How Is Ayn Rand Still A Thing?

Does Rand Paul claim to be "greatly influenced" by her, or simply that he liked her novels? I don't want any of those people to be President either, but I don't care what novelists they like.
He's named after her. By his father, whom he grew up with and learned his life philosophy from.
No, his name is Randal, and he was called Randy most of his life until his wife decided that was too childish and shortened it to Rand.
He's named after her, I am convinced. Papa Ron was/is a HUGE fan. But he's no dummy, and knows she's a cult figure.
So ignoring the facts because you think you know better. What were you saying about me being delusional?
The only fact is that he added an 'al' to the end.
Because "Randal" isn't a common name or anything.
 
Does Rand Paul claim to be "greatly influenced" by her, or simply that he liked her novels? I don't want any of those people to be President either, but I don't care what novelists they like.
He's named after her. By his father, whom he grew up with and learned his life philosophy from.
No, his name is Randal, and he was called Randy most of his life until his wife decided that was too childish and shortened it to Rand.
He's named after her, I am convinced. Papa Ron was/is a HUGE fan. But he's no dummy, and knows she's a cult figure.
So ignoring the facts because you think you know better. What were you saying about me being delusional?
I didn't say you were delusional. Please don't twist my words.
Actually you did.
 
Forget the influence of Randian concepts.....

We need a socialist, community organizer for President so we can be more like France......

Workers of the World, Unite !
People Before Profits Comrades!!!
Fuck off, troll.

Better yet, welcome to my ignore list.
 
Actually, on the surface, Rands theories actually make some sense. Business would thrive without government interference, if it would police itself. The problem is, it doesn't. This is evidenced by the financial crisis of `08. Many people rightly point out that Clinton laid the groundwork for that cluster-cuk, by signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall.

The financial crisis wasn't caused businesses Policing Themselves...it was caused by Big Government Cronyism.
Welll...except the reality suggests that isn't really the case...

Well, except for the fact that the Financial and Real Estate industries are highly regulated, that the Fed is basically owned by Wall Street with a direct line to the White House, that Federally Subsidized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac enabled the mainstreaming of subprime liar loans, that the Federal Government de facto mandated race based quotas for mortgages which could only be met by subprime loans, that politically connected speculators used such subprime loans to bid up real estate prices in an inflated bubble and then cashed out.....
Only if enforced. Christopher Cox did not enforce them, in accordance with Bush administration priorities to ease regulatory oversight, and with Republican Congress priorities to cut funding to regulatory agencies. Fact.


Wrong. But thank you for sharing.
It's easy for you to make statements like that when you have no intention of backing them up.

Par for the course with you.
 
You say that as if the agenda of Corporatism isn't rampant, unfettered "free market" capitalism. The cognative dissonence is almost laughable. Although you're right, the industries were still regulated. They were regulated in totally uselss, stupid ways, but they were regulated.

It would be kind of like having a law that specifically says "You cannot print $5 bills", while you are printing billions of dollars worth of $20 bills, and flooding the market with them. Then, when the economy crashes, you insisting, "Well, I was regulated! And I even obeyed the law! I didn't print one single 5 dollar bill!" Well, yeah! That's because the regulation was completely useless, and did nothing to regulate what you were actually doing.


The agenda of Corporatism is not Free Market Capitalism...it's regulatory capture so that they can socialize risk and privatize profit.
Congratulations. You are now parroting the Liberal argument.

Of course you'll deny it, but you sound just like Ed Schultz.

Welcome aboard.
 
Second of all, no one is suggesting that there were not a number of factors leading to the crisis, but to just dismiss deregulation, as if it were irrelevant, and just a "distraction", as you keep trying to do, is dishonest.
You've summed up Boedicca in record time. Congrats!
 
He's named after her. By his father, whom he grew up with and learned his life philosophy from.
No, his name is Randal, and he was called Randy most of his life until his wife decided that was too childish and shortened it to Rand.
He's named after her, I am convinced. Papa Ron was/is a HUGE fan. But he's no dummy, and knows she's a cult figure.
So ignoring the facts because you think you know better. What were you saying about me being delusional?
The only fact is that he added an 'al' to the end.
Because "Randal" isn't a common name or anything.
Actually it isn't. But Randall is.
 
No, his name is Randal, and he was called Randy most of his life until his wife decided that was too childish and shortened it to Rand.
He's named after her, I am convinced. Papa Ron was/is a HUGE fan. But he's no dummy, and knows she's a cult figure.
So ignoring the facts because you think you know better. What were you saying about me being delusional?
The only fact is that he added an 'al' to the end.
Because "Randal" isn't a common name or anything.
Actually it isn't. But Randall is.
The point stands.
 
Actually you did.
Nope. And I know you're smart enough to know the difference, so either you have not gone back and re-read it, or you're being dishonest.

Wow. That's delusional.

You said that seeing no role for the state, which was my stated position, was delusional. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from that comment is that because I hold that position I must be delusional in your mind.
 
Actually you did.
Nope. And I know you're smart enough to know the difference, so either you have not gone back and re-read it, or you're being dishonest.

Wow. That's delusional.

You said that seeing no role for the state, which was my stated position, was delusional. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from that comment is that because I hold that position I must be delusional in your mind.
Let me clarify for you, since you refuse to do so for yourself:

I think that particular position is delusional. I don't think you are delusional.
 
Actually you did.
Nope. And I know you're smart enough to know the difference, so either you have not gone back and re-read it, or you're being dishonest.

Wow. That's delusional.

You said that seeing no role for the state, which was my stated position, was delusional. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from that comment is that because I hold that position I must be delusional in your mind.
Let me clarify for you, since you refuse to do so for yourself:

I think that particular position is delusional. I don't think you are delusional.

When you call an opinion delusional, you call the person delusional. For an opinion can only come from a person and nothing else.
 
The financial crisis wasn't caused businesses Policing Themselves...it was caused by Big Government Cronyism.
Welll...except the reality suggests that isn't really the case...

Well, except for the fact that the Financial and Real Estate industries are highly regulated, that the Fed is basically owned by Wall Street with a direct line to the White House, that Federally Subsidized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac enabled the mainstreaming of subprime liar loans, that the Federal Government de facto mandated race based quotas for mortgages which could only be met by subprime loans, that politically connected speculators used such subprime loans to bid up real estate prices in an inflated bubble and then cashed out.....
Only if enforced. Christopher Cox did not enforce them, in accordance with Bush administration priorities to ease regulatory oversight, and with Republican Congress priorities to cut funding to regulatory agencies. Fact.


Wrong. But thank you for sharing.
It's easy for you to make statements like that when you have no intention of backing them up.

Par for the course with you.

I noticed how you never backed up yours.
 
For so called conservatives to worship a Soviet atheist who espoused feminism and abortion rights makes perfect sense.

But she hated poor people so that evens everything out

I think so called conservatives really relate to Ayn Rand's intense self loathing.

I think they relate more to her distinctions between the workers and the capitalists and how we must stroke the capitalists or else
 
Actually you did.
Nope. And I know you're smart enough to know the difference, so either you have not gone back and re-read it, or you're being dishonest.

Wow. That's delusional.

You said that seeing no role for the state, which was my stated position, was delusional. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from that comment is that because I hold that position I must be delusional in your mind.
Let me clarify for you, since you refuse to do so for yourself:

I think that particular position is delusional. I don't think you are delusional.
I hold that position, so what other conclusion can be drawn?

Regardless, semantic games aren't all that interesting, but if you're insisting on not insulting me then that's more than most people on the board would do and I appreciate it.
 
Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.
4i6Ckte.gif






There's nothing wrong with the fundamental premise of her political theory. It's rest of her stuff that's absolutely batty.
 

Forum List

Back
Top