Entertainment

Atlas Shrugged Producer Details the Fight to Get Libertarian Movie Made in Liberal Hollywood

Atlas Shrugged Producer Details the Fight to Get Libertarian Movie Made in Liberal Hollywood

As The Blaze reported yesterday, the film Atlas Shrugged opened in theaters one week ago. The film is based off of Ayn Rand’s novel of the same name, which is a favorite among those with libertarian leanings.

John Aglialoro, producer of the new  film, spoke to Fox News in the clip below about the struggle to get the film made.

But first, some context. The Wall Street Journal’s blog Speakeasy has some helpful background on the book, and on Rand:

Rand and her army of ideological adherents—both then and now—claim that “Atlas Shrugged” is the greatest novel ever written. Even those who have never read it know the plot: America’s productive titans go on strike against a progressively intrusive, tax-happy, and morally corrupt socialistic government until, at last, the nation’s “looters and moochers” beg them to come back and restore prosperity on their terms, ending with the promise of a utopia of the competent and the strong.

“For the first time [in history], you have depicted persons and their actions in perfect accordance with principles and their consequences,” libertarian founding father Murray Rothbard wrote to Rand about the book in 1957, adding that she had “a mind that I unhesitatingly say is the most brilliant of the twentieth century.” (A few years later, he compared her exercise of control over the minds of her followers to the cults of Hitler, Mao, and Trotsky.) Delineating a world in which productive, purposeful people like herself could thrive without being thwarted by the envy, greed, or interference of others less gifted was her life’s mission. She accomplished it in “Atlas Shrugged” and wanted to see nothing less than a movie that represented her imagined world in all its glorious details and dark colors.

Aglialoro explains that he purchased the right to produce the film in 1992. At about the same time, the New York Times and the Library of Congress did a study of the top-ten most influential books—and Atlas Shrugged came in second (after the Bible). So, Aglialoro says, given the popularity of the book, he expected to get the movie  done in a few years.

But, when he went to pitch the film to the Hollywood studios, no one bit. So he took matters into his own hands:

Also, here’s a flashback clip of William F. Buckley Jr. discussing Atlas Shrugged and Ayn Rand. Rand and Buckley had a bit of a testy relationship, to say the least, as a result of  a damning review Buckley published in National Review of Atlas Shrugged. The review was written by Whittaker Chambers.

Comments (219)

1 2 3 4
  • mndjohnson
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:33pm

    The Fountainhead: Gary Cooper and Patricia Neal I believe.

    Report Post »  
  • mndjohnson
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:28pm

    Life was full of guns and wars and everyone was trampled to the ground. I wish we’d all been ready. Man and wife asleep in bed, he hears a noise and turns his head, she gone. I wish we’d all been ready. Two men walking up a hill, one disappears and one’s left standing still. I wish we’d all been ready.
    A piece of bread could buy a bag of gold. I wish we’d all been ready. There’s no time to change your mind, the SON has come and you’ve been left behind.

    Report Post »  
  • angelcat
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:27pm

    I saw the movie today and found it to be the scariest movie I have ever seen since I can see so much of what is happening in our country today in the movie. I thought the movie would be a bit boring and tedious, but it wasn’t. I do wish the sex part had been omitted, though. It wasn’t needed. I am looking forward to part 2.

    Report Post »  
  • ThoreauHD
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:27pm

    I’m gonna see it tomorrow.

    Report Post » ThoreauHD  
  • isnrblog
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:24pm

    The best book I ever read. If you haven’t read it, please do so. You will understand how destructive Obama/Soros/Cloward and Piven Plan is. You will also see that Obama is following the C & P plan, destroying capitalism in order to set up a Socialist state.

    Report Post »  
    • warmac9999
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 3:48pm

      I only wish that we had some Republicans who were as committed to individual liberty. Far too many are still unprincipled and self-serving.

      Report Post »  
  • NOTYERHUCKLEBERRY
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:18pm

    Read the book for the first time in the late 60′s. It did a lot to form my way of thinking about government. I would rate myself today as about two steps away from anarchy. That’s how much I like government.
    Hope to see the flick, but where I live, the closest theater is over 100 miles away. If demand picks up, we should get it soon.

    Report Post »  
  • tmbell87
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:16pm

    The great thing about Objectivism is that even religious people can see its relevance and follow the principles that are laid out. The only real point of contention between the two is where our rights as human beings stem from. Objectivists believe that our rights are inherent to man because we are beings of volitional consciousness and we do not act by instinct. Theists believe that our rights are a gift from god. A large majority of the other principles associated with Objectivism and religion fall in line with each other.

    Report Post »  
  • Paleo2k
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:03pm

    Ruler4You
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:12pm

    Spare me! The ONLY movie EVER to be 100% faithful to the book was “The Lord of the Rings.”

    Every producer ALWAYS capitulates for ‘creative license.’ The end product will be a liberal POS.

    FYI Lord of the Rings, though vastly more faithful than most any other book brought to the screen, hardly rates a 100%. Got google?
    http://www.google.com/search?q=lotr+books+vs+movies&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
    Fail.

    Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 2:52am

      LOTR was not 100% faithful to the book. Case in point, Faramir.

      This is unrelated to the rest of your post. But LOTR was no 100% faithful, and Gimli never once said anything about tossing dwarves, that was a modern insertion of PC crap.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
  • dlechkun
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:50pm

    Hubby and I went to see on opening day and the audience actually clapped and cheered at the end of the movie. Our son came home for Easter from Sweden and hubby took him to go see the movie this afternoon. He absolutely loved the movie. There is hope for our nation! The discussion we had afterwards was the difference between facts and feelings. One can lead you to a path of prosperity, the other ????!

    Report Post »  
  • Roy-Al_K
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:39pm

    The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.
    – V.I. LENIN

    Report Post »  
  • Dougral
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:36pm

    I saw the movie today and I enjoyed it. I look forward to parts 2 and 3. I read the book last year and that helped understand the background of the story. I don’t agree with Rand on all points of her philosophy but I sure do agree with much of her economics. Its a very appropriate movie for today. The looters are here and after us right now.

    Report Post »  
  • bereal
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:29pm

    ENCINOM, YOU ARE AN IDIOT! You can’t even take reading a book at good reading. You must’ve had a really disastrous child hood. We all pity you!

    Report Post »  
  • tifosa
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:28pm

    Who would think Hollywood wouldn’t be rushing to bring the book by Алиса Зиновьевна Розенбаум, Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum, aka Ayn Rand, to life? I mean, if only to see the part where she lavishes worship on a child murderer/dismemberer.

    tifosa  
    • Physicist_In_Training
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:50pm

      …..yeeeaaaahh….ummm….you should really check your references, if not read the books, before posting something like that. I can’t think of an instance where a child dies, let alone is dismembered, in any of Rand’s books. And if you’re referring to something that happened outside of her novels, then…come on, references! And write your comment a wee bit more clearly; it definitely implies said incident occurs in one of Rand’s novels.

      Report Post » Physicist_In_Training  
    • tifosa
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:05pm

      You say all that needs to be known about you a few posts above~disgusting. Google William Edward Hickman, her model for an “ideal man.” While you’re at it, you may want to check the DSM-IV for the definition of a sociopath. Happy Good Friday. Happy Earth Day.

      tifosa  
    • Physicist_In_Training
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:55pm

      Thanks for the recommendation; I did look that up, in fact. The article I read referenced four sources, each of which I looked up and read in turn. Three of them did not refer to Hickman at all (i.e., the references were made up.). The fourth said Rand started, but did not finish, a novel called “The Little Street” in 1928. It then claims that the protagonist, “Danny Renahan, kills a villainous religious figure modeled on a real-life Ku Klux Klan pastor.” There is a reference provided for this. The article goes on to say that Renahan is based on Hickman — but provides no reference. This same article raves about Rand’s admiration for Nietzsche, which I know to be baseless, based on her stark criticism of him in her essay books, which are not just hearsay, but “from the horse’s mouth,” so to say.

      A tragic case, though. If this Hickman character did, indeed, perform the crime he was convicted of, then his sentence was well-deserved. But to say that Rand “lavishes worship” on this fiend is, as far as I can tell, a total fabrication. And such “lavish worship” certainly never appeared in any of her four novels.

      You seem pretty defensive; jumping straight to (ambiguous) personal attacks against me! That’s too bad. My Easter weekend will be filled with studying (finals are coming up) but I appreciate the well-wishes. May you find many chocolate-covered eggs (chocolate’s supposed to be really good for us female types).

      Report Post » Physicist_In_Training  
    • ozchambers
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:27pm

      I am enjoying your posts Physicist even though there may be some major philosophical differences in our beliefs regarding the purpose(s) of our existence, many of us here on Blaze and in the conservative movement in general believe in absolute truths and realities and can find kinship in these united beliefs.

      Report Post » ozchambers  
    • BBomber66
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 11:23pm

      I find the posts illuinating, interesting and refreshing.

      They illuminate because they include references that can be verified and for this I am thankful.

      They interest me because of the writing. Some are literate, poignant and down right intertaining; but they clearly show how illiterate some posts are and how quickly those with no real substance in their posts slide into personal attacks.

      I am refreshed by the fact not only that a young, female student is showing me that truthful writing trumps emotional babble everytime, but also that this same person will allow me to depart this world knowing that she is in it. I witnessed my daughters become independent and comfortable in their own skins. Some chose careers, some chose a family and some chose both. The point is that they made the choice. I have much reading to do to absorb the all the facts presented (and the references) and am not sure sufficient time has been allotted, but I have begun.

      Report Post » BBomber66  
    • Manny_McFly
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 1:25am

      Sociopath: “The main characteristic of a sociopath is a disregard for the rights of others. Visible symptoms include physical aggression and the inability to hold down a steady job. The sociopath also finds it hard to sustain relationships and shows a lack of regret in his or her actions. A major personality behavior trait is the violation of the rights of others. This can appear as a disregard for the physical or sexual well-being of another.”

      So, I guess in your opinion that is supposed to be a definition of someone who believes in the values espoused by Objectivism, or of Rand herself? Obviously you understand very little about Rand’s philosophy. The rights of the individual are paramount to Objectivism, which is infused with an abject abhorrence to the use of coercion or force of any kind against another person to deny them their natural rights, no matter how “altruistic” or “noble” the excuse. It is in essence a defense of the concept of individual freedom, which entails the rights to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. I guess by extension we can declare Thomas Jefferson a sociopath too…

      As far as her supposed “worship” of Hickman…That’s laziness on your part and others (left and right) who hate Rand and have tried to discredit her in any way possible. Rand was exploring the concepts of living life on your own terms without fear of what society or convention expected. She ponders this archetype in her journals as…”A Hickman with a purpose. And without the degeneracy. It is more exact to say that the model is not Hickman, but what Hickman suggested to me.”

      You and others willfully distort this philosophical exercise as some sort of admiration (“worship” you called it) of a specific brutal child-killer as an “Ideal Man”, which is ridiculous. Rand looked at Hickman in the way a research scientist looks at a virus. The scientist may marvel at and admire the simplicity, the pathology, or structure of the virus. They may even see how certain characteristic of this virus could be used to further research on other diseases. This doesn’t mean they “worship” this particular virus, or would want to see it propagated and spread through society.

      Objectivism, like any philosophy, has flaws and contradictions (as did Rand herself). However, I think it would be interesting to know if you have the same venom for the likes of Margaret Sanger and George Bernard Shaw, “worshiped” by today’s Progressives, who spent their lives advocating the implementation of eugenics as a means of ridding society of the burden imposed by “inferiors” (the mentally challenged, blacks, the old and infirm, the sickly, etc). How many millions of people (men, women, children) have died in the name of such a philosophy? I don’t recall any dictators like Pol Pot, Castro, Saddam Hussein, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, Chavez, Qaddafi, et al EVER citing Objectivism or Ayn Rand as their influence. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao where in simpatico with Sanger and Shaw’s low opinion of mankind and how he should be dealt with. The same cannot be said of Rand.

      “We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”

      Ayn Rand

      Report Post »  
    • Crave
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 2:09am

      How about the murderer who founded your sacred holiday……….Earth Day! Ahh, and just think how the left still considers him a hero. Don’t you feel clean all over? Drill please, and have a fantastic Easter weekend, Mrs. Socialist. And, please, do not take this Christian holiday away from us like Christmas.

      Report Post »  
    • tifosa
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 8:48am

      idk where THAT definition of “sociopath” came from, but it wasn’t from the DSM-IV, which is the only approved mental health diagnostic tool. Interesting re-writing of facts you engage in. I don’t “hate” nor have “venom” for Ayn Rand, actually it‘s a laugh to see how she’s lionized by so many on the far right. I was referring to her journal entry (p.21-22,) 1928, where she quotes Hickman and calls his ideology “The best and strongest expression of a real man’s psychology I have heard.” I can only assume that you read what Hickman earned his notoriety for. [Sociopath (Rand) celebrating sociopathological thinking that enabled him to commit abhorrent crimes.] My guess is that there won’t be parts 2 or 3 of the movie, but hey, there clearly is an audience for it, so fine by me. :)

      tifosa  
    • tifosa
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 9:04am

      CRAVE, despite what Rush or Glenn told you yesterday, Einhorn wasn’t the founder of Earth Day, though he did speak at the first one. It was founded by Gaylord Nelson, WI Senator. It’s not considered a “sacred holiday” despite what you’re told. It IS funny to hear teapartiers tout “cleaning up the mall” yet vilifying a day when such positive attention to the earth is recognized.

      tifosa  
    • Manny_McFly
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 10:39am

      The DSM-IV is the only approved mental health diagnostic tool? This is like saying the AFI is the only approved word on what the top ten movies of all time happen to be. The fact is the “official” definition of sociopath has changed repeatedly over the years, even within the DSM-IV, and not all of it’s members always agree on the final version. And like any attempt at setting some definitive benchmark or diagnosis in the field of psychology, it is a largely subjective exercise where for every supporter of a theory there are detractors with their own opinions.

      I answered your “worship” assertion by quoting Rand’s statement about Hickman in regards to the “Ideal Man”. Detractors of Objectivism have long tried to call it socipathic by hanging it on the “lacking in empathy” and “grandiose sense of self worth”, portions of someone’s definition. Again, very lazy and based on the most superficial attempt at defining Rand’s philosophy.

      You don’t have venom for Rand…OK, my mistake. You just think it’s funny that people lionize her. I do too. But I can separate the philosophy from the person, you wish to personalize it. You just think she’s a sociopath who “lavishes worship” on a fellow sociopath that was a “child murderer/dismemberer.” That’s high praise indeed. I disagree with this flippant, misleading statement. So there we are.

      BTW, couldn’t help but notice you failed to answer my question about your opinion regarding the psychosis of the likes of Sanger and Shaw, and the impact their philosophies have had on mankind versus the sociopath “worshiping” Rand. Where do they fit in with your DSM-IV approved definition? Does it bother you that our current Secretary of State and former First Lady has openly praised the eugenics supporting racist Sanger? That Planned Parenthood still uses her name for a prestigious award?

      “I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision… when I think about what she did all those years ago in Brooklyn, taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions, I am really in awe of her.”
      Hillary Clinton

      What is this “vision” she in awe of? Let’s let Sanger tell us:

      “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social service backgrounds and with engaging personalities … We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the ***** population.”
      M Sanger, letter to Clarence J. Gamble, 1939

      Referred to immigrants and Catholics as “…reckless breeders”. “[They're] an unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”
      M Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, (p.187).

      “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it,”
      M Sanger, Women and the New Race, 1920 (p. 63).

      Sanger later stated that there should be “…a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”

      And let’s not forget that cuddly George Bernard Shaw:

      “We should find ourselves committed to killing a great many people whom we now leave living, and to leave living a great many people whom we at present kill. We should have to get rid of all ideas about capital punishment …”
      “A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.”
      GB Shaw, Lecture to the Eugenics Education Society, March 4, 1910.

      Is it just as funny to you that people like this are STILL “lionized” by the Left, or is it just that you
      conveniently have no opinion about them and their ideologies?

      Report Post »  
  • johnzorba
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:26pm

    I read the book three times, and saw the movie last week. The words that come to mind are: Powerful, hopeful and fear. I fear it may be too late for our Country. The government and the people have been become too corrupted. Children are brainwashed as soon as they enter school. Us old folks are dying off. I cry too often at what our Nation has become.

    Report Post »  
  • bereal
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:25pm

    The fountainhead was a good book too. Both of these books once you start to read, you can hardly stop untill the end. Great witting!
    Some say she gathered her writting material from her lover “Philip Rothschild” of the illuminati fame, which starts this conspiricy thing with the books, the Fountainhead and then Atlas Shrugged. I have found by reading the first book “Fountainhead then Atlas Shrugged, I’ll reiterate, great reading.
    For those who have not read either one, my suggestion would FH first then AS next. Enjoy!

    Report Post »  
  • David, the Constitutional Libertarian
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:22pm

    This clip mixes today’s events with a trailer. It is better than the original.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK7B6mAIhU0&feature=player_embedded

    Report Post » David, the Constitutional Libertarian  
  • SeannyRotten
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:21pm

    WFB JR

    Is a Lying Liar!

    Ok, through 1998 WFB did two things that were despicable: he maintained he stood by Whitaker Chambers’ review AND claimed he never ever read Atlas Shrugged. Screw you, WFB, you pompous, self-indulgent WINDBAG!

    Also, if the most incendiary piece of a review is “from every page … to a gas chamber, go!” don‘t you think that’s a tad insensitive being spoken to an ethnic Russian Jew barely a decade after the Nazi Holocaust??

    Shame on you WFB. You should have read Atlas back in the 50′s and realized Whitaker Chambers was a bastard for writing what he did and never published it.

    Report Post »  
  • David, the Constitutional Libertarian
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:18pm

    Is that what Beck is doing? Is he John Galt?

    I went Galt Sept 1st 2008. I have spent the last 3 years reading, learning and disseminating information.

    I was quite surprised to see many, many of my ideas played out in Beck’s shows over the last year.

    I started in a forum disseminating my ideas and beliefs. Became one of the highest contributors. I was attacked constantly by the leftists on the site. I was actually accused of being Beck a couple times. Especially when a bunch of my threads got on his show.

    Anyway, who is John Galt? You.

    Report Post » David, the Constitutional Libertarian  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 6:59am

      why surprized so many of your ideals stolen?

      Report Post »  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 6:59am

      beck stole them, just like you did!

      Report Post »  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 7:01am

      he got them the same place you did! neither of you are original thinkers!

      Report Post »  
  • snidley-whiplash
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:15pm

    encinom writes:
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:03pm
    The movie and the book are giant turd stains on the world of culture. The book is the athiest gospel towards greed. Gordon Geecko looks like Mother Theresa compared to the Rand heros
    —————————————————————————————————————————————–
    Lets re-write that…….. encinom is a giant turd stain on the world of culture. The book is the great gospel towards freedom. Ayn Rand is a hero compared to Gordon Geecko.
    Using a well repeated phrase……………..back to you cave encinom.

    Report Post » snidley-whiplash  
  • Ikto B. Dokto
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:13pm

    Just saw the movie. Scary how this was written in the 50′s and is now coming true little by little. Good movie but I could tell that Hollywood’s best and brightest were not involved. Acting was marginal at best and there were some geographical errors and a few other minor details that could have been improved. The message was delivered loud and clear so hopefully the masses will go and see the movie and see the ramifications of a socialist government.

    Report Post »  
    • southernORcobra
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 1:35pm

      Hope they get it in where I live I so want to see this.

      Report Post »  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 7:03am

      they have doubled the theaters and they made less than half what they did last week! its run is over!

      Report Post »  
  • PATTY HENRY
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:09pm

    GOING TOMORROW!!! IT’s doing well per theatre and well enough that its distribution has widened. This is part 1 of 4… PLEASE try to see it …the more $ it makes at the box office, the faster the other parts will be made and the MORE decent movies will be made.

    Ayn Rand was an Atheist Capitalist (don’t know how those fit together) but I forgive her for that because she saw what was coming…I’ll be willing to believe a death-bed conversion too. Whatever…her story is right on the mark of what is happening 50+ years after she wrote it. ALL Conservatives, FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE should go see this movie.

    OBAMA is asking: WHY don’t the people who made Millions in the USA using the USA benefits want to pay extra. WHAT THE DOPE doesn’t admit or maybe even realize is this: THE ones who made millions were 97% from poor or lower to middle class families; they created products that employed or employee still thousands of people and they give more to Charity than any dems!!!

    BUT HERE’S THE KICKER…OBAMA is admitting that there is OPPORTUNITY here. LOL!!! SO my question back to him is this: WITH THE OPPORTUNITY that has allowed some people to become MILLIONAIRES because they had an idea, had guts, worked hard…WHY HASN’T EVERYONE who physically/mentally can…why haven’t they made their own spectacular living???

    ANSWER: is because you damned DEMS have made slaves of them to buy their votes.

    Report Post » PATTY HENRY  
    • Physicist_In_Training
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:34pm

      “I’ll be willing to believe a death-bed conversion too…”

      _____________________________________________________________

      How benevolent of you. If you YouTube “Ayn Rand Interview” you’ll find one which was done shortly after her husband passed away. The interviewer mercilessly drills her on her lack of belief in God, even going so far as to ask her why she doesn’t believe her husband would be in Heaven, waiting to reunite with her. She responded that if she really believed that by dying she would see her husband again, she would kill herself on his stage then and there.

      I recommend you read “For The New Intellectual” by Ayn Rand. The essay portion is only about 56 pages, if I remember correctly, and the rest is excerpts from Rand’s novels, so it’s an easy read. She explains that those who seek to conquer the “men of the mind” fall into two categories; the “Attilas” and the “Witch Doctors.” The former do so by physical force; the latter do so by proclaiming themselves spiritual masters and thereby tying the hands of their intellectual betters with superstition and self-inflicted guilt. It’s very kind of you to “consider a death-bed conversion,” but doesn’t speak well of your understanding of Objectivism.

      Report Post » Physicist_In_Training  
    • ozchambers
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:19pm

      PATTY respects Ayn Rand and believes in God and as such, hoped that she might have come to embrace the key to everlasting life with God. Based on what little I’ve read of her philosophy of objectivism, it seems highly unlikely as she rejected any form of spiritualism whatsoever. I have read that she believes that man, through the mind, does not create reality (like you might see in “The Matrix”) but that through the mind man is able to discover reality. Just wondering if it’s possible that the reality is that we and all of the world were created by a higher being? I believe it to be true, and I am banking my life on it. I do not believe that my happiness is the purpose of my life, but I also believe that our relationship to God can only be attained individually and as such personal liberty and respect (especially when it diverges from my beliefs) of others liberty is crucial.

      Report Post » ozchambers  
  • snidley-whiplash
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:08pm

    Ayn Rand shows us what America has become today……………………Ayn Rand (if you have read the book) shows what America will become tomorrow!

    “America’s productive titans go on strike against a progressively intrusive, tax-happy, and morally corrupt socialistic government until, at last, the nation’s “looters and moochers” beg them to come back and restore prosperity on their terms, ending with the promise of a utopia of the competent and the strong”.

    Delineating a world in which productive, purposeful people like herself could thrive without being thwarted by the envy, greed, or interference of others less gifted was her life’s mission. She accomplished it in “Atlas Shrugged”……………………………………..

    Report Post » snidley-whiplash  
    • sleazyhippo
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:25pm

      Hey Snidely;
      It is interesting that today, where a couple hundred show up for a McDonald’s opening, that the John Gault crowd thinks disappearing to Atlantis will ‘teach society a lesson’
      In political debates you can present all your scary opponents as collectively stupid, inherently evil Trolls. The room becomes a “good Human-versus-evil Troll” fight that shuts down substantive debate. Troll calling is the lazy man’s farcical escape that turns adult discussion into overtly violent fake battles like “pro Wrestling.”
      So I guess that means you are the Winner!

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • BetterDays
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 11:50pm

      @hypo
      Hey lady, hyperbole much? Not that there is any difference between your somewhat substantive ( jiving you) posts and let’s see, oh your minion DAWG, right . Just like the coldest winter on record in the southern hemisphere this last winter, and then the northern hemisphere having the coldest in the last 100 years in indicative of global warming. Or say the same as the sun in Alpha Centuri (Blue Dwarve) is just like our sun. My point, if a person of a differing ideology is as willing to listen as well as to surmise then post away, but if the best you have to offer is egregious vulgarity pandered with intent to enrage, such as these, are done.

      Report Post »  
  • tesla V
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 7:59pm

    Why do the femenists not brag about the greatness of Ayn Rand? Any answers?

    Report Post »  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:14pm

      Because Demorats hate her

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • C. Schwehr
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:16pm

      Why do the feminists not sing the praises of Ayn Rand??? Simple answer of course….In order to be a feminist, a female MUST also be of the progressive/marxist persuasion!!!
      Look at Sarah Palin who’s accomplishments make those of the “true” feminists pale in comparison. Is Palin a classic femininst??? NO!!! She is not a marxist. Therefore she is a target……

      Report Post »  
    • Physicist_In_Training
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:23pm

      Because she advocates, in truth, that which feminists only pretend to, but in fact do the opposite of. Rand was highly critical of the feminist mentality, and rightly so. Feminists demand that women are entitled to certain benefits because of their gender; Rand declared that all humans in an ideally free society should be free to *earn* said benefits, based on their own productive achievement and ability to exchange value for value, *in spite* of their gender (or race or religion or sexuality or age or whatever have you).

      There is a very important difference between those two mentalities, which I’m certain you probably understand already. In fact, the one is totally contradictory to the other — which is why feminists shuffle their feet and mumble, or rage and storm, at the mention of Rand, while indulgently proclaiming the superiority of a woman who creates art modeled after her nether regions.

      Report Post » Physicist_In_Training  
    • sleazyhippo
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:08pm

      Strange question, since Ayn was a free love queen that was a confirmed Christ-hating, anti-Zionist adulteress who hated conservatives from Buckley to Nixon to Goldwater to Reagan. She was supposedly “crazier than a Minnesota congress person! But, hey nobody id perfect. I just wonder if many of her “Blaze supporters” are not going to be embarrassed someday when they find out she was looser than Donald Trump, and behaved like someone you do not want your children to emulate. .

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • PrfctlyFrank
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 11:43pm

      Damn.. I hate to admit it but I’ve gotta go with SLEAZY on this one.. I’ve been an Ayn Rand follower for decades.. First Anthem, then The Fountainhead, Then Atlas, 3 times.. I love those books, because I never got Ayns perspective I suppose.. Ayn Rand was the epitome of everything Christ taught us to forsake.. She was a prideful, egotistical, contentious, selfish, promiscuous, adulterer.. Oh well, Who is John Galt?

      Report Post » PrfctlyFrank  
    • Showtime
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 3:17am

      @sleazyhippo
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:08pm
      Strange question, since Ayn was a free love queen that was a confirmed Christ-hating, anti-Zionist adulteress who hated conservatives from Buckley to Nixon to Goldwater to Reagan. She was supposedly “crazier than a Minnesota congress person! But, hey nobody id perfect. I just wonder if many of her “Blaze supporters” are not going to be embarrassed someday when they find out she was looser than Donald Trump, and behaved like someone you do not want your children to emulate. .
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      But Grandma Sleazy, what big teeth you have!

      Do you know how to say a nice, kind word — to anybody? So full of hate. So full of anger. Much like the Progresives’ FIST!

      Report Post » Showtime  
    • dc5
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 11:34am

      The feminist movement is antithetical to Objectivism. Objectivism glorifies the individual, whether male or female, and does not consider groups per se. Feminism elevates groups because they belong to a group, regardless of their achievement or lack of. Ayn Rand elevates individual achievements regardless of what gender or group they belong to.

      Report Post »  
    • tifosa
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 4:49pm

      Interesting editing. tifosa Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:11pm Are you kidding? (about the concept that Ayn Rand be considered a “feminist.”) tifosa
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:46pm BTW, re: $arah, Ayn “wouldn’t vote for her.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpzDdTrw5II “…a Commander in Chief of the army, a woman, I think it’s unspeakable.” Also, if she was around today, I’d bet theblazers would give her the “HelenThomas” treatment re: looks, no?
      tifosa Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:31pm Unless, say, you’re a female who aspires to be, and is qualified to be, POTUS. Celebration of self to the exclusion of all others is EXACTLY what Jesus taught against. He died FOR the sins of OTHERS, no? Rand wouldn’t have turned her head to benefit others.

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • atasteoftea
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 11:32pm

      Rand is more dangerous to the Socialists now that she is dead. The use of force agaisnt these Socialists is now justifiable. No one who suffers because they choose to suffer has any right to deprive me of freedom. I met many such people in school and the workplace who hated achievement knowing that the government would never allow them to starve or go without and they were right. I came from a poor family and I worked my ass off to pull my self up. I now have one more life and death battle to against the Socialists. Who is John Gultin? He is us.

      Report Post »  
    • sleazyhippo
      Posted on April 25, 2011 at 1:09pm

      Who knew I wear a #22K secret system 2 (extra thin)?
      Three nice things about Ayn Rand, who was exactly as worthy as anyone to be loved by femenists (sic)
      1) Crazy people are often good in bed (but it’s really just not worth it).
      2) Her books were able to resonate with new adolescents, they easily get the main points.
      3) She invented the“Greed 101” plot template: a) Money is good. b) Selfishness is good.
      c) Businesspeople are awesome. d) Government intervention is horrible.
      4) She convinced all the original thinkers to go to Galt’s Gulch, allowing much less talented posers to take over the country from 1996 to 2008
      5) She spent her whole life railing on against government and complaining about the “parasites” who accept money from the government.
      Then, at the end of her life, she took Social Security and Medicare payments from the government under a fake name. (She had terminal lung cancer from smoking, because she also refused to believe the government warnings about cigarettes.)

      Report Post » MONICNE  
  • chiefparker
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 7:54pm

    Shouldn‘t be a surprise Hollywood wouldn’t touch it, Please, guys, you said it.
    The Bible is the #1 book and they wouldn’t get anywhere near it.

    Report Post » chiefparker  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 6:56am

      you do know heston in “moses” and all those christian easter films! rands books were poorly reviewed in the 1950′s as the article says she had almost a cult like control of her followers minds!

      Report Post »  
  • RepubliCorp
    Posted on April 22, 2011 at 7:50pm

    Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked: “Account Overdrawn.”
    Ayn Rand

    Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 7:54pm

      Loved the movie, ask yourself this question “Are you a producer or a looter?”

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • pajamash
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 7:55pm

      I am excited about what I have seen about this movie. I have read the book. Anyone that has not, I suggest you do. Understand going into it that it is a challenging book to undertake but well worth the read. I am hoping to see the movie this weekend.

      Report Post »  
    • My Sacred Honor
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:00pm

      I HAVE to read that book again….Only read it once, and was so profound That I remembered quite a lot of it. I want to read it again before I see the movie, anyway.
      Gratz to the producers who didn’t stand down on their fight to have the movie made!

      I salute you!

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • Psychosis
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:06pm

      lol @ encinom

      lame attempt loser try again

      Psychosis  
    • BetterDays
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:08pm

      Liked the move a lot, read the book years ago when it was required reading in my AP English class ( thanks Mr. Stephany) then again a year ago. All it was missing for me was GOD, go figure.

       
    • lovenfl3
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:10pm

      I went ot see it lt weekend, it is awesome. I started reading the book again, it‘s scary how relevent it is to what’s going on today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIMRNUGXxII

      Report Post » lovenfl3  
    • BetterDays
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:11pm

      @ENCINOM
      Don’t worry Rand-El-Thor will eventually defeat the Seachan, Hogwartz will crumble to mystic dust, and the princess bride did drink the poison, got it? I’m praying for you.

      Report Post »  
    • Ruler4You
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:12pm

      Spare me! The ONLY movie EVER to be 100% faithful to the book was “The Lord of the Rings.”

      Every producer ALWAYS capitulates for ‘creative license.’ The end product will be a liberal POS.

      Report Post » Ruler4You  
    • Physicist_In_Training
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:13pm

      I read Atlas Shrugged the first time about three years ago (maybe a little less), and since then I’ve hungrily devoured every novel and every essay by Ayn Rand I could get my hands on. In the span of this time I’ve read Fountainhead twice, We The Living twice, Anthem once, and Atlas Shrugged three times, and each essay book except for Romantic Manifesto once.

      …I will not see the movie. Ayn Rand’s philosophy is so powerful, and so deep, that I don’t imagine it being transferred to the Silver Screen without being totally butchered in the process. I’m glad everyone here enjoyed the movie, but I urge you please to read the books as well, and don’t engage in debate with anyone who sees the movie but does not read the books. I suspect that an unwanted side-effect of this movie will be thousands of liberals who declare themselves newly minted experts on Objectivism, and no good will come of indulging these people in a debate. There’s nothing worse than a person who thinks himself learned about a subject which he is, in truth, ignorant of. I wish I had not seen this in my lifetime. It makes me very uneasy.

      Report Post » Physicist_In_Training  
    • nothingbuthetruth
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:16pm

      please make the next one before a year!!!

      Report Post »  
    • My Sacred Honor
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:19pm

      Ruler4You
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:12pm
      Spare me! The ONLY movie EVER to be 100% faithful to the book was “The Lord of the Rings.”

      ….Are you stoned? Or no, you just haven’t read The Lord of the Rings.
      After my first viewing of The Two Towers, I almost, ALMOST didn’t want to see Return of the King.
      But it grew on me.
      And I’m over it now.
      Almost…

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • No1YaKnow
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:21pm

      And question answered–Enciom is clearly a LOOTER. Cheers. :)

      Report Post » Marci  
    • My Sacred Honor
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:26pm

      No1YaKnow
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:21pm
      And question answered–Enciom is clearly a LOOTER. Cheers. :)

      Not yet. He is only 12 years old.

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • No1YaKnow
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:30pm

      My Sacred Honor—he’s certainly being trained well by his leaders then. :)

      I want my…
      I want my..
      I want my….I Phone 5..

      Sure money aint for nothing.

      Report Post » Marci  
    • Soros_is_the_Devil
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:30pm

      I saw the movie the other night… It was FANTASTIC!

      It’s a must see!

      All the “fairness” bills they put forth in the film are being proposed today.

      Report Post »  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:49pm

      @Pajamash:

      Next payday I will order it.

      @Jalad:

      I hope the movie will be as good as the book (when I get it to read it). Or, in this case as I will see the movie first, the book will be as good as the movie.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • dealer@678
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:15pm

      Just boycott Hollywood. I did it a long long time ago

      Report Post »  
    • SLARTIBARTFAST
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:30pm

      I’ve seen it twice and will see it many times more. True to the book, as I remember, from many years ago. This is a work of capatalistic art. Went out today and used white shoe polich on the back window of our car: “Who Is John Galt?” I hope others will join me.

      Report Post » SLARTIBARTFAST  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:35pm

      @Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      The movie is great, it follows the book, there is a lot that was left out but it would be just too long for a movie. I have read the book twice, I recommend reading the book, it will fill in a lot of voids in the movie. But for someone who hasn’t read the book, you will still enjoy the movie and get mostly everything Ayn Rand was writing about.

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 9:54pm

      You can get “Who is John Galt” products at proudproducers.com
      I have had a bumber sitcker and license plate holder for years.

      Who is John Galt? Find out.

      I have no affiliation with that website and I have no financial ties. I have bought many products from them and have always been satisfied with the quality.
      Just a disclaimer.

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • sleazyhippo
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:01pm

      Too bad about Atlas Shrugged, everybody’s favorite book at the age of sixteen! The motion picture version of Ayn Rand’s 1957 depiction of egotism, free love (hubba hubba!) and free markets could have been a blockbuster bigger than Pirates of the Caribbean! Ya think? The Book is just Huge and Famous, Too! But possibly this low budget rendition would have benefited from more star power and a little less mountainous cinematography. I wonder if the remaining parts could be Animated? Certainly were it a ‘profitable’ book, Disney would be all over it, or PIXAR, or at very least, FOX?

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • 9111315
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:05pm

      MY SACRED HONOR
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:26pm
      No1YaKnow
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:21pm
      And question answered–Enciom is clearly a LOOTER. Cheers. :)

      Not yet. He is only 12 years old.

      Enciom may be older than 12, but she can not read at that level.

      Report Post »  
    • Partygirl
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:09pm

      I think the account is already way overdrawn. Loved the movie, have the book still need to read it. I congratulate the producer on a movie well done. You know the movie is great when everyone claps at the end. I can hardly wait for part 2 and 3.

      Report Post »  
    • Professional Infidel
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:40pm

      encinom is to off base to know what the facts, the bozos will have to pry it out of my cold dead hands. i will not submitt to the left, whackoff’s. he‘s the clueless not a helpless that deserves society’s generosity.

      Report Post »  
    • seeker9
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 10:58pm

      @jzs
      Thanks for the laugh! You, giving clarification! Funniest comment I’ve heard all day.

      Report Post » seeker9  
    • BetterDays
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 11:28pm

      @JZS
      JZS says shame you didn’t watch the vedio with the story. Then rants and raves to his amusemtn feeling smug and superior ( typical stupid libotard BTW, reversi ) . and finally chides us because no one says anything about GOD not being in it, so we are obviously horrid Christians and should bow to his dogmatic ways!

      BUT WAIT, look what’s that I see, their way near the top, a POST saying something….let me seed….yes BETTERDAYS did mention the lack of GOD in ATLAS SHRUGGED, as well as that BETTERDAYS liked the movie.

      Ah geee Spooky Dude one of your minions is an idiot……. Ok they all are, just like most DEMOCRATS OF THE CIVIL RIGHTES ERA VOTED AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS, But who have thought this was Possiable ?

      Report Post »  
    • CultureWarriors
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:01am

      Too bad this is way above encinom’s intellectual ability to comprehend. Typical ignorant liberal loser. encinom should go hang with those Democrats in the McDonalds video. They mo on encinom’s IQ level yo. Better go check the mail, your welfare check might be there.

      Report Post » CultureWarriors  
    • MiketheTrucker
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:14am

      @JZS

      YOU, couldn’t be more wrong in your lame attempt at “shaming” the Christians here.

      Jesus taught many things, and while charity was one of them, so was self sufficiency and self respect, two things I doubt you know anything about.

      However, you clearly relate to the premise and plot of the book/movie as YOU are most certainly a looter or supporter thereof.

      And as for H-wood, they are the most predictable at shunning ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that might expose the left for what they truly are—————– LOOTERS!

      Report Post »  
    • politicaljules
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:48am

      Atheists can be political conservatives too.

      BTW The liberals are trying to dismantle Atlas Shrugs with the whole atheist argument. Some pretend to be Christians and drum up some kind of feined outrage of Rand’s lack of faith.

      ignore them.

      Report Post »  
    • I-HATE-THE-WORD-DISENFRANCHISE
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:52am

      Rand wrote a book that put a label on the users and destroyers. With the ability to recall the destructive nature of socialism and communism from her youth, and being a witness of the early decline of our own country. She was able to fathom what most Americans could not, the destruction of capitalism and freedom by the very ones who reap from it.
      Although I enjoyed her book she seem to miss the very reason of our freedom. GOD

      Report Post »  
    • Anarcho Capitalist
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 1:42am

      For some reason my posts never show on this site. Only true Neo conservatives seem to be able to post. But Ayn Rand would snap if she knew you called her flick Libertarian.

      Im an Objectivist and a Libertarian. All you have to do is read a book or 2 to know this crap. Get it together blaze!

      Report Post » Anarcho Capitalist  
    • Crave
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 1:43am

      @jzs

      Get that weak argument out of here. No one needs to be preached to by someone that is most likely leftist and, as such, pseudo-Christian at best. The novel is an excellent, and accurate, portrayal of what is wrong with our world today. Looters thought themselves to be altruistic and very progressive. Obviously people who are Looters do not represent Christian values, but God appeared no where in this novel. It is just slimy men (looters) regulating and taking from the men that prop up the world (producers).

      If you want to knock Atlas Shrugged because Ayn Rand was an atheist, I think you should learn to be objective. Try to separate your government and religious beliefs a bit. The two do not and should not mix. I do not want my preacher to tell me how to vote, and I do not want my representatives to tell me how to pray.

      BTW, is that you Jim Wallace?

      Report Post »  
    • Showtime
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 1:54am

      @encinom
      Posted on April 22, 2011 at 8:03pm
      The movie and the book are giant turd stains on the world of culture. The book is the athiest gospel towards greed. Gordon Geecko looks like Mother Theresa compared to the Rand heros.
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      How nice to read your glowing review of the greatest-selling novel in the world! If you don’t like it, it has to be GOOD! — No, wait, make that STUPENDOUS!

      Report Post » Showtime  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 2:03am

      @jzs

      “I think we need some clarity on this issue.”

      Yes, we do. We’ll start with your post.

      “Good job Blaze posting the interview with Buckley, the icon of conservativtism.”

      False. The icon as he would readily say, Neoconservatism. He was quite ardent about that. Read your history sir.

      “I doubt any of you watched that interview, or at least understood what he was saying. But I recommend that you watch it. ”

      Anything Buckley says regarding America is irrelevant, he was a progressive. A liberal who liked war, so yes, as Neoconservative.

      “He, when the book came out, panned “Atlas Shrugged” in a withering negative review of the book. Subsequently Ayn Rand refused to attend any event where he was present, as he says in the interview. He also says that when they first met, her first comment to him was, “”You are much too intelligent to believe in God.””

      Quite astute. Buckley also flagged his wang outside his open limo roof and pissed on automobiles. He was as conservative as Lenin. I suspect, sir, he would have told you as much himself. He was one so to enjoy a good laugh.

      “Blazers, you may not know this, but Ayn Rand was an “in your face” athiest. One thing Buckley mentioned in the interview (watch it) was that he was offended – he was a Christian – at Rand’s contempt for altruism and empathy. Rand viewed those to human characteristics as weaknesses, those to things that are at the very foundation of Christ’s teachings: love and caring for your fellow human.”

      And? Libertarian, alas, is not “social conservative”. The attempt fails at the gate I’m afraid.

      “I’m baffled when I read the posts here. You all claim to be Christian, yet you embrace Ayn Rand, an athiest, whose philosophy was antithetical to Christ’s teaching and foundation of the Christian religion. ”

      I make no such claim.

      “Frankly, it seems to me you have no core beliefs, beliefs you’ve examined, understand and accept.”

      Ah sir, I do. You should ask me sometime.

      “Beliefs that you use to examine what you hear and determine, yourself, whether you agree with them or not. You have no firm beliefs, you just agree with whatever the AM radio guy says.”

      Incorrect.

      “BTW, Hollywood doesn’t care about the philosophy of a movie. As capitalists – good for them – they just want to make money. The idea that liberals made it hard to make this movie is really just stupid.”

      True and false. True on the capitalist part, false on the lack of liberal influence. They’re called gatekeepers, if you’re a scriptwriter (and you’re not) you know about them right from the start.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • Showtime
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 2:23am

      @JZS ~

      No one is trying to BE Ayn Rand. That she was an athiest is of no concern. It does not make her a demon, a devil, an evil person, or even a goody-two shoes. She wrote a book, delivered a message, and lived her life the way she thought it was intended.

      Having lived in Russia and then living in the United States and becoming a U.S. citizen, she would have the experience necessary to understand what the Progressives were aiming for.

      Forgetting all that, all you saw was an opportunity to point out that she was an athiest. What a small mind you have.

      Showtime  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 2:49am

      JZS Laughable….. next

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • blacksmith
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 3:24am

      You just have to love it when the trolls come out from under the bridge!
      Christianity is about free will! The choice to believe or not. There are consequences in your choice like in all choices.
      Buckley is not what I would call a great conservative. He caused a rift in the movement by coming out against Goldwater. A decision that set the movement back for many years.
      Rand must have had a crystal ball to be able to predict what our lives would become in just a short half a century! Read the book and cannot wait to see the movie version.

      Report Post »  
    • Entropy
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 3:51am

      Are you guys sure that is a picture of Ayn Rand at the top? It sure looks like Dana Perino to me. Did they have color photos way back then? Just curious.

      Report Post »  
    • avenger
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 7:57am

      great movie,I am waiting for part 2…..the blond babe sent real tingles up both legs…

      Report Post »  
    • 28_ID
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 8:42am

      @ Darmok

      Ditto regarding your sentiments.

      Report Post »  
    • Ward Dorrity
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 10:40am

      Encinom: you are, of course, insane. If there were a Fookwits Pride Day celebration, your float would be leading the parade down Main Street.

      Report Post » Ward Dorrity  
    • Silversmith
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 10:52am

      I have never read Atlas Shrugged. But if it bothers the trolls here (encinom, sleazy hippo, jzs) then perhaps it is worth the perusal. Congrats guys (or girls) you’re angry rhetoric only furthers your oppositions aims.

      Silversmith

      Report Post » Silversmith  
    • jeepkid99
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:30pm

      so by the terms of jzs,sleazyhippo, and prfctlyfrank; if you agree with the precepts of Rand’s book, you must agree with her every thought about life in general? i’d love to debate you! i can just hear the conversation, i say one thing and you would agree wholeheartedly, but then if i said something completely opposite to test your convictions, you would agree wholeheartedly- because that’s what you are trying to lay on everyone else!
      BTW, i haven‘t read ’atlas shrugged’, but because of all the wailing and knashing of teeth i hear from the lefties about it, it MUST be worth reading which i‘ll do right after i get through with ’the secret of the league’ by Ernest Bramah(supposedly the influence for ‘atlas shrugged’)

      Report Post »  
    • bert2020
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 12:50pm

      I thought the movie was great. I think they are trying to keep the public from giving their reiew of it as well. Get the book on tape it’s much easier to digest that way.

      I want to see them tell the part where the created a Marxist experiment. That must and I mean MUST be told. Most people do not understand what socialism and Marxism is and what type of society we would have. My favorite part is when he says that we all thought we were going to get the rich peoples money.

      Report Post »  
    • Chief Moolah Eggplant
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 3:55pm

      The Olympic bodybuilder Mike Mentzer got me interested in Ayn Rand.
      I’m reading Atlas Shrugged and listening to the book on CD (50 CDs!!! Can you say MP3?)

      So, what is this babble about it being unChristian?
      One should read the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard where the owner said, Isn’t it lawful for me to do what I want to with what I own?
      Socialists and Union bosses would disagree with the pay scale and demand the owner pay the workers according to some “social justice” system that makes it unlawful for the owner to do what he wants with what he owns.
      Many are called but few are chosen.

      Methinks Rand was a closet Christian.

      Report Post »  
    • tifosa
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 4:55pm

      ENTROPY, of course that’s NOT her pic. This is her http://mollyandmary.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/ayn-rand-cigarette.jpg

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • jzs
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 10:55pm

      Why are you getting on my case? I didn’t even post on this thread as you can see.

      So, what did I say that was so wrong?

      Report Post » jzs  
    • atasteoftea
      Posted on April 23, 2011 at 11:23pm

      Everyone who has seen the film is now in danger from government. We now have the message in our mind and lungs. This explains why Democrats, Liberals, and Blood Liberlers have attempted to surpress the release and even the viewing of this film. Her book written in 1950s is a prophacy that we are now living. How could she have see all of this? The message is to leave us alone or taste the lead of our musket fire.

      Report Post »  
    • The Noodle Fish
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 1:21am

      I just saw the movie today. It was actually amazing. I’m gonna read the book ASAP to know what happens next!

      Report Post » The Noodle Fish  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 6:51am

      what greatness did rand attain? she wrote some (mostly poor reviewed books)! she was a rabid atheist and there was not a god yet all these tea party people love her! btw the movie derailed big time!

      Report Post »  
    • memememes
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 6:53am

      it cost over 10 million to make and has been a total flop making less that 2 million! its runs already considered OVER!

      Report Post »  
    • jeepkid99
      Posted on April 24, 2011 at 11:27am

      mes @6:51 today
      see my post yesterday @ 12:30p in this same group. thanks for being an adult and not using the degrading terminology used by others, just because that group has a different opinion(i am being sincere here)
      @6:53
      run is over huh? scrambling to fill print orders is more like it. it won’t become a block buster, but i‘d say it’s doing alright, averaging about the same per theater $ as scream 4. don’t most movies make the majority of $ on the weekend?
      @7:03 “doubled the theaters”, hmm 299 on 4-15-465 on 4-22. just the facts!
      why the hate?

      Report Post »  
    • sleazyhippo
      Posted on April 25, 2011 at 9:59am

      Weekend Box Office Update
      Earning less than $3.25 Million after ten days ($3.09 M on April 24), looks like Atlas Shrugged is headed for the DVD aisle — without recovering its low $10 Million budget. This is disturbing to some, who point out Atlas Shrugged is the #2 published America book (behind the bible), and more patriotic Americans know the exploits of spunky protagonist Dagny Taggert than those of feisty punditician Sarah Palin.
      Don’t look for Overseas Box Office receipts to make things even, because the socialist leaning Europeans, Africans, Asians, South Americans and Canadians, have proven time after time that they will not watch movies unless they are fun and enjoyable. (Australia, maybe not so much.) Besides, the free-loving Ayn Rand philosophy cultists and the anti-government Taxed Enough Already Party movement that took ownership of the movie weeks before it was even released are intrinsically American subcultures.
      So we will soon be looking for the “Atlas Shrugged 4th of July Boxed Set” (1 movie DVD with 5 out-take DVDs and 12 blooper DVDs) for the low price of $117.76 (that’s One, Seventeen-Seventy-Six) to bail out the producer.
      We expect every real patriot to purchase as many sets as possible by canceling their Summer Vacations and applying the gasoline savings.
      It is very apparent that the liberals just decided this movie was going to be killed, one way or another, and they decided to let greedy theater owners do their progressive dirty work.

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • pajamash
      Posted on April 25, 2011 at 7:36pm

      I saw the movie over the weekend. They have done a very good job with the book converting it to movie format. I am looking forward to Part II.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love