One of the most interesting things about the Ayn Rand controversy is that the tone of the respective responses from the two camps reveals so much about their different worldviews.
The discourse of those who are against La Rand is characterised by an arch mocking, a witty subtlety, a squeamishness that is suppressed by an ironic sense of the incredulity of the whole proceeding.
The discourse of the Objectivists, as they obligingly call themselves, on the other hand, is characterised by a hot fanatic hatred, a bitter resentment that the dialogue is not taking place on their terms, and insanely disproportionate delusions of grandeur.
This is either very revealing of the kind of people who are attracted to La Rand and those who are not; or of what her ideas and writings can do to one.
I mean, what kind of person becomes a disciple of a writer whose first name is a typo?