indications that Peikoff's warnings about Iran will indeed ring true -- the news story today about the warnings of what will happen to us if we use their airspace is just the latest hint.

[mil-vet]

GET THEM B4 THEY GET YOU! They've already MURDERED 7000 civilians. Nuke'em and Nuke'em now! Otherwise, we will be Nuked! This is SURVIVAL!

Nukes are a tad of a problem, from a couple of aspects, even the small tactical ones (I'm actually being factual here, without my tongue in my cheek for a change).

Napalm, however, is cheap, environmentally friendly, sucks all the air out of caves over which it's dropped, and sticks to the skin of "supporters of terrorism" dancing in streets celebrating terrorist attacks on civilization. Napalm also provides training for the heaven to which these idiots are REALLY headed.

Combine napalm with myriad "15,000 pound" fuel-air "daisy cutters", and I think you'll find the need for nukes diminishing rapidly!

[lynn madison]

Echoes of "Little Alice is the greatest philosopher since Aristotle?" Come on, isn't it time to update your routine?

Three posts, all ad hominem or argument from intimidation. It seems like it is you who needs to update his routine.

Last night, I saw an inarticulate, mentally disjointed, sputtering kook. O'Reilly's comparison of Payoff to Dr. Strangelove was a slap - at Dr. Strangelove.

Must have been some good weed you were smoking. I hear he's been invited on some radio shows since because he did so well. Different strokes, I guess :)

Go back to your silly, 1950s sci-fi comic book. Comic Book Philosophy - no thanks!

More of the same argument from intimidation and question-begging epithet with no actual argument whatever. Waiting to hear about that axe. . . .

[lynn madison]

I am baffled by Peikoff. I am a big fan of Rand, but I cannot for the life of me figure out the Ayn Rand Institute and its leader Peikoff. I remember going to a party about 10 years ago held by some ARI people, and it was the most boring, godawful party I'd ever been to.

Let me get this straight. You were bored at a party that ARI gave, therefore we're supposed to dismiss Peikoff's point of view? What kind of argument is that?

It was in honor of a visiting Russian from their equivalent of a conservative/libertarian party, and he was trying to get the rights to print "Atlas Shrugged" and a few other works in Russian as educational materials. The ARI refused to grant the rights at a price that would make publication affordable, so the poor guy walked away empty-handed. A year later, bootlegged copies started showing up in Russia, on which ARI made not a dime. Smart business people, those folks.

Hmmm, so they were bad, in your view, because they didn't give into the threat: "give us what we want at the price we want or else we're going to steal it"? How smart would it be for them to set that precedent?

I am much more comfortable with Kelley and the Institute for Objectivist Studies.

Yeah, I guess if I were you, I would just go ahead and go wherever I was comfortable and not examine it any further. After all, comfort is the standard, right? (Big sarcasm.) Can we start talking about content here anytime soon?

[motzman]

You are forgetting the Army Barracks in Saudi and the 2 US Embassies in Africa!

And now I'm reading that OKC and TWA 800 had Clinton Bin Lyin connections....

[lynn madison]

Re #160. Salt, you need to reveal your axe and drop the ad hominem. Otherwise, libertas, this guy should not be talked to any further. That's 4/4 posts with no content. (Libertas, see my prior ones addressed to him.)

[grego]

Let's face it-O'Reilly is a populist who basically goes with the flow. Haven't you noticed how he ardently denies that he is a conservative. He is only a conservative on taxes; domestically he is a liberal. Did you notice he got that annoying Lib Elise Wheeler (from Commie Seattle) a job permanently on Fox? O'Reilly was bashing Falwell but defending Maher. He was abrasive to Peikoff and wouldn't even let him talk. O'Reilly =phony 2-sided person who doesn't have the courage to take a stance. He changes with the wind.

[Libertarian_4_eva]

Sean used to be ok but now he is turning into one of the excuse making for conservatives pundits sorta like rush.

[Lurker]

I like the way you think.

L

[Who is George Salt?]

Here's my favorite Little Alice story:

Alice was really, really dense. Incapable of comprehending even the most rudimentary principles of probability or statistics, she responded in characteristic form by denouncing anything associated with those subjects. She produced utterly absurd commentaries on quantum mechanics. And since "relative" was a bad word in her lexicon, she also denounced Albert Einstein and his theory of "relativity."

She also maintained that statistics linking cigarette smoking with lung cancer were fraudulent; she said that they were produced by anti-capitalistic "looters" who were out to destroy the tobacco industry.

In addition, she maintained that sickness was a sign of moral failing. In other words, those who got sick deserved it. This presented Little Alice with quite a quandry when she came down with lung cancer. Either she had to admit to a moral failing, or she had to admit that she was wrong about statistics. Her doctors described her as an utterly foul patient.

As an aside, her innumeracy prevented her from really participating in the "capitalism' she supposedly extolled. She had a neurotic aversion to investing, and kept all of her money stashed away in cash.

PS Why did she prohibit the members of the "Collective" from listening to Beethoven?