That may be, but the seriousness is in the content of their ideas. The destruction is a consequence of that. The stagnation of so many peoples' thinking processes to the level of a 12 year old is only part of the destruction that accelerates the rest.

No I did not know how the novel would end, and neither did I find it "painful" or "long suffering".

She did, lol.

No, sorry... not Temlakos' interpretation, YOUR interpretation. I hope that clarifies my lack of clear reference in my post.

It did focus on the rich, but I clearly got the idea it was the producers, not just the rich.

"I go with [Temlakos'] interpretation."
That means you think the script writers were portraying Rand in a positive light.

"I think he meant you have more people who want than people who make the things others want."
In that case I agree with him completely.

I saw one comment about it until I logged in and couldn't find it again.

So drop a comment at https://www.facebook.com/TheGoodWife

I just did... :)

I go with your interpretation. My wife and I looked at each other and laughed out loud after that clip on the GW, which we watch on DVR regularly. I had to back it up to catch the dialogue we missed when we were laughing.

As the archaic phrase goes, "chillax, guys..." The writers, if they're as liberal-lefty Hollywood as we trust they are, they would not miss a chance for a cheap shot like that, and the situation served up a softball for them to try to hit out of the park. So easy to do when you're controlling the pitcher, catcher, batter... :)

Hell, maybe some viewer might have their curiosity piqued by the comments and go Googling... who knows?

And my wife and I are constantly amazed at the string of curve balls the writers throw into the story line(s) EVERY episode! We're in a constant state of WTF can they think of next, as we predict, several times during each episode, that 'well, THAT'S not going to end well...'

Great points.

Along the lines of Ayn Rand writing from her personal history, for the first time in 40 years, I recently reread Anthem. Talk about distilling it down to the essence! This should be encouraged reading for all teenagers coming of age. I think now I must reread We The Living.

Absolutely correct. 1982 is the first publication. Peikoffs association with Ayn Rand goes back to the '50's with the Branden's in anticipation of the publication of AS.

@Flo
Thanks for correcting me on FDR's New Deal.

I agree that by writing the history as a novel that future generations would be able to learn the pattern(sequence of events) and know how the slippery slope unfolds.
It is only by being aware of history's patterns that we can have a chance to make sure they are not repeated.

I thought Ominous was written in the 80's.

It's very true Ayn Rand was drawing on personal lifetime experience, the context being not only the time period, but where. However, there is no doubt she was applying it to her adopted country as a warning of what will come. Hence she provided much inspiration for Leonard Peikoff's "The Ominous Parallels". A comparison of America in his "today" with Nazi Germany. 1957.

FDR's New Deal was in the 1930's by the way.

@Flootus5
If you have read about the time period that Ayn Rand grew up in, you will recognise that she was writing about events that had already happened.
(Take over by the bolsheviks / communists in Russia and FDR's New Deal of the 1920s).

I am not surprised at her comments. My personal experience with those who say they do not like her books is that, when questioned as to have they actually read them, every single one has replied "Well no, but my friend told me about them" thereby becoming what Ayn Rand called an "Intellectual Second-Hander". These "Intellectual Second-Handers" are rampant in today's society. No one wants to read to understand.

A network screenwriters character of someone portraying the liberal Chicago (home of the current socialist state) viewpoint, on a blatantly liberal network, written by a guild that has very deep roots in the Communist party? Why am I not surprised?

The only other ones I've heard using the same anti-Rand vitriolic are those (a) currently involved in (and very proud of their association with) the various communist manifesto / Workers of the World Unite schlock, (b) the "Anarchist" movement players, who are deeply tied in with (a), and the "Occupy (wherever) movement"... again, parading their pride in their involvement in the former.

Never forget the Marxist manifesto requires their system be adopted universally and absolutely, and having the screenwriters act on their behalf to include their propaganda (overtly or hidden) into the brainwashing tool of the modern era (network TV entertainment dramas) is intended to spread their ideas, and gain complete acceptance, among the sheeple of America.

What amazes me is how people suck this scum up as if it were gospel, and spew it as fact, after watching it on a propaganda feelie on TV, and not see it for what it is. (And then get offended when they get called "Sheeple"...)

Ayn Rands books were written for adults, whether actual or intellectually.

Jim Wright

I would ask the question if she has ever read any of Ayn Rand's books herself. Or parroting the usual propaganda. I was around 10 when I began reading Ayn Rands works - and am still amazed at her insight and prescience as Atlas Shrugged becomes "now non-fiction".

"A twelve year old's view" Seems to me that the demographic all the networks shoot for. The schools have dumbed down the kids with with potential and the networks can now broadcast this swill they call news and entertainment. The low information voter not only lives in America, they rule!

Their attitudes are one of the reasons a good show went south and I no longer watch this liberal outlook on life. CBS is in the pocket of the liberal agenda, just look at their news division and how they support the current administration in their lies. This goes for all the other networks also. Any news organization is promoting some sort of train of thought. This is right out of AS, where the government controls everything.

Any bets that the actress, the writer of the episode, the director, etc., have actually READ the book, AS?

No, probably not. They are fiercely proud of their ignorance.