connection? Do they think that the American public is too illiterate to understand it? If it was up to me I would nail Ryan to the Rand "cross." Surely you would hammer him to it too...
All in good time.
Those who have read Rand understand her "philosophy" either support it or reject it already and have likely formed an opinion on how it makes them view Ryan.
I don't mean to be disrespectful but those who have not read Rand, or heard Rand, wouldn't really "get" the significance of Ryan's views on her.
The campaign will use it to reinforces it's points with regards to Ryan's policies but that's about it.
I would love to work for Obama and point out how Ryan believes in I rather than We, and how this good Catholic boy is such an admirer of an atheist's beliefs. Like shooting ducks in a barrel, but they better not wait too long if they are to use this wonderful ammo at all...
Doesn't need to yet I have a plan and it's different to I have a plan that's similar to I have a plan & it's the same plan is working well enough on it's own! Along with temporary amnesia of I can't recall & we're not sure of what those figures are. I can't recall clipping a kids hair, he now recalls previous years taxes. I think he's no comment on dressing up as a police officer in college & pulling people over. He's proud of his time at Bain when he created 10,000 jobs no 100,000 jobs no I was never there when that happened PUH LEASE who needs Rand we have floppy disk.
I shared your attitude, labrea, until last night when I drifted off to sleep with CNN on in the background--some political talk show I don't know the name of--Solidad (is that her name?) was in charge. Several people at the table insisted that Obama isn't as strong in several of those key midwestern states as he appears. Supposedly Obama is 6 pts or so ahead of Romney/Ryan there, but the argument was that since Ryan was added to the ticket, Romney has picked up support and those several key states are now seen as "undecided"--close enough, in other words, that they could foresee the possibilities of R/R squeezing ahead, winning those states, and winning the presidential election!
I believe someone also noted that a couple of those key states are also where they passed the stricter ID laws and limited voting hours in an attempt to cut back on the Democratic vote. In other words, the Republican plan just may be working and Romney/Ryan may manage to steal the victory!
I was still thinking about that CNN program when I woke up this morning. Depressing scenario.
Its still early days with the Ryan pick. Remember the first two weeks with Palin? Unlike Palin, where all they had to do was put her in front of a microphone, Ryan has a fairly well established track record - for what its worth - and his budget proposal is the kicker.
Once again, when people find out whats in it - tax free dividends and capital gains, cutting Pell grants, vouchers for Medicare, giving Medicaid to the bankrupt states, etc., support plummets.
I agree with david, it is still early.
He is digging himself a hole. Not only does he embrace her radical views and use them to bolster his radical budget plan which the Catholic Bishops call immoral, but he thinks he can just lie to the American people that he didn't embrace her philosophy (just her bad fiction) as if voters were too stupid to simply look at him on Youtube praising Rand and actually lecturing on Rands philosophy. Perhaps he will figure a way with Romney's help to retroactively not lecture on her.
How much has Ryan actually said about Ayn Rand's writings?
.....a little effort on your part (research) will give you the answer you seek.
Very little now, elvis.
Snipped from a current WaPo article: "In 2005, Paul Ryan explained that he often looks to Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged" as inspiration for his views on monetary policy. "I always go back to, you know, Francisco d'Anconia's speech, at Bill Taggart's wedding, on money when I think about monetary policy," he said in a speech to the Atlas Society."
elvis, he used to say a lot about Ayn Rand--she was his inspiration. He has gone into detail about how he discovered her as a young man (I believe he was still a teenager? or close to it)and how she provided him with the moral basis of his developing political vision and he has even stated her philosophy was a major influence on his thinking throughout most of his adulthood--until he recently needed to renounce her when he found out, to his surprise, that she was an atheist, etc. He didn't know that all those years he claims he studied her and followed her philosophical thinking.
I seem to remember that he was even invited to speak about Ayn Rand at some kind of conference on her life/writings. In other words, his adulation of Ayn Rand was generally known in Ayn Rand circles.
At any rate, there is a lot on the record documenting his long-time adulation of Rand. I'm fuzzy on some of the details right at the moment, but you can easily google details about his active role as a Ayn Rand disciple.
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.
Well he said her writings were responsible for him getting in to politics, that they define his philosophy for governing, he requires all of his staff read her, he gives her books away as Christmas presents, he has made several speeches stating that he is a devotee and has given at least one lecture to the Atlas Society - which is the society of people who embrace Rand. The link will take you to audio and a transcript of the Atlas speech where he states the following:
Some exerpts from the audio (with minute and second markers):
(1:45) I just want to speak to you a little bit about Ayn Rand and what she meant to me in my life and [in] the fight we’re engaged here in Congress. I grew up on Ayn Rand, that’s what I tell people..you know everybody does their soul-searching, and trying to find out who they are and what they believe, and you learn about yourself.
(2:01) I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are, and what my beliefs are. It’s inspired me so much that it’s required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff. We start with Atlas Shrugged. People tell me I need to start with The Fountainhead then go to Atlas Shrugged [laughter]. There’s a big debate about that. We go to Fountainhead, but then we move on, and we require Mises and Hayek as well.
"I always go back to... Francisco d’Anconia’s speech [in Atlas Shrugged] on money when I think about monetary policy."
(2:23) But 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. And the fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism.
(2:38) In almost every fight we are involved in here, on Capitol Hill, whether it’s an amendment vote that I’ll take later on this afternoon, or a big piece of policy we’re putting through our Ways and Means Committee, it is a fight that usually comes down to one conflict: individualism vs. collectivism.
(2:54) And so when you take a look at where we are today, ah, some would say we’re on offense, some would say we’re on defense, I’d say it’s a little bit of both. And when you look at the twentieth-century experiment with collectivism - "that Ayn Rand, more than anybody else, did such a good job of articulating the pitfalls of statism and collectivism"you can’t find another thinker or writer who did a better job of describing and laying out the moral case for capitalism than Ayn Rand.
(3: 21) It’s so important that we go back to our roots to look at Ayn Rand’s vision, her writings, to see what our girding, under-grounding [sic] principles are. I always go back to, you know, Francisco d’Anconia’s speech (at Bill Taggart’s wedding) on money when I think about monetary policy. And then I go to the 64-page John Galt speech, you know, on the radio at the end, and go back to a lot of other things that she did, to try and make sure that I can check my premises so that I know that what I’m believing and doing and advancing are square with the key principles of individualism…
(6:53) Is this an easy fight? Absolutely not…But if we’re going to actually win this we need to make sure that we’re solid on premises, that our principles are well-defended, and if we want to go and articulately defend these principles and what they mean to our society, what they mean for the trends that we set internationally, we have to go back to Ayn Rand. Because there is no better place to find the moral case for capitalism and individualism than through Ayn Rand’s writings and works.
Here is a link that might be useful: Ryan's speech before the Atlas Society
One can only hope that most of these issues will be brought up in the VP debate. I suspect that nothing has gone unnoticed or undocumented by the Democratic side and will be brought up on the debates. At least that's my hope. At the same time I believe the time to strike is whenever something is brought up and is fresh on the public's mind since so many of us seem to have the attention span of fruit flies when it comes to political issues and statements.
Like everything else, the remarks about Ayn Rand's writing are subject to interpretation. "Adulation" or speculation? An example of what is right about the ideas put forth in her writings, or was Ryan inspired by Rand's writings because they made him more aware?
We don't know that his statements about Rand's writings are supportive of the ideas (espoused) in those writings. We only know that those ideas provided him with ideas of his own. Ideas that perhaps are not in accord with what Rand wrote.
Surely being affected by certain ideas does not necessarily mean espousing those same ideas.
Well, I take Ryan at his word. He said (on more than one occasion) things like the following:
But if we're going to actually win this [,] . . . if we want to go and articulately defend these principles and what they mean to our society, . . . we have to go back to Ayn Rand. Because there is no better place to find the moral case for capitalism and individualism than through Ayn Rand's writings and works.
I fail to see what is open to interpretation there. That is a statement he made on multiple occasions in his adult life. What you seem to miss, elvis, is that he was an ENTHUSIASTIC supporter of Ayn Rand's writings and philosophy for most of his adult life, and he made no secret about it. In fact, he bragged about it.
Why are you having so much trouble accepting that well-documented fact?
It is also a fact that this past week, he has suddenly done an about face and made public announcements on his rejection of everything Ayn Rand stands for. Now we can all "speculate" on why he did that--but given the fact that he was just anointed VP candidate, I bet most TV viewers who watched his rejection on TV will attribute his sudden conversion away against Ayn Rand to politics, don't you think?
I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are, and what my beliefs are. It's inspired me so much that it's required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff.
Those are his words.
So elvis, is that what you really think based on what he said? He mentions it affected his "value systems". Sounds a lot like he would espouse those ideas.
I'm just saying.
Elvis, did you read what I posted - Ryan's own words on this? Because it seems like you didn't or maybe you are just splitting hairs to avoid the truth.
It always seems so easy for conservatives to play 6 degrees of separation from Socialism or terrorism when they want to pin something on Obama but when it comes to their own guy, they can't grasp the literal truth sitting right in front of them.
Well, his budget seems to not have strayed too far off the golden path.
In Atlas Shrugged, how big was the military, and what percentage of GDP was swallowed up by the congressional/industrial/military complex?
They can grasp it just fine, they are just masters at "denial".
Rolling, rolling down the river
Elvis read this exerpt from KT's post above because it answers your question on what we know about Ryans views as formed by Ayn Rand. I wish I knew how to change the font to bold so as to emphasize the last sentence.
"3: 21) It’s so important that we go back to our roots to look at Ayn Rand’s vision, her writings, to see what our girding, under-grounding [sic] principles are. I always go back to, you know, Francisco d’Anconia’s speech (at Bill Taggart’s wedding) on money when I think about monetary policy. And then I go to the 64-page John Galt speech, you know, on the radio at the end, and go back to a lot of other things that she did, to try and make sure that I can check my premises so that I know that what I’m believing and doing and advancing are square with the key principles of individualism… "
By the way, the 538 blog had this to say on 8/15 about the effect on Romney post-announcement of Ryan:
Mr. Romney has gained a net of one point, on average, in the eleven polls conducted wholly or partially after his announcement of Mr. Ryan, compared to the prior renditions of the same surveys in the same states. This is a below-average "bounce" for the selection of a vice presidential candidate; in past elections, the bounce has averaged in the neighborhood of 4 percentage points instead.
Here is a link that might be useful: source
and how this good Catholic boy is such an admirer of an atheist's beliefs.
See, but I'm not sure that is anything but a moot point.
For example, Ryan could be an admirer of Ghandi (a hindu) or the Dalai Lama (a buddhist) and not be derided.
So the demonization of atheists or anyone who admires the political philosophies of an atheist would be hypocritical, considering that it is not an issue to admire any other non-Christian.
Frankly, I am a bit surprised to see many liberals eager to highlight the "atheist" angle of the Rand issue, willing to make the trade off between the religion aspect in order to score points for the political aspect.
I think the political philosophies of Rand are sufficient to roast Ryan over... but to attack him for daring to admire the writings of an atheist when you wouldn't do that for a Buddhist or Hindu... I find that very wrong. It's highlighting atheism as if it were an evil in a category all it's own. I can't condone these cheap political points at this expense.
HG probly' because conservatives present themselves as the Christian party, carrying the cross so to speak for all Americans and liberals as a bunch of atheists.
There was a time in this country that I could not tell you what religion if any a president and/or other reps were.
They, republicans, have adapted the banner of Christianity and it is to be expected that there would be some "poking" at the perceived hypocrisy of one of their own being inspired by this "heretic".
I thought that Ryan was a "Christian values" kind of guy and was very anti abortion or maybe I have the wrong guy. If that is true then it emphasizes the half-bakedness of his adulation for Randian philosophy. If those are core values of yours how do you support the philosophy of someone whose core values are so opposed to your own? It is that aspect of the whole thing that is important to me. If he has not thought through what Randian Individualism actually means then does he think at all?
HG probly' because conservatives present themselves as the Christian party,
Regardless of what Republicans present themselves as, do others wish to play into that? To accept that as the default?
For liberals to use and play into that anti-atheism only solidifies the idea that it's okay to portray atheism as some "special" category.
Never, never, never should someone's religious beliefs or lack of religious beliefs be used as a way to discredit them or their followers.** That includes the crowd who used to scream "Kennedy is a CATHOLIC!" or the one screaming "Obama is a MUSLIM!" and the crowd currently screaming "Romney is a MORMON!" ... all three of which have been used to score points for the "BUT HE'S NOT A CHRISTIAN" crowd. It should not make a whit of difference and should not even be mentioned.
**Disclaimer: Yes, I realize that there are some exceptions. Perhaps if your religion is a suicide/homocide cult like Jim Jones or Heaven's Gate or such, I admit I may make an exception.
I thought that Ryan was a "Christian values" kind of guy and was very anti abortion or maybe I have the wrong guy. If that is true then it emphasizes the half-bakedness of his adulation for Randian philosophy.
But here is my point, patricia...
If Ryan was saying that he learned a lot from Buddhist philospohy...people would not be mentioning how Buddhism is not "Christian". We could express our support for the non-violence, or debate vegetarianism, or the method of acheiving peace within ourselves... but we wouldn't be sitting here attacking Ryan as a Christian who dared learn from someone who wasn't Christian.
We can certainly disagree with Rand's political philosophies, just as one might disagree with the Dalai Lama's politcal philosophies... but why would be attack it based on the religious views of the author?
I think that having the U.S. Conference of Bishops condemn Ryan's proposed budget is more important than the fact that Ayn Rand was an atheist. And three cheers for Nuns on the Bus for taking on Paul Ryan and his stinky budget. Catholic Nuns Gun for Paul Ryan
This summer, the outspoken Catholic nun [Sister Simone Campbell] led a bus tour across the country called "Nuns on the Bus," protesting the Wisconsin congressman's proposed federal budget plan, which she says would slash funds for social programs for low-income people. Now she is recruiting teams of sisters to lobby their state legislators to insist on protections for the poor, such as an expansion of Medicaid. She has invited Ryan and Mitt Romney to join her in spending a day with poor people...
Sister Simone says it's not the social programs that are keeping people poor, but rather the economy. "The problem is not enough jobs and low wages," she says, adding: "Catholic teaching is based on solidarity. Ryan doesn't understand that all decisions need to be made with the common good in mind."
Surely you would hammer him to it too...
You jest. When half of one party's supporters believe Obama was born in Kenya (where's that?)...how in the world can you assume that they've ever even heard of Ayn Rand (let alone the concept of objectivism)?
Surely being affected by certain ideas does not necessarily mean espousing those same ideas.
Would the affect then be to the digestion?
"Back in 2005, an up-and-coming lawmaker named Paul Ryan credited the polemical novelist and libertarian Ayn Rand as a central inspiration for his entry into public life. Ryan toiled in those days in relative obscurity, a well-respected but low-profile member of the House of Representatives."
The only think missing was the Dollar Sign pin in the lapel
At Georgetown, Ryan defends budget as fruit of Catholic teaching
A group of 88 Georgetown University faculty and staff members sent a letter to Ryan April 24  outlining their concerns over his "misuse of Catholic teaching" to defend his budget plan. The letter pointed to Ryan's reference to the principle of subsidiarity, which he has used to justify reduced expenditures in nonmilitary areas of the budget and an overhaul of the tax code.
"I don't think he can get away with Catholic social teachings as a cover for his budget cutting," said Jesuit Father Thomas Reese, who organized the distribution of the letter on campus.
"Since Ryan is coming to our campus, the faculty felt that he couldn't just come and leave, but we should initiate a dialogue, a challenge to him because frankly we don't agree with his interpretation of Catholic social teaching," Father Reese said.
Do the right wing Christian T-Ps actually know Ryan's "inspiration" was a Russian atheist? Imagine if he were Obama and the flack he'd receive.
Since Ryan is pro war and anti woman, he is actually not following his idol's philosophy very closely any more which should appease them. .
I don't know that it's a case of name-calling base on religious belief or lack thereof. It's more of a case of embracing one aspect of Objectivism (the small government, market/capitalism-focused society) but then entirely disregarding the method Rand takes to get there. Objectivism is, at its base, a practice of using reason to act in rational self-interest. That requires an ability and a desire to disregard such outside dogma or influence such as government and collective mores, or religious beliefs. There is no room for "faith", either in a deity or a government. So there is definitely no room for using one's faith in a deity to exercise control via government. In fact, this would be completely contrary to Rand's teachings.
It's this disconnect that is seemingly willfully ignored by those in the GOP who claim to embrace all that is Rand. This is something that the Libertarians get pretty much right, but the GOP most certainly doesn't.
The fact that Ryan and many other conservatives embrace an atheist is merely proof (like we needed it) of the hypocrisy of Republican claims of the Godless influence of socialism and liberal philosophy. The aspect of this that concerns me and many others is not the atheist aspect but rather Rand's radical views promoting narrow individual self-interest and the way that this one aspect of Objectivism is being used as a justification for policies that indulge the wealthy with even more tax breaks at the expense of the country's longterm fiscal security and that of most people in the country who aren't rich. Its not a guiding philosophy that seems compatible with the idea that politicians are elected to represent all the people and that government has a role in maintaining fairness and a level playing field.
"Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artists metaphysical value judgments."
-Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead
Many think this is contradictory to Rand's own philosophy.
That being said, there's a lot of disagreement about the modern use of the word "metaphysics", To me, it's the study of discussion about reality which can't be answered by scientific observation and experimentation.
It's been my observation in conversations with the (very few) atheists I know, that this sense of metaphysics is usually disregarded.
So it's no surprise to me that there's a disconnect here. I don't know how I can explain my view on this particular point more plainly than that.
So, back to the OP: "Why doesn't Obama push the Ryan/Rand...?"
Why do YOU think?
I think the best reason was mentioned earlier - not enough people even know who Ayn Rand IS.
Let alone spell her name correctly. You may be right. The crickets are loud on this one.
No surprise there--Ryan Romney and Rand share the same authoritarian regressive mindset, taking advantage of other people, and entitlements that they are denying for those other people. Birds of a feather.
As for the OP's question. Patience, Richard. Timing is everything!
Yes, good idea--the Prez should hire you!
"...and Rand share the same authoritarian regressive mindset, taking advantage of other people,..."
We're talking about AYN Rand, maddie@home.
Brilliant, maddie@home. Not.
The right lane ain't the slow lane for nothing.
Do the right wing Christian T-Ps actually know Ryan's "inspiration" was a Russian atheist?
Lily--religion or none doesn't matter here. They all stem from the same root.
Imagine if he were Obama and the flack he'd receive.
Ya...imagine. The crapstorm it would cause here...
jakabedy explained Randian Collectivism:
"Objectivism is, at its base, a practice of using reason to act in rational self-interest. That requires an ability and a desire to disregard such outside dogma or influence such as government and collective mores, or religious beliefs. There is no room for "faith", either in a deity or a government. So there is definitely no room for using one's faith in a deity to exercise control via government. In fact, this would be completely contrary to Rand's teachings.
It's this disconnect that is seemingly willfully ignored by those in the GOP who claim to embrace all that is Rand. This is something that the Libertarians get pretty much right, but the GOP most certainly doesn't."
The Ryan apologists here like HG and Elvis who unsuccessfully tried to turn this into a counterattack do not understand or will not concede that atheism is central to Collectivism. The Randian Collectiviism which motivates Paul Ryan is contrary to the teachings of Jesus and of the Christan Church. Jesus would have scorned someone arrogant enough to actually write a book about why man should only be motivated by self interest, as if we really need to have that in this world with all the selfishness and greed that abounds. For Paul Ryan, a kid raised in a well-to-do home in an all white town, it took no courage to become a disciple of A-yn Rand and rage against the Welfare State. Ryan formed his views as a naive, spoiled college kid isolated from the reality of the world and all of the problems in society. As such, he is a lightweight with an undergraduate degree and no life experience outside the very protected world that he grew up. he is neither an an economist nor a philosopher, just a rank ideologue of self-centered Right Wing Republican politics.
do not understand or will not concede that atheism is central to Collectivism. The Randian Collectiviism which motivates Paul Ryan
Huh???? Collectivism is what the progressives and socialists want. Ayn Rand lived under that form of government and saw the loss of everything her family had worked for. She became an Objectivist. She also happened to be or become an atheist.
Atheism is central to nothing. Collectivism not inherently atheistic. It is possible to hold communist or socialist economic views while being a theist and it isn't at all uncommon to be an atheist while defending capitalism, a combination often found among Objectivists and Libertarians.
Before one posts one should at least gain a rudimentary understanding of what capitalism and collectivism entail.
When Obama said "you didn't build it" it was a statement of someone who believes in collectivism. He was just wily enough not to voice the rest of his agenda which is "you may have built it but we want it". Similar to the folks who are bitter because Romney built a healthy financial portfolio. He built it but they want it. Never mind they did nothing to earn it. Collectivism says that even though the ant does the work it must share with the grasshopper. Never mind the grasshopper chose not to work or do anything to sustain himself.
I inadvertently typed collectivism instead of objectivism.
There was no need for your sarcastic swipe and I admit my inadvertent error.
Meanwhile you intentionally substitute "capitalism" for "collectivism" which diverts the discussion about the kind of greedy capitalism that Rand and Ryan Republicans want.
Thus... " atheism is central to Randian/Ryan/Republican Objectivism."
The selfishness, greed and lack of any social conscience that is at the heart of objectivism and Right Wing Republican politics is personified by the GOP ticket this year.
Collectivism says that even though the ant does the work it must share with the grasshopper. Never mind the grasshopper chose not to work or do anything to sustain himself.
Who are these grasshoppers that choose not to work and want to be sustained by others? The Welfare Queens from Chicago? Those on Social Security, Medicare, medicaid and Unemployment?
Why can't Republicans just fess up and say what they really mean instead of beating around the bush?
I will say this, now that this Teabag simpleton Paul Ryan is on the ticket, the battle lines have been drawn a little clearer for the electorate.
and unless this election gets stolen in places like Pennsylvania and Ohio with voter suppression tactics, you guys are gonna lose.
When Obama said "you didn't build it" it was a statement of someone who believes in collectivism. He was just wily enough not to voice the rest of his agenda which is "you may have built it but we want it".
He is "just wily enough" ? You mean, he is cocky but not really intelligent?
You may have built it but we want it.
Yes, it is the 1% who "want it" and they get a lion's share of it yet it seems like they just keep wanting more and more and more.
And they can still go to Church! How about that.
Here is a link that might be useful: CEO pay
Suddenly I've become a Ryan apologist. Methinks Heri's comprehension difficulties have returned.
Either that or he's hasn't kicked that lying problem yet.
Posted by heri_cles 10 (My Page) on Sat, Aug 18, 12 at 7:45
"He is "just wily enough" ? You mean, he is cocky but not really intelligent?"
"Wily" means cunning, sly. It does not imply lacking intelligence.
"Yes, it is the 1% who "want it" and they get a lion's share of it yet it seems like they just keep wanting more and more and more."
That's your perception; you are sure within your rights to see it that way, but:
"And they can still go to Church! How about that."
Your religious bigotry is showing.