John Stossel on Hannity: Why Hollywood Was Against the "Atlas Shrugged" Film

Hannity's ignorance is on display here, lolz. It should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with Eastern european literature that there is a long established tradition of anti-statist literature (though not "officially" sanctioned till the fall of the Soviet empire) that depicts the crushing nature of omni-present regimes. As I understand her (I haven't read much Rand stuff yet), she's well in the tradition of Zamyatin, Solzhenitsyn, Tolstoy, Bulgakov, etc. /end rant
 
Wow. Hannity promoting Ayn Rand. I feel like I've left planet earth.

I'm amazed he actually alluded to the FDA's heartless practice of denying experimental drugs to terminal patients.

It is nice to see some of these right wing talking heads coming around, even though it's almost definitely just rooted in partisanship rather than in any sort of real limited government ideology.
 
Hannity just read the SparkNotes summary of Atlas Shrugged before his show.
 
Sorry, but, the movie is going to, not at all be good. :[
 
Don't be fooled. Many of us will NEVER forget how Hannity treated THE most honorable statesman in our government. We know in our hearts that he's really a big government tool and rarely if ever mentions the three hand in hand in hand issues that he and his bosses will NEVER touch intimately. The Federal Reserve, the Military industrial complex/foreign policy and the mainstream media. They can "talk" about reducing government, individual liberty, the Constitution, taxes and liberal policies all day long and they may even convince a lot of people who as Stossel said "don't have time" to "work" or look into things any deeper than watching Fox, listening to Hannity and Rush and Beck and remembering what they were "taught" in school. Government school.
 
Melissa, I wouldn't worry about it. It is a thousand pages. You don't have to read it all in one sitting though. It's a great book. I couldn't put it down. I think everyone on this forum should read it. It's very educational and entertaining.
 
Melissa, I wouldn't worry about it. It is a thousand pages. You don't have to read it all in one sitting though. It's a great book. I couldn't put it down. I think everyone on this forum should read it. It's very educational and entertaining.

Good to know thanks I am a book reader over tv and since the movie was coming out wanted to read it first
 
Hannity proclaimed himself a libertarian after Obama was elected, he touts Atlas Shrugged as a great movie. Yet whenever he speaks of presidential candidates that will be running this year on his radio show he conveniently forgets Ron Paul or Gary Johnson.

His stripes are the same.
 
I'm amazed he actually alluded to the FDA's heartless practice of denying experimental drugs to terminal patients.

It is nice to see some of these right wing talking heads coming around, even though it's almost definitely just rooted in partisanship rather than in any sort of real limited government ideology.

Hannity supports limited government in certain areas. Unfortunately, he just doesn't realize that his foreign policy views contradict a limited government ideology.
 
Don't be fooled. Many of us will NEVER forget how Hannity treated THE most honorable statesman in our government. We know in our hearts that he's really a big government tool and rarely if ever mentions the three hand in hand in hand issues that he and his bosses will NEVER touch intimately. The Federal Reserve, the Military industrial complex/foreign policy and the mainstream media. They can "talk" about reducing government, individual liberty, the Constitution, taxes and liberal policies all day long and they may even convince a lot of people who as Stossel said "don't have time" to "work" or look into things any deeper than watching Fox, listening to Hannity and Rush and Beck and remembering what they were "taught" in school. Government school.

So true. Yesterday I had that dickhead on in the car while going to pick up some hay for the livestock. He was going on about how a government "shutdown" was no threat in the short term because "vital services" would not be impacted... then listed "social security check" as one of those. He is most clearly a giant government advocate, all this lip of decreasing it notwithstanding. Do NOT trust him... or any of them.
 
So true. Yesterday I had that dickhead on in the car while going to pick up some hay for the livestock. He was going on about how a government "shutdown" was no threat in the short term because "vital services" would not be impacted... then listed "social security check" as one of those. He is most clearly a giant government advocate, all this lip of decreasing it notwithstanding. Do NOT trust him... or any of them.

I don't think Social Security should've been created in the first place, but people have now paid into the sytem their entire lives, and they deserve to get their own money back from the government. Giving people their own money back is something that the government has to do.
 
I read every page of the book, but my god it was a chore to read.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j56IiLqZ9U&feature=related


Agreed. The story was good, IMO. The core liberty message excellent. The style is tedious and she simply talks WAY too much. But IMO one should take what wheat from it they can and ignore the chaff.

The biggest error Rand makes in her work is the presumption of rationality on the part of people. In today's cultural context this is an assumption that cannot be validly made. In a different setting, one where the imbeciles are not bailed out when they do stupid things, I suspect her assumption would come significantly closer to broad legitimacy. But in this welfare/entitlement/coddle-the-idiots culture, the only thing that can reasonably be counted upon is for the average person to behave non-rationally - even stupidly, much of the time. Were this not so, our market bubbles would not inflate as they do.
 
Back
Top