About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


Post 40

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Adam—in response to your request, I don't believe I have any e-mail from the main suspects—except Justin, from a couple of years back. But that's on a subject that is rather sensitive in New Zealand right now, so I don't really want to pass it on, especially since he was on the right side in that matter. Moreover, I rather have the sense with Justin that hurling invective under his own name in public is his career choice. Why would he cower behind an alias in private?

Tom–the soul of a Saddamite as revealed in that e-mail is pretty typical in my experience. And not at all surprising. What would you expect of entities that demand the American president eulogise beheaders?

And you couldn't be more wrong about the outcome of the debate here. Pro-liberation contributions by the likes of myself, Joe Rowlands, George Cordero, Barbara Branden & Robert Bidinotto have nailed it from every angle. Why, we've even seen a couple of conversions before our very eyes!

Linz

PS—Congrats all for the humour on this thread. I've been in danger of spilling my tea over the keyboard many times this morning (NZ time). The line that cracked me up most was, in the midst of it all, Barbara's plaintive "I don't seem to know what anyone is talking about." Hahahaha!

Post 41

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:13pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thomas, I'll quoth a bit more. Because I received one nasty letter -- two, now -- from a nutty Raimondo admirer, Malloy, and since you and Jeff Riggenbach now are gracing Solo with your presence in order to to defend Raimondo against me, I think it not unreasonable to assume that this may be the beginning of a campaign, and that other nuts like Malloy well may weigh in. I hasten to say that I truly do not put you and Jeff in the same category as the Malloy person, but I find it interesting that you both have only now registered with Solo.

And who knows what the Valliant book may inspire. I have seen considerable venom on the net already, although the book is still unpublished, from people who apparently are delighted to find an excuse to express their devoted allegiance to Leonard Peikoff.

My quoth for now.

Barbara

Post 42

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Thomas, one further point. I don't think you understand our use of the term "phrends." It has nothing at all to do with Raimondo. It's a Solo in joke having to do with a former member of Solo.

Barbara

Post 43

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Majesty—that's phormer member!

Post 44

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Barbara,

Let me note that even in the midst of such nonsense you're able to deliver acidic and entirely appropriate turns of phrase.  And not a hair out of place.  Bravo for your graciousness and eloquence.  I'm beginning to see why Linz termed you "Her Majesty."


Post 45

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:20pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Alec—just saw your post. Yes, I'll send the address to Adam Poirot-Reed since it's certainly no state secret. But I still don't think it's Justin, for reasons already stated.

Linz

Post 46

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:24pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Alec, I truly don't understand the need for all the theorizing. Malloy makes it very clear -- in the letter I posted and in the second one I received today -- that he is in agreement with Raimondo and is defending him. I doubt if the phrends share Raimondo's views or would be interested in defending him.

Barbara

Post 47

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit


Friends one and all, my "Babs" hysteria was intended as humor. Apparently, it fell with a thud. It's true I don't like the name, but it's not a big deal.

Barbara

Post 48

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Well, *this* reader took it as humour & loved it ... I'm sure everyone else did too.

Calling Bidinotto "Bob," however, is a different matter altogether ...

Post 49

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Actually, Barbara, I thought it was quite funny. I knew it was intended as humor, that's why I addressed it seriously.

Alec


Post 50

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 2:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
We were discussing forgiveness on another thread, and I think we all pretty much agreed that some things cannot be forgiven. I place in that category Malloy's remark about John Hospers. Nothing but a soul polluted by malice can explain such a remark.

Barbara

Post 51

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 3:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dear Barbara

You wrote (please pardon the "quoth" -- it's just the usual style I affect in newsgroups and such)

"Because I received one nasty letter -- two, now -- from a nutty Raimondo admirer, Malloy, and since you and Jeff Riggenbach now are gracing Solo with your presence in order to to defend Raimondo against me, I think it not unreasonable to assume that this may be the beginning of a campaign, and that other nuts like Malloy well may weigh in. I hasten to say that I truly do not put you and Jeff in the same category as the Malloy person, but I find it interesting that you both have only now registered with Solo."

Actually, I just RE-registered with Solo. Lost my password. I usually don't participate in the forums, although I did paricipate in at least one thread under my old userid for the purpose of discussing the relationship of Rational Review and Rational Review News Digest to the International Society for Individual Liberty and Freedom News Daily. I visit Solo on a daily basis, and have for some time. Usually RRND and FND feature a few articles every week from Solo.

I'm not here to "defend" Justin Raimondo. I'm frequently at odds with him myself, and occasionally publicly so, especially with respect to the subject of Israel.

More particularly, Raimondo requires no defense from the likes of Stephen Schwartz. Among the 1,000-1,500 or more published political commentaries I read each month, Stephen Schwartz is almost always in the running for the "most baseless, undocumented, stupid piece of trash-talk published in recent memory" prize.

I'm not interested in defending Raimondo as much as I am in trying to figure out what has led a group of alleged Objectivists so far off the path of fact and reality with respect to the war issue that they'd feel compelled to attack him -- even to the extent of lauding Schwartz's screed.

Regards,
Tom Knapp

Post 52

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 4:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Tom, you wrote: "I'm not here to "defend" Justin Raimondo. I'm frequently at odds with him myself, and occasionally publicly so, especially with respect to the subject of Israel."

Fair enough. Apparently I misjudged you, for which I apologize. And I'm pleased to be wrong. And now that you remind me, I do recall your post about ISIL, which I was glad to see. ISIL is my favorite libertarian group, although I disagree with many of its members about the war.

If Stephen Schwartz is the sort of man you say he is, would you refer me to some of his articles that you think are especially bad, so that I can judge for myself?

I won't attempt here to explain why so many Objectivists support the Iraq war; it's explained all over Solo and in an almost infinite number of sites on the web. But, speaking only for myself, I would feel about Raimondo pretty much as I do even if we were not opposed in our political philosophy. I have a particular loathing for viciousness and malice, they truly sicken me, and he is a master of both.

I just this second recalled something. When I wrote "sicken me" the words took me back to another time I had felt sickened. I said I had received very few nasty letters over the years. I now remember that one of them was from Raimondo, just after the film of The Passion of Ayn Rand ran on Showtime. It was, I believe, a one sentence email; it accused me of being a pornographer.

In any event, let me make up for my error about you by welcoming you to Solo.

Barbara




Post 53

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 4:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Barbara,

Per your request, I'll go through some of Schwartz's other material and post links as soon as I have time (probably overnight, US time).

You wrote:

"In any event, let me make up for my error about you by welcoming you to Solo."

Don't be so quick to assume you were in error about me -- time will tell, and I'll be interested in your judgment. One of the high points in my career as a writer, such as it is, was receiving a complimentary note from you concerning one of my articles a few years ago. Thank you for the sentiments, though ... I do try to follow what's happening at Solo, but have never made participation a habit. That may change.

Where Raimondo is concerned, I regard much (but not all) of his writing as on target, and many of those for whom he displays scorn as worthy of said scorn ... but not all of them by any means either. I certainly didn't find _The Passion of Ayn Rand_ -- in either book or film form -- to be "pornographic," for example. Quite the opposite.

Regards,
Tom Knapp

Post 54

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 5:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Tom: "Don't be so quick to assume you were in error about me".

I was in error in thinking you were here to defend Raimondo. I haven't attempted to make an estimate of your character -- which I tend to be careful about doing and slow to do without a great deal of evidence.

Barbara

Post 55

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 7:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Trying to catch up on this thread is quite an experience. I can't remember who is saying what! However, one thing is perfectly clear. Paul Malloy refers to John Hospers as senile. I have had several meetings and conversations with John over the last year. John is physically slowed by age, it is true. So am I, a little. But his mind is as sharp as ever. There can only be one reason that Mr Malloy would call him senile. He is a snake. I hope he finds a rock to crawl under gets out of the sunshine soon.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 56

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 7:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Well, I guess I should check in about now and say that I too am not here principally to defend Justin Raimondo.  I started visiting SOLO on a daily basis some months back after friends alerted me to several threads on the site that they believed (correctly) I would find interesting.  Mostly I've been lurking since then.

I must say, however, that as I read the vitriolic denunciations of Justin on this site, I do wonder whether any of you actually know the man.  I've known him for nearly thirty years, and while I'll admit that his personal (and literary) style is often somewhat over the top, and while I'll admit that I've seen him behave badly in public a time or two -- in ways that would make a bad first impression on anyone meeting him for the first time -- I do not recognize him in the posts I read on this site.  The Justin Raimondo I know is -- believe it or not -- an exceptionally kind person.  He's all bark and no bite.  If he regards you as a friend he will go far out of his way to assist you.  If he doesn't know you, he will treat you with courtesy and respect until you insult or otherwise abuse him.  Anita Anderson, who ran Laissez Faire Books in San Francisco for many years and worked closely with Justin during that time, once told me that "Justin has a good heart," and that "he wouldn't hurt a fly."  And she was right.  He is neither vicious nor malicious.  If anyone would care to read his reply to Stephen Schwartz's scurrilous (and ludicrous) article, look here:

http://antiwar.com/justin/


Post 57

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 9:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have been reading through and skimming a lot of the back stories, commentaries, op-eds, etc on here and a lot of them don't seem to have much Sense of Life -- more like Sense of Attack Objectivists -- I'm not saying its inappropriate but it seems inappropriate for a website called "Sense of Life" which to me implies celebrating the great things and people in life, not Justin Raimondo or ISIL. BB gets one piece of hate mail in defense of Raimondo and it gets 56 responses? I'd like to know the ratio of hate mail BB has received from other Objectivists over the years versus Rothbardians or people defeding antiwar.com or whatever...

I know I know I'm free to submit articles to SoloHQ -- just an observation, new people to the site (like me) might see 'Sense of Life Objectivists' and go 'great, Objectivists being mainly positive for a change rather than stick in the muds' then see all these negative and attacking articles...

Post 58

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 9:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jeff Riggenbach,

Your words:

"Anita Anderson, who ran Laissez Faire Books in San Francisco for many years and worked closely with Justin during that time, once told me that "Justin has a good heart," and that "he wouldn't hurt a fly." And she was right. He is neither vicious nor malicious."

Working with someone is not the same as having a discussion where there is disagreement.

You said:

"I do wonder whether any of you actually know the man."

The thread that got Justin Raimondo banned from solo is here:

http://www.solohq.com/Forum/NewsDiscussions/0538.shtml

Mostly insults. What's there to like? I don't think Justin deals with his world view being challenged very well. Compare his rantings to reality. The opinions of the principles here at solo on the Iraq war and the middle east have a much higher likelyhood of a positive outcome that the pipe dreams of Justin Raimondo.

Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 59

Friday, March 18, 2005 - 10:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Anita had plenty of discussions with Justin, Mike, and plenty of disagreements.  Work closely with someone like Justin, who has strong opinions on many subjects, and you will have both discussions and disagreements.  Working closely with someone like Justin is not like working with some sycophant or toady who never disagrees with anything the "boss" says.

I followed the thread that got Justin banned from SOLO as it was unfolding.  He was perfectly respectful and courteous until the denizens of SOLO began firing their uninformed insults at him, at which time he retaliated.

As to your claim that "[t]he opinions of the principles [sic] here at solo on the Iraq war and the middle east have a much higher likelyhood [sic] of a positive outcome that [sic] the pipe dreams of Justin Raimondo," . . . well, I'm afraid I regard the majority opinion of the Iraq war and the Mideast here on SOLO as delusional, so I don't find your semi-literate assertion very convincing.


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.