Michael Stuart Kelly

Root Admin
  • Content count

    27,605
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Michael Stuart Kelly

  • Rank
    $$$$$$
  • Birthday 06/09/1952

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Michael Stuart Kelly
  • Articles
    Initial Understanding of Islam on Fundamental Intellectual Issues Thoughts on the 12 Steps and Self-Forgiveness Why the Tolerance and Support? Atlantis in the Wilderness A Hunting Story Moral Perfection Like a Lamb to the Slaughter Letter to Madalena ... An Homage to the Value of Valuing Going Home... A Few Thoughts on Family Values Where Principles and Rights Break Down The Stigma of Addiction Book Review on an Addiction Fraud - A Million Little Pieces Charmed on a Raw Night The Nature of Private Written Correspondence – The Sciabarra Smear Online Objectivist Mediocrity The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 2 - Moral Ambivalence The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 3 - Brotherhood of Hate The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 4 - Rand's True Value The Virtue of Silliness (w/Kat)
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

60,717 profile views
  1. Has anybody noticed that this thread is called "Trump Humor"? Michael
  2. Although this meme is not about SJW peak identity nor gender identity, it does show the core of how SJW's identify themselves. Michael
  3. Here's a thought I want to share about President Trump and my support for him. There's an OL member who no longer posts here (Mike Renzulli), but we are Facebook friends--united in our support of Trump, of all things. His understanding of Objectivism leans toward the ortho view and the free-thinking about Rand that goes on here, presumably, makes him uncomfortable. So he simply doesn't show up. That's fine with me, though. What's good for him is good for me and good for OL. We generally avoid discussing this and stick to Trump-related things. Most recently, he expressed doubts about the president's tax plan. As I understand it, his objection was that the tax plan was not ideological enough and so close to Reagan's, it could cause some of the same long-term consequences in giving even more power to Congress to do crony bargaining backstage ("hand out favors" is the way he put it). I wrote the following, he liked it and, apparently, his doubts ended. I especially want to mention this, though, because of the critics who say I worship Donald Trump. Hell, one guy (one I like a lot) came out--in another place at another time--and said he refused to post on OL anymore because I worship Trump--and this because I consider him to be like a Randian hero from one angle. Good Lord! I ask you, the reader, isn't this the same kind of boneheaded thinking fanatics always do? Hate to the point of distorting what their own eyes see and read? I was surprised hearing it from this guy (who I prefer not to name as I believe this was a lapse). Anyway, here's what I wrote about the tax plan doubt: This is thinking in stages and in reality, not in all-or-nothing mental visions that ideologues always do. In fact, this is exactly the way President Trump gets things done--in stages. For people like the critics who might not be familiar with the term, it's called a business plan with a timeline. For those who stuck it out here on OL, don't think you didn't make a difference. You did. OL's influence in this election was small (tiny ), but it was real. Each of us played a part in getting President Trump elected, not as characters in a play in the theater of our minds or just on some online forum, but out there in reality. We helped change the world. You were part of that, so was I, and it is damn important. Behold the results. They unfold before our eyes every day all around us--out there in reality. Be proud. That's worth a lot and nobody can take it from you. Michael
  4. Heh: Michael
  5. I received this offline. I didn't have time to mess with it, but now I do. It worked out OK that I delayed, but oddly enough, now that NAFTA will be renegotiated at the request of the leaders of Mexico and Canada, the cartoon kinda lost its edge. What's missing, I wonder? Michael
  6. Mark, I've found this to be a generalized habit in O-Land. It's easier to deduce reality from a principle (whether the principle is correct or incorrect) than it is to look at reality--actually observe--and derive principles from it. I've seen too many people in O-Land who think Rand did all the deriving of fundamental principles that anyone could ever need. In my view, Peikoff's DIM Hypothesis suffers from precisely this problem. He derives reality from it, that is, he derives what reality should be according to his system of sorting so he can keep keep and ignore the different aspects reality he looks at. Then he can make a judgment and feel correct. The problem is, ignored reality might go away in one's mind, but it doesn't go away in reality. Other people see it. Michael
  7. Now we move into high-end scientific SJW gender culture with Bill Nye doing "My Sex Junk" with someone named Rachel Bloom. You know it's bad when the most interesting thing up there is the weirdness of DJ Sea Horse (at the end). And just to make sure you realize that all this is scientific, Nye says so--and he says that three year olds choose their gender identities and it's so exciting to him. I stand in awe at the sheer awfulness of it all. If I wanted to make an imaginary scene out of the book Rand invented in Atlas Shrugged, "Why Do You Think You Think?", nothing I could come up with would hold a candle to this. What's worse, they all seem like they're gathering material for a sequel based on performing arts instead of epistemology, "Who Needs Talent?" Michael
  8. Then there's this across the pond: Michael
  9. Here is the video in this series immediately preceding. This one is not funny unless you like laughing at morons who live and breathe victimization so much, who virtue signal to their collective of peers so much, they no longer distinguish between imagination and reality. The teacher Saad cites is one such moron--and one, I suspect, is hamboning it up, too. Michael
  10. Peak Identity (SJW) You just have to see this to believe what our educational system is doing to young minds. This video is by a marketing professor at Concordia University In Montreal, Gad Saad. He numbers and names a YouTube series of videos as "The Saad Truth." Saad said what he found is not satire. People are actually doing this. My favorite part, though, is not from current professors. It's Saad's introduction as he's describing the way authors start their blurbs and articles on the Inside Higher Ed site. Taken from the video: But the other stuff is hilarious, too. In fact, you can read the transcript and get links here: Gad Saad: This Is Not Satire, This Is Peak Identity Politics Being Reached. Michael
  11. Just for the record, Kat had me out on the street handing out political propaganda in 2010 when Joel ran against Jan Schakowsky for the House here in our district. (He lost.) I met him and his wife during that time. I doubt he would remember me, though. I was just a volunteer schlub. Kat became a fan of his when he played a song he wrote during a rally. One day this is a chip I intend to cash. Michael
  12. Mr. Chanakya, Welcome to OL. May you find good discussion with good people here. Michael
  13. Brant, Generally? How about a population explosion and doubling life expectancy within a century? There you have collective and individual, so somebody's doing something right among us humans. As to my phrase "destroyers of the earth," this is actually from the Bible and it sounds so Randian I had to use it. In the Randian sense, this would not mean global warming, but instead, killing the human spirit for living well on earth. To be anally exact, it should be something like "destroyers of rational human flourishing and happiness on earth." But "destroyers of the earth" has a dramatic appeal to it the other doesn't. btw - In the Biblical sense, "destroyers of the earth" means those who live by violent conquest and excesses--like, in Revelation, the Seven Headed Beast (Rome) and the Whore of Babylon (insiders in the corrupt system of all persuasions). Apropos of nothing in particular, the Whore of Babylon used to ride the Beast until the Beast stripped her naked, killed her and ate her. Michael
  14. Alex Jones has a different view of O'Reilly, but since there was bad blood between them, it's no wonder. Alex does recognize that this was a political takedown. Michael
  15. There were two threads open with the same title and opening content. (I imagine this was due to a stuck computer or something and a repost to make sure it went up.) One thread had no posts and this one was getting posts. Then, someone finally posted on the other even though the main discussion was here, so I merged that post in this thread and deleted the other thread. It sounds confusing, I know, but imagine if two different conversations among the same people continued on two different threads about the same topic without crossover. Now that would get confusing. It might get fun, but not as a discussion. Just letting people know what happened and why... Michael