Chris Cathcart

My current Top 25: #1 - 10: Rated 10/10: Barry Lyndon (1975) The Godfather saga (1972-1990) Nostalghia (1983) Suna no onna [Woman in the Dunes] (1964) Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975) Eyes Wide Shut (1999) Vargtimmen [Hour of the Wolf] (1968) The Big Lebowski (1998) Team America: World Police (2004) Persona (1966) #11 - 25: Taxi Driver (1976) The Trial (1962) Rated 9/10: Harold and Maude (1971) Gangs of New York (2002) Paper Moon (1973) Schizopolis (1996) The Shining (1980) Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) Vredens dag [Day of Wrath] (1943) Intolerable Cruelty (2003) Offret [The Sacrifice] (1986) Mulholland Drive (2001) Punch-Drunk Love (2002) Full Metal Jacket (1987) Once Upon a Time in America (1984)

Yes, my posting was in good fun, of course. I was in a particularly geeked-up mode when I did it, too, which helped. It may be in the context of bickering in some cases, yes, but that can be when people say their most lampoonable stuff. In other cases, it can be lampoonable just because. I did address Ed H. directly on the other site about his pretty-rosey outlook on things -- positivity is healthy, though there's context to consider . . .

F. Weiss - No Kelleyite ever managed to fix a light bulb. Damn straight. R. Campbell - Just one. Real Objectivists don't travel in claques. Denounce enough bulb-changers as pseudo-bulb-changers, and the orthodoxy may award you new bulbs, but don't count on it. L. Perigo - Light bulbs over here are just fine; it's the dim bulbs over there who keep stumbling around in the dark. E. Hudgins - Oh, happy happy joy joy, the light bulbs are working so well, things are so bright and all lit up! To celebrate, we're announcing another new name! Wheee! R. Bidinotto - The creeps and guttersnipes obsess every last wa(n)king moment about others' light bulbs, without ever once bothering to lift a finger to change their own. C. Fahey - Have you read PLCC? P. Coates - Here I am, totally cleaning up on the lightbulb-changing debates. I changed your bulbs real good! Now that I've got my points out and they haven't been addressed, I'm the winner! P. Donna - Mmmm, come over here and change my lightbulb, you cutie you! G. Reisman - Light Bulb Changing Requires Capitalism by G. Reisman How many times and in how many ways can it be said: bulb-changing -- indeed, the very existence of bulbs themselves -- depends on capitalism. All bulb-changing policymakers know this. A. Reed - I had observed N. Branden many times playing with a sub-bulb-changer. W. Sherk - El Bolbo Change-O! This way and that! Reee-reee-reee, eh-eh, eh-eh. Whooooaaaannggg!!! R. Bissell - Oopsies, looks like some bulb-change crusaders slipped in their own poodle poop! Looks like Ms. Bulb-Screwer screwed the poodle on that one! Bulb Screwer? More like Boob Screwy, screwin' up again! MS Kelly - I've got a novel argument about bulb screwing, i.e., turn the other bulb. What, what's wrong with it? It makes perfect sense, and it's totally how Rand viewed it, too! What's wrong with you people? C. Sciabarra - Bulb change requires a multi-level, hierarchically-and-horizontally-cross-integrated, mutually-reciprocating, doubly-interpenetrating, synchronic-diachronic-chronic-chronic ontologicalepistemologicalethicalsociopolitical context. Without all that, bulb-change is a one-sided affair -- the changer without bulb, or bulb without changer, neither of which can thereby have identity as what they are. What we need are the prerequisites for total bulb change. C. Cathcart - Who cares about how many Objectivists it takes? More importantly, how many lezbos does it take?

Rich, what you're quoting from are embedded, italicized quotes from Fred Weiss, to which I was responding. This is the original post in question, with my responses in plain, non-italicized text: http://www.solopassion.com/node/979#comment-9183