Overton&#39;s Baseball

Ah, you don't have the whole context, apotheon. His comment is a bit of needling among friends.

candid, with rare exceptions, has historically cast a very jaundiced, bloodshot eye upon altruistic justifications of the state. I would recommend him as part of anyone's life, especially if you enjoy dead baby jokes.

From:

apotheon.livejournal.com

Well, I'm a sucker for dead baby jokes, so I'll probably not argue with you on that one. I still calls 'em as I sees 'em in a public venue, though.

From:

perich.livejournal.com

Sorry, Joel; you're just as much at fault as that boob. You violated the First Law: never get in an argument on LiveJournal.

From:

I spent my entire lunch hour feeling retarded.

From:

apotheon.livejournal.com

My apologies if I contributed to that. I meant my comments to be more playful than they appear to be in retrospect.

In my own defense, however, I'm more of an insensate jackass than a "boob".

From:

"One line" = "One sentence."

Wrong. A sentence can go on for more than one line. And a line can have more than one sentence in it.

Thanks for the intelligent debate!

No thanks for trolling and making no attempt at such.

From:

Jesus fuck, are you people all retarded?

Have you ever heard of a one liner?

Do you think that the term can only refer to the formatting of the text?

Do you really have nothing better to do than to argue over whether I used a word correctly? (Hint: I did.)

From:

Do you think that the term can only refer to the formatting of the text?

No, the term can have more than one definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=line&r=67), which means that such a statement of universal equality ("'One line' = 'One sentence'") is false.

Do you really have nothing better to do than to argue over whether I used a word correctly? (Hint: I did.)

Do you? You've got as many posts discussing terminology on this thread as I do. But you're right, this has gotten dull pretty quickly, so feel free to get the last word. My apologies for dragging this out.

From:

Yes. No layabouts allowed. If he wants to eat, he better work, dammit.

From:

My baby makes wallets with fake "Gucci" logos.

From:

IP theif!

From:

I mean, thief. Man, no more coke before noon for me.

From:

I think it was the coke before noon that made me attempt to have some fun in your comments section. Sorry for the mess.

From:

My apologies as well. I jumped at you without doing much thinking. I hate these type of threads, so I'm sorry for helping to turn this into one.

From:

herbaliser.livejournal.com

Well, yeah.

From:

apotheon.livejournal.com

Hmm. Upon rereading this discussion roughly twenty-four hours later, I think "Try not to be ignorant" may not have been the ideal means of bringing focus to what I meant by my pseudo-satirical misquote. It was unnecessarily confrontational.

From:

bhv.livejournal.com

Candid I want to as politely as possible question your premise. Your response implies that people who are free to choose will choose to let their babies starve, while a statist violence based system like the average department of children and family services will be better for children.

You are right in thinking that one will probably be better than the other, do you have any evidence that might persuade me that the a DCFS system enforced with the guns of the state does less damage to children and families than private voluntary programs like Mooseheart?

From:

Brent, it's no use.

candid forces his own babies to make fake "Gucci" handbags. Appealing to

candid's kindness is like appealing to the Pope for a box of condoms.

That said, Mooseheart sounds like a neat organization. Too bad that the fraternal orders appear to be in decline.

From:

You're putting an awful lot of words in my mouth.

I don't think I implied anything about what people will choose. And I certainly didn't imply anything about one system being "better for children" than another.

All I said is that people who are free to choose are free to choose to let their babies starve. Because if they're not, then it's not really "to each as they are chosen," is it?

From:

spacenymph.livejournal.com

I like that MUCH better than:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

From:

faustin.livejournal.com

I like that MUCH better than:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which was the previous libertarian motto, right?

From:

joe-tofu.livejournal.com

it's something the bad communist guys say in an Ayn Rand book. specifically it was the philosophy of the hippie managers of that factory where John Galt invented his motor. i guess i don't really see the point in basing an entire real world political movement on the opposing of fictional hippies.

From:

Fictional hippies? If only that were true.

From:

faustin.livejournal.com

1. I was making a joke based on a possible (perhaps, even a probable) misinterpretation of his words. I had taken it for granted that everyone knew "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was a direct quote from Karl Marx, and probably the most familiar and oft-repeated quote. It's regarded as "the justice principle," the "distribution principle" of socialism /communisim; it's called "the communist ideal," etc.

2. I apologize for the subtle logic and presumption of literacy. As long as you keep your awareness virginal, all the relevant insight in the world will seem fictional to you. If you wanna know how to oppose Objectivism, I can give you some advice. The way you're going now, you need it.

From: