Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
no Nazi sympathizer. no "took advantage of welfare" argument. Luddite has no depth of capability to discuss the work -- only to lie about the author..
We've done this argument before Luddite and your side is just desparate to avoid a real discussion..
Suggest you research your hero under her married name, Ann O'Connor, wife of Frank O'Connor.
As for "avoiding discussion", I already commented and really, what more is there to say? She was in favor of abortion on demand, she was a nazi sympathizer, she was NOT a Christian and she was a hypocrite who hated Medicare right up until her heavy smoking gave her lung cancer.
But her books do matter to teepotter types and others who don't really think things through.
Classically Liberal: Lying about Ayn Rand and Social Security
in 1966 Rand's Objectivist Newsletter said that not collecting from programs that one is forced to finance would be wrong. It said:
...the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.
The AlterNet smear also claimed that Rand said that the link between smoking and cancer was a hoax. She actually never said that. She said she was not convinced that the case had been made, and at the time it hadn't been fully made. She never said it was a hoax and she stopped smoking instantly when her physician showed her a dark spot on her own lung's x-ray.
According to AlterNet one Evva Joan Pryor, "who had been a social worker in New Yorker" said that "I remember telling her that this was going to be difficult. For me to do my job she had to recognize that there were exceptions to her theory." What job was that? Well, if you believe AlterNet she was "social worker" during this period. The implication being that Rand had to seek out a social worker to help her. Some smear-mongers of Rand have argued with me that she died penniless as the result of the evils of capitalism and that was why she sought out this social worker.
Pryor was NOT a social worker. She worked for the law firm of Ernst, Crane Gitlin & Winick which handled all legal matters for Rand. Nor was Rand penniless or in need. She was penniless when she arrived in America but during this period she had cash reserves of a few hundred thousand dollars and a steady income from book royalties.
Rand had sufficient resources to cover the health issues she faced. In fact, she had sufficient funds to pay for heart surgery for her brother-in-law from Russia. Rand's estate had a substantial sum of cash at the time of Rand's death indicating that Pryor's concerns that health costs could "bankrupt" Rand never took place. And, since Pryor argued that Rand should have these things in case health care bankrupted her, it is entirely possible that Rand never got a cent. We just don't know. But if she did, there is nothing to attack her over either.
from --- “The Fascist New Frontier,”But there are stylistic differences of emphasis. The socialist-communist axis keeps promising to achieve abundance, material comfort and security for its victims, in some indeterminate future. The fascist-Nazi axis scorns material comfort and security, and keeps extolling some undefined sort of spiritual duty, service and conquest. The socialist-communist axis offers its victims an alleged social ideal. The fascist-Nazi axis offers nothing but loose talk about some unspecified form of racial or national “greatness.” The socialist-communist axis proclaims some grandiose economic plan, which keeps receding year by year. The fascist-Nazi axis merely extols leadership—leadership without purpose, program or direction—and power for power’s sake.
You mean she accessed the benefits she had been paying into for 50 years?
Exactly and thank you for making my point for me.
Like the potters today, she was dead set against until she needed it.
Like potters today, she didn't care about anyone but herself. She would have taken that safety net away from others but was quick to grab it for herself.
At least she was not a teepotter hypocrite about abortion.
You mean she accessed the benefits she had been paying into for 50 years?
Exactly and thank you for making my point for me.
Like the potters today, she was dead set against until she needed it.
Like potters today, she didn't care about anyone but herself. She would have taken that safety net away from others but was quick to grab it for herself.
At least she was not a teepotter hypocrite about abortion.
The point is not whether or not she needed it but whether or not she was a worthless hypocrite, which clearly seems to be the case.[...]
1) Not clear that "she needed it" since she died with a fairly large estate and plenty of royalties still streaming in.
[...]
Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year olds life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs.
Always worth repeating:
Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year olds life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs.
Did Ayn Rand walk point for the masters of the universe? Or was she a ditzy windbag selling books to immature thinkers to make a living?
Here are the facts.
You decide.
On abortion
'Abortion is a moral right--which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved,' [Ayn Rand] told an audience of 1,500 people at the Ford Hall Forum, five years before the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973 and in Massachusetts, in which abortion was then illegal. 'An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being,' [Rand] declared."
On taking government assistance
Ayn Rand completed all the proofs of personal entitlement and then accepted Social Security payments and Medicare benefits under the name of Ann O'Connor and not under her literary name.
And so now we know a little bit more about the Holden Caulfield of the nutball element.
Since the first movie flopped so badly, are they going to make a second still?
Since the first movie flopped so badly, are they going to make a second still?
