Lawrence O'Donnell on Ayn Rand and Paul Ryan

[George H. Smith]

This is Lawrence O'Donnell's third discussion (from last night) of Rand and Ryan. I usually cannot stand O'Donnell, but this is well done.

I couldn't figure out a way to embed this video from the MSNBC website:

http://www.bing.com/...yn-rand/6fmjwnr

Ghs

[syrakusos]

Thanks for the links! I watched all three. Usually, I would not. I had to google Lawrence O'Donnell and then read Wikipedia. I was surprised to learn of his involvement with The West Wing. It is one of our favorite shows - we own all seven seasons on disk. We also often read the credits when they roll, but his name just had not stuck. He is a compelling presenter. And he is correct about Rand and Ryan.

I think also that these presentations of Rand's ideas certainly do not take anything away from her. He was objective and truthful. I suspect that many in his audience did not know of her opposition to the war in Vietnam or her dislike of Ronald Reagan. (In fact many of the conservatives within the Objectivist social matrix are in denial about Rand's opposition to American involvement in World War II.)

I agree also that, as O'Donnell put it, that if President Obama cited a Russian atheist - would that be Lenin? - as his leading light, the right wing media would be relentless, as indeed, the left wing media is now.

(About embedding media here: When the software upgrades were installed one or two rev-points back, it stopped working in an intuitive way. It still works, but I cannot tell you what clues and cues to look for. You can see the icon, I trust: lower row below the Text Colors A and the Emoticon Smiley; between the Unlike and the <Code> brackets. But I could not tell you what happens when you click it. It does not seem to work for me... then it does. I have problems sometimes just with Bold and Italics and have to hard code them. It's the software version. It might get fixed with the next patch, release, revision, or version.)

[9thdoctor]

I couldn't figure out a way to embed this video from the MSNBC website:

It's on YouTube already. This stuff's pouring out in a flood.

[studiodekadent]

So many articles in which Paul Ryan is "applauded" by Objectivists....

Ryan is dangerously anti-Objectivist. I will accept that the Ryan budget is an incremental improvement over the current one (especially in that it simplifies the tax code). BUT.

1) Romney and Ryan disagree on a lot, and Romney's 4% of GDP defense spending plan constitutes a massive increase above the Ryan budget. Basically, voting Romney is extremely unlikely to get the Ryan budget passed.

2) Ryan is phenomenally bad on civil liberties issues. Pro life and anti gay doesn't even begin to cover it.

3) Ryan supported TARP, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D the USA PATRIOT Act and every single one of Bush's wars. You know, those massive expansions of intrusive government!

Romney-Ryan is a ticket back to the George W. Bush era, with the added drawback of associating Ayn Rand with religionist warmongering statist corporatism. Actually, scratch "ticket back" since Obama is basically continuing the George W. Bush era... it's a ticket guaranteed to perpetuate the George W. Bush era.

Objectivists, above all other people, should be outraged. We should repeatedly and strenuously oppose Ryan and Romney.

The simple fact is that if Romney wins, there is a potential economic benefit. Note "potential," and a potential which Romney's own policy preferences incline towards squashing. However, there are certain costs on social issues and foreign policy, and ideological costs imposed by the Rand-Ryan connection.

Romney only picked Ryan in order to provide a certain level of fiscal-conservative credit to his ticket. It is an attempt to pander to the libertarian-leaning. It is a transparent attempt to get as much of the libertarian, Gary Johnson, and Ron Paul voters behind him.

The potential damage this can do to Objectivism and libertarianism is immense. We should not let the backward, backwater, religionist, anti-cosmopolitan, mystic, warmongering, statist Conservatives co-opt our ideas and the passion that many people have for them.

Romney and Ryan do not deserve to be voted for. Vote for Gary Johnson, or possibly write in Ron Paul, but don't sanction Romney or Ryan.

[Selene]

Romney and Ryan do not deserve to be voted for. Vote for Gary Johnson, or possibly write in Ron Paul, but don't sanction Romney or Ryan.

Andrew:

Depending on:

1) how close it is in a particular libertarian/objectivist's state, I completely agree with you;

2) in a very close swing state, like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota, Arizona and Missouri, one has to seriously consider voting, as a purely short term practical matter, for the lesser of the two (2) evils.

The above statement is made from a purely political consultant perspective and not from a long term moral/ethical perspective.

Adam

[studiodekadent]

2) in a very close swing state, like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota, Arizona and Missouri, one has to seriously consider voting, as a purely short term practical matter, for the lesser of the two (2) evils.

Your assumption is that Romney/Ryan is the lesser of the two evils. Whilst I grant Ryan's plan would be an improvement on fiscal policy, remember that 1) Romney will be the Prez and is much more profligate than Ryan, 2) Romney's little 4% GDP of military spending is both profligate AND indicative of a sabre-rattling warmonger perspective which will be very dangerous in terms of foreign policy, and 3) Both of them will be just as bad if not worse than Obama on the social issues.

Ergo, it is quite difficult to say Romney/Ryan would be the lesser of the two evils.

The above statement is made from a purely political consultant perspective and not from a long term moral/ethical perspective.

Well, I think that the long term is more critical, especially in this case.

[Selene]

2) in a very close swing state, like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota, Arizona and Missouri, one has to seriously consider voting, as a purely short term practical matter, for the lesser of the two (2) evils.

Your assumption is that Romney/Ryan is the lesser of the two evils. Whilst I grant Ryan's plan would be an improvement on fiscal policy, remember that 1) Romney will be the Prez and is much more profligate than Ryan, 2) Romney's little 4% GDP of military spending is both profligate AND indicative of a sabre-rattling warmonger perspective which will be very dangerous in terms of foreign policy, and 3) Both of them will be just as bad if not worse than Obama on the social issues.

Ergo, it is quite difficult to say Romney/Ryan would be the lesser of the two evils.

The above statement is made from a purely political consultant perspective and not from a long term moral/ethical perspective.

Well, I think that the long term is more critical, especially in this case.

Andrew:

I am certain that four (4) more years of O'bama/Biden will be virtually fatal to my country.

Not certain whether the middle, to long term effects of a Romney/Ryan regime, from a purely libertarian/Randian perspective will be preferable, however, I am at the other end of the age curve, so I will not see the long term results.

Therefore, to a great degree, I am evaluating based on the potential for my two (2) children to have a real shot at excellence. Not sure that they will have that with either result. However, I believe that the Romney/Ryan regime has a better percentage chance of accomplishing that goal.

As I mentioned, I live in New Jersey, so I will be voting for Johnson. It I lived in one of the "critical swing states" that I identified, I would have to consider holding my ethical nose and pulling the lever, or, filling in the circle for Romney/Ryan.

Adam

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

O'Donnell says Paul Ryan merely used Rand so he could appear like he was an intellectual.

Since when has the far left ever considered Ayn Rand as an intellectual, much less someone you could borrow the reputation for being an intellectual from?

Things are slowly getting better...

Michael

[caroljane]

Therefore, to a great degree, I am evaluating based on the potential for my two (2) children to have a real shot at excellence. Not sure that they will have that with either result. However, I believe that the Romney/Ryan regime has a better percentage chance of accomplishing that goal.

Adam

This is interesting to me, a reminder of how same but different our two countries are.

I have 2 children I think around the ages of yours. We have the most conservative head of government we have ever had, and I dislike and distrust his policies. Yet I don't think that my kids' future will be destroyed even by four, or five or whatever years of Harper.

One son is already getting his shot at excellence in the cuttrhoat market-driven radio business. The other landed a fairly secure, uninionized job in the city public transit.

Guess who makes the most money.

[Selene]

Therefore, to a great degree, I am evaluating based on the potential for my two (2) children to have a real shot at excellence. Not sure that they will have that with either result. However, I believe that the Romney/Ryan regime has a better percentage chance of accomplishing that goal.

Adam

This is interesting to me, a reminder of how same but different our two countries are.

I have 2 children I think around the ages of yours. We have the most conservative head of government we have ever had, and I dislike and distrust his policies. Yet I don't think that my kids' future will be destroyed even by four, or five or whatever years of Harper.

One son is already getting his shot at excellence in the cuttrhoat market-driven radio business. The other landed a fairly secure, uninionized job in the city public transit.

Guess who makes the most money.

Are we counting the value of the union benefit package in the "most money" judgment?

[caroljane]

Actually no, I don't know what benefits the radio station pays.

And my grammar bad, I should have said "the more money!" Oh, I am slipping...

[Selene]

Actually no, I don't know what benefits the radio station pays.

And my grammar bad, I should have said "the more money!" Oh, I am slipping...

So, I am guessing that, purely on mere weekly paycheck, the union son is paid more?

[caroljane]

Actually no, I don't know what benefits the radio station pays.

And my grammar bad, I should have said "the more money!" Oh, I am slipping...

So, I am guessing that, purely on mere weekly paycheck, the union son is paid more?

Yes, considerably. In fact because he works more hours, he is paid more than I am though my hourly rate is higher.

[studiodekadent]

Andrew:

I am certain that four (4) more years of O'bama/Biden will be virtually fatal to my country.

I understand why you are scared, but America is a very resilient nation. You have far more individualistic social and intellectual capital than anywhere else in the Western world (politics, after all, doesn't determine everything). This alone makes me sufficiently confident that America can survive another four years of Obama/Biden, although I agree that four more years of those two will be damaging.

As I mentioned, I live in New Jersey, so I will be voting for Johnson.

Good to hear!

[George H. Smith]

Andrew:

I am certain that four (4) more years of O'bama/Biden will be virtually fatal to my country.

I understand why you are scared, but America is a very resilient nation. You have far more individualistic social and intellectual capital than anywhere else in the Western world (politics, after all, doesn't determine everything). This alone makes me sufficiently confident that America can survive another four years of Obama/Biden, although I agree that four more years of those two will be damaging.

As I mentioned, I live in New Jersey, so I will be voting for Johnson.

Good to hear!

Here is another possibility: The American economy could very well collapse within the next few years, regardless of who wins the presidency. And if that happens, the President will get the blame, and his party will have a rough time in future elections.

Btw, I have little doubt that Obama will win, assuming that the economy doesn't collapse within the next few months. I don't even think the election will be all that close. Mark my words.

Ghs

[studiodekadent]

Here is another possibility: The American economy could very well collapse within the next few years, regardless of who wins the presidency. And if that happens, the President will get the blame, and his party will have a rough time in future elections.

Indeed, that is a possibility. I should've noted that. Thank you.

[syrakusos]

O'Donnell says Paul Ryan merely used Rand so he could appear like he was an intellectual.

Since when has the far left ever considered Ayn Rand as an intellectual, much less someone you could borrow the reputation for being an intellectual from?

Things are slowly getting better...

Michael

I agree 100%! As I posted in another thread, this is only more publicity for Ayn Rand. Unlike Studiodekadent, I do not see Objectivist circles as touting Paul Ryan as one of our own. More to the point, Objectivist deny him. And, in fact, as Lawrence O'Donnell epitomizes most of the mainstream media understood and understands quite clearly that Ayn Rand advocated for agendas and initiatives that Paul Ryan finds anathema. (Rachel Maddow, of course, is an exception. She is an idiot.)

[George H. Smith]

Earlier today, while I was writing, I heard a brief clip of a speech by Obama -- an apparent criticism of Paul Ryan -- in which he said that selfishness is not a virtue. I assume this was a reference to Rand, but I could not find the clip on YouTube. Does anyone know anything about this?

Ghs

[9thdoctor]

Earlier today, while I was writing, I heard a brief clip of a speech by Obama -- an apparent criticism of Paul Ryan -- in which he said that selfishness is not a virtue. I assume this was a reference to Rand, but I could not find the clip on YouTube. Does anyone know anything about this?

Ghs

I'm pretty sure that comes from one of his debates with McCain. I've heard Peter Schiff use it as part of his program identification, you know the thingamajig that plays as you go to or come back from a commercial on a radio show. You should be able to find it on YouTube that way, though it's just a 2 second sound clip. I don't recall in which of his debates with McCain he said it, if you wanted to hear the context.

[Selene]

Earlier today, while I was writing, I heard a brief clip of a speech by Obama -- an apparent criticism of Paul Ryan -- in which he said that selfishness is not a virtue. I assume this was a reference to Rand, but I could not find the clip on YouTube. Does anyone know anything about this?

Ghs

Fascinating...

While searching for what you referred to, I found this from 2008, Jack Tapper's blog/column Political Punch:

"John McCain and Sarah Palin they call this socialistic," Obama continued. "You know I don’t know when, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness."

It’s unclear if this was a nod to the Ayn Rand book

"The Virtue of Selfishness,"

with all that

the invocation of Rand implies

.

It would seem to be, given the themes of Rand’s work, what happens when independent achievers are demonized.

Which would fit with this description of those who want to keep their hard-earned tax dollars as "selfish."

Atlas may not be shrugging, but Obama is.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/10/obamas-new-atta/

In another 2008 speech, O'bama opined:

"The change we need won’t come from government alone," Obama said to a crowd of an estimated 80,000. "It will come from each of us doing our part in our own lives, in our own communities. It will come from each of us looking after ourselves and our families but also looking after each other. You know I – it’s been awhile now – we’ve made a virtue out of selfishness, there’s no virtue in that. We made a virtue of irresponsibility and we need to usher in a new spirit of service and sacrifice and responsibly."