Rand and "Black Hate Radio"

Lesbians, Michael, lesbians.

Post 141

Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 10:07pm

Chris Cathcart, obviously you are not a fan of Star. I'm not sure how much experience you have of his show or his ideas. I've never heard him before, so I don't have much to say.

Dean, I think I was quite clear in why I'm not a fan, plain and simple. It has to do with truth in advertising. You don't go about adopting a label "Hate" and proclaim that it has something to do with Ayn Rand. No one who respects Rand would do something that vicious.

It's also telling in its own right that someone peddles some allegedly defensible ideas under the label "Hate". Hate is not a value. Hate is not a positive. Hate is the antithesis of values. Someone who goes about trying to promote positive values and yet touting them under the banner of "Hate" is, if we were to put it in most charitable terms, clueless about how to promote a positive message. We don't need to let him tie the name of Ayn Rand into this crap in the process.

The latest scandal surrounding his pitiful attempt at being a radio entertainer only further illustrates that he doesn't know how to communicate objectively or exercise good judgment. Above all, he can't be trusted to be any kind of reliable spokesperson for Objectivist ideas. We should not welcome this guy's crap into the arena of the promotion of Objectivism.

Post 142

Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 10:17pm

Stern is not for everyone, but he is a smart guy...reminds me of Gene Simmons in a lot of ways, a marketing genius.

Post 143

Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - 10:37pm

Very astute observation there, Jody.

As Howard said on The O'Reilly Factor:

"Bill, there will always be lesbians on this show. I make this vow to you. As long as I'm breathing, there will be lesbians. I will give the people lesbians, because there is nothing sexier in this world, besides you, there is nothing sexier than two women getting it on."

(I realize of course that Howard was speaking off the cuff and inexactly. It's two beautiful women getting it on.)

It's not hard to see how Howard is a first-rate achiever of values. He's the top guy in media because he knows how to entertain. He's scrupulously honest in his business dealings. His uncensored show on Sirius is such unbelievably good entertainment (it's R-rated, but so are some comedy masterpieces like The Big Lebowski). You would have to have heard the way they played on "Crazy Alice" today to get just a small taste. It's got his whole industry in a tizzy trying to figure out how to keep up. And then you have lamewad pretenders and imitators who go out of their way to "shock" without having a clue as to what makes for success in so-called "shock" radio. And Howard isn't even "shock" radio, unless quality R-rated comedy counts as "shock" comedy. His aim was never to shock, but to have fun.

But these pretenders, like Opie and Anthony, and pseudo-friend of Objectivism DJ Star, they pull these outrageous stunts in an attempt to be funny and shocking, and they only fuck up their own careers big-time in the process. It's such poor judgment, the kind of stuff that Stern wouldn't even contemplate doing. If O&A's sex-in-the-Catholic-Church stunt didn't tell you all that you needed to know about them, you might try even listening, if you can bear it. There's a reason Howard is getting upwards of 2 million or more listeners willing to pay $13 a month, and who'd be happier doing that than listen to O&A for free (which has even now happened with a deal bringing O&A back to boring old-fashioned testicle radio). Even the lesbians and strippers O&A bring in can't make their show entertaining. And pseudo-friend of Objectivism DJ Star has now proven himself to be such a bad risk that his career looks all but over.

Post 144

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 4:41am

Chris -

Troi, aka "Star the Hater," expressed resentment at the press's comparison between himself and Stern. He didn't make the comparison, the press did that.

Post 145

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 4:53am

Hey Jody,

Some months ago there was a hot debate here about what is an objectivist hero/ine�whether a genius creator qualified in absence of danger to themselves or others; even whether living an exalted life qualified. There was some interesting clashes but no consensus...but if I recall no one brought les-voyeurism into the mix. Perhaps with the influx of new blood we should go with the flow and move away from such concepts as the individual who stands up against Chinese tanks or the lone creator who catapults discoveries onto the next level and replace that with men who give wanking a good name?

Michael

Post 146

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 6:18am

Stars actions on the radio that led to him being fired and arrested are being lumped into who he is, and what he believes. I heard the show in question, and knew of the threats and several days worth of baiting, that were levelled against him by DJ Envy (how appropriatee is that name!). He was simply calling the weasel out. The weasels response? None.
It is a radio show folks, with a culture all its own. Think of it as a rap battle, or an episode of Yo Momma.

Radio needs him more than he needs radio. He is a money making machine for them.

Don't fool yourselves for one minute that the execs and suits do not delight in the spectacle of two men duelling on the airwaves. Its all about the money, and that is rolling in.

As for this site disavowing Star - since when did we become part of the Wad? For that matter, he does not need this site and I suspect appears only because he is bored, or amused.

John

Post 147

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 8:04am

(Edited by Ciro D'Agostino on 5/18, 5:28pm)

Post 148

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 8:10am

.... Perhaps with the influx of new blood we should go with the flow and move away from such concepts as the individual who stands up against Chinese tanks or the lone creator who catapults discoveries onto the next level and replace that with men who give wanking a good name?

If your aim was a wider audience, this should be a formula for success. :-)

Post 149

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 8:24am

Michael N. It is already too late. Pop culture is beyond repair. The best we can hope for are *sub-cultures* of creators, producers, traders, and of course, artists :)

Post 150

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 11:28am

Michael Newberry...if I get your drift, I'm with you.

Mygod, folks, when I think of Objectivism, I think of it embodied by the kinds of characters Rand celebrated in her novels. But from Francisco...to Star? From Rearden...to Stern?

If such are to become the new role models for Objectivists, please stop the movement: I want to get off.

Post 151

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 11:45am

Somebody definitely stop the train...unless I'm mistaken I don't think anyone was holding Stern up to Rearden, or for that matter likening him to an individual who stands in front of a tank. We were speaking in the context of 'shock-jocks' after Star compared himself to Stern, and talking about what he has achieved in that area. And he has given the FCC some good fights, something to be commended. So everyone just back away slowly from the Objectivist Kool-Aid. Though I know of no way to quantify heroism, especially as an abstraction, I would not equate Stern with Rearden. I'll be sure and not mention that Nolan Ryan was one of my 'heroes', lest I be brought to tribunal and grilled about how the achievement of a fastball could be compared with Galt's speech. Take some deep platonic breaths people, your archetypes are still safe.

Post 152

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 1:06pm

hahahahaha, Robert, you got me right!

Jody!

What has happened to your mind? Have you been hanging out too long where sloppy epistemology and poor judgement are the norm? Ugh? You know the feeling of warm fuzzy rude irrelevant and superficial values...something like a Friends sitcom. Man I couldn�t smack your head hard enough!!! Double check post #138

Hahahha, gosh, there is a reason why I am no fucking crybaby and why when I make great friends I keep them. Its called giving meaning to value and exceptional people. And silly irrelevant shit has its place but I really like people with perspective...and people who ain�t got that are a waste of time.

Michael

(Edited by Newberry on 5/18, 1:51pm)

Post 153

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 9:55pm

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 10:25pm

Howard is certainly about the lesbians, though in connection with this, he is certainly about first-rate entertainment. His comedic talents are top-notch. As far as Howard the man, well, I see him in terms of the courage that he had to chart his own new way amid a sea of mediocrity. The integrity and work ethic he brings to his endeavor is unsurpassed.

Post 155

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 11:03pm

Help! help! Michael is resorting to physical force ;)

Howard Stern the radio personae is what he is, but Howard Stern the individual has accomplished some things, and whether you like him or not, he would tell you you are free to change the channel. As a matter of fact, he has fought for this idea and I admire him for that. And Howard Stern the business man certainly has perspective.

Anyone willing to help will be of no help at all!

Changing the channel has never been a problem...

"...accomplished things..." go on, I really don�t know anything about him, so give me some facts...or would you rather I base my opinion on your opinion?

He fought for the idea that I can change channels? I think you mean something along the lines of free speech? No?

Ah, business, great point. Is business about making money as the standard? Or is it about increasing the value of the business? I have a few friends and collectors, some make huge sums of money, but they are primarily driven by value...on the other hand I have no friends that are into primarily making money...and I will be absolutely delighted to never have them.

Michael

Post 156

Thursday, May 18, 2006 - 11:26pm

Michael Newberry has stepped in the ring and he is s-w-i-n-g-i-n-g (no, no pun there). EVERYBODY (for pride's sake) duck!

Impressed,

Ed

Post 157

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 6:25am

Robert said:

From Rearden...to Stern?

Jody agreed:

Though I know of no way to quantify heroism, especially as an abstraction, I would not equate Stern with Rearden.

I agree also. I knew Hank Rearden. Hank Rearden was a friend of mine. Stern is no Hank Rearden. : )
Actually, I'd compare Stern to Gail Wynand. He panders to the public.
Thanks,
Glenn

Post 158

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 7:06am

Actually, I'd compare Stern to Gail Wynand. He panders to the public.

Except that he's miserable having to do a show like that. He's content only with doing his own show, his way.

The real point is that Howard is hugely successful, immensely talented, doing what he does his own way.

No one said that you have to like what he does -- though what's there not to like about lezbos?

Post 159

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 9:42am