Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel W. Koehler who wrote (2161)	3/14/1999 6:24:00 PM
From: The Street	Respond to of 13060

Thanks Dan-- will check it out!

To: Daniel W. Koehler who wrote (2161)	3/15/1999 1:57:00 PM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13060

I've seen it... I am AWED by her intellect. I think the "intelligentsia" gives her short shrift. In college, when I was studying Democratic Theory and Institutions, I mentioned to my professor that I was finishing reading Marx, and had read a good deal of Rand. His response was "I don't think either will give you a basis for reality, but Marx was certainly closer to the truth and has more to offer. Rand is too "superficial"." I was stunned by his answer. I still am. It is the simplicity of her viewpoint and her willingness to take a stand that makes her so appealing. I had the good luck to work with one of her old proofreaders (she was my assistant a few years ago). She pointed out several misspellings and factual errors to Rand once (she said there were so few, it was nice to be able to point SOMETHING out). Rand EXPLODED and screamed at her impertinence. Later, however, upon doing some research, Rand returned and apologized. She admitted to her errors and felt her reaction was overblown and uncalled for. Quite a tribute to her sense of fairness.