Darrell Cody

What did you think of the Vice Presidential debate?

8 posts in this topic

Someone counted the interruptions and Ryan interrupted Biden six times while Biden interrupted Ryan 91 times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect "public opinion" will say that Biden won, but from a strategic standpoint, I think Ryan accomplished his goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the "debate" but I flipped the channel to it for a minute to see Biden wagging his finger at the interrogator, I mean moderator, and couldn't watch any more. After hearing and reading what they argued about from others, it reminded me of a 6th grade argument over current events. It is clear that Rand did indeed have little affect on Ryan's intellectual prowess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the "debate" but I flipped the channel to it for a minute to see Biden wagging his finger at the interrogator, I mean moderator, and couldn't watch any more. After hearing and reading what they argued about from others, it reminded me of a 6th grade argument over current events. It is clear that Rand did indeed have little affect on Ryan's intellectual prowess.

Yes, very little Objectivist influence was visible. Irritating!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the "debate" but I flipped the channel to it for a minute to see Biden wagging his finger at the interrogator, I mean moderator, and couldn't watch any more. After hearing and reading what they argued about from others, it reminded me of a 6th grade argument over current events. It is clear that Rand did indeed have little affect on Ryan's intellectual prowess.

Yes, very little Objectivist influence was visible. Irritating!

Objectivism as a philosophy has been around since 1956, but round it up to 1960. That is 52 years ago. If it hasn't "sold" in 52 years have you wondered why? Why isn't the potential audience more receptive?

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the "debate" but I flipped the channel to it for a minute to see Biden wagging his finger at the interrogator, I mean moderator, and couldn't watch any more. After hearing and reading what they argued about from others, it reminded me of a 6th grade argument over current events. It is clear that Rand did indeed have little affect on Ryan's intellectual prowess.

Yes, very little Objectivist influence was visible. Irritating!

Objectivism as a philosophy has been around since 1956, but round it up to 1960. That is 52 years ago. If it hasn't "sold" in 52 years have you wondered why? Why isn't the potential audience more receptive?

ruveyn

Well ruveyn, when you put it in the context that Objectivism has had to work to over come a couple millenia of that poisonous altruist dogma that the worlds religions have worked to infect people with I don't see where it's doing all that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... it reminded me of a 6th grade argument over current events. It is clear that Rand did indeed have little affect on Ryan's intellectual prowess.

Yes, very little Objectivist influence was visible. Irritating!

Objectivism as a philosophy has been around since 1956, but round it up to 1960. That is 52 years ago. If it hasn't "sold" in 52 years have you wondered why? Why isn't the potential audience more receptive?

ruveyn

Well ruveyn, when you put it in the context that Objectivism has had to work to over come a couple millenia of that poisonous altruist dogma that the worlds religions have worked to infect people with I don't see where it's doing all that bad.

There is a lot more to it than the ethics, which is required for the ethics and which most people still don't realize exists let alone understand. Most still don't understand even what she meant by 'selfishness' let alone the rest of her theory of morality. Some of the worst offenders among those who consider themselves to be in agreement with her are the ones who breezily claim to have invented it themselves before reading Ayn Rand. There are certain outlooks on life that many have come to without getting it all from Ayn Rand, but that is not the equivalent of her philosophy and its explanation.

Someone like Paul Ryan could not, even if he understood it, which he does not, and wanted to use it in a presidential debate, could not do so because he would have to explain too much of what he meant, which is not possible in the format and time limits of a debate. In today's culture he could not even take a consistent position on political freedom if expected to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites