"Yes, at first I was happy to be learning how to read. It seemed exciting and magical, but then I read this: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of s___, I am never reading again."
Posted on 01/05/2022 4:14:51 AM PST by MtnClimber
It appears to me that he may had been a recent convert. His ex girlfriend was Olivia Munn and going through coronavirus restrictions may had “woke” him up.
What ridiculous and frightening times...
I thought sure this was a Bee satire when I saw the headline...
SMDH!
I also read it during the Obama years. I wish I liked Atlas Shrugged more, but I don't. I liked the over-all theme and atmosphere. She perfectly captured the insane mind set of the left. But the speeches were too long, and I thought the conclusion was rather ridiculous. Dagny was such a strong character, but she melted in the arms of her dream-stud John Galt. It had a great build up to the final section. I just thought the pay-off was weak. The themes were well expressed, but the story-telling was kind of silly in the conclusion. Rand seemed to fantasize about strong independent men taking her into their arms. Howard Roark and John Galt embody those fantasy objects.
But there so much that is good in it that it is certainly worthwhile reading, and it moves at a pretty good pace in spite of its length (long speeches notwithstanding). I have not seen any of the movies based on it.
76 years, but whatever.
The problem with Atlas Shrugs is it was an atheist society which will not work in a capitalistic economy.
I like Rogers, seems to have his head on straight which is unusual for NFL players.
"Yes, at first I was happy to be learning how to read. It seemed exciting and magical, but then I read this: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of s___, I am never reading again."
'Atlas Shrugged' would be required reading in a real university system (which rarely exists). Add it to the list of "parallel/actual learning" books. It's long and desperately needs a shortened version but it's worth it.
For those who have read not read it, I encourage you to do so and then encourage others.
For those who have read it, please take the time to recommend it to others.
Looks like they are against censorship when we try to remove porn from school libraries, so that kids don't have easy access to it.
Well maybe the leaders of the left do, but their Antifa/BLM storm troopers wouldn't know.
I used to be a five-alarm, flaming lefty.
I figure there are two kinds of leftists.
The ignorant and the ideologues.
I was one of the former.
Maybe Rodgers is, too.
Rand was a prophet. For all her faults, and she had many, she was dead on about where our society was heading when she wrote this book.
L
Aaron and MTG could have a Tea Party discussing their canceled lives. LOL
Regarding the movies, in my opinion the first one is good. The second average, the third terrible!
It’s my understanding that ‘Hollyweird’ inhibited money raising for the films and the distribution of the first film to movie theaters. I understand the film did well in theaters it was shown in. I was living in NOVA at the time. It was a ‘packed house’ when I went to see it. I was told that was true every night it was shown. The Hollyweird campaign against it made films two and three toxic for theater distribution also. Also, I understand that ‘Hollyweird’ threatened the careers of the actors who appeared in the first film. The remaining films had increasingly obscure actors playing the roles.
In writing the screen play the the writers did not help the film by sticking slavishly to the book. Prime problem having the Taggart company be exclusively a railroad company. The excuse of ‘why railroads’ in the film’s opening was at best lame. It made the film looked dated, out-of-touch’ and ‘uncool’ to younger audiences. That was the consensus opinion of a bunch of my daughters’ friends. They should have generalized Taggart to be a transportation conglomerate and rewrote the story to including trucking and commercial air. The theme of the ‘story’ would not have suffered, and the same points could have still been made. I heard they were limited in their screen writing by those who controlled the Rand estate.
I used to be lefty. Not a flaming one, but I bought into all the stereotypes people have about conservatives. I voted for Mondale, Dukakis and Clinton. Something changed between 1992 and 1994. I guess I actually started delving deeper than surface stereotypes. By 1994, I was voting straight Republican.
Sad. So many of his teammates can’t read at all.
Changing the casts for all three movies really made it hard for the movies to succeed. I wondered if they used the trains in the movies. I always imagined the story set in the period it was written, but it would have been very expensive to mount a production set in the 40’s or 50’s.
If you can slog through the first 150 pages, the rest is easy. And if you’ve paid attention, you can skim through John Galt’s 50 page speech.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.