Great pickup trackman. What makes it so maddening is how obvious it is they've not read Rand. They're all reacting to what they've read ABOUT Rand from other detractors as opposed to what Rand actually wrote and said. It's downright painful to read.

Hi Track. I had the extreme displeasure of going to this site earlier. The content is so typical of conservatives. No wonder Rand disliked them and why I loathe them. When the crap hits the fan, and I fervently hope that day comes soon, they'll be the ones crying for mercy. They won't get any because they don't deserve any. No great loss.

My comment shown here is in moderation. Hopefully they approve it:

As to one billionaire that is not a crony capitalist I would say George Lucas. I would say that Lucas is just the kind of person Ayn Rand was writing about. Rand isn’t writing about how the world is, she is writing about the way she thinks the world should be. As to why people enjoyed the book more when they were younger than when they are older, it is because in maturity we make concessions, and that is not always a good thing. A wrong idea cannot be made correct just because everybody thinks something is correct. Socialism is a failure, and our lives are seething with it. Most people have so much of it in their lives they can’t see anything different. But that does not make Ayn Rand wrong, bad, or somehow immature. It just means that too many people in society have been willing to accept philosophies that they shouldn’t have, out of the laziness of not thinking things through. ‘Atlas Shrugged’ is a great piece of literature. It’s on par with ‘War and Peace,’ ‘Gone with the Wind,’ or ‘Lord of the Rings.’ It is a great literary undertaking that has been very successful. If filmmakers can make another ‘Hang Over II’ movie, then its OK to have an ‘Atlas Shrugged Part II’ movie. There is an audiance for it, but there are people who won’t like it, because as adults, they have simply made too many concessions in their lives to enjoy a film that is about a superhero in John Galt who refuses to bend even a little, and fears nothing. In a world of fearful people, it is understandable that those people will not enjoy a strong character like John Galt. For those people they can go see ‘Magic Mike.’

Apparently the writer and almost all of the people who left comments are incapable of reason. I know many that are the same so I don't even bother wasting my time trying to convince them. Although, on occasion I have uttered, "You're lack of preparation will not be MY emergency." Which is also probably lost on them.

This writer assumes humanity is flawed. That perspective can be seen in two comments:

"Since heroine Dagny Taggart (played by Samantha Mathis, replacing the more fetching Taylor Schilling from part one) is the embodiment of Rand’s philosophy, she behaves more like a Randian hero and less like the transportation executive she is. If you were a COO and were offered the patent for a cold fusion device, you would be stupid and negligent to turn it down. Dagny does, with some accompanying platitude about never accepting the fruits of another man’s labor.

The fact that she’s thinking about her individualist principles when she enters the presence of what would be mankind’s greatest invention in history demonstrates one of the bigger problems with Rand, and one of the challenges to communicating her novels onscreen: The things the characters are doing and the things they’re saying often bear only the slightest relation to one another."

and

"Wealth is good, except when it comes from political connections – James Taggart is the playboyish CEO of Taggart Transcontinental, whose dealings with his political allies lead to the closure of the John Galt line, and to the embodiment of the second half of that maxim. But show me a billionaire who isn’t a crony capitalist in some form; people who treat Rand as revelation seem unaware of the fact that real-life wealth creators are never as scrupulous as Randian heroes. Also, an epic story or comprehensive philosophy communicating that crony capitalism is wrong is overkill."

You see, Rand is only a revelation to us naive youthful types who don't hold a correct concept of humanity--that people will do anything to get what they want.

I know I was snide with that statement, but it's hard to not be. You can't argue with a person who basically thinks everyone is an asshole. But really, do you even want to argue with him?