Government

Did Paul Ryan Really Just ‘Reject’ Ayn Rand?

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan has made no secret of his admiration for Ayn Rand in the past. As far back as 2009, in this article, Ryan was letting his geek flag fly:

To that task, Ryan brings an admittedly geeky head for numbers and detail. He also brings a deep philosophical attachment to market capitalism and “supply-side” economics – a world view shaped by such icons of individualism and free enterprise as Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek.

“The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” Ryan said at a D.C. gathering four years ago honoring the author of “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead.”

This led the likes of New York Times columnist Paul Krugman to describe Ryan as  ”a garden-variety modern G.O.P. extremist, an Ayn Rand devotee who believes that the answer to all problems is to cut taxes on the rich and slash benefits for the poor and middle class.”

There’s just one problem with this whole “Paul Ryan as Ayn Rand cultist” narrative. And that is that there‘s a big difference between being a casual admirer of Rand’s individualist vision, or her views on free markets, and embracing her Objectivist philosophy wholesale. Liberals like Krugman tend to conflate one with the other, usually because pure, unleaded objectivism has a number of politically toxic tenets. It’s a bad faith argument, but it‘s one that Ryan hasn’t taken the time to shoot down.

Until now. From the Huffington Post:

“I reject her philosophy,” Ryan told National Review on Thursday. “It’s an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview. If somebody is going to try to paste a person’s view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas. Don’t give me Ayn Rand.”

Note the wording there. “If somebody is going to try to paste a person’s view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas.” Here is a list of things Ryan is not saying:

1. He thinks Ayn Rand is wrong about economics.

2. He thinks Ayn Rand is wrong about politics.

3. He thinks Ayn Rand is wrong about ethics.

4. He thinks Ayn Rand is right about religion.

He is simply saying he rejects Rand’s epistemological claims, which is a very specific subset of philosophy. And indeed, many people (including and especially Roman Catholics like Paul Ryan) would reject that part of her philosophy in favor of Aquinas.

Unfortunately, the Left didn’t quite get that little bit of nuance. In fact, in the same Huffington Post article linked above, the author spends multiple paragraphs rehearsing all the times Ryan has said he admires Rand (typically on political/economic grounds), as though this somehow contradicts his stated position above (the first few passages of this are below):

But any urban legend about Ryan’s affinity for Rand surely started with Ryan himself, who, prior to this week, had no qualms about gushing about Rand’s influence on his guiding principles.

“The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” Ryan said during a 2005 event honoring Rand in Washington, D.C., the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported in April 2009.

During the 2005 gathering, Ryan told the audience, “Almost every fight we are involved in here on Capitol Hill … is a fight that usually comes down to one conflict — individualism versus collectivism.” The event was hosted by The Atlas Society, which prominently features a photo of Rand on its websiteand describes itself as a group that “promotes open Objectivism: the philosophy of reason, achievement, individualism, and freedom.”

Ryan also said during a 2003 interview with the Weekly Standard, “I give out ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as Christmas presents, and I make all my interns read it. Well … I try to make my interns read it.” He noted that he “looked into” Rand’s work when he was younger, but reiterated that he is a Christian and reads the Bible often.

Note that none of those cited Ryan quotes mentions anything about agreeing with Rand on religion – in fact, Ryan explicitly says he is a Christian and reads the Bible often. This is perfectly consistent with admiring Rand for her political and economic views, but not agreeing with her entire philosophy. However, based on the reaction from HuffPo, apparently this wasn’t clear enough, so Ryan’s spokesperson had to explain it further:

Ryan spokesman Kevin Seifert downplayed the lawmaker’s apparent change of tune on Rand.

“I wouldn’t make too much of this one way or another. Congressman Ryan was not ‘distancing himself’ from Rand, merely correcting several false storylines that are out there, such as the myth that he requires all of his staffers to read Atlas Shrugged. Saying he ‘rejects Ayn Rand’s philosophy’ was simply meant to correct a popular falsehood that Congressman Ryan is an Objectivist — he isn’t now and never claimed to be,” Seifert said in a statement to The Huffington Post.

Of course, this is not a “change of tune,” based on Ryan’s paper trail regarding Rand. Indeed, he has never claimed to agree with her on religion, or on epistemology. What’s so complicated about this is not clear, but hopefully it’s been explained properly now.

Comments (142)

1 2 3
  • HowardSternIsABigot
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:06am

    Big deal, leftist troll shockeed that a person can actually embrace some ideas of Rand and reject others . Trolls spend their lives drinking koolaid and quoting the teleprompter potus, repeating outrageous lies as fact and demonizing anyone that raises a point of concern about the moslem socialist democrat party.
    Vote romney, obama taking us to progressive hell at 120 mph, romney wants to go 95 mph.

    ANSWER: start discussions about word FREEDOM and what it means in the costitution vs its meaning in obamalamadingdongs head. For example, someone should have asked Holder and the lesbianlatina and ugly feminist justices how they felt about white peoples rights when being confirmed. someone should have asked teleprompter what a lynch mob is all about as opposed to rule of law.

    Report Post »  
    • SoNick
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 9:04am

      Racist, sexist, homophobic and completely nonsensical rant. Yeah! Go Freedom!

      Report Post »  
    • HowardSternIsABigot
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 9:33am

      sondick, big words without meaning, you little heterophobic sexist bigot name caller. freedom is beyond your limited understanding, even before your being brainwashed by your slavemasters.

      Report Post »  
    • AOL_REFUGEE
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 10:18am

      What a pile of meaningless gobbledegook this article is. Best to print it on a sheet of toilet tissue and wipe your arse with it.

      Report Post » AOL_REFUGEE  
    • ChildOfTheKing
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 12:05pm

      So, Paul Ryan, ONCE AGAIN, is on target as being totally CORRECT ABOUT AYN RAND.

      Report Post » ChildOfTheKing  
    • destrecht
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:25pm

      Yeah- I have a friend that decided he didn’t like me anymore. He made a big deal out of the fact that I quote both Catholic teachers and Ayn Rand. The article pretty much describes how I feel about her. I like her vision of Government and dislike her vision of atheism. I also have no problem with charity.

      Report Post »  
    • MONICNE
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:05pm

      Why is Representative Ryan disrespecting the memory of Ayn Rand? You cannot cherry-pick “bits” of a philosophy, to mix with other “selected” philosophic bits, if you want to enforce a predictable, stable, efficient economy. Not to mention a “road to prosperity.”

      This sounds like he is trying to mix objective logic with subjective moralistic emotion. Just does not work. I did not always like the puerile Congressman’s pedantic speeches, but we could always, ALWAYS count on him to stick to his young guns, and not pick up the “etch-a-sketch.”

      Could it be he is afraid of Catholic-Americans who will be watching him closely as he tries to remain in the running for Governor Romney’s vice presidential running mate or senior cabinet officer selection?

      This is why we seriously need to broker in President Sarah Palin and Vice President Allen West at the Tampa Convention.

      TEA

      Report Post » MONICNE  
    • Mannax
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 3:06pm

      MONICNE = ENCINOM
      Dude, come on, you aren’t even trying as a troll.

      Report Post »  
    • db321
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:24pm

      Go Paul Ryan – the liberal atheist hate baiters are going to try and silence you – when they do – they will silence all conservatism. I will fight to the death for Conservative Christian Values. There is not a Government on Earth that can save me – my hope is not in a Govt – my hope is not in Obama – my hope and salvation come from Jesus Christ!

      Report Post » db321  
    • jzs
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 5:15pm

      This, of course, is nonsense. Google “Paul Ryan Ayn Rand” and you’ll see, from his own quotes, the lie that this is. Don’t take my word for it!. Do your research! But like the book 1984, he’s trying to erase and now rewrite his own history.

      The question is why. The smart money is that he’s in the running for VP.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • alinga
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:04pm

      Muslims do this every day with the Bible and History. I too am a Ayn Rand student years ago. I reject now her view of Religion but her sense of right and wrong as to the Govt. wanting to steal what is legally ours.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:28pm

      Hey JZS,

      When a liar calls someone else a liar, should we believe that the person the liar says is lying is actually lying, or should we believe that the liar is himself lying?

      Got any links?……credible links?

      That means nothing from politifacts or Wiki.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:33pm

      Oh…JZS, one more thing,

      Do you really want to get in to dueling over 1984 / history re-writing examples?

      And does media smatters pay you extra for always getting your posts right up near the top of page one all the time?

      Funny how that happens all the time.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • blair152
      Posted on April 29, 2012 at 8:24pm

      That’s right. Obama hates white people.

      Report Post »  
    • ksschwandt
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 1:26pm

      Ayn Rand has an awesome philosophy of the subject of economics and of the ultimate hazards of the Collectvism issues. I am an evangelical Christian and understand she was also an atheist, So What! I first read Ayn Rand as a teenager–Atlas Shrugged at age 15–and have read it again more times than I can count. All I could think at 15 was “Wow, someone has solidified my thinking on work ethic, capitalism and bloodsuckers” like Obama wants all of us to become. I love other authors for different issues, but on the subject of Collectivism/Socialism/Communism: this is the ultimate “This could Happen.” Who is John Galt?

      Report Post »  
    • MartinX
      Posted on May 4, 2012 at 7:49pm

      What do you mean Howard Stern is a bigot… you make no sense Howard, you read like a bigot.

      And as far as Ayn Rand’s influence on Paul Ryan, I would suggest that you get better acquainted with radical right wing Libertarianism — specifically “radical selfishness” / “radical self-interest” which is at the heart of today’s radical right wing, as well as Ayn Rand’s selfish oriented philosophy… (altruism is secular a sin in her book)

      There is no real measurable difference between what Ayn Rand’s objectavist philosophy means and that of most any other radical right wing Libertarianism / anarchism means… on the other hand, left leaning libertarianism is about the self interest of the community and not the self interest of the self. It is obvious that each and everyone of us has to look out for our “interest” or what is a good path to take in life (for moral and ethical reasons…(…) but the right right wing nutters like to stress more importance on the radical selfishness of living as though, if we were all as equally selfish, then it all would work out–hunky dory. Hence the problem with mixing the radical right wing nutters with the community of Christianity. Christianity has never been about a focus on selfishness…it has been about altruism, as well as the self, the community, etc.

      Report Post »  
  • KyleD
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 5:58am

    I tend to agree with Ryan. A lot of her basic points are solid but I consider her motivations suspect.

    Report Post »  
    • inblack
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:19pm

      I’ve never had a problem with her motivations – I think she is an philosopher.

      1) Ryan cannot agree with Ayn Rand on religion because she believed that God and Jesus Christ are a lie.
      2) She believed this because religions teach that you do not deserve what you produce.
      3) She also believed this because religion teaches that you must love all men.
      4) She believes that religion cannot be correct because it is at odds with man’s nature. If God created man, in his image and likeness no less, then how can God and man’s being/nature be in conflict?

      Ayn Rand’s view was that man is defined by his nature and his nature requires him to develop himself for his own survival and happiness. He cannot be enslaved to other men and he cannot love what he does not admire – it is unnatural.

      If you believe in God, you cannot reject Ayn Rand’s philosophy, out of hand. It is based on man’s nature. Man’s nature was created by God, so therefore there cannot be a contradiction between man‘s nature and God’s creation, only a misunderstanding of it.

      I have never me a man or a philosopher whose ideas I accept 100%. Only a drone/fool can say they are 100% in agreement with another man. Therefore Paul Ryan’s position is excellent.

      BTW – Albert Einstein did not believe in free will. Does that mean he is smarter than you or dumber?

      Report Post »  
  • Anne G
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 5:10am

    The far left are WMD’s.

    Report Post » Anne G  
    • Kuma with Klaws
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 7:38am

      Yes, they have been weaponized in the last several years….mindless time-bombs just waiting to go off.

      Report Post »  
  • Diane TX
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:15am

    Question: Why hasn’t Obama been vetted by the Media? He’s trying to win a second term, yet we still don’t know what his College and University grades were. That’s because he sealed them as his first Executive Order. Why would he do that, since he claims that he’s so brilliant? If I were so brilliant, I certainly wouldn’t hide that fact. Who paid for Obama’s education? Was it his White grandparents? There isn‘t any shame in grandparents paying for a grandchild’s education, since most grandparents would do that, if they could. Why is everything about Obama so hidden and murky? So far, Obama has been a disaster for the USA. We rejected his Socialist Obama Care, and he told us that we’re going to get it anyway. We reject European Socialism. We’re Americans – NOT Europeans!

    Report Post »  
    • BehindBlueEyes
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 6:08am

      I can tell you one of the things the grandparents did for Obama. They picked a communist named Frank Marshall Davis to mentor Obama during his teen years.
      I can see the influence this has had on Obama’s ideology. America was duped and elected a full blown communist as its President.

      Report Post » BehindBlueEyes  
    • u.citizen.concerned.s
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:47pm

      That is just the tip of the ice berg.

      http://beforeitsnews.com/story/2073/397/Obama_Changed_His_Name_In_Canada.html

      Report Post »  
    • texasbeta
      Posted on April 29, 2012 at 2:58pm

      You don’t seal college grades ******. You don’t have public access to them. Tell me, what did Bush make his 2nd year at Yale? Ya don’t know do ya? That‘s because he didn’t release his grades. You have no legal right to have his grades, and no President in history released his college grades. Face it…your dishonest at your heart, or an idiot.

      Report Post »  
  • Thomas_Jefferson_Lives_Now
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 3:03am

    Honestly does it matter? Paul Ryan is a Progressive who happily endorsed another Progressive “Willard” Mitt Romney.

    Way to go America. In 2008, you pushed Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo out of the Race to give Progressive McCain a chance. Now, you’ve pushed Michele Bachmann out of the Race to give Progressive Romney a Chance. When will you awaken?

    Report Post » Thomas_Jefferson_Lives_Now  
    • BehindBlueEyes
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 6:16am

      I’m wide awake now and if you choose to wine about not getting your way then good luck. If we don’t get behind Mitt Romney America is finished. It will become a communist country because that is the Sorros/ Obama agenda.
      America is the only country preventing world wide communism.
      So Thomas I would respectively suggest you need to wake up.
      Vote for Romney at least he’s not a commie.

      Report Post » BehindBlueEyes  
    • johnnycatt
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 6:51am

      It’s fun to watch the collapse of our society. Our choices are Obama and Romney, I can see little difference in their philosophies. Long after we are gone, maybe someone, somewhere, will pick up the writings of Jefferson, Madison and Washington (NOT Hamilton) and start over. Maybe they will have the benefit of seeing where our grandparents and parents made mistakes or where Mr. Jefferson’s philosophy was perverted to create the totalitarian state that we will perish under… may the coming dark ages not be as long as the last “Dark Ages!”

      Report Post »  
    • Challenge_Falsehood
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 7:32am

      Ryan is a progressive? Come on. He may not be as conservative as you on certain policy issues but he is neither a progressive nor a rino. Your comment would be stronger without the ad hominem attack. From my perspective, he is one of the few Republicans actually trying to solve the budget crisis rather than throwing gasoline on the fire or picking up his marbles and going home.

      Report Post »  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:16am

      The good news ……we don’t have NeoLib Paul

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
    • justangry
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:35am

      @Republicorp, Do you realize the two figures in modern history most associated with Neoliberalism are Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan?

      Report Post » justangry  
    • endgamer
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:42am

      Jcatt I agree with you,, Again the establishment choices have been set by the media, The Blaze and Glenn are creating the Neo-Religous Right before our eyes and “they” claim to be ( at least Glenn does) Libertarian. This is where we find out where the Tea Party was duped!! The GOP did this and is now distancing themselves from true constitutional conservatism ( aka libertarian or Classic Liberal DEF: Classical liberalism is the philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets.) . Neocon GOP be warned! Your party is about to have wholesale changes.. Your colonialist days are numbered & when it hits the papers it’s already a done deal.. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-26/the-ron-paul-effect

      Report Post » endgamer  
    • DeVain
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:38pm

      @leader1776…I am unaware of that. I am aware she studied in the St. Petersburg Dept. of Social Pedagogy and majored in History. Maybe at some point maybe she took a psychology class. I am aware though that it had nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I can only assume you are making an accusation in the attempt to make her sound dumb.

      It’s not working.

      Report Post » DeVain  
  • Eyeball
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:23am

    I too have always admired Ayn Rand. I don’t care much about her religious beliefs or lack there of, but she is too extreme and extremism in any form is bad. However, if our country move in her direction with moderation, then we could get back to a more purer form of capitalism and rid our economy of crony capitalism.

    Report Post » Eyeball  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:26am

      Wait..extreme love and goodwill is bad?

      Just asking.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • KyleD
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 5:54am

      @Ghostofjefferson

      Extreme love is very bad. It drives people to do crazy things like kill people who they perceive as stealing their love interest. Extreme goodwill doesn’t happen as often but taken to the extreme you can give away every penny and every morsel of food to those around you, eventually leading to your death.

      Report Post »  
    • BehindBlueEyes
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 6:29am

      I didn‘t read the book so I don’t know what extreme love and goodwill is. But I do know we have a whole generation of young clueless adults that are narcissists because we gave them everything they wanted and then some.
      Now they have a sugar daddy in the WH.

      Report Post » BehindBlueEyes  
    • DeVain
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 8:37am

      @ghostofjefferson, To love is to value. Only a rationally selfish man, a man of self-esteem, is capable of love—because he is the only man capable of holding firm, consistent, uncompromising, unbetrayed values. The man who does not value himself, cannot value anything or anyone.

      The practical implementation of friendship, affection and love consists of incorporating the welfare (the rational welfare) of the person involved into one’s own hierarchy of values, then acting accordingly.

      One gains a profoundly personal, selfish joy from the mere existence of the person one loves. It is one’s own personal, selfish happiness that one seeks, earns and derives from love.

      A “selfless,” “disinterested” love is a contradiction in terms: it means that one is indifferent to that which one values.

      Concern for the welfare of those one loves is a rational part of one’s selfish interests. If a man who is passionately in love with his wife spends a fortune to cure her of a dangerous illness, it would be absurd to claim that he does it as a “sacrifice” for her sake, not his own, and that it makes no difference to him, personally and selfishly, whether she lives or dies.

      Love is not self-sacrifice, but the most profound assertion of your own needs and values. It is for your own happiness that you need the person you love, and that is the greatest compliment, the greatest tribute you can pay to that person.

      (compiled from interviews of Ayn Rand)

      Report Post » DeVain  
    • Leader1776
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 12:24pm

      @DeVain
      You DO realize Rand took freshman psych three times before passing it, don’t you?!

      Report Post » Leader1776  
  • Joss
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:14am

    AYN RAND and Greenspan were BFF. I appreciate her views, but they are always suspect.

    Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:25am

      Wow, that canard.

      Have you even bothered to read Rand’s history? She had a huge argument and then split from Greenspan. He has denounced her as well. Being “bff” (God, what an effeminate term) at one time, does not mean always. Sorry.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
  • ChevalierdeJohnstone
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:09am

    This is one of those non-news stories you have to publish because the left is so awfully stupid.

    Report Post »  
  • lassiegirldawn
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:23am

    With a father that wants to legalize drugs and prostitution, what can you expect?

    Report Post »  
    • Huguenot Descendant
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:15am

      Did you just mix up Paul Ryan with Rand Paul? Or does Paul Ryan’s dad want to legalize drugs and prostitution? I don‘t know Paul Ryan’s dad to well so I can’t tell.

      Report Post » Huguenot Descendant  
  • lassiegirldawn
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:23am

    That doesn’t surprise me that the Royal Society is involved, they are a bunch of inbreeds that have always been nuts in any ways they deal with people. Syphilis has been carried through centuries of the Royal Society’s brains and carries on in the gene pool. All the others I have no idea for an excuse.

    Report Post »  
  • cuinsong
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:20am

    Is their not better things to report on?
    Like I care about Ayn Rand! Real news?

    Report Post » cuinsong  
  • AshleyTK
    Posted on April 28, 2012 at 12:04am

    Pure, unleaded laissez-faire, please.

    Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:01am

      Most people don’t understand Rand. They believe that she proposed that a man valued himself above all else. In fact, the opposite is the case. Take a father for example. How many fathers would jump in front of an axe murderer to even possibly save the life of their loved ones? Under the objectivist views of Rand, this man has made a determination that what is important to him is that his loved ones remain alive and unharmed even if it means that he will suffer terrible agony and death head on. How anyone can conflate such a thing with being callous or uncaring is unbelievable.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:11am

      @SGTB

      Because most against Rand hate her because she presents a sound case for individualism in ways that confound their beloved pseudo-intellectual heros. As is the norm in that situation, lies, sneers, screaming and hate are the order of the day.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • MammalOne
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 9:55am

      SGBT

      Plus, the idea that human beings can be compassionate and free without religion goes against the narrative of the christian right so they feel they must slander the message to discredit the possibility.

      Report Post » MammalOne  
    • Enough is Enough__Oath_Keeper
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:32pm

      Right on SGBT

      Report Post » Enough is Enough__Oath_Keeper  
  • flagbearer
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 10:52pm

    The plot of Ayn Rand’s ATLAS SHRUGGED has parallels to what is happening today. You have Warren Buffet, the Bershire railroad, the pipeline, and substitute oil for copper, and the plot is almost identical—crony capitalism at its worst exposed, if only the media would report it. No conservative has ever embraced everything about Ayn Rand, and the liberals/progressives just can’t get a handle on it. The fact that she escaped communist Russia under Stalin is rarely discussed by them, only that she was an atheist with extreme liberal views. They just can’t accept that her views of capitalism and individual liberty and wealth could coexist with those views. There‘s a part of their brains that just doesn’t work/comprehend the depth of it.

    Report Post »  
    • Stoic one
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 11:59pm

      I am currently on pg 800 or so. Swap out a few terms and this book is VERY DISTURBING in how it is mirroring what is happening on the entire planet.

      Report Post » Stoic one  
    • Cesium
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:03am

      Maybe we should listen to her views on religion as well!!!

      Report Post »  
    • Akridgerunner
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:19am

      I knew nothing about Atlas Shrugged but picked it up as an audio book on 50… that’s right…50 cd’s. The first few discs covering character development put me to sleep but as I got into it and saw the parallels of how it relates to things going on today I got totally hooked and just finished it off a few days ago. What a book! It book could have been written yesterday afternoon and it would be as relevant as anything else written about the US at this point in history. Unbelievable. Having grown up in Russia she would well know how a government run amuck can screw with a successful economy and totally destroy it. Anyone who has not read it should think about doing so.

      Report Post »  
    • dataweaver
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 5:49am

      @Cesium: I tend to be in the same boat as Ryan, in that I tend to agree with a lot of what Ayn Rand had to say, but I don’t accept all of it. In particular, I don’t accept her beliefs about religion. And paradoxically, this is very much in keeping with the individualist elements of her overall philosophy: I have thought things through for myself, and I‘ve decided for myself what makes sense and what doesn’t.

      Report Post »  
  • Wakeup Maggie
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 9:55pm

    Everybody knows liberals do nothing but lie

    Report Post » Wakeup Maggie  
    • 13th Generation American
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:26am

      Iran-Contra

      Weapons of Mass Destruction

      Quit Lying

      Report Post » 13th Generation American  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:21am

      13TH DEGENERATE AMERICAN, Unlike you I lived through those days and was already on my second tour in Germany when this came out. Oh yeah, don‘t confuse these hostages with Carter’s screw up with Iran and the embassy hostages. This was a separate and later situation with only 7 hostages. As it says below the knowledge was vague at the time.
      To this day, it is unclear exactly what Reagan knew and when, and whether the arms sales were motivated by his desire to save the U.S. hostages. After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the United States did not trade arms for hostages.
      As for Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction, go back and look up the statements made by all of the democrats to include Bill and Hillary Clinton claiming that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and cried to American that something must done about it. Actually, it Hussein bragging to the world that he did have large amounts of such weapons that caused all of this fervor. Funny how the democrats changed their minds once Bush actually did something about it. But, there were weapons of mass destruction discovered. The dems and media just tried to brush it away as nothing or at least just not enough to be credible. Plenty of chemical weapons, 7 tons of yellow cake uranium in one find alone, and there were several others. Go ahead and look it up. Fool.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • eagle2715
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:55am

      They also found several trashed mobile facilities for making and storing Anthrax, as well as chemical agents that were rendered inert due to exposure to the desert environment for several months… So they weren’t at the time discovered “WMDs”, but they were at one point…..

      Report Post » eagle2715  
    • 1TrueOne55
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:59am

      @rjjing:
      Sadam Hussien had chemical weapons that were supplied by Donald Rumsfeld and George H.W. Bush during the Reagan administration to fight against the Iranians because of the hostage crisis. And when our DoD went to get back the left over supply Iraq refused to do so and that is what lead George W. Bush to go after Iraq because the chemical weapons used against the Kurds were more than likely the same weapons supplied by our DoD to Iraq in their war with Iran.

      Report Post » 1TrueOne55  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 3:41am

      WakeupMaggie, I think I have something to say to you. It is progressives that lie. They are in both parties and are not just liberals. Everyone needs to start seeing this or we are never going to fix anything.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
  • South Philly Boy
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:55pm

    Go Paul Ryan Go

    Report Post » South Philly Boy  
  • Matrix22
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:38pm

    Wow, the trolls are out on this one huh!

    Report Post »  
    • hillbillyinny
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 6:49am

      No date for them on a Friday night. If you sit in your parent’s basement all of the time, you’re married to the basement!

      Report Post »  
  • ConservativeMajority
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:12pm

    Dumb. This is bad for Ryan but sitting in Wright’s church for 20 years means nothing? Please

    Report Post »  
    • GoodSis
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 9:19pm

      Any American who truly believes in INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS would find Ayn Rand’s writings INCREDIBLY INSPRING. If they are a Christian, they can easily reject the atheist part of Objectivism. One particular Rand book, ANTHEM, a short story about the creation of a society in which everyone lives for the government, no one refers to themselves or others by their names—only as “We”, and all aspects of their lives are controlled by the government (government chooses the waking hour, chooses their life’s career, denies marriage and child raising). Electricity or other energy sources are not in use and discovery and innovation are forbidden, with life hard, laborious and dull. Hopefully, this is not where we are headed.

      I’ve read this book, and few others to my child this year. Now, even she can spot from a mile away a progressive, socialist or communist idea or plan heard in school or on the news. She immediately tells me about it.

      As a Mom, I feel this poem by Ayn Rand well describes how FREEDOM should be viewed and protected as the precious gift from the Founding Fathers that it is.

      IRREPLACEABLE SPARK

      “Do not let your fire go out,
      Spark by irreplaceable spark.

      In the hopeless swamps of the
      not quite, the not yet, and the not at all,
      Do not let the hero in your soul perish,
      And leave only frustration for the life you deserved,
      but never have been able to reach.

      The world you desire can be won,
      it exists, it is real, it is possible, it is yours.”

      Report Post »  
  • atrain
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:49pm

    Who is John Galt?

    Report Post »  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:01am

      Moreoil, The Tea Party was initiated by Ron Paul and his supporters on Dec, 16, 2007 with a moneybomb on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. Supporters gathered together to re-inact it by throwing boxes into rivers with IRS, Open Borders, Patriot Act, Homeland Security, End the FED, etc… on the boxes. It started as a protest to the government for smaller government, ending the wars, fiscal responsibility, ending the Federal Reserve. Those are still the main view of real Tea Party activists, before the Koch Bros and GOP clammered on.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bNiDx7qTjA

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Enough is Enough__Oath_Keeper
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:27pm

      He is John Gault!

      Report Post » Enough is Enough__Oath_Keeper  
  • recoveringneocon
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:48pm

    Some of bills Paul Ryan voted for:

    Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act
    Federal Aviation Administration
    National Defense Authorization Act
    Increasing the Debt Ceiling
    Ground Forces in Libya
    Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act
    Patriot Act
    Unbalanced Budgets

    Just another Fake Conservative , Enemy of the People, Constitution, and the Republic.

    Report Post » recoveringneocon  
    • justangry
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:01pm

      Don’t forget he voted “NAY” on the balanced budget admendment. He’s a swell guy though.

      Report Post » justangry  
    • Classical Liberal
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 11:11pm

      Yup. Seems like the “well informed” tea party is a thing of the past.

      It’s been replaced by a bunch of religious wack-jobs who will happily swallow the crap they are spoon-fed and vote for the politicians they are told to vote for.

      Glenn beck has changed. The march of tyranny goes on.

      Report Post » Classical Liberal  
    • moreoilplease
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:55am

      Classic, religious “wacko’s” and anti-religious whack jobs are the same to me. I’m just spit balling, but you probably fall into one of those categories. You also implied that in the past the Tea Party was well informed and now they are not. The Tea Party consists of thousands of individual groups across the nation with general excepted ideas like small government etc. but they don’t all agree on everything. So saying the Tea Party is, was or never was well informed is silly. Some are some aren’t.

      So sit on the sidelines because “it’s all rigged” or so and so is a sell out and we will never get it back. Politics is a nasty, necessary business! You are never going to have a perfect candidate.

      Report Post »  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:08am

      Moreoil, sorry, my reply ended up on the post above.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • endgamer
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 6:52am

      All the more reason to vote for the Rand Paul budget!! Then throw the Neocons and Rinos out next election. A little note, Ron Paul disciples and the revolution are taking over the Republican party and platform. The GOP takeover will be complete nationwide by 2016.. Some inside info.

      Report Post » endgamer  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:07pm

      Endgamer, So true that is. We are gathering up the chair seats at county and state levels all over the country. We live in exciting times and are experiencing a second revolutionary war here in America. This time it is being done by stealth, knowledge of the system, and determination. You will not find the determination from Romney supporters, as they are mostly people blinded by the media and think they have to just go and pull the lever.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
  • lukerw
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:48pm

    In a Fight between Marx and Rand, who would Win?

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • socialism.rocks
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:03pm

      leona blavatsky = key to ayn rands objectivism
      Under true communism, Marx said there would not even be a government. The state would simply wither away and disappear
      libertarianism is further left…. then socialism
      people who are educated understand libertarianism= hard c0re communism
      socialism is more right=then left it leaves people “property rights”
      libertarians dont even understand what they follow ~

      socialism is just acceptable standards= “Free enterprise” for the people pick the value of goods services wages
      libertarianism is absolutism
      absolutism is tyranny
      thats why i get giggles when libertarians talk about freedom~

      Report Post » socialism.rocks  
    • The_Cabrito_Goat
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:19pm

      Uh?

      Report Post » The_Cabrito_Goat  
    • Baikonur
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:52pm

      @socialism.rocks
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:03pm
      ‘blavatsky = key to ayn rands objectivism
      Under true communism, Marx said there would not even be a government. The state would simply wither away and disappear’
      *************************
      I agree. Marx was more descriptive than prescriptive. He was a historian. He spoke of gigiantic, inevitable, automatic movements of history. His idea, the economics is the driving force of history, si the accepted theory in academic circles for many decades because it is true.

      As for Madame Blavatsky, I find her a fascinating person, as I do Gurdjeef and Ouspensky.

      Report Post » Baikonur  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 12:12am

      Marx was a loon that lived in squalor.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 2:29am

      @Rocks

      That’s simply nonsense. Rand is on record, repeatedly, against anarchism. Your straw man couldn’t even weather a gentle breeze.

      Slainte.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • tifosa
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:04pm

      The PERFECT DEFINITION of the Republican Party: Fascism personified!
      http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • inblack
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 3:33pm

      @SOCIALISM.ROCKS

      Your posts read like 1984 doublespeak. Are you a propagandist for the Communist party?

      Libertarianism is liberty. Freedom to make your own decisions without the government.
      Communism is a forced socialism where no one may make their own decisions, where no one may own anything, and the communist party elite, who like Obama are smarter than everyone else, make the decision for you.

      You are obviously an enemy of personal freedom and for using the power of the govt to force your view on others.

      Republicans need to start taking liberty more seriously. It doesn’t matter what you think someone SHOULD do, only that they do not hurt others if THEY chose to do it.

      Report Post »  
    • socialism.rocks
      Posted on April 29, 2012 at 12:07am

      @inblack i dare you to go to europe as a “teaparty libertarian”… and meet up with some of real libertarians… libertarianism is not american by any means… its is further left then communism… go take a fricken political theory course
      libertarianism is further left then communism go read any of the founders of the libertarian movement… any of them
      you can think ayn rand was a libertarian she was not
      you can think libertarianism is just anti big-government its not
      you can believe what you will but the libertarians i know would kill you for being a right wing corporatist…
      you can scream the founders were libertarians anyone who has studied history knows they loathed libertarianism as much as conservativism

      i dare any libertarian tea-party folk go to any european country- even austria and try to protray themselves as real libertarians
      like i said no teaparty person even has a clue what they follow they are the biggest birdbrains of all time

      Report Post » socialism.rocks  
    • inblack
      Posted on April 29, 2012 at 12:58am

      @SOCIALISM.ROCKS

      You are so hilarious. Like I care what someone in Europe thinks.
      No wait – try reading Frederic Bastiat – maybe that will help you understand.

      Hitler was a socialist and Stalin – you wear that name like you are proud of it.
      Try going to Poland or the Ukraine and tell them how proud you are of your heroes.

      Any form of large govt has the power to oppress. And, large govt is constantly under the risk of corruption. The US govt has fallen prey to this – billions spent on lobbying, every citizen voting to get their Obama money from the taxpayers who are under threat of prison for not paying for the handouts to the free loaders.

      Maximum Freedom and Minimum Government are what the founding fathers preached. Call it what you will, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

      One last thing – they warned us about people like you. People who try to play word games, who rewrite history and promise people they can have anything they want without working for it.
      A lie from the father of all lies.

      Report Post »  
  • 2adrunk
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:34pm

    The ratio of S&P500 CEO to the typical worker has risen again. It is at 380 to 1. In 1980 it was 42 -1.

    the weathy are ripping us off and using their mouthpieces to pull it off. Want proof? Where is the money going? Who is getting richer? And who does the right wing say is taking the money…the poor… go figure

    don’t fall for the rubber neck trick.

    Report Post »  
    • gobnait
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:25pm

      Nobody’s stopping you from attaining similar success in this great nation but you and your defeatist attitude.

      Report Post »  
    • socialism.rocks
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:26pm

      did you know the old system of taxation… when taxes rates were high 80 plus percent prior to reaganomics they would pay the employee’s higer wages to transfer corporate tax to the individual over the corporation corporations less power
      supplyside economics is the reverse… corporations purposely cutting taxes at the individual rate to the corporate rate “and they love it they say we pay it all” its unfair its unfair
      any corporation could instantly transfer the corporate tax rate to the individual just by paying the employee’s a higher wage the corporate tax rate would go to the individual
      but it would lose them power “corporations is about absolute power”~ to dictate

      double the wages of workers… would make corporations make less high margins of money and pay less in taxes
      it evens out…… corporations dont lose money in the end they just pay less in taxes and have less power
      more power the the people is what corporations dont want

      Report Post » socialism.rocks  
    • inblack
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:00pm

      @SOCIALISM.ROCKS

      What is your native language?

      1) You are off topic anyway, if a CEO makes money as claimed by 2ADRUNK then that is not taxed as corporate money, in fact it lessens the corporate profit just like paying a clerk would.

      2) It is not the govt role to make things fair. The govt is a tool to protect us from foreign threat and to enforce our liberty – not attack our liberty.

      3) A flat tax – say of $10,000 – paid by citizens is the only fair tax. I suppose you could make the argument that if you cannot afford the tax, then you pay what you can.

      4) A flat percentage tax – say 10% – is immoral. Why should someone who makes $1M pay $100,000 when someone who makes $1000 pays only $100. Do they not receive the same benefit of justice and protection.

      5) By what right do you force people to pay more and by what right do you force people to support you? Who are you to tell a corporation how to allocate their money.

      Start your own company and try instituting your marxist philosophy.

      Report Post »  
    • inblack
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 4:48pm

      @2ADRUNK

      You are believing and regurgitating communist propaganda.

      Do a quick google search of the richest Americans compared to the US GDP.

      Bill Gates, who is far and away the richest capitalist in our time is not even near the top.

      Then look through the list again and notice that the names are mostly familiar, not because they were rich, but because they built this country AND because they turned their money into the organizations that even today support us. Andrew Carnegie was rich, but his trusts supported thousands of libraries, research at Carnegie Mellon University, and they are still supporting PBS and educational shows today. The same can be said for any others e.g. Duke University.

      You need to focus on what people produce, not their money. Money is just the reward for what people produce. Without steel, we would not have skyscrapers and would not have been able to defend ourselves after pearl harbor. Without oil and gas, we would not have been able to power the industrial revolution or the computer age. Cars, oil, steel, coal, computers – these are the things that make people rich. Ultimately these things improve our lives and and make us rich, and the rich men spend their money and it all comes back to us.

      Report Post »  
  • TOMSERVO
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:31pm

    Aquinas, eh?

    “Things which are of human right cannot derogate from natural right or Divine right. Now according to the natural order established by Divine Providence, inferior things are ordained for the purpose of succoring man’s needs by their means. Wherefore the division and appropriation of things which are based on human law, do not preclude the fact that man’s needs have to be remedied by means of these very things. Hence whatever certain people have in superabundance is due, by natural law, to the purpose of succoring the poor. For this reason Ambrose [Loc. cit., 2, Objection 3] says, and his words are embodied in the Decretals(Dist. xlvii, can. Sicut ii): “It is the hungry man’s bread that you withhold, the naked man’s cloak that you store away, the money that you bury in the earth is the price of the poor man’s ransom and freedom.” (Question 66, Article 7.)”

    Report Post »  
    • Baikonur
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:46pm

      @’“It is the hungry man’s bread that you withhold, the naked man’s cloak that you store away, the money that you bury in the earth is the price of the poor man’s ransom and freedom.”’

      **************

      I am amazed. You are going to make me want to stop by church.

      Report Post » Baikonur  
    • oldironsides
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 11:20pm

      right on Aquinas – It is a morally duty for individuals who have abundance to share with those that don’t – as in charity. Not right for overlords to confiscate a portion of that abundance and redistribute it.

      Report Post »  
  • socialism.rocks
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:29pm

    lmao running from rand now~
    ha ha ha ha~%~!%~%~%^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Report Post » socialism.rocks  
    • Psychosis
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:46pm

      ha ha ha ha

      your an id.iot

      ha ha ha hhhahahahaaaa

      Report Post » Psychosis  
    • socialism.rocks
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 9:57pm

      how much in foriegn aid is spent each year…google it
      how much in corporate welfare is used each year google it
      how much in welfare for poor people all combined google it
      foriegn aid is about 50 billion and growing
      corporate welfare is about 180 billion a year and growing
      welfare for poor people is around 17 billion and growing
      now who should get their welfare cut
      idiot
      paul ryran and your ilk are pro..foriegners over american pro… corporation over the american people…
      it says a lot about paul ryran and you ~

      Report Post » socialism.rocks  
    • portague
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 12:37am

      It depends on what one classes as welfare if you count ss, medicare, medicaid, foodstamps. etc. it goes well beyond 1T a year. Companies appling for tax deductions to pay less in taxes is not welfare because everyone has access to some form of them if they know what to look for.

      Report Post »  
  • Jackie Rogers, Jr.
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:28pm

    What does Paul Ryan have to do with episstemology? He’s a congressman not a urologist

    Report Post » Jackie Rogers, Jr.  
  • MONICNE
    Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:26pm

    Holy Smack!

    Why does Representative Paul Ryan feel the need to apologize for his hero?

    Why is this author protecting Congressman Ryan’s honor? This is embarrassing.

    Could it be the Roman Catholic-Americans are harassing him?

    TEA

    Report Post » MONICNE  
    • 338lapua
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:41pm

      Take your meds and eat your Spagettios before they get cold.

      Report Post »  
    • jhaydeng
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:45pm

      He’s one of the few trying to get something done!

      Report Post »  
    • Baikonur
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:02pm

      Of course he is reacting to the slap down by the Bishops:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/18/ryan-budget-catholic_n_1434919.html

      ”Catholic Bishops Say Ryan Budget Fails Moral Test ‘

      Report Post » Baikonur  
    • Baikonur
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 8:24pm

      @jhaydeng
      Posted on April 27, 2012 at 7:45pm
      ‘He’s one of the few trying to get something done!’
      *************
      Well, it seems the faculty and administrators of Georgetown University think that what he is trying to get done is:

      ‘..misusing Catholic social teaching in defending his budget, which hurts the poor by proposing significant cuts to anti-hunger programs, slashing Pell Grants for low-income students and calling for a replacement of Medicare with a voucher-like system.’

      Thery go on to say:

      “As scholars, we want to join the Catholic bishops in pointing out that his budget has a devastating impact on programs for the poor,” said Jesuit Father Thomas J. Reese, one of the organizers of the letter. “Your budget appears to reflect the values of your favorite philosopher, Ayn Rand, rather than the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Her call to selfishness and her antagonism toward religion are antithetical to the Gospel values of compassion and love.”

      Report Post » Baikonur  
    • SgtB
      Posted on April 28, 2012 at 1:22am

      @ Jaydheng, Paul isn’t getting anything done. He has a well thought out plan. That is for sure, but the facts are that he is not looking for a way to take us out of debt or even balance the budget of the federal government in the near future. He is trying to help, but he isn’t making bold enough steps to curb the crisis that is quickly befalling this nation. So far it just looks like more left vs. right politics without any real headway on the real issues. That is why the 2 party system should go the way of the dodo or the dinosaur.

      Report Post » SgtB  
1 2 3

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