Red Rover, Red Rover, send Rand Rover over

In a number of threads now, Rand Rover has interrupted a stream of commiseration, pity, compassion, whining, or complaining (take your pick as to the characterization that applies) with a very black-and-white, confident appraisal of the problem being faced.

So far as I’ve been able to observe, his comments are seldom models of compassion or empathy.

In this latest example, a thread about a family evicted from a rental property after the owner lost in in forclosure, he observes:

Now, while it’s true that this comment, and this line of thinking, makes him an asshole, there’s more to it. Thus this Pit thread.

Rand Rover, ol’ chum, it seems to me that if we take this logic you’ve outlined and run with it, there’s really no sense in commiserating over any unfortunate turn of events. Lost your leg when a drunk driver hit you head on? Hey, you knew the risks of driving, and you voluntarily chose to assume them. You could have purchased a Hummvee and gotten extra steel plating installed; perfectly legal, but you chose not to. Wife died of a heart attack? Statistically, it’s a virtual certainty that one spouse will outlive another. You should have known the forseeable risk in getting married was that your wife would die.

Now, I’m not blind to the basic idea you’re pushing, here, which is that when a person suffers injury as a result of their own bad judgment, we tend to leaven our sympathy a bit. If you lost a leg because YOU got drunk and drove head-on into someone, for example, it’s perhaps understandable that the outpouring of sympathy itsn’t as copious as it might be for the first traffic accident scenario.

But however defensible that idea might be in the abstract, you’ve elevated it to an indefensible extreme here. The woman in the rental story was not a victim of particularly poor judgment. She entered into a contract, which the landlord breached – every contract requires good faith, and the landlord owed her a fiduciary duty which he failed to exercise. She acted reasonably, and was hit by a very unfortunate event. This calls for sympathy, and your critique of her is unreasonable.

Nor is this the only example.

I’m all for calling out the people that have indeed been victims of their own stupidity, malfeasance, or negligence. Even then, I don’t agree that they deserve nothing but scorn, but I’m willing to allow that some scorn may be in order. You have abandoned (if you ever held) that idea, and have evidently decided that any misfortune is the fault of the victim. This is wrong because it’s logically flawed, and because it’s cruel.

I realize that you care naught for one of those reasons, but perhaps the other will make an impact.

You could be at your mother’s funeral, posting from your Blackberry, and eventually somebody will wander into the thread and say “It’s your own fault you’re so sad. You shouldn’t have loved her so much!”

And then castigate you for being so heartless as to post whilst at your mother’s funeral…
I came in here to say that I really like your thread title, Bricker and that I also agree with your OP. I get the whole self-reliance thing and mostly agree with it, but this is taking things a bit too far. How is it her fault that she’s homeless, again, RR? That reasoning makes no sense.
Looking behind the sentiments expressed, I’m left with this question: how threatened does one have to be to feel the need to blame the victim in this case?

Sad.

They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash!

I don’t mind that he’s a heartless automaton, but I do object to his constant insistence that everyone else be like him. In the Rand Rover hegemony we’d all be tax attorneys working 95-hour weeks and making 8 cents an hour.

Have we ever seen Rand Rover and Spock in the same room?

No, wait… Spock is written as half-human. Need to pick a more “traditional” Vulcan.

I’m surprised to see you fall for an obvious troll.

Good post, Bricker. As usual, you say it better than I could.

Not everyone can be like him(thankfully). Remember, he is Rand Rover,millionaire. He owns a mansion and a yacht.

Vulcans do feel emotion, they control the display of it. Furthermore, a Vulcan would look at this logically and see the woman was wronged.

And as a logical extension of that logic, he would then make it right. The needs of the many (tenants) outweigh the needs of the few (this particular landlord).

And bringing race into it was the top of the troll. It works better when you’re just at the line of plausible deniability.

Great minds think alike. As well as sick, twisted, and perverted minds, it would appear.

This is what happens when you spend 100,000 years trapped in the caldera of an active volcano, having atomic bombs tossed at you willy-nilly. You develop an almost supernaturally strong insight into the exact causes of the human condition.
We should all be grateful that Rand Rover chooses to grace us with his widom.

Wow, didn’t expect this out of you Bricker, but I really do need to stop holding lawyers to higher standards of rationality (I guess you are letting your religious side over-shadow your rational side here).

I may respond with more particularity when I get home tonight (so I can quote parts of posts, etc). But my basic response to the OP is that you are ignoring the valid dstinction between a business transaction (and other sorts of events where people should be expected to apprise themselves of their options and choose wisely) with every other decision someone makes on a daily basis. You have also used a logically fallacious argument (ie, "if you believe X you must believe Y, and Y is ridicuolous so X is ridiculous), which obviously fails. I don’t believe Y and there’s no reason that believing X implies a belief in Y.

You are also ignoring other factors at play in the evictiomn thread, such as that the article was an obvious emotional play and really shows how lots of people really feel about black women.

I thought Rand Rover was “going Galt” or something. Why’s he still here? How can we [del]celebrate his departure[/del] miss him if he won’t go away?

Galt had a Blackberry. He was going to stop contributing his genius to our society, but he wasn’t *about *to stop telling us why.

Are you implying I am a scientologist? That’s absurd.

My only thought as well. I can’t believe people still take his comments seriously.

So not only are you a fuckwit, you are a racist fuckwit. Gotcha.

Have you ever thought of contributing anything of value to the boards? You know, just for a change of pace?

To be fair to Bricker, when you dream up a title like that you just gotta write a post to go with it.