What do you guys think of Romney's VP pick Paul Ryan? Do you think it strengthened the republican ticket or diminished it? What do you think of his Ayn Rand POV?
http://www.newsday.com/opinion/viewsday-1.3683911/filler-paul-ryan-ayn-rand-and-the-meaning-of-life-1.3899285
After the midterms, I thought that Obama would win if the economy didn't get visibly worse, and that his republican challenger would win if it did get visibly worse. I've been consistently pessimistic about the economy (still am) and so I have long thought Obama vulnerable.
Nothing since then has changed that. If the economy dives in the next 3 months, Ryan's ideas might be welcome change. If the economy does OK in the next 3 months, Ryan's ideas will probably be viewed as unnecessary. I think the election's close enough that it will hinge on economic reports between now and November.
I've seen him compared to Palin, which I think is ridiculous. Palin was and is an idiot, an anti-intellectual, full of gut-feeling vague buzzword homey donchaknow platitudes, totally unable to respond to any kind of questioning, totally unable to think on her feet. I don't get that impression at all from Ryan. His ideas may or may not deserve criticism, but at least he has ideas, youbetcha.
The furthest the Palin comparisons go is that both VP selections were made by candidates who were behind in the polls, who thought something a little unorthodox might help. Both McCain and Romney have had some trouble motivating the far right base; I think that's actually less of a problem for Romney since the far right
hates Obama and wants him gone.
So - for this reason, I am surprised by the Ryan pick. I thought for sure he'd go for someone who'd help him in Virginia or Ohio. It seems an odd risk. Then again, risk assessment and management is exactly what Romney made his fortune doing, so maybe I should have a little faith.
As for the influence Ayn Rand had on him - one can appreciate and agree with some of her core messages, such as self reliance, individual reward for individual achievement, personal freedom ... without embracing the cold empty selfish deadness that her philosophy implies.
I suspect there isn't a single doctor on SDN who can read this oft-quoted passage and not have it resonate to some degree:
"I quit when medicine was placed under State control some years ago," said Dr. Hendricks. "Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I could not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun.
I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything—except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the ‘welfare' of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said, but ‘to serve.'
That a man who's willing to work under compulsion is too dangerous a brute to entrust with a job in the stockyards—never occurred to those who proposed to help the sick by making life impossible for the healthy. I have often wondered at the smugness at which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscience, to stifle my mind—yet what is it they expect to depend on, when they lie on an operating table under my hands?
Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce. Let them discover, in the operating rooms and hospital wards, that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man they have throttled. It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it—and still less safe, if he is the sort who doesn't."
That character has an angry bitterness which isn't really attractive, but he isn't wrong.
You could ask Palin which philosophers influenced her, and she'd say "all of them" ...
You could ask Palin what she thinks of Ayn Rand, and she'd say "who?" ...
So in that regard at least, the GOP vice presidential candidate this time around is a brilliant improvement.
