She was unyielding because she knew she was right, and she expected others to have the same attitude. Unfortunately, that is often perceived as arrogance. I feel a certain kinship with her when some bubblehead speaks nonsense with great authority on a subject I have studied and struggled with and finally came to a conclusion on.

Bullseye!!!!!!!!!!

Miss Rand made it very clear (and why) she was
NOT a Conservative.

"...when he mocked her accent....." What about Buckley's accent (uh, uh.....uh......)

Buckley was a pretentious fool.

Thank You Sir! I needed to take my meds, and this
reminded me to do so, quite adequately. pain pills,
gastro pills, etc. for the grossness of this reviewer.

Buckley was, for me, only a source of new and
interesting words. even his view of capitalism
seemed weak. good-bye, BIll.

Thanks Again, blarman!!! -- j

I recall having read (I think in a John Campbell article) that Buckley was the first person to make the word "ecology" popular in the media.

Jan

You're welcome. She was amazing. I watched different interviews and no one was able to shake her.

she was in a word "brilliant" those 2 guys are not, nor are they even close.

Richrobinson:
Thank you!
I watched various videos of Ayn Rand that came up with your selection... stunningly awesome this woman and a great debater for her philosophy. I hate to say it but if you have not read her books a great deal of her philosophy flys over the head. Her attackers are most always coming from ignorance based on emotional reactions that weep contradiction. Her (Rand) logic is a razors edge!

That too. And we don't even need to get into Chambers' book review that he referenced....

Ah yes, Charlie Rose. I wondered why I disliked him on sight.
Ayn Rand was not a saint, and in some cases, not a very nice person. But I have yet to encounter a sharpness of intellect that comes anywhere near hers. Whether they can admit it or not, rather than projecting a Nazi-like image as they prefer to portray her, she had an exalted view of mankind. A fact that her critics miss because she threatens their entire belief system.

That wasn't ignorance, that was malice, complete with a touch of prejudice when he mocked her accent.

My impression of Bill Buckley: he had to protect Whittaker Chambers, after the latter made an abject fool of himself.

"To a gas chamber--go!" That's what Whittaker Chambers got out of AS. He probably was talking about the destruction of the Taggart Tunnel. Jeson Lee Steorts made the same mistake.

Did neither man realize that it's not safe to put in place certain policies that place the wrong people in command of particular transportation infrastructures and systems, if they are going to rely on the same?

Rand's central idea is that rational beings make their own luck, and can reduce risk in ways that do not involve mere avoidance of the issue or situation. She also sought to illustrate the Law of Unintended Consequences. But a Jason Lee Steorts or a Whittaker Chambers does not want to think about people calling for unworkable policies, then suffering the consequences.

And Bill Buckley didn't understand it, either. All he understood was, "My man got himself into trouble, and now I have to run interference for him, or else call me a fair-weather friend." Sorry, Mr. Buckley. But there is more to honor and integrity than that.

I think that is Charlie Rose. He clearly enjoyed Buckleys criticism of Rand. Not exactly an objective interview.

For any who are interested, here is a transcript of the "devastating review" of the book mentioned:

http://whittakerchambers.org/articles/nr...

very well put.

Buckley was as far off the mark as a bowman using rubber suction cup arrows. He talks about A.R. and her philosophy like someone reading a Cliff's Notes pamphlet with half the pages missing.
Buckley is an OK guy when it comes to capitalism vs socialism and all the illustrations of the meanings and differences of both. But when it comes to basic premises, he's way off the mark. In this particular interview, the smarminess of the interviewer and the acceptance of it by Buckley does make me want to pop a Zantac or two.

First, Buckley - as a staunch conservative - disagreed on many more points with AR than religion. Second, AR's beliefs caused no such thing; e.g. Buckley could not have been an ally. He did not truly understand her beliefs.

buckley acknowledges that AS is the BIGGEST selling book of all time. therefore Rand will be remembered for as long as the book is in print. however, does anybody mention one word that buckley has written? that will also be for all time.

Buckley is very much respected in the conservative community. I find it frustrating that he couldn't see past the religious differences they had. On the other hand from what I have read Rand was unyielding in her beliefs and most likely had a way of creating enemies of potential allies.

He was always excruciatingly mocking of AR.
And for an intellegent person, he was far too ignorant of her views. He overstates his association with her.

I was just thinking, DAMN I missed one.

WHAT? you don't look at all my comments on the gulch?! up is down