Harrison Danneskold

Michael Stuart Kelly: I've reached my daily quota of positive votes, so consider this one EPIC vote for everything on the first page!

Sorry, but I do pick and choose which of Rand's ideas I'll hold, on the basis of logic. Giving her "credit" sounds a lot like an excuse to not think it through, for yourself. And if honesty, both intellectually and vocally, excluded me from being a full-fledged Objectivist then I would blaspheme in a heartbeat. What's the point of accepting individual rights on faith?

I really don't know what you're talking about. In recent months I've spent considerable time at O.O and posted quite a few things which, by all rights, SHOULD have been deleted and weren't. I've been aggressively hostile, hyperbolic, borderline obscene and completely tangential and yet not a single bit of it has been censored! So. . . What in Galt's name were YOU trying to say? As for goose stepping, that's simply false. I've given Rand's ideas the same scrutiny I give to Marx or Kant, explicitly, and others have defended such spectacularly, and I'm not aware of anyone else being censored- so what's this party line and where's the enforcement?