The Dim-Post

June 29, 2011

Wishart over-reaches

Filed under: general news — danylmc @ 4:41 pm

Via Stuff:

The Paper Plus Group issued a press release today saying they won’t stock Breaking Silence: The Kahui Case, which is being written by Ian Wishart in conjunction with King.

A short time ago the Warehouse also announced it would not be stocking the book, while Whitcoulls was planning to make an annoucement tomorrow.

Not all publicity is good publicity.

Ian Wishart is always at the back of my mind – every now and then it occurs to me he’s been ominously quiet, and then he publishes, say, a biography of Helen Clark (definitely a lesbian, according to Wishart. Huge lesbian. Big, big lesbian. There – I’ve just summarised the entire book for you). And I remarked to a friend just the other day that Wishart had been laying low, and now here we are. You can’t say he isn’t industrious. Utterly amoral and a blight on the country, sure – but he works hard.

About these ads

86 Comments »

  1. Ian Wishart is always at the back of my mind

    I always suspected he was satire…

    Comment by James Butler — June 29, 2011 @ 4:43 pm

  2. Does anyone know who started the boycott campaign? It’s certainly received a lot of publicity thereby.

    Comment by T2 — June 29, 2011 @ 4:50 pm

  3. I await with baited breath the cries of “censorship!” and “PC gone mad!” eminating from the comments thread on certain other blogs.

    And by “certain other blogs”, I mean Kiwiblog.

    And by “Kiwiblog”, I mean David Farrar in full “feed the denizens of the sewer” mode.

    Comment by Grassed Up — June 29, 2011 @ 5:15 pm

  4. I’ve no time for the trash Wishart publishes, but it does have a large market.

    I’m more than slightly queasy at book chains acting as censors.

    Wishart’s ghastly book on Clark was a defamatory abomination. But it was displayed in the window at the bookstore in Bowen House and walked out the door. That is how it should be in a free society.

    Comment by johnsonmike — June 29, 2011 @ 5:16 pm

  5. Agree with # 4, show your disdain by not buying it. Or even better illegally downloading it and then deleting it off your computer. We don’t need populist facebook groups stopping book chains from stocking books.

    Comment by nw — June 29, 2011 @ 5:24 pm

  6. T2: Are you thinking that Wishart started that FB group?

    Comment by Ataahua — June 29, 2011 @ 5:32 pm

  7. Agree with #4 and #5. But if the bookstores MUST refuse to stock a book, why couldn’t it have been Wishart’s appaling book on climate change, Air Con?

    Comment by DT — June 29, 2011 @ 5:33 pm

  8. Are you slow Grassed Up? Too much grass maybe

    Kiwiblog here (by Jadis)

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/06/macsyna_king_and_that_book.html

    Wishart is participating…

    Comment by The Double Standard — June 29, 2011 @ 5:36 pm

  9. if the bookstores MUST refuse to stock a book, why couldn’t it have been Wishart’s appaling book on climate change, Air Con?

    There are lots of books I think are a con, including anything from Wishart, some of which I choose to read, (the Clark one, just to affirm my worst suspicions about Wishart) some I don’t (Air Con and his fantasy stuff on creationism).

    People should be free to buy whatever they want. If they don’t want to buy Wishart’s books, good on them.

    I do note that some of his books sell very well. I do also recall him going bust once after he published too many books that did not sell.

    The market should decide, not censors or Facebook groups.

    Comment by johnsonmike — June 29, 2011 @ 5:44 pm

  10. It saddens me deeply that at many Auckland bookstores I’ve been to, Wishart’s pile of shit known as “Air con” is more likely than not to have its own prominent shelf under the little thing that says you’re looking at books on “environment” or ‘climate change.” I loathe the badly ballbag middle-managers who think that it’s a great idea to do that.

    Comment by Hobbes — June 29, 2011 @ 5:47 pm

  11. A retailer choosing not to sell something is part of the free market as well though isn’t it?

    Comment by JB — June 29, 2011 @ 5:47 pm

  12. @4, 5, etc.
    Unless they’re being forced into censorship by the government, aren’t these stores just exercising their own right to not stock an item that they obviously think will have a negative impact on how their customers perceive them?

    I’m a bit uneasy about book chains “acting as censors” as well, but the “we should be free to buy what they want” argument should probably apply to companies that redistribute books, too.

    Comment by kim — June 29, 2011 @ 5:51 pm

  13. A retailer choosing not to sell something is part of the free market as well though isn’t it?

    The Commerce Commission usually takes a dim view of retailers colluding in the marketplace. I wonder what would happen if Wishart lodged a complaint that the major booksellers were colluding not to market his book? At the very least, the response would be interesting.

    It’s hardly as if he’s trying to sell Mein Kamf or the Protocols of Zion (though neither of those are banned in this country, and used to be sold quite openly at an odd little bookshop I once discovered in the Canterbury Arcade building in Auckland).

    Comment by johnsonmike — June 29, 2011 @ 5:52 pm

  14. @#13: I doubt that any one bookseller has a significant degree of market power, so s36 of the Commerce Act wouldn’t apply. Therefore there would need to be a `contract, agreement or understanding’ between the booksellers not to sell it (unlikely). Furthermore, to breach s27, this action would need to `substantialy’ lessen competition in a market, which is pretty unlikely. So no, the Commerce Commission wouldn’t investigate this.

    Comment by DT — June 29, 2011 @ 5:57 pm

  15. Penny Bright supporting Wishart on KB – a sign this is the End Time !

    Comment by Michael S — June 29, 2011 @ 6:00 pm

  16. I doubt that any one bookseller has a significant degree of market power,

    From what I’ve read, Paper Plus and the Warehouse have already decided not to sell it, and Whitcoulls is expected to follow.

    That’s about 90 per cent market power as far as I can judge.

    It would be different if Whitcoulls didn’t join. Let’s see what happens.

    Comment by johnsonmike — June 29, 2011 @ 6:01 pm

  17. Also, if anybody is interested, most university libraries have copies of Absolute Power or whatever it’s called – I flicked through it once, it’s like somebody turned the kiwiblog comments section into a book. A true work of art.

    Comment by Hobbes — June 29, 2011 @ 6:02 pm

  18. There are bloody thousands of books that one can’t buy at paper plus or the warewhare or whitcoulls. Is that collusion? Nope. It’s booksellers making commercial decisions.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — June 29, 2011 @ 6:12 pm

  19. Ian Wishart is always at the back of my mind
    Lesbian IMO

    Comment by garethw — June 29, 2011 @ 6:39 pm

  20. Mr Wisharts only attribute is that he brings the left and right closer together.

    Comment by NZ Groover — June 29, 2011 @ 6:42 pm

  21. It’s booksellers making commercial decisions.
    Commercial in the broadest sense maybe, but not in the narrow sense – I suspect this book would outsell most local tomes they stock. It’s more of a PR decision (which I agree has broader commercial underpinnings)

    Comment by garethw — June 29, 2011 @ 6:49 pm

  22. @Ataahua – not really; the world’s got lots of people in it with too much time on their hands, and the man’s got lawyers on speed dial. But generating faux outrage isn’t unknown in the shady world of marketing, and the sheer amusement value if it were him or a sock puppet would more than justify the effort in finding out.

    Comment by T2 — June 29, 2011 @ 7:05 pm

  23. “I’m a bit uneasy about book chains “acting as censors” as well,”

    Me too. I think this is a wrong decision.

    Comment by K2 — June 29, 2011 @ 7:12 pm

  24. Twenty years ago it might have been de-facto censorship, but now Wishart can just sell his book over the internet.

    Comment by danylmc — June 29, 2011 @ 7:14 pm

  25. Actually, speaking of selling books over the internet, isn’t Whaleoil meant to be publishing some sordid expose of politician’s sex lives? Or did that go the same way as the whole “I’m going to reveal the Labour Party donor list and also break open a culture of corruption in NZ politics?”

    Comment by Hobbes — June 29, 2011 @ 7:24 pm

  26. Wishart self-publishes. Booksellers can make their own minds’ up about whether they stock self-published books (or any books) or not. Arguing they should is like arguing that a publisher should have to publish my own 2000 page magnum opus “Objective Truth: the Universe Told Me So”.

    How’s Infinite Jest going BTW Danyl?

    Comment by Guy Smiley — June 29, 2011 @ 7:36 pm

  27. now Wishart can just sell his book over the internet.

    Ironic then to hear booksellers moan about how many people buy books over the Net.

    The attraction of bookshops to me is to be able to browse and find titles I didn’t know exist, not the “blockbusters” that fill shelves in the Warehouse, Whitcoulls and Paper Plus. Not many independent bookshops left now. Unity Books and not much else.

    Comment by johnsonmike — June 29, 2011 @ 7:37 pm

  28. At least Wishart’s publishing something other than cookbooks…

    Comment by Kate K — June 29, 2011 @ 8:14 pm

  29. Chances are Wishart will have ‘The Clayton Weatherstone Crockpot Cookbook’ in the stores for Christmas . . .

    Comment by danylmc — June 29, 2011 @ 8:20 pm

  30. Wishart publishes and practises investigative journalism for people who believe in astrology. The Clayton Cookbook is too classy for his tastes.

    Comment by Tinakori — June 29, 2011 @ 9:20 pm

  31. Work in an angle about the All Blacks and you have a top seller there Danyl…

    Comment by MeToo — June 29, 2011 @ 9:26 pm

  32. They don’t have to let anyone or anything in their stores that they don’t want to. If they think that stocking a particular product – Wishart’s book, hardcore pornography, violent video games – will affect their sales, then they have every right not to stock something, just like they have every right to bar entry to drunks, homeless people and convicted shoplifters. That’s not censorship – that’s the free market. If they chose to stock an appalling piece of Wishart publicity, it’d be my choice not to shop at those stores. That’s the free market too.

    If you’re whining about Wishart’s book not being sold there, then you should really stand up for Shaving Private Ryan to be sold on the same shelves.

    But there’s a lack of uproar about not being able to get porn in Paper Plus or the Warehouse – largely because complaining about that doesn’t fit a narrow, hypocritical agenda.

    Comment by Dizzy — June 29, 2011 @ 9:31 pm

  33. is helen gay?

    Comment by reginald — June 29, 2011 @ 10:15 pm

  34. Sure Wishart’s a religious nutter but who says he’s wrong all of the time with what he writes? Air Con was very well researched and the evidence is becoming overwhelming that Global warming is bullshit.As for absolute Power….what did he get factually wrong in that?

    Comment by James — June 29, 2011 @ 11:10 pm

  35. is james gay?

    Comment by reginald — June 29, 2011 @ 11:12 pm

  36. No…..why? You hot for me?

    Comment by James — June 29, 2011 @ 11:21 pm

  37. First, a retailer deciding not to stock a book isn’t “banning” anything – so the media really needs to stop throwing around the B-word with such gay abandon.

    That said, and much as I loathe Wishart, I will note that Paper Plus and The Warehouse are quite happy to sell novels containing astoundingly graphic descriptions of child abuse, so-called “true crime” titles speculating about open cases and memoirs of criminals. And they couldn’t book a noxious bigoted turd like Paul Henry fast enough, but I guess that’s what happens when you’ve got a marketing department of a major multinational publisher behind you.

    Comment by Craig Ranapia — June 30, 2011 @ 12:02 am

  38. In before public book burnings and pogroms against stockists of the book.

    @James: you think the same for The Hollow Men? As for Absolute Power, while Helen dissed it, she by and large brushed it off as a joke. IIRC it appeared in bargain bins not long after.

    Comment by DeepRed — June 30, 2011 @ 2:01 am

  39. Seriously though, the point is how far can anti-PC go mad?

    Comment by DeepRed — June 30, 2011 @ 2:18 am

  40. I haven’t read the Hollow Men but I’ve heard a fair bit from good sources so…..?

    As for Absolute Power…. interesting read….does anyone know if Peter Davis is spending much time with Helen in New York?

    Comment by James — June 30, 2011 @ 2:41 am

  41. “…does anyone know if Peter Davis is spending much time with Helen in New York?”

    You care because?

    Comment by Guy Smiley — June 30, 2011 @ 8:12 am

  42. If I remember correctly the entire basis in Absolute Power for Wishart asserting that Peter Davis & Helen Clark are gay is that he rung up the helpline for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and asked the guy at the desk if that was the case. When he didn’t get an answer he decided that there must be a secret coverup at work.

    Comment by Hobbes — June 30, 2011 @ 10:54 am

  43. @ James

    Peter Davis, another notable lesbian, spends a lot of time with Helen Clark in Grenwich Village, where they can indulge their mutual homosexuality with absolute power.

    Apparently.

    Comment by Gregor W — June 30, 2011 @ 11:12 am

  44. helpline for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

    Clearly he doesn’t have the universe’s phone number.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — June 30, 2011 @ 11:18 am

  45. … As for Absolute Power, while Helen dissed it, she by and large brushed it off as a joke. IIRC it appeared in bargain bins not long after.

    Everyone else brushed of Helen’s authorised biography as a joke, too. It also appeared in bargain bins not long after hitting the shelves.

    Comment by Phil — June 30, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

  46. @ James: “Air Con was very well researched and the evidence is becoming overwhelming that Global warming is bullshit.”

    Apparently the reality bestowed upon us by the Universe can be ignored when it doesn’t produce the required outcome … http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_906_en.html

    Comment by Grassed Up — June 30, 2011 @ 1:36 pm

  47. “Not an official record”…..and I could put up stuff showing the exact opposite.

    Comment by James — June 30, 2011 @ 4:42 pm

  48. http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2011/06/wheres-my-global-warming-dude.html

    Where’s the Global Warming upward trend….? Busted.

    Comment by James — June 30, 2011 @ 4:45 pm

  49. Psssss…. James….. I think that they want you over at the No Minister blog. A natural home for your…. insights….. into climate science.

    Comment by DT — June 30, 2011 @ 4:49 pm

  50. Hooray!

    A link-war with James!! Here’s one from a bit later than … 2006: http://thestandard.org.nz/chart-o-the-day-warming-is-over/#comment-344538

    Of course, it is important to note the Universe settles the truth through debates on obscure blogsites. People like “scientists” who form hypothesis and test them against observable data are just out to make a quick buck from research grants … .

    Comment by Grassed Up — June 30, 2011 @ 5:35 pm

  51. Hahaha, oh James, you’re adorable.

    Global Warming? bwahahaha, BUSTED noobs…check out my link to Ian Wishart’s blog!!

    Comment by Hobbes — June 30, 2011 @ 5:40 pm

  52. Wishart’s blog is located in the universe, thus it’s objective truth. Busted and pwned losers! James has a deep understanding of epistemology and ontology. This is why he always wins these exchanges.

    Comment by Guy Smiley — June 30, 2011 @ 7:51 pm

  53. You all find playing with James an exciting part of your productive working day. Anyone a defence force secondee?

    Comment by abel the amish — June 30, 2011 @ 8:11 pm

  54. Has anyone read the book before deciding to stock it or not?

    Booksellers are independent business people.

    This “campaign” amounts to an old fashioned protection racket.

    Personally I have no time for Wishart.

    Neither do I have time for anonymous arrogant bullies threatening anyone, bookseller or not.

    This “campaign” will do exactly nothing to promote our childcare’s welfare.

    It will promote the smug arrogance of a handful of half wits who know how easy it is to manipulate Facebook and its ilk.

    The promoters will feel good.

    Children will keep on dying and being abused.

    What an achievement?

    Comment by peterlepaysan — June 30, 2011 @ 8:30 pm

  55. Yawn…..just put up something that shows s constant linear increase in warming…not sporadic ups and downs.

    Comment by James — June 30, 2011 @ 11:36 pm

  56. PS….Grassed up……….the Standard?!….game over buddy…thanks for playing. he he. ;-)

    Comment by James — June 30, 2011 @ 11:39 pm

  57. constant linear increase

    You specifically used the term “linear”, which suggests that at some level you’re hoping for an exit clause, but complex systems simply don’t work that way – one looks for trends. Surely the universe has told you that? Do you have even the most basic knowledge of the operation of complex systems?

    the Standard?!….

    The Standard is indeed hardly the best secondary source, but you’ve willfully ignored the primary source, which indicates – as usual – your disingenuous and facile approach. If you honestly can’t tell the difference (and that might well be the case, as you’ve never shown any evidence that you aren’t a very naive prepubescent), then I suggest that you’ve not got the direct line to the universe denied to everyone else that you claim to have after all.

    Oh, and to save you the bother, as you’ve already said “yawn”, let’s just add “zzzzzzz”, “pwned” “Nih” and whatever else is going to be a demonstration of your supposed overwhelming intellectual capacity.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 12:32 am

  58. Really, this use of “game over” and “pwned” and “zzzz” shows the most utterly childish level of consciousness. I suppose that James, or “the completely different James” really doesn’t understand objective reality at all, but thinks that associations determine truthiness… genuinely objective facts, such as pi or relativity have nothing to do with his bubble-blowing, hair-twirling obsession with social standing amongst an assumed group of teenaged fashion victims. The only answer to him, ultimately, is time, the years of life experience that he will have in which his fatuous mythology will simply fail to deliver the riches he imagines are due to him.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 12:44 am

  59. Golly…that Rhino fella sure knows some big words yessiree bob! Yuck yuck!

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 1:09 am

  60. Quod erat demonstrandum.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 1:17 am

  61. Most normal folks woulda said QED but not our Rhino…no siree!

    lol

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 1:33 am

  62. Rhino….be honest…you aren’t getting laid much lately huh?…..must be crimping your pipes somewhat hence the childish bile you are offering here. ;-)

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 1:35 am

  63. Hmmm, I have got to you, haven’t I? Pray tell, what is the connection between my sexuality and global warming? Personally, my sexual relationship with my partner is my own business, is quite satisfactory, and is not a matter for your voyeuristic fascination.

    Let us return to the point that you are trying so hard to avoid (thus demonstrating my point that you care more about appearing “cool” than really relying on the “objective” facts that you claim to have exclusive access to).

    What is a nonlinear system?

    What is the difference between a primary and a secondary source?

    If a secondary source refers to a primary source, then the primary source is that which should be addressed, no?

    Why do you avoid doing so?

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 1:49 am

  64. I have never claimed to be “normal”. Should I? Does that matter? Does being “normal” make one right or average, which is by implication less than the best? Are not people who have exclusive access to the thoughts of the anthropomorphosised universe “supernormal”?

    If one is fucked twice a week, is one more or less right than someone fucked thrice a week?

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 1:55 am

  65. Actually, I’ll call this the Theory of Orgasmic Veracity: the more orgasms one has, the more true one’s assertions are and the more irrelevant anyone else’s critiques are. Now, James has to certify that he has had more orgasms than me or any any climate scientist and he will be proven to be objectively correct. The universe will adjudicate over our ejaculations (women play an entirely secondary and contingent role of course).

    Does anyone want to film this?

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 2:27 am

  66. Pray tell, what is the connection between my sexuality and global warming?

    Both are debatable as to whether they actually exist and the facts in regard to both suggest long-term frigidity is extremely likely.

    ;-0

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 2:50 am

  67. For your convenience: QED.

    Now, answer my questions. I’m afraid that the universe is snoozing at the moment.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 2:58 am

  68. Additional: How many orgasms have you had lately, and how intense have they been? According to your own logic, this matters greatly as it directly represents the truthiness of one’s statements. If you have not had long, satisfying orgasms with an appreciative partner, then I’m afraid that I cannot take you seriously on any matter at all.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 3:02 am

  69. Ask ya Mum.She was a mission to satisfy in the shower yesterday morning. lol

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 3:12 am

  70. I repeat, answer my questions. You claim to be an objective person, in direct connection with the true and absolute facts as revealed by the universe.

    I am not being serious (that is obvious), but you take yourself very seriously indeed and denigrate those whom you claim to be unserious. Thus, you must prove that you are serious.

    What does Rand have to say, what does the universe tell you? Answer my questions.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 3:20 am

  71. Yesterday, a unicorn walked through my lounge.

    Actually, it didn’t. There are no unicorns.

    Then the Loch Ness Monster…

    Nope, that doesn’t exist either.

    Then a UFO…

    OK, no, sorry, there wasn’t one.

    Come on, enough of the fantasies – I really don’t want to know about your sexual preoccupations, which we’ve all been learned far too much about lately.

    Answer the questions.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 3:26 am

  72. Come on. I’m waiting. Isn’ t the universe whispering the answers in you ear right now?

    In case you’re wondering why I’m awake so late at night, I have a job because I have to pay my own way in life and sometimes – in fact quite often – that means I have to work into the small hours of the morning, like a lot of people who don’t have their parents paying their way and wiping their worthless arses and I really need the entertainment.

    So tell me, really, for starters, what is a nonlinear system? Make me laugh.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 3:45 am

  73. According to Rand I don’t have to do anything you or anyone else requests of me….so diddums.

    The only thing I MUST do someday is die…..;-)….the Universe gives me no other option that I’m aware of…..bummer eh? lol

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 3:45 am

  74. I’m at work too…so spare me the boo hoo working man BS….join the club buddy.

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 3:47 am

  75. Answer.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 3:54 am

  76. You’ll do and say anything but answer.

    If you aspire to be a sociopath, why must you justify yourself to anyone, why must you praise cactus Kate as altruists when Rand denigrates altruism?

    Why must you live? Why must anyone care about you?

    Answer.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 3:59 am

  77. Erratum: “Cactus Kate and John Key”, who, in your words, only want what is best for New Zealand.

    Why does this matter? Why are they virtuous? Why do such virtues matter? Why are they admirable if they supposedly have such intentions?

    What would Rand say of them?

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 4:07 am

  78. What a busy evening.

    Rhinocrates is perfectly correct in pointing out that James praises Odgers as an altruist. Rand despised self sacrifice as a monstrous evil. Oh dear, the cognitive dissonance! He’ll need to revalidate his concepts and check his premises, or be exposed as an evading second-hander.

    Comment by Guy Smiley — July 1, 2011 @ 8:43 am

  79. Now I want to know if he’s attending a school, polytech or university. If any is the case, he’s receiving good paid for in a majority portion by the taxpayer, in which case he’s a sponging parasite as well as a hypocrite.

    And James, again, what is a nonlinear system, what is a primary source, how many orgasms does one have to experience in order to be right about something?

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 10:25 am

  80. Once again, James is effectively saying “lalalalala, I can’t hear you!”

    Comment by DeepRed — July 1, 2011 @ 10:41 am

  81. Oh, he’s been saying that all along. I’ve just got him to demonstrate that that is the primary mode of his argument, overwhelming even “Vanilla ice cream is superior to penicillin and that is an objective fact, the universe told me so.”

    It’s actually quite comical watching him run all over the rhetorical landscape with such desperation rather than substantiate the most simple argument.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 11:20 am

  82. CK is not an altruist for wanting to become an MP….she can and does have self-interested reason for doing so.She’s not coming home out of a sense of duty or un-chosen obligation so that line of argument is stillborn from the get go…..and the poor grasp of Rand’s philosophy is revealed.

    Comment by James — July 1, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

  83. Yet you praised her such yourself.

    To say that I have a poor grasp of Randian “philosophy” is like saying that I have a poor grasp of vapour.

    Now, are you self-sufficient, do you attend an educational institution where the service you receive is subsidised Do you work in the public sector? Have you ever been to a public hospital?

    When a primary source is cited by a secondary source, should one not look at the primary source rather than denigrating the second? What does “nonlinearity” mean? Is the theory of orgasmic veracity demonstrably true? Why do Helen Clark’s and Peter Davies sexual orientation matter? Why do you have masturbation fantasies about my mother? Is gerontophillia a necessary part of Randroid ideology?

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 1:22 pm

  84. James: “CK is not an altruist for wanting to become an MP….she can and does have self-interested reason for doing so.”

    Of course, when you define “doing what I think is the right thing” as “acting in a way that satisfies my self-interest” then you’ve created a meaningless tautology. CK stays in Hong Kong making lots of money? She’s acting in a rationally self-interested manner. CK returns to NZ to seek public office at a radically reduced salary? She’s acting in a rationally self-interested manner. CK gives all her money to the Ayn Rand Institute before setting herself alight on the steps of Parliament as a protest against Heather Roy? She’s acting in a rationally self-interested manner.

    This is what happens when Rand gets mixed up with the multiverse hypothesis … given the existence of an infinite number of quantum universes, all accounts of CK’s actions are required by “the Universe”. I didn’t know James was so smart!

    Comment by Andrew Geddis — July 1, 2011 @ 1:38 pm

  85. @ Rhinocrates

    Have you considered that James may be the Metatron?
    Even the great randian sky ghostie needs PR.

    It always explains why explanation is negated.

    Comment by Gregor W — July 1, 2011 @ 1:48 pm

  86. @GregorW

    Hmmm…. does he look like Alan Rickman and hang out with Jay and Silent Bob?

    @Andrew Geddis

    You know, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics would explain James’ completely random responses and non-sequiturs.

    We’re all trapped in linear chronological time where classical causality operates, but James simultaneously exists in all quantum states in all universes. Thus, for example, if someone mentions global warming, we receive a message from an alternate James in a parallel universe along the lines of “Helen Clark is a big fat dyke!” where in fact the conversation really was about her sexual orientation.

    That would explain his odd claim a while back that he is a completely different James. That message may have come from a world where Napoleon won the Battle of Waterloo, and considering therefore that his original language would have been French, I should have congratulated him on his English.

    Comment by Rhinocrates — July 1, 2011 @ 1:59 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 413 other followers

%d bloggers like this: