Friday, November 2, 2012

To Win or Not to Win

Producer John Aglialoro and Atlas Society founder David Kelley discuss the election….

Aglialoro: It's no surprise that, after 55 years since Atlas Shrugged was published, Ayn Rand is still being attacked with total disdain by the socialist left.

Kelley: John, we knew up front that the movie reviewers, who overwhelmingly subscribe to the socialist left ideology, would trash Atlas Shrugged Part 2, despite the obvious improvements in cinematic quality. They hate the message, and that takes precedence over the artistry in their eyes. You wanted the film to come out before the election because you felt it has an important bearing on the political choice the public faces. Do you think that the critics felt the same connection? That they want to see Obama re-elected?

Aglialoro: Yes. The question I have is: Why does the public continue to embrace the political class, who provide nothing but unemployment checks,  over the entrepreneurial class, who provide the opportunity for prosperity? That's not what America is about. Ultimately, this election is a referendum on capitalism.

Kelley: You remind me of something Ayn Rand said in 1972, about the McGovern-Nixon election. Watching the Democratic convention that year, she noted that the older politicians still believed in capitalism, even though they wanted to hang regulations and welfare programs around its neck, but that McGovern was deeply anti-capitalist. He wanted to redistribute income on a massive  scale, with his proposal for a guaranteed income regardless of work. It looks as if we have the same issue in 2012.

Aglialoro: Exactly. Obama is not a capitalist. He believes in government control of producers, he opposes individualism, he believes—morally speaking—that "we are our brothers' keepers," that "we are all connected," that you should love your neighbor over yourself. This is the antithesis of Rand's individualism. She invoked the principle of individual rights, with government protecting the freedom of every individual person to pursue his or her own course in life.

Of course we are charitable to those who are down on their luck. But our immigrant ancestors  did not come here for the sake of their neighbors. They came to America for themselves, and for their families, the people they loved.

Obama cannot bring himself to say that he is a capitalist, and it would be a lie if he did. And that means he has abandoned the vision of the Founding Fathers.

Kelley: Going back to 1972, after McGovern lost in a landslide, Rand attributed it to the American sense of life, the American instinct for individualism even if it is not articulated clearly in principle.

Aglialoro: Although too many Americans are generally unthinking about politics and elections, I have always believed that the American sense of life will come through. I have always been confident in the American love of freedom, of self-responsibility, of opportunity, of the love of winning over the fear of losing. I have to believe that, at the crucial moment, the American people will make the right choice of individual self-worth over the detestable commandment to live for others.

Kelley: And if they don't?  If Obama is re-elected and we continue down the path of collectivism, what about Atlas Shrugged Part 3? Will there be any point?

Aglialoro: Not likely. What is the point, once he is re-elected? It will mean that America has decided to continue down that slippery slope, ultimately down to the dustbin of history where the Greek and Roman empires dwell.

Kelley: Atlas Shrugged—Rand's novel, and the two adaptations you have produced—teach us that individuals who produce, who support themselves and create value, at any level, from the janitor in Hank Rearden's mills to Rearden himself, are the Atlases holding up the world. What would you say to these people on the eve of the election?

AglialoroNovember 6th, my friends, is a more important moment in our country than any since our Founding Fathers in the 1770s offered their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to create a free country. On November 6th, you face the choice whether or not to affirm their vision of America, whether or not to affirm the values that Ayn Rand made so clear in Atlas Shrugged. Your immediate imperative is to vote Obama out….  

Hopefully, if  you do, we won't have to shrug.

134 comments:

  1. When is Atlas Shrugged II going to be released in Toronto, Ontario, Canada? You released Atlas Shrugged I here for a limited showing so why not Atlas Shrugged II?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Part II is unfortunately doing much worse at the box office than Part I did. The producers may decide that a Canada release schedule isn't worth the trouble.

      Delete
    3. Actually, on consideration, the producers might decide that a theatrical release of Part III isn't worth the trouble. If the goal is to compete a box set (now that it looks like the defeat of Obama is off the table), and all that theatrical-scale releases have brought is heartache and red ink, then maybe the big cinematic scale is out of reach and Algialoro and Harmon should aim for the little screen instead.

      Delete
  2. Sadly it appears that Aglialoro doesn't understand that Romney is also a statist like Obama.... if Romney is elected there will really be no difference. It is unfortunate that someone with such a poor comprehension of the Objectivist philosophy would be allowed to be the producer of the Atlas Shrugged movie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh please... he is doing something good and I applaud him for it... I am not a scholar of Ayn Rand but love her works and believe deeply in individualism and capitalism... quit the crying about not being a purist and celebrate the man and his accomplishments!

      Delete
    2. I vote for Jeffrey Bean!!!!!!!

      Mark Markarian

      Delete
    3. He didn't say vote for Romney. There is another choice: Gary Johnson, Entrepreneur.

      Delete
    4. A vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Obama. Simple as that.

      Delete
    5. I am voting for Gary Johnson. Republicans and Democrats have proven what they do over a half century of divisive politics and crushing debt. Neither party is for freedom. Neither party is for capitalism.

      A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Gary Johnson. Saying it is anything else is ignorant of principle. It is spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Those who are lead by fear will be chained to it forever.

      Ayn Rand presented an idea of a few challenging the status quo. Thats what Libertarians do and will always do. It is not politicians who have to change but the voters. Until each person decides that principle is important then they will suffer under the lack of it. Its time to Live Free.

      Delete
    6. Right. "A vote for anyone but Kang is a vote for Kodos."

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/giddygirlie/2987270819/

      Do it because the WRONG LIZARD MIGHT WIN.

      Delete
    7. Romney is a good man. I like him. But the main thing is that WE BURY OBAMA SO RUTHLESSLY THAT HE IS NEVER HEARD FROM AGAIN!

      Delete
    8. Anyone who thinks that Romney is anywhere close to Obama, let alone the same, is an absolute moron along the scale of Obama. They are nothing alike and our country under Romney will be completely different and better than it is under Obama.

      Delete
    9. Right, just ask the residents of Massachusetts who had him as their governor, and saw first hand how he banned more of their guns and instituted Obamacare before Obama did. If you think Romney's policies are anything but to tell you what he thins you want to hear so you will elect him to his next office, you're one of those fools who just can't learn from the mistakes other people have already made.

      Delete
    10. I write from India and am least connected with American politics but surely feel Obama should be re-elected as he is a genuine person and although i adore Ayn Rand i understand no country in the world can practically be full of perfect people who could all adopt Ayn's way of life it is perfection the world can only strive for it.

      Delete
    11. Like it or not we have a two party system, by not voting you ensure a victory for the wrong candidate. Gary Johnson and the other 3rd party candidates are just stroking their egos. They solicate votes with no chance of winninng. They are not registered in all the States. If you want a third party, work for one and create something competetive. But until then vote for the best candidate who at least has a chance of winning.
      Get you heads out of the sand. Vote Vote Vote.

      Delete
    12. Nonsense. Because of the electoral college, there are plenty of 'safe' states where a vote for Johnson sends a clear message, without affecting the outcome of the election. But too many people believe too much of the hype of a close election. It was close in 2008, too, that is until we actually voted. Besides, in Colorado and New Mexico, the Obama camp believes Johnson pulls their votes. It all works out. I for one would never, ever vote republican, yet you paint me with that brush.

      Delete
    13. I agree with you about Romney. Mr. A says that if Obama wins there is no point in producing AS III. That is so incorrect! If anything, AS III will be needed more than ever. Romney is not a Capitalist, Romney is a Romneyist.

      Delete
    14. Rand would have rejected Mitt Romney for exactly the same reason that she despised Ronald Reagan: the attempt to make political advantage by appealing to what she called the "God-Family-Tradition swamp."

      I think that, were she around now, she would have objected at the top of her lungs to the attempt by Republicans to turn her into their dancing showgirl.

      Delete
    15. Sorry for coming off as a bit offensive... I did go to see AS II and thought it was pretty good(was just really sad the actors were completely different). I was 1 of the only 4 people in the entire theater for the Noon-time showing.
      I have lived in Massachusetts for 25 years(whole life) and can assure you that Romney is not getting my vote.
      In the John Aglialoro discussion he didn't say vote for Romney, but sure seems that is what's implied.

      I will vote for Gary Johnson because Obama and Romney are both Corporatists. In my opintion a vote for Obama or Romney is a wasted vote...
      If Gary Johnson gets 5% popular vote, that "will secure approximately $10 million for the Libertarian candidate in the 2016 election."
      http://ivn.us/2012/11/01/why-5-matters-to-gary-johnson/

      Delete
    16. The only way to get Obama out is to vote Romney & not let other presidential candidates split the votes. Absolutely TRAGIC for the USA for Obama to get in again. He surrounds himself with socialists & anti-capatilists who do the real damage ... with his stamp of approval. Romney is a businessman who'll surround himself fith fiscally responsible peole who can get America headed OUT of this debt-mire!

      Delete
  3. To Uni....you must understand and accept that neither Leonard Peikoff nor I are running for President, Romney is.
    We're going to have to win back America, culturally, and at the ballot box, over much time and many battles.
    Insisting on perfection right now is to invite disaster at every level.
    But I agree with you, Romney is philosophically far, far away from being our first Objectivist U.S. President.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Galt, Ragnar, and Francisco were destroyers. If I could figure out which one of the candidates was the most likely to destroy the system that we have now, I would vote for that person. They are so close, it's pointless, and I already voted for Gary. At least I have shown my preference, and may give the liberty candidate a better chance in 2012.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you, John. It will take time and we will start with voting Romney into office next week. Thank you for posting this.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. I have always been a Republican. When I was five and watched the DNC and RNC in 1952 on our new TV, I saw that the Republicans were more like adults and the Democrats more like children. I have never seen good reason to change my mind. Now, as it happens, Ayn Rand was also a Republican.

      Today, it is the libertarian wing of the Republican Party that comes up with its better ideas and the Tea Party Movement has aligned itself mostly with the Republicans and somewhat with Libertarians. There is no comparable generally limited government wing of the Democrat Party. There are religiously fanatic Mother Earth people in the Democrat Party who are fully the equal of the religious evangelicals of the Republican Party and they are actually more destructive.

      It is the Democrats who most refuse to observe the simple fact that people are highly differentiated and complex individuals with highly diverse needs, wants, and values. They refuse to do the simple thinking that realizes that no government can know and provide for these needs, wants, and values. It could not be more clear that it is in the private sector where each individual can exercise his freedom of association to cooperate with those of his choosing to pursue the values of his choosing in voluntary association. What greater anti-intellectualism is possible than refusing to understand this basic lesson.

      Delete
  4. If John A starts stumping for Rombama, I'm done with him and his project. Ayn would spit in his face and turn away, never to look upon him again with anything less than utter disdain (which she was quite good at...).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's doubtful. Ayn Rand backed Nixon both in 1968 and in 1972. I think Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is a better choice, but the "buying time" argument for Romney does have some merit.

      Delete
    2. I agree Charles, but there really isn't any noticeable difference between Obama or Romney other than skin color. They both want to continue the illegal/immoral wars. They both want to keep running up the deficit. I say don't vote for either of the Goldman Sachs candidates. Send both parties a message and vote Libertarian or any other 3rd party choice

      Delete
    3. Ayn Rand did not like the libertarian party but that was due to personality and not principle. I believe she didn't like libertarian acceptance of religion (freedom to believe even if she disagreed).

      Objectivism is unquestionably libertarian aligned though. No other party even comes close to the philosophy.

      The LP was formed in 1972 because of Nixons failures.

      Delete
    4. geo6892000, do you honestly believe that Obama and Romney are no different from each other? The very fact that you could make such a comment only shows that you have made the choice to throw your vote away by voting for a third party. What people need to understand is that voting for a third party NEVER works. There are far too many people in America who ALWAYS vote Democratic or ALWAYS vote Republican. Do your research on Obama. What you find might scare you. At this point, Obama is capable of hurting our country far more than Romney is, making Romney the only real choice if we want to even attempt to save the country.

      Delete
    5. readernerd,
      what you need to understand is that we the people have decided that we will no longer vote for the parties choice against our own judgement . i am not willing to accept that any president could bring about the ruin you all promise !! i say we should follow our hearts as did the founding fathers and throw off the chains of an over-reaching burdensome government. let the fruits of capitalism flow to the masses and let the people keep the fruit of their own labor this will encourage more production

      Delete
  5. As a libertarian and Ojectivist, I can tell you many of us aren't looking forward to a Romney win, since he doesn't have any idea of how to fix our government. Why not let Obama win, so a libertarian can pick up the pieces in four years. In this way, the left will be unable to blame the coming depression on capitalism. If you simply look at the disaster of every Republican President starting with Nixon and his closure of the gold window, we can see the GOP never comes through for capitalism, instead making it much worse, not better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another four years of Obama and there won't be any pieces left to pick up.

      Delete
    2. Bachstar, You maybe correct. Best, Mark

      Delete
    3. The only difference is that the crash and reset will occur quicker under Obama

      Delete
  6. Regardless of who wins, its time to go back to the world. Get in gear to provide leadership that is desperately needed.
    The Future Designer

    ReplyDelete
  7. “In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.” Ayn Rand.

    A vote for Obama is a vote for evil. A vote for Romney is a compromise. And from that vote, only evil can profit.

    I voted for Gary Johnson. I can respect those who chose either to make no vote, or to write in Ron Paul. But don't fool yourself that a vote for Romney is a vote for capitalism.

    Furthermore, don't imagine that your single vote can keep Obama out of office. It can't. For that to happen, you would have to live in a swing state who's electoral college vote was decided by one popular vote. The odds of that happening are miniscule.

    So vote your values. You will feel better as a result.

    And what would you rather have: a lame duck Obama with slim R majorities in each house, or one party R government? Lame duck Obama sounds fine to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly - Gary Johnson is not perfect either but we must send the establishment a message by either writing in Ron Paul or voting Gary Johnson

      Delete
    2. Best reply so far Bruce. I was going to use that same quote from Atlas Shrugged. Geography is much more important to certain people's votes than others. Since I live in CA, any vote is a vote for Obama. Thus, you might as well vote your conscience anyways. Plus it sends a stronger message to the two party duopoly that controls our political system.

      Delete
    3. Living in Illinois I have the same problem. I don't pretend to understand the reasons behind the electoral college, but isn't it time to change the system so everyone individually feels their vote counts?

      Delete
    4. No, we should not change the electoral college unless you want the presidential election decided by Ohio, California, New York, Florida, and Texas. Right now, even South Dakota has some say in the election but who is even going to count those 300K votes when some city in California has 100 times that many votes? Or Wyoming's 190,000 votes? At least with the college, all those votes get counted and the presidential campaigns make some effort to court those votes.

      Delete
    5. It is most unfortunate that those wishing to destroy the electoral college are using as their argument "We want your wishes to be considered". The purpose of the electoral college IS to strengthen each vote. If you think your vote is weak at the state level consider how weak it will be at the USA level.

      Delete
  8. The key here isn't destroying our country so a Libertarian can come in and pick up the pieces afterwards. Progressivism (either with Republicans or Democrats) is a drug which is flowing in the veins of our country. It has clouded the thinking of those in power and many Americans who have come to be part of the 47% that Romney referred to during his fundraiser this spring.

    We cannot undo that type of addiction to government by quitting cold turkey. The key is to begin returning power and responsibility back to states and individuals whenever possible. Romney might not be the PERFECT answer to restoring liberty and free markets but he understands the role of the free market in our society.

    I will be voting for Gary Johnson on Tuesday because more choices and more competition will make all market participants stronger. The Democrats and Republicans have held a stranglehold on the American electorate for far too long. We do not need to do away with the Republicans/Democrats - we need to strengthen a third (or fourth) option who can compete and challenge for the leadership mantle.

    Even with my vote for Johnson, I am not going to be disappointed when (or if) Mitt Romney is elected as the next President. It may not be the answer I hoped for, but it will stop our push to destruction and collapse begun by the current administration. Once Romney is elected the effort will have to be holding him to the promises of reducing government influence in our economic AND social lives. We have to begin pulling the political structure back towards the center/conservative foundation. It will not happen over night but we can achieve this goal.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm not living in The States, but in Europe where it's not any better. Thanks John for producing the movie, for sharing your opinion and love for Freedom.
    Here (France & Belgium mainly) we wrote a book with 100 individuals to share our ideas on Freedom, it's titled in French "Libres!". we (the 100 authors) connected through Atlas Shrugged actually : ) The book was finally translated into French and we started promoting it, then came the movie which we try to get here (but not enough interest I'm afraid)we did not knew each other but it brought us together. I don't know how far our message will go, but I've already touched a few people through the book, asking them what Freedom means to them, and if it takes one person at a time, so be it!
    I've created an International Day of Freedom on September 20th, it was the first ever, can you believe it?! We were just a few, not even 200 people knowing about it, but hopefully next year will be big. FYI https://www.facebook.com/InternationalDayOfFreedom
    None of this is about politics, it's about mindset, Freedom is a state of mind and that's where the change needs to be. And indeed that will take time and will require cultural changes.
    It's also about realizing that "you should love your neighbor over yourself" is actually the total opposite, because if you apply that you'll end up stealing from A to support B (or to help yourself). The one who put himself first and seek his own happiness, will provide more prosperity to the world. As I wrote on the blog from the project "Let's All Be Free" (http://www.letsallbefree.com/Blog/being-free-or-freedom-of-being.html) "“What interests me is not the happiness of all men, but the happiness of each individual.” And where would the key to happiness lie, if not in the Freedom of Being?


    Many people today find our society too “individualistic” – I used to think that too – but I wonder if, on the contrary, it isn’t individualistic enough… If we want to live together and co-exist in peace with respect for one another, we must first learn to exist as a Free individual – rather than pretending to be someone we aren’t, for the sake of the community or to please others!"

    I hope for your sake and ours here in Europe that people will see that, because if they don't they're the most egoist (in their understanding of the word!) person without even knowing it.

    Good Luck to You, Folks of America ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Only a moron would not vote for Romney because he isn't pure enough.

    Reagan destroyed Communism and Romney will be in the position to destroy Socialism. He's already talking about replacing foreign aide with micro loans, a great move.

    We don't live in Objectivist vacuums, we live in a world where numb nuts vote for Marxists like Obama and in order to move the world to where we want it to be, we need to fight 'the war' with the weapons we have and today that weapon is Romney/Ryan.

    On Tuesday, I'm voting for Romney and if you don't vote for Romney then YOU'RE VOTING FOR OBAMA.

    Live Free or Be a Serf of the State!
    Mark Markarian
    Pleasantville, NY

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can make your case for the first three paragraphs if you wish, there is nothing wrong with that. But "On Tuesday, I'm voting for Romney and if you don't vote for Romney then YOU'RE VOTING FOR OBAMA" is completely and utterly false.

      Delete
    2. So if Romney and Obama tie, my vote for Gary Johnson will put Obama over the top? That's a rather creative interpretation of the election laws.

      Delete
    3. Splitting the conservative vote with candidates with absolutely no chance of winning is a vote for four more years of ignoring the Constitution and what made this country a destination for those seeking a better way of life for themselves and their children from around the world.

      Delete
    4. Do you notice that my name is Mark Markarian and I live in Pleasantville, NY and your names are High Priest and Strategies for Liberty?

      Stand Tall like an American with Your Real Name Up Front.

      And by the way, SFL, my statement is true in a swing state where Obama could win by 1 vote and that vote gives him the electoral college.

      Then there's the physiological aspect - independent of state - the more Romney wins by, the more Socialism is rejected!

      Delete
    5. Your statement is true only if, instead of Gary Johnson, I would otherwise have voted for Romney. And even then, it would only result in a tie, not a Romney victory.

      A vote for Gary Johnson is also a rejection of socialism, in fact an even more forceful one.

      I intended to sign my name (Charles Barr) to the last comment, but the profile put the name of my blog up instead.

      Delete
    6. Hi Charles,
      A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote against socialism, but the numb nuts will not get it. They only know Romney / Obama and that's what the PRESS will report. Only Romney is a vote against SOCIALISM!
      Best,
      Mark

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. Mark is right. A vote in favor of the corporate cronyist drug warrior defender of militarism abroad who gave us Obamacare and promises to raise federal spending $5 trillion over a decade is a vote for SOCIALISM.

      A vote in favor of the corporate cronyist drug warrior defender of militarism abroad who gave us Romneycare and promises to raise federal spending only $4 trillion over a decade is a vote AGAINST socialism.

      Rand would be proud of how well her followers argue from fundamentals...

      Delete
    9. Your vote only counts in your state towards your state's electors. If your state already has been decided (my state will not vote for Obama--in the primary, a candidate named Undecided beat Obama big time in the Dem primary) a vote for Gary Johnson will not take away from Romney's win. It will provide ballot access for the next four years to the Libertarian party if there is the required percentage. Rs and Ds have a stranglehold on the elections by requiring 2 signatures for themselves to get on the ballot, whereas any other party has to have 5000. However I would not have voted for Romney anyway.

      Delete
    10. A vote for Gary Johnson is a way to not take any responsibility for the the outcome. Only Obama or Romney will be POTUS. If you think BHO will get u to your goal quicker then Man Up and vote for him. But to vote for Johnson so you can feel morally superior is immature and sad.

      Delete
    11. Blame it on the GOP - they are the ones that disenfranchised the Ron Paul loving Liberty crowd by cheating him out of the nomination. Both the Republicans as well as the Democrats can kiss my butt. I wanted Ron Paul but don't see the point of writing in his name when he so clearly does not want that. I will vote the next best candidate and its NOT Romney - Gary Johnson 2012

      Delete
    12. Mark, since you live in NY, a vote there is the equivalent to a vote here in CA: it will all go to Obama's electors. In CA we only have a 30% registration rate for Republicans, and are behind by over 2 million registrations. Vote for the candidate who best represents your values up there in NY, as there be no ramifications in your geographic area.

      Delete
    13. Hi Mark, I agree that we need Romney and Ryan at this juncture. I would be willing to vote for anyone who I think has a chance to get this moron out of office. Moron is a word that I have never used in my life until now. I never even liked the word. I have always felt that people who use the word are at a loss for words but, the time is right for its use. I am at a loss for words looking at how many Americans(?) think this moron is good for anything. He is not my President. When Obama first started to run for the office of President and I heard him speaking, I told my wife that I would like to help him financially with his run for office. The second time I heard him speak I shouted to my wife; MY GOD! There's something not right with this guy. He's a liar! If this guy gets into office, our country is in trouble. My feelings for this charlatan have only gotten worse over time.

      Delete
  11. The monetary crisis caused by our debt is inevitable at this point. Better the flag of socialism be flown when the ship finally sinks than Romney's false flag of capitalism. The blame needs to be placed on its rightful owners.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never give up. Never surrender! I will give my last dying breath fighting for freedom and liberty.

      You can fold like a cheap camera, but I will fight!

      Live Free or Be a Serf of the State!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
  12. Nothing will change for the better with either candidate. I agree the system will be brought down faster and with less peeps of protest from the left if Obama wins; which I predict he will.

    This immoral system only stays in existence by pitting people against each other who think they are(or will be)free, granted by said system; thus unwittingly giving their sanction and making the illegitimate legitimate.

    No matter what happens though John, you simply must complete the Atlas film project with Part III. It's a moral imperative and for our posterity.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I get the lesser of 2 evils mentality, but I disagree with it. Yes, Romney may be better on economic issues, but Obama is better on gay rights and women's rights. I am sure many of you live in states which are not in play, which are safe for either Romney or Obama. Especially if you live in one of those states, I implore you to vote for a true freedom candidate, Gary Johnson!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you miss is that you advocate the lesser of 3 evils. This tired old mentality "the lesser of 2 evils" should be laid to rest. I prefer to pick the candidate that best represents me... then when you enter the booth to vote you will either be a pragmatist and vote for the one that best represents your views and has a chance to win or you will "disappear" and vote for someone that has no chance to win. Mitt and Gary are both successful business men and are both 1000% better than the status quo.

      Delete
  14. it would take a lot of change for me to believe that Romney or any of the republicans have what it takes to change anything in this first wave of change. The economy has been taken for a ride ever since we started spending the social security trust fund and forgetting that money has an intrinsic value tied to a gold coin.

    It seems to me that Romney is more a second generation looter of companies than a true capitalist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you nuts? What planet are you on? Mars, Saturn, Jupiter or the moon Europa?

      Romney is a Great candidate and stop being as stupid as a religious zealot who thinks their beliefs are the only true beliefs!

      Take your head out of the ostrich hole and see reality!

      Delete
    2. Both Romney and Obama are Goldman Sachs puppets - don't fool yourself Mark

      Delete
    3. Mark,

      Why would you try and offset cultural level commentary with personal attacks? That is a zero sum game. Do you win the argument like that? Do you influence people?

      Ugh me say romney good. You dumb no romney...

      Really?

      Delete
    4. I noticed this too with Mark's comments. Using Arguments from Intimidation... Ayn Rand would not approve. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/argument_from_intimidation.html

      Delete
  15. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ironically, Atlas Shrugged itself provides us with the answer.

    Americans should stop doing what Dagny Taggart and Hank Rearden did, which was to unwittingly support the looters. Instead Americans should do what John Galt and Francisco D'Anconia did, withdraw their support by opting out entirely.

    Is Romney "different" from Obama?

    Yes. But only in the sense that strychnine is "different" from cyanide. Obama is cyanide. Romney is strychnine.

    The mere fact that Obama is terrible, does not mean that Romney is any better. The mere fact that cyanide will kill you, does not mean that strychnine won't.

    Voting for Romney in order to avoid Obama, is like taking strychnine in order to avoid cyanide.

    Therefore the only rational choice is to reject both poisons altogether.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said... Gary Johnson has the inoculation of VETO that we desperately need! I know... I know... doesn't have a chance... vote for someone who has a chance.

      Delete
    2. Vote for Johnson or write in Ron Paul - who cares if they have a chance or not? Vote your conscience - you will be boycotting the 2 Goldman Sachs puppets

      Delete
  17. Hi Benvin Chu,

    To climb a mountain, you take a step of a time, UPHILL.

    Obama is a leap off a cliff, Romney is a quantum jump up the mountain.

    Benvin Chu - Take that step, Vote Romney!

    Best,
    Mark Markarian

    ReplyDelete
  18. Josh, I'm not sure that's true. Romney is very different from any other candidate I've seen in my long life. He has integrity. The main goals he has are good ones. And the most important thing about any presidential election is mostly this:

    Two terms of a conservative presidency like Romney guarantee's possibly two younger originalst judges on the Supreme Court, and one, or possibly two new originalists. This actually is more important than any other issue because it is the only thing that will overturn unconstitutional actions as properly unconstitutional. W, might have been a statist of sorts, but he increased the originalist count of the court. That is what is most important. That is the only way to rid ourselves of a lot of this evil.

    By all means, vote your conscience, but also realize how important that is. It has already upheld the 2nd amendment in ways in which a different court never would have. It can only be improved and preserved at the least, in the case of even a single Romney term. If the fates gave Romney a R house and and R senate, we would doubtless get the best judges on the high court

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Romney has integrity... ahem... sorry, just threw up a little in my mouth... congratulations... your mind has been purchased by Romney's super PAC... didn't take much did it... baaaaaaa. They will harvest your wool and send it to Ayn Rand's socialist Russia for those stupid hats.

      Delete
    2. I agree SailorDude - the only thing Romney is good at is destroying American companies and sending the jobs overseas

      Delete
    3. Fact is, Romney being able to appoint supreme court judges is one very strong reason to vote against him.
      We already have indefinite detention without due process - Most Republicans find this GOOD to combat terrorism - Hand more authority over to police? Republicans find this especially good. What will happen when we get more republican appointees on the court? Other than gun rights nothing good. Who gave us 'free speech ZONES? Bush and his administration! A friend of mine was arrested for not moving to a free speech zone, not because he was speaking but because he had the WRONG t-shirt on. Really? The wrong shirt message and he is not allowed where others are?
      That's the republicans for you. And Romney will appoint judges that uphold this kind of nonsense.

      Delete
  19. let the world fall...lets go to Colorado....

    ReplyDelete
  20. If, as it's the case, a country is flooded with educators who believe in socialism and the welfare state and most of whom have no hesitation about using the classroom to preach instead of teach, it is very, very tough to keep the flames of liberty burning.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I have already voted for Gary Johnson and no matter who ends up winning at least I will be able to live with my own conscience for the next 4 years. Regardless of the final outcome things will get worse for all of us until people stop voting for what they think they have to settle for and vote for what they want.

    Also keep in mind that if Gary Johnson manages to get just 5% of the popular vote the Libertarian party will have a nest egg of almost 100 million to start with in 2016. Your one vote will actually have the most impact if you cast it for Johnson rather than either of the duopoly candidates. Especially if your DON'T live in a swing state cast your vote for Johnson and Liberty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm with you brother (or sister). I live in Ohio... I will vote late, that way if my vote doesn't matter, I can vote Johnson... otherwise... well, we'll see what happens. Thx June!!

      Delete
    2. i'm also with you, June. i've already voted for Gary Johnson, and i was very excited and proud to do so. i am heartened by the number of Johnson supporters on this blog. we MUST build up that nest egg -- voting for obomney won't help our cause one little bit, either way.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for pointing out these June, you beat me to it. A vote for Johnson, especially in non-swing states, is planting the seed for the future. We need to end this two party duopoly. No more Kane or Kodos! :-P

      Delete
  22. I wholeheartedly agree with Bevin Chu and his poison analogy above. However as I've told many a friend, I fear the Republican's and Romney and the American Taliban that the R's have become, and how they will restrict individual liberties far more than I fear how the D's will mess with the free market and individual liberties. For the most part, we've not reached the point where the free market won't bounce back -- that is it isn't entirely destroyed (nor can it be, as even in the old Soviet Union the black market -- or free market -- flourished) Adam Smith's invisible hand will always exist -- and man will seek that which benefits him.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Obama cannot bring himself to say that he is a capitalist, and it would be a lie if he did. And that means he has abandoned the vision of the Founding Fathers."

    Really? Capitalism is also about risk taking. He is the one who supported Tesla and Fisker, even though it is a bold bet. The American spirit has entrepreneurship in it. Entrepreneurship brings leadership.

    What is Romney's proposal here? Let's burn coal. Right, that's what China is doing, or any other developing country is doing. That's what will put you behind.

    Obama is not just about helping the poor. You can be successful by being selfish, but it is about time America proves to the world that you can be successful and also be good, too.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I saw Atlas shrugged II after reading the book. At the tender age of 74 my grand daughter age 17 told me about this story. I loved it, and I loved Atlas Shrugged II for being so true to the book. I saw the movie with friends who had not read the book, and they were completely befuddled at the beginning. They needed a little history from Atlas I to get them into the story sooner. We all came out of the screening wanting to see the remainder of the story.
    Yes, we do need to defeat Obama or America is going the way of Atlas Shrugged.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I live in Colorado and it a rat infested swing state that will go with Obama (IMHO). Romney is a joke and a wasted vote.

    Vote Obama to tattoo the next fiscal crisis on the POTUS and his party then start the rebuilding.

    This nation needs a revolution not a liberal RINO.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This was an interesting sentence: "from the janitor in Hank Rearden's mills to Rearden himself, are the Atlases holding up the world"...

    A janitor living in a world dominated by the principles of Objectivism would die away real fast after his first run-in with illness. You guys have a totally ill-founded faith in charity.

    Rand's philosophy does not work for the janitors of this world, whether they are productive or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would you rather be a janitor in the former Soviet Union or a janitor in a free society?

      The main reason health care is so expensive in the U.S. is that it drowning in a cesspool of subsidies and regulations. There is no free market in modern medicine, at least in any meaningful sense.

      Charles Barr

      Delete
    2. Of course, a janitor in a free society, but one with protections to labor brought about by progressive thought, not Neo-Darwinism. It is ironic that the janitor would in any way be a "Randian" hero of sorts, as implied by the OP.

      Delete
  27. To Bevin Chu,

    I first read Atlas Shrugged in 1979 when I was a medical student. I'm a psychiatrist now, and I have read it at least five more times. Additionally, I listen to John Galt's Speech EVERY morning on my way to work. (Blackstone Audio disks number 44 and 45 of Scott Brick's audio rendition.)

    All of the above is a preface to let you know that I know Atlas Shrugged quite well.

    With that said, I'd like to inform you that neither John Galt nor Francisco D'Anconia practically opted out entirely from the get-go.

    Frisco continued to work slowly over the course of 12 years to destroy D'Anconia Copper because according to his own words to Dagny in the Berkshires, D'Anconia Copper has to be destroyed surreptitiously due to the fact that it -- D'Anconia Copper -- was not as fine a piece of machinery as Taggart Transcontinental. And as such, it required slow poison rather than sudden death manuever.

    Secondly, Frisco helped put out the fires in Rearden's Mills.

    Thirdly, disguised as a man named Frank Adams, Frisco worked as a Foreman in Rearden's Mills in the final days of its operation.

    Fourthly, Galt worked in the tunnel for Taggart Transcontinental for twelve years.

    Fifth, Galt also offered to fix the broken signal system in the terminal the night when Dagny was reduced to using human beings as signal-posts and signal-runners in the tunnel.

    There are several other examples of characters who worked slowly to "the job done" while waiting for the day when they could fully experience the Concerto of Deliverance. Such examples include Owen Kellogg who did work in Connecticut and also helped Dagny continue running The Comet the day Dagny went looking for Quentin Daniels.

    There was also the young brakeman who worked for Taggart Transcontinental even while studying music in the Gulch.

    I could go on. But I should conclude by drawing your attention to the fact that even Ayn Rand voted for and worked with less-than-pure characters in politics, publishing and in business.

    She worked with the ones who could make the center hold, while she personally worked forward toward the day she would not have to abide their inanities.

    On another note, for those here who equate Libertarian philosophy with Objectivism, you are wrong.

    Libertarians believe in the primacy and supremacy of Freedom. Objectivists are convinced of the primacy of existence and the supremacy of reason. If you consider Objectivism to be gold, Libertarianism is the fool's version of it.

    With that said, I urge you to do the math. If Obama scores 47% (!), and if without Gary Johnson or Ron Paul, Romney would have scored 53%, if you then took 10% from Romney and shared it between Johnson and Paul, Romney ends up with 43%.

    With that scenario, we will plunge straight into the Dark Ages, and people don't come out of dark ages in four years. Four centuries, maybe.

    As for me, I'm not that patient.

    There's so much more I would have loved to write, but "ars longa, viva brevis!"

    The most important statement I wish to make here is: Thank you, John Agialoro for making the movie. Galt bless you!

    For those who wish to see more of my own 'objectivist' political fiction, go download a novel called The White House Games on either Amazon or Barnes and Noble. I wrote it under the pseudonym Say Dozeman. Check it out.

    For those who wish to debate further, write to me at DrDozeman@gmail.com and use Objectivism as subject header.

    For those who have not yet voted, I ask you to vote Romney-Ryan for our own enlightened self-interest reasons.

    Galt bless you, and Galt bless the United States of America!

    Best regards,
    Aderemi Dosunmu, M.D.
    Founder and CEO, American Brain, LLC.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We deserve more than the lessor of two evils which is why I may never vote Republican or Democrat again - certainly not in this election. Write in Ron Paul or pull the lever for Johnson - TAKE a STAND all you SHEEP !

      Delete
    2. "With that said, I urge you to do the math. If Obama scores 47% (!), and if without Gary Johnson or Ron Paul, Romney would have scored 53%, if you then took 10% from Romney and shared it between Johnson and Paul, Romney ends up with 43%."

      This assumes that all the Ron Paul and Gary Johnson votes would have otherwise gone to Romney, that somehow they are "stealing" votes from Romney. Not true! Many of these voters would sooner stay home rather than support Romney. In addition, Gary Johnson is picking up many disillusioned former Obama supporters in addition to disillusioned former Republicans.

      To some extent this is a replay of the 2000 election. We "had to" vote for George W. Bush to save America from the big-government ideologue Al Gore. We saw how well that worked out.

      Charles Barr

      Delete
    3. If you really believed in Objectivism you would not be a psychiatrist since that very discipline is totally based on the initiation of force. Outside of the fact that the whole concept of 'mental illness' and 'mental health' is a fallacy, see the 30 books of Thomas Szasz, MD, in this regard, involuntary commitmment, forced electroshock, forced drugging, outpatient commitment and prefrontals all violate the premise against the initiation of force. Psychiatry forcibly incarcerates those who have committed no crime AND excuses those who have via the bogus insanity defense. If there was actual organic brain damage it would be a physical disease like mental retardation. If people commit actual crimes involving the initiation of force or fraud as a variant of force they should be tried according to objective criminal procedures, not the subjective whims of psychiatric jailers.
      Check out Faith in Freedom by Thomas Szasz wherein he has a lengthy critique of Nathaniel Branden and a much milder one on Rand.
      Your blanket condemnation of all of libertarianism is stupid. The Randians have backed a failed Fabian Support GOP Statists for 62 years.
      Ron Paul, except on abortion, was 99.99% in tune with Objectivist principles. Peikoff voted for Kerry in 04 and Clinton in 08. So much for Objectivist wisdom.
      ARI's Israel First foreign policy and advocacy of mass murder of billions of Muslims is contra Objectivism and has been exposed by the Objectivist ARI Watch.
      John A, we are not supposed to an empire (Greece was not)and Rome fell precisely because they became one.
      Obama will likely win and it will not be the end of the world.
      And why did you replace en toto the excellent first cast ? Particularly the Dagny & Hank characters ?

      Delete
  28. I want to congratulate Mr. Aglialoro for his efforts in defending America's individualism and capitalism, but there's one point I'm reading here that is just like a punch right to my face: You say "What is the point of Atlas Shrugged Part 3 if Obama is re-elected?"
    Well, I say "That would be the moment when America would really need men like you, capable of sending a mass message, a message we all need more than ever! Don't abandon the fight, please!! Whether we win or lose, we need YOU, America needs YOU, the world needs YOU, John!!!"

    ReplyDelete
  29. I find the social policies of the Republican party to be so anti-intellectual that it disqualifies them from consideration.

    To be a real Republican seems to be to reject reason.

    Thus to protect Individual rights and intellectualism -- even if it means tolerating Altruism on steroids -- means a vote for Mr. Obama.

    How in the world can anyone argue that it is REASONABLE in 2012 to ban abortion; to ignore climate change; to keep free people from legal marriage???

    These Individual Rights and Scientific Realities would be ignored if not trampled upon in a Romney/Ryan administration.

    How do you square the cognitive dissonance?

    Capitalism is only one side of the coin.
    How come you don't turn over the ticket and realize what is underneath?
    I submit that the danger is JUST AS SIGNIFICANT, if not more so.
    And just as far from true Objectivism as is a second Obama term.

    Sincerely,

    Ben Caswell

    ReplyDelete
  30. Would Rand have supported a theist crony capitalist whose church believes it is destined to establish a Zionist theocracy in America? I seriously doubt it. Besides, the GOP should not be rewarded for its duplicity in undermining the Liberty Movement and four more years of Obama will so totally discredit the Democrats and government in general that our job will only be easier.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. we already live in a sotto voce theocracy. could a nontheist even run for office in this atmosphere, much less win? obomney is Hobson's Choice -- vote Gary Johnson and build up the nest egg of statistical veracity.

      Delete
  31. And here I thought that Atlas Shrugged parts 1 and 2 were movies, for entertainment. Since I now see they were trying to make some kind of political point, I won't bother to see part 2. It becomes complete tripe, as no true capitalist system has ever worked long term in history. It's a pipe dream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You thought the whole purpose of the book Atlas Shrugged and the philosophy for the past 55 years was entertainment ?
      Your a pinhead and I agree don't go to see the movie again.
      We have never had a true capitalist system but the closer we came to it the freer we have been.

      Delete
  32. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Unfortunately the only choice we have is the side of the equation on which we will condone the government coercion, not if we will have it. If all I cared about was the free-market capitalist piece of Objectivism, Romney would be my man. The problem is that, at least when he ran in the primary and selected his VP, Romney made very clear statements about his VERY invasive positions on abortion, marriage issues, and a wide array social issues. Ryan is considered a follower of Rand yet he is blatantly against freedom for anyone who disagrees with his far right Christian positions. The fact is, neither candidate and neither VP choice, has even a remote shred of real connection to individualism. I'm sad to see you, John, take a position in favor of a candidate who's positions change depending on his audience and who's social philosophy is as socialist as his economic philosophy is capitalist. Neither candidate has respect for individuals and neither has the slightest integrity. I have no candidate this time and Ms. Rand does not seem to either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please do not throw away your vote. Disagree with Ryan if you will on Social or religious difference's. However, what better example of free Capitalism do you need than Romney . His money coupled with an idea to entice investors and then a plan to accomplish the objective with a profit.

      Delete
    2. I did not say that wouldn't vote for Romney. But, he's not in favor of individualism. I agree with Gennady (see below) that a vote for Romney is a vote for Jim Taggert not a vote for Francisco D'Anconia or John Galt. Also, when discussing the good of capitalism, I do so in the Randian context of rational self interest or the Miesian context of rational praxeology. In both cases, capitalism works because the self-interested actions occur based on reason. I can't convince myself that a guy who believes that he should have a big family so he can get an extra-cool planet in the afterlife is living a life of reason. I don't think I do it well, either. But I'm not running for president or trying to get Libertarian and Objectivist votes.

      Delete
  34. Mr. Aglialoro,

    When I watched the excellent “Atlas Shrugged: Part II”, my impression was quite different – that Mitt Romney is the real-world equivalent of James Taggart, a prime representative of the crony corporatism that undermines true capitalism and replaces the economy of merit with the economy of pull. If anything, the rational implication of your film is that one should avoid supporting Mitt Romney and destroyers of his ilk at all costs. I invite you to read my review: “Rejecting the Purveyors of Pull: The Lessons of ‘Atlas Shrugged: Part II’” at http://www.rationalargumentator.com/index/blog/2012/10/the-lessons-of-atlas-shrugged-part-ii/ and http://www.quebecoislibre.org/12/121015-6.html

    I would welcome your thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Capitalism is better served by letting Obama be re-elected and take the blame for the economic mess that is coming once Europe finally crashes followed by Japan, China and finally, the US.

    Although the President's powers over the domestic economy do not amount to much (Congress has the power to tax, spend, borrow and regulate), it is the President and his party who take the blame for the economy, especially during mid-term elections. That is why Democrats lost control of the House in 2010 just as Republicans lost control in 2006 thanks to GW Bush. In fact, the House could balance the budget easily by refusing to raise the debt ceiling. Obama has been neutralized by 2010 GOP takeover of the House. Let him and his party be further weakened. Should Romney become President, Republicans will be blamed for what's coming and they will lose control of Congress in 2014. I say let it be Obama and the Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
  36. It came to my attention earlier today that if a third party is able to reach 5% then that would open up debates and ballots in future elections. I don't, however, see votes from Obama going over to a third party. it will be potential Romney votes that will bolster the third party. I almost hope for the tension to build until the public takes action. elections won by sheep are not making any impact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I don't, however, see votes from Obama going over to a third party." Maybe you don't, but Democrats in Colorado are certainly worried. Check out the last seven paragraphs of this article:

      http://rt.com/usa/news/johnson-race-colorado-election-881/

      Charles Barr

      Delete
  37. Gary Johnson? "...Born in Minot, N.D., Johnson was a George McGovern–supporting anti–Vietnam War pot smoker who went to high school and college in New Mexico and started his empire as a door-to-door handyman..."

    Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/01/who-is-gary-johnson-and-why-is-the-gop-so-mad-at-him/#ixzz2B9a2KLu2

    This is the guy who you think is BETTER than Romney? .. the guy who is more moderate Dem that anything conservative? ... um, no thanks. I'd rather not take the chance of an Obama win in my state then vote for this guy ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is your objection? That he was born in Minot, N.D. (so he's an American citizen)? That he went to high school and college in New Mexico (so he's educated)? That he started his empire as a door-to-door salesman (so he's a successful entrepreneur)? That he smoked pot (like a majority of younger Americans back then)? That he was anti-Vietnam War (what's wrong with that)? That he once supported George McGovern? (Reagan supported FDR in his younger days.)

      Overall, doesn't seem like a bad history to me. And yes, I do think Gary Johnson is better than Romney on most of today's important issues.

      Charles Barr

      Delete
  38. The upcoming election presents us a rare opportunity that has not been offered before as far and I know... A viable candidate has promised to repeal a major piece of legislation (Obamacare), has promised to audit the fed, and promised to address the 3rd rails of Social Security and Medicare. I agree with Mr. Aglialoro that it is imperative to vote Obama out of office but would add that we do have a chance to also elect a unique candidate that has a real chance to win. Let us not "mess" this chance Americans!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Eyes on the Prize, my fellow Producers:

    Obama has to lose.

    The only way that can be achieved is if Romney wins.

    If you "vote your conscience," and make a noble statement at the ballot box by voting for somebody who is in complete alignment with your views, and yet stands no chance of winning, you are helping Obama get re-elected: You are no longer part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  40. This election is bigger than any social issue, i.e., abortion, gay rights, etc.

    We must elect Romney/Ryan 2012 to keep this great republic...The United States of America!!!!

    The greatest "experiment" ever known to man in the entire world!!!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Kelley: And if they don't? If Obama is re-elected and we continue down the path of collectivism, what about Atlas Shrugged Part 3? Will there be any point?

    Aglialoro: Not likely. What
    is the point, once he is re-elected? It will mean that America has decided to continue down that slippery slope, ultimately down to the dustbin of history where the Greek and Roman empires dwell.

    That's the most cogent reason for voting for Obama that I've heard during this entire election cycle: a vote for Obama is a vote against a third installment of Atlas Shrugged.

    Aglialoro: Hopefully, if you do, we won't have to shrug.

    Go ahead and shrug after Obama is reelected, John, because the audiences are shrugging now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very stupid sour grapes non-response. Critics hated the book and Atlas 1 movie but sales of both dramatically increased as time went on. The DVD is doing very well
      and so will number two.
      Null, I have yet in five years to meet an intelligent Obama supporter. Thanks for keeping my true stereotype intact.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Very stupid sour grapes non-response.

      This self-aggrandizing nonsense didn't deserve a serious response. "Oh woe is us, the movie is doing poorly because the critics all lined up to bash it." Second verse, same as the first. We heard all this the last time the Invisible Hand gave this franchise a spanking.

      Critics hated the book and Atlas 1 movie but sales of both dramatically increased as time went on.

      You've got to be kidding me. Not only is there no basis for claiming this about the book—if there are any lists of sales for Atlas Shrugged the novel broken down by year, they aren't anywhere online—it is also simply false regarding the movie.

      Here we do have the figures, and they tell a tale of failure. The first week's gross was $2,215,781, over two-thirds of which it earned on its opening weekend. Then in the second week the gross takings fell by 43% even as they added 166 screens nationwide. They never stopped falling after that. This movie used up its built-in audience within the first three days, and never did any better business at any week thereafter.

      Null, I have yet in five years to meet an intelligent Obama supporter.

      Apparently you have a very limited set of acquaintances, or you just live around a lot of very stupid people.

      Thanks for keeping my true stereotype intact.

      I'm sure it's not hard to maintain your stereotypes when you don't even bother to ask people if they support Obama first. Here's a helpful tip for you: I don't. I never did. I voted against him in 2008 and I intend to do the same thing in 2012. That doesn't mean that I have to take this Shruggalo pity party seriously, nor ignore the irony of the advocates of personal responsibility blaming everybody but themselves for their awful movie's failure.

      Delete
  42. Do you change surgeons in the middle of a surgery, change drivers on a slippery road, change engineers when half way across a river building a bridge? We are learning a president and his cabinet need eight years to accomplish their goals, or at least build a solid foundation, right or wrong. Republicans gave us two wars, huge debt after Clinton pushed us into the black. Government isn't just philosphy. I believe in science. Want to solve problems? Change the congress to Reps. serving 3 years and only two terms and senators serving 5 years and only two terms: stop despotism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damn right, you change doctors that are killing and engineers that are building defective bridges !
      And change the driver if he's about to crash you too.
      Clinton never pushed us into the Black, they were all budget gimmicks resting on a gross understatement of Medicare and Social Security unfunded future liabilities AND a gross overestimate of future revenues. NASDAQ crashed in March 2000 on Clinton's watch, which was the beginning of that recession.
      You advanced the most inane reasons for voting Democrat that I have ever heard and I abstained from voting for Prez this year.

      Delete
  43. I just wanted to thank John Aglialoro for getting this movie out before the election. If he hadn't, I might have voted for Mitt Romney, and what a mistake that would have been! Romney has made massive money by soaking the US taxpayer, and he's got James Taggart stamped all over him.

    I'm voting for Gary Johnson.

    Thanks for clinching the anti-Romney argument. To think, I almost voted for the guy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  44. Vote the straight Libertarian ticket below president. Romney is a go-along-to-get-along kind of guy and will work with a Libertarian majority as well as any other.

    Any slave knows the first principle of freedom is self-ownership. Obama does not believe in freedom, he just wants to run the plantation.

    see / buy "Runaway Slave"
    equality7-2521

    ReplyDelete
  45. When will Part II be for sale on Blu-Ray and DVD? It was gone from the theater before I could go see it, and I heard great things about it from those that saw it before it was gone. It doesn't make any sense but I think the theaters wanted it to fail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The theaters would have liked for it to succeed, because they're businessmen and they like money. But nobody came when they showed it. The movie did so poorly in its first and second weeks, when it was showing everywhere, that most theaters dropped it like a hot potato as soon as the obligatory two weeks were up, freeing up the screens for a chance to make some money.

      Delete
  46. It seems after a quick glance at several of these comments the polarization of America is mostly complete - people still arguing about what appears to be their only two choices. Even those who have broken free enough to think about Gary Johnson as a viable candidate even with his flaws are not talking about the robbery that took place in Tampa. No mention of the write in candidate RON PAUL who to this day stands by his principles, and can still level his critic's with the Constitution and Austrian economics. America may have learned a valuable lesson from Part II - stop the motor of the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No mention only because the Republican Party has hammered him into irrelevance. I would have felt just as justified voting for Ron Paul as voting for Gary Johnson… but my vote for Gary Johnson will be visible in the results, whereas a writein for Ron Paul will not. This didn't stop me from writing on Ron Paul four years ago, when even the Libertarian candidate was a lying statist.

      Delete
  47. Those who favor Romney-Ryan seem to have no respect for facts since they have no problem with these two men who have lied repeatedly to gain power. So much for objectivity. Given their religious biases, they are the enemy of personal freedom (for most women and gay people, for example). And they believe is a massive military beyone what the military thinks is needed. So much for limted government.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I have read most of Ayn Rand's books, including "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal". The value she ascribes to the individual and the inherent right to profit and benefit from your own work is, I think, the message at the heart of her philosophy. That doesn't mean you must, or even can, do everything yourself, but you should not have your work co-opted by others against your will, if it is truly yours alone--your idea or creation.
    But I disagree with the spirit, tone, and message Mr. Aglialoro is presenting under the guise of Ayn Rand's philosophy. One of the core plot lines in Atlas Shrugged is the group of powerful men who spin circumstances, news, and wording to influence the public toward their ends, political ends at that. The word for it is propaganda. Anyone who tries to tell you who to vote for or not vote for, using emotionally charged terms (such as liberal, radical, socialist, right-wing, neo-con) is, in my opinion, doing exactly what the antagonists in Atlas Shrugged were guilty of doing. It's not about free speech, it's about power and influence.
    I believe Ms. Rand wanted each of us to be free to choose our own path; acting on our own self-interests, but not forcing someone else to serve our interests over their own. Unfortunately, the problem I see is that people have not evolved to be selfless enough to realize we can't always have things our way. Fear, anger, or greed can make people who think they have good intentions violate the very principles Ayn Rand espoused. The antagonists in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead conspired to influence people to accept their way, while from a different point of view, everyone at Galt's Gulch and John Galt himself might be seen as conspiring to influence the world to their way. Many hard working people the world over, who at that time in their lives have lacked the power or influence to change anything, end up devastated and have their futures ruined by powerful people who, in the long run, protected their own interest without the benevolence that Ayn Rand knew was necessary.
    Lastly, we also now live under a system that requires money, which is printed in limited supply, and which effectively makes us all subservient to this system. So, if Capitalism is all that's needed, then here is something to think about:

    Why doesn't the game of Monopoly go on forever?

    ChrisL

    ReplyDelete
  49. Why do you think there will be no point in finishing your AS movie series if Obama is elected? Wouldn’t there be merit in having a complete product to use in the long education process?

    Even if rediscovered as the Italian production of We The Living was? Finish the job, which might include re-editing part I.

    Are you letting your discouragement get to you, again?

    (BTW, you have a script problem on this web page, Keep It Simple for Success!_

    ReplyDelete