Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Zoso

Most despicable people in the United States today

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I'm curious as to how you discovered Ayn Rand by watching his show. The reason I like O'Reilly and not Hannity is that Hannity is just a mouth-piece for the Republican party. He is extremely biased and never deviates from the party platform. He defends anything and everything that is ever done by a Republican. Alan Colmes, in all fairness, criticizes members of his own party and isn't afraid to say when a Republican is right. Sean Hannity never criticizes Republicans and never admits when a Democrat does something right. Bill O'Reilly is fair to both sides. He's certainly conservative, but he isn't afraid to criticize conservatives when he disagrees with them. He also voices agreement for people that he normally hates. For example, I've seen him agree with the ACLU and actually praise them. If you watch his show, you would understand why that's a big deal...he hates the ACLU with a passion, but he still stands up for them if he thinks they're right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what there is to like about O'Reilly. He's a religious fanatic, a socialist, and an overall authoritarian. The liberals at least present a semblance of social tolerance.

Every now and then he takes a stand against idiocy – but there is so much idoicy going around that one only gets so much credit for rejecting a fragment while embracing the bulk of it.

Edited by GreedyCapitalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm curious as to how you discovered Ayn Rand by watching his show.

Not from his TV show, from his radio show, he was talking about school vouchers. I didn't know what a school voucher was so I searched the internet for information about them. In my search, I stumbled upon capmag.com. The columns on there blew my mind and the rest is history ;).

I agree with you whole-heartedly about Hannity being a republican party lap-dog, but the same could be said for pretty much every conservative on AM radio or on Fox News. You have to take them all with a grain of salt, or perhaps an entire shaker of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see what there is to like about O'Reilly.  He's a religious fanatic, a socialist, and an overall authoritarian.  The liberals at least present a semblance of social tolerance.

Every now and then he takes a stand against idiocy – but there is so much idoicy going around that one only gets so much credit for rejecting a fragment while embracing the bulk of it.

I'll give the the religious fanatic part, but that's not different than any other conservative. I'm curious as to why you think he's a socialist, though. Everytime I hear him talk about the economy, he always comes down on the side of the free market.

And the main reason I like him is because I think he's a good host.

Edited by Moose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll give the the religious fanatic part, but that's not different than any other conservative.  I'm curious as to why you think he's a socialist, though.  Everytime I hear him talk about the economy, he always comes down on the side of the free market.

And the main reason I like him is because I think he's a good host.

Actually Bill O'Reilly has the typical Catholic view of Christian socialism on many economic and social issues. I know that he thinks it is a government responsibility to promote social justice and so-called 'fairness' as it relates to public school students and club/off campus/extra-curricular issues. I well remember Neal Boortz showing up on Bill's show and calling him on the 'hubcap' comments. LOL I have never seen anyone do to O' Reilly what Neal did to him. The only thing O'Reilly could come up with as a rejoinder was - "You are a viscious son of a bitch". Anybody remember that one? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, but I wish I had because I like Neal Boortz.  He calls himself a Libertarian, but he doesn't seem like one to me.

He's a registered member of the LP. Believes inherently in the abolition of the War on Drugs. Also, he is minarchist in his views on just how much scope government should have. Other than the Iraq war and his view on what the NAP says, he pretty much is libertarian on all the party planks. BTW, I am also a registered member of the LP, and as such I have taken my share of criticism here, but I am one of the few that doesn't believe that Objectivism and the LP are diametrically opposed. (I thought I'd be honest and upfront with that, but I have no desire to discuss my stances as this is not the thread to do so.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Boortz had a falling out with the Libertarian party, I am not positive but I heard him mention something about not willing to toe the line of any group's opinion. That was about 2 weeks ago.

I think Boortz now catagorizes himself as a "Republitarian" in the same vein as Larry Eldar. I see Mr Eldar's Op-Eds on Capmag.com and have read his book, and think very highly of the sage from south central.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see Mr Eldar's Op-Eds on Capmag.com and have read his book, and think very highly of the sage from south central.

Did you see he has his own daytime talk show now? I noticed it when I was flipping through channels the other day, I was shocked. I didn't watch it though, so I can't say anything about the content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Add

- Rudy Guliani

- Spitzer

I agree with your choice of Elliot Spitzer, that self-proclaimed Big Business killer.

I strongly disagree with your choice of Giuliani, who provided principled leadership in New York City during 9-11, and also, as mayor, was responsible for spearheading the fight against "quality of life" crimes on the streets of New York City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see what there is to like about O'Reilly.  He's a religious fanatic, a socialist, and an overall authoritarian.  The liberals at least present a semblance of social tolerance.

Every now and then he takes a stand against idiocy – but there is so much idoicy going around that one only gets so much credit for rejecting a fragment while embracing the bulk of it.

I don't either.

But I'm not sure that "socialist" is the best term to describe him.

The term I like to use, "faith-based conservative" fits O'Reilly like a glove. He's a loud-mouthed authoritarian who likes to out-shout his guests and is a rude, aggressive host.

Yes, I consider O'Reilly despicable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reason I like Boortz is because he isn't a hippie like the rest of his Libertarian pals.

Can I add a "me too" here? I like him also, and one reason is that he won't hesitate to disagree with the liberarian official doctrine on occasion. (I am sorry for not remembering the specific issue).

I don't get the chance to listen to him often enough, but when I do it is a pleasure to listen to his ruthless logic and adherence to principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with your choice of Elliot Spitzer, that self-proclaimed Big Business killer.

I strongly disagree with your choice of Giuliani, who provided principled leadership in New York City during 9-11, and also, as mayor, was responsible for spearheading the fight against "quality of life" crimes on the streets of New York City.

Yeah, I guess New York politicians have the "right" to shut down porn shops and theaters. "Quality of life" supercedes property rights, hmm? My "right" to have nothing in my vision that offends me supercedes your right to develop your plot of land as you wish.

Yeah, some vision of Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal.

[Edit: Quoted passage removed until poster PMs me his source in order to give proper citation to the author(s) of the passage. --Felipe]

Edited by Felipe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah,  I guess New York politicians have the "right" to shut down porn shops and theaters.  "Quality of life" supercedes property rights, hmm?  My "right" to have nothing in my vision that offends me supercedes your right to develop your plot of land as you wish.

Yeah, some vision of Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal. 

Giuliani removed the homeless from the streets of New York, and removed the panhandlers from the subway stations and other such public venues. Panhandlers and homeless are nuisances in that they think nothing of imposing upon you for what they need.

That's a tribute to his respect for individual rights. That contributes mightily to quality of life.

Whatever happened to the porn shops and the triple-x theaters was borne of the rules imposed upon them through the Board of Estimate (I believe that's NYC's answer to local zoning boards, in this instance). So the machinery to deal with this issue was in place, Giuliani or no Giuliani. So while I don't disagree with your argument about politicians shutting down porn shops, I disagree with your attitude regarding Giuliani being solely responsible for this.

Regarding your link to an unknown source (which you should righteously credit the author) about Giuliani and his prosecution of tax evaders and the "rich", it's a good way to smear a personality with some virtues, now, isn't it? I mean, did Giuliani, as a prosecutor, not also put away some notorious organized crime figures? You seem to want to make this vision of Giuliani as lop-sided as possible.

I grant you, Giuliani's record as a defender of capitalism isn't perfect. But if you are looking for the consummate politician who is perfect defending individual rights, you are not going to find him.

Anyhow, my disagreement with the poster regarding Giuliani as "despicable" still stands.

Edited by Yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every cloud has a silver lining. Knowing that Giuliani had panhandlers arrested makes his crack down of insider traders, tax evaders and porn dealers a lot easier to accept.

When it comes to defending individual rights, Giuliani is great -- except when he is terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with your choice of Elliot Spitzer, that self-proclaimed Big Business killer.I strongly disagree with your choice of Giuliani, who provided principled leadership in New York City during 9-11, and also, as mayor, was responsible for spearheading the fight against "quality of life" crimes on the streets of New York City.

Guliani was the prosecuting attorney in the case against Michael Milken, and used the threat of RICO in that instance. SRB (now Ayn Rand Bookstore) used to sell a book about the case, but I forget the title. ARB still sells a lecture by Dr. Locke about the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The recently deceased Johnnie Cochran certainly would be near the top of my list. A disgusting man who perpetuated race hatred in order to free a savage murderer.

Quite an interesting list of celebrities who showed up at his funeral...

Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Charlie Rangel, and of course O.J. Simpson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to add:

Bill Frist

Tom Delay

Ann Coulter

and all those lovely mouthpieces of the "science" of Intelligent Design

In addition to some of my other beefs against them, all of these people are PROFOUNDLY anti-reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is that Hannity never talks about anything except religious stuff.

Really? I disagree. After 9/11, when I first became more politically minded, my earliest exposure was to Sean Hannity. Prior to learning from Hannity, I was indoctrinated with the values of my liberal teachers: FDR saved the failure capitalism with big government; Republicans and non-liberals are all racist, poor-hating oppressive basatards; individual liberty couldn't exist without big government to protect you. I outwardly accepted this, considering myself a Democrat and never once planned to vote Republican once I came of age. However, in my gut (I guess it would be my sense of life) told me that Jefferson's small government was right, Reagan's belief in lowering taxes was positive, a strong military was necessary and government should be small.

From Hannity I got the message of limited government, individual liberty and value of unregulated capitalism. This allowed me to break out of the indoctrination of my teachers and, eventually, led me to Ayn Rand. Does he talk about religion sometimes? Yes, but so did George Washington -- did that make him a bad man? No, it didn't. Hannity is a very important voice to counter liberalism, even if we don't agree with him 100% of the time.

Edited by Captain Nate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it didn't. Hannity is a very important voice to counter liberalism, even if we don't agree with him 100% of the time.

We aren't seeking to counter liberalism: Objectivists seek to counter irrationalism, altruism, and collectivism, ideas embraced by liberals and conservatives alike. If you think that Sean Hannity is anything but pure poison, I suggest you read Ayn Rand's speech, "The Age of Mediocrity."

Don Watkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...