I have read quite a bit of Ayn Rand's work and seen and read many interviews. I certainly do not agree with a lot of her philosophy; I think that American altruistic tendancies have been of huge benefit to our society. But your characterization of Objectivism could not be much further from the mark.
Certainly she was influenced by the circumstances of her birth, as I am sure that you and I both were. Escaping from a totalitarian regime made her appreciate her freedom much more than the typical Obama voter. Trying to make the case that her philosophy could only work in a police state is completely baffling as every fiber in her being opposed communism, socialism and all powerful police states.
No one has more accurately predicted the eventual outcome of the socialist policies that have been eroding the system in our country than Ayn Rand. I am sure that you and I agree much more than we disagree, but I do not believe that your characterizations are fair or accurate. I personally fear a socialist hiding behind religion more than an athiest who believed to her core in the free market.
Keep in mind, it was forced altruism that Rand objected too.
If it was in your own rational self-interest to be altruistic (it made you fell better, or it made your community a better place etc.) then go for it.
It was the 'looters' who took from you to give to others and call it altruism that she thought was evil.
She saw socialism warping the market. She did not see her own top down enforced amorality warping the human character and society to where economic socialism would be guarenteed via dysfunction. She did not see humanism’s political correctness replacing Christian morals and ethics in a top/down elitist rule.
Like most atheists, she understoodmaterialism and service to self (darwinism). It does not work on a cultural level for a free nation. It is amoral and without direction and inspiration. It is animalistic and legalistic.