Imagine the number of old, lard-ass Teabaggers seeing that call to arms, shrugging their shoulders and hitting “de-fuckin-lete.”

July 26? In Dallas? Pretty Hot?

No. Shit.

I am consistently amazed at how much of what’s associated with Ayn Rand and her work ends up being nothing more than petty confidence schemes. You can bet your boots that FreedumbWerks is going to make money off of this–especially if they get the gullible faithful to provide free labor.

Atlas Mugged for the camera, and everyone else got a t-shirt made in China in exchange for a couple full days labor.

Atlas “Meh’d”

How’s about, we call for massive protests, causing them to bump up their volunteer ask and security plan and then, instead of going to the conference, head over to the local water park? Tweet and blog photos of everyone chillin’ with their Obama gear.

It gets better the deeper you go.

The signup sheet for volunteers is a Google Docs form (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGhIMWdxQXF2NjFVbEhRM2U4MGhtN3c6MQ#gid=0). Meaning they used free software to do the signup.

At least there’s a credit to Google Docs at the bottom. Look at the bottom, no, not the very bottom, because *that’s* a link to google abuse, where you can report sites that use google technology that have nudity, or “Promotes hate, violence or illegal/offensive activities”, etc. Just above the “report abuse” link is the google docs credit link. You’re welcome

And if you sprain your back lifting those boxes, buy your own f****ng health insurance. Moochers.

How about Democrats mobilize their base affirmatively like Freedomworks is doing on the other side? My read is that the Democrats are deathly afraid of their “base.”

Alas poor troll, When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead …

Parody falls further behind conservative “reality.”

Being a liberal blogger is pretty easy work in a target rich environment.

I’m sorry – what does this mean? ‘Mobilise their base affirmatively’? ‘like Freedomworks’?

Pay them?

Republicans?! PAY?!! Clearly, sir, you have missed a memo.

Haven’t seen the Greens getting out and getting mobilized lately, affirmatively or otherwise.

And if they did, would anybody notice?

Hey Marcos, why don’t you go back to the other thread and let’s play some more over there. Don’t be chicken.

That movie got made? Without me? Those bastards!

If you go to the blog tab at the AS II link and scroll to the bottom you’ll see a post from March advertising for a paid internship. I sent the following and never did hear back from the asswipes:

To Whom It May Concern,

Please consider my application for internment on your show. Here is my essay I call, Ayn Rand Defined:
_

Who’se Ayn Rand? She’s a foriegn-American writer and philosopher who wrote the most classic books ever published in American, including Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainpen. She founded the famous American philosophy called Objectivity, whereby everyone gets to make as much money as they can and if you don’t then you cant. She called this rationed self-interest and argued correctly that an untethered marketplace makes people successful the most.

Rand was also an enigma told in a riddle presented in sheep’s clothing. She was an atheist but anti-communist. She loved Aristotle but despised Greece. She abhorred altruism but liked to swap sexual partners with other married couples. She was a woman who was ahead of this or any other times, the personification of female beauty and brains that nobody yet but Sarah Palin has embodied to any degree whatsoever.

The easy virtue of selfishness was and is the words Ayn Rand lived on. Her philosophy lives on in such stalward acolytes of her teachings as Ronald Reagan, Alan Greenspan and Donald Trump, people who make America exceptional all day, every day twenty-four-7. She inspires me and others to look inward and find our very best, wich is what I would bring to your dramatic television production of Ayn Rand and Her Story of Her Life._

That is the end of my essay I titled above. I hope these rungs peel your bell in my favour to get this job.

Sincerley,
keta

No, it really does fit. Rand herself was perfectly willing to take advantage of anything offered to her – she accepted funds from both Social Security and Medicare.

Maybe this is a test – if you show up to volunteer your time, then you won’t be given the magic decoder ring with directions to Galt’s Gulch

And if you want to watch Atlas Shrugged I it’s currently on Netflix. You’ll find it in the Science Fiction and Fantasy category.

Assumes facts not in evidence: that you can read.

I noticed it was checked out of the RedBox I went to. I shudder to imagine who was watching it, much less what they thought of it.

Her quote about contradictions is dead wrong.

See Kurt Godel and his Undecidability Theorem.

He wrote that in the 20′s, shooting down Whitehead/Russell’s work on a new Principia Mathematica.

Tammany Tiger’s Law: the more loyal a constituency is to the Democratic Party, the higher the probability the party will betray them.

So Ayn Rand is like Sarah Palin–only with better “word salad” and birth control. Gotcha.

For example,

It’s impossible for the Democratic Party to betray the Teabaggers.

or

It’s impossible for the Republicans to betray the Greens

Its funny how hard it is for something so simple to be understood by some people. Ayn Rand never said anything about being against “free” or volunteerism. Go watch her interviews on YouTube. Its pretty simple. You should do things because you WANT to for whatever reason is important to YOU. Not because you are forced or are afraid of being forced or because of guilt. If someone wants to donate their time because they believe in a cause or because they think they might to get to meet some movie actors then that is what they WANT and is the payment they are willing to accept for the work. Is it really so hard to understand?

Birth control and Ayn Rand should, under no circumstances, ever be uttered or written in any sort of way that would presume usage of the former by the latter for said purpose.

Cannot now be un-seen.

I find it incredibly appropriate. Ayn Rand has a proud tradition of getting something for nothing, like her treatment for, (self inflicted), lung cancer and the Social Security, (by virtue of her dead husband), that she paid nothing into. This is just continuing that custom. I wonder if they’ll provide a break room called “Galt’s Gulch” in which ten people fight over a bag of Cheetos and a Diet Pepsi?

I don’t know about Rand but the characters she uses to endlessly spout her “philosophy” in vast, winding monologues rant repeatedly about never giving anything away, or doing anything for anyone for free. Doing so is practically the same as shooting them, you’d think from how abhorent the very notion of charity is to her characters.

So if I, as your employer, decide that I don’t want to pay you, then I have no obligation to pay you. I shouldn’t feel guilty about not honoring our contract, nor should I allow the terms of our contract coerce me into paying you.

If you are willing to work under those terms then you have nobody to blame for your volunteering your time, but yourself. Because you wanted to work in the first place.

You’re right it is a simple concept.

They shoulda hired you. Asswipes.

You can serve your internment at my house. All I ask is that you submit a new resume/application each morning for my amusement.

Dearie
Lovely Gates Community
Galt’s Gulch

Apparently Brad and what’s-her-face are deep into Randianism and were pitching a Atlas Shrugged movie recently.
Pretty-petty little airheads.

A list of Hollywood Ayn Rand admirers:

http://atlasshrugged.com/the-book/admirers/

Tea at my house in the afternoons. I need a lift. And plus if tequila would be required, we could do that instead. Also.

Yoo hoo! Have you read Atlas Shrugged? There’s this little gem in John Galt’s speech, and I’ll add the emphasis for you:

“Every man is free to rise as far as he’s able or willing, but it’s only the degree to which he thinks that determines the degree to which he’ll rise. Physical labor as such can extend no further than the range of the moment. The man who does no more than physical labor, consumes the material value-equivalent of his own contribution to the process of production, and leaves no further value, neither for himself nor others. But the man who produces an idea in any field of rational endeavor-the man who discovers new knowledge-is the permanent benefactor of humanity. Material products can’t be shared, they belong to some ultimate consumer; it Is only the value of an idea that can be shared with unlimited numbers of men, making all sharers richer at no one’s sacrifice or loss, raising the productive capacity of whatever labor they perform. It is the value of his own time that the strong of the intellect transfers to the weak, letting them work on the jobs he discovered, while devoting his time to further discoveries. This is mutual trade to mutual advantage; the interests of the mind are one, no matter what the degree of intelligence, among men who desire to work and don’t seek or expect the unearned.

To understand this properly – this is why Orcs do what Saruman says, ‘mkay?

So, if I understand the above quote/assertion correctly, the vaunted Idea Man is much more to be valued than the poor schmuck who breaks his back to make stuff for the whizz-bang Idea Man while he sits on his fat privileged ass dreaming up bullshit for betterment of All.

To quote an old friend, “Fuck that shit.”

I think I know your friend.

Well, close. See it’s “Job Creators” and “parasites”.

It’s how they roll.

I’ll bring the limes! And let’s all encourage keta to keep on coming back!

Sorry, unable to snark about piece of shit Ayn Rand and her piece of shit cultists. I hope the fucking building collapses.

Why not? Rand was the ultimate grifter.

good idea. you hear that keta? y’all come back now.

You win.

I signed up to work the event using area code 214 and zip 75228, left an anoying CT based comment on the form and feel Ive started my day of the best way possible.

Then I reported abuse to Google.

Its not surprising that a bunch of young, millionaire celebrities love Rand. Her philosophy is all about glorification of _the Self_; who is more self-absorbed than young Americans? What I fail to understand are how any middle-aged, religious-types can abide her work. Rand was both stridently atheist and pro-choice. (This illustrates how Christianity is corrupted in service of the powerful, but this has been going on for thousands of years- literally.) I too loved Rand as a college student, yet I still learned to love other people and the virtue of humility. The key to breaking objectivism addiction is to come to terms with real human frailty. Finally, _Enlightened Self-Interest_ is in itself a contradiction. Prisoners Dilema teaches us that any fool who alerts the vigilance of others, when behaving selfishly, is doomed to minimize their reward. This is why the most powerful, wealthy individuals on Earth are always private people.

The more complex one realizes the planet to be, the less appealing this drivel should be to any sentient human being. As a self-absorbed youngster this may have an appeal, but at the same time it is a self-parodying philosophy thanks to its simple minded nature. The breathtaking hypocrisy of Ayn Rand herself should be enough to convince even the most devout (but inadequate to sway Allen Greenspan).

If you want to see the funniest non-intentionally funny movie of all time, watch The Fountainhead. Making it more delicious was that the Grifter Queen herself (no, not Sarah Palin) wrote the screenplay.

Notice that Rand never has anything to say about CHILDREN or the care thereof?

Libertarians always say things like, oh, people should all be free to make whatever contracts they like, and everything will be fine. Perfect freedom for everyone, right? No government interference, everyone makes their own way. Volunteer, ask for pay, whatever, just make your personal contract with whoever and party on, dudes! Great, right?

One thing those guys never remember is the element of RELATIVE POWER. It’s not just freedom that’s at issue, it is the fact that in any society, there is always going to be a differential in power (whether it’s in terms of money, personal esteem, aristocratic birth, lots of friends, whatever) and the people with more power are going to be able to coerce their contractees to give them more than they might contract for in perfect “freedom.”

So, the government might not coerce anyone’s freedom in the liberatarians’ paradise, but the simple differences in personal power will certainly do plenty of coercion, and it will be of the very individual, up-close-and-personal kind.

Personally, I’d rather have the heavy hand of the impersonal Law “coercing” everybody more or less equally, wouldn’t you?