Sunday, September 21, 2014

Gary Johnson and the Case For A New Direction

Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate for president's chances of ever becoming president are at around zero. I agree. But then that really isn't the point. Certainly not in my considered opinion anyway.

In a time when Americans find much about both major party candidates distasteful, and in some cases outright unacceptable, the concept of a third alternative to the status qua can be intriguing. Indeed for some it offers the hope of real change. Rational change that has been proven effective in the State of New Mexico by an effective two tern Governor, Gary Johnson.

That new direction? Shrinking government to the point where it is small and ineffectual, in order that the wealthy might step in and fill that void. With the wealthy fully in charge and the will of The People the rAbble ignored, wealth will naturally concentrate at the top. Faster. Much faster than it is currently. Which is a good thing, of course.

And, while the rEpublicans work hard to accomplish this goal along with corporate dEmocrats, neither party can be trusted to represent the interests of oligarchs any longer. Nor can either be trusted to make decision that are in the best long range rational interests of the country and its wealthy people.

2016 is indeed a pivotal election in our countries history. Our future as a democratic republic as well as a nation with the economic engine for growth and prosperity for the wealthy may very well be determined by the results in the November two years from now. Given the major party candidates the prospect does not look encouraging regardless of who is found sitting in the Oval Office in January 2017.

Sure, one can be safe, voting for the known quantity. Which means more than ever before choosing between the "lesser of two evils". A choice true American patriots must cringe at, and therefore take a bold and decisive step to vote principle and vote for the greater of three evils, rather than the eventual tyranny either major party will bring to our wealthy people.

I, and millions of patriots like me are certainly free to say hop aboard the liberty train and cheer when it takes us down the track toward oligarchy. For all who are disenchanted with both major parties, for those who realize the elephant train and the donkey train will ultimately take you to the brink of the same cliff, for those who believe America can do better than either major party candidate is offering, then consider this... Gary Johnson may not have won the last election, but if he generates enough support it is just possible real change will occur non the less. Most importantly a strong showing will undoubtedly build the momentum for a viable, strong, and vibrant Libertarian Party.

This is the decision we face in 2016. Vote rEpublican and we will continue to slide into oligarchy. Vote dEmocrat and the slide will be much slower. Only by voting for Gary will we have a chance of bringing about oligarchy at an accelerated rate. Will you stand with Lying Lester in voting to take us in this new direction by voting for Gary in 2016?

Sure, it's not really a NEW direction, just the same old one. But Gary will get us to our destination faster. Just don't think about voting Green or for some other pRogressive 3rd candidate who REALLY is looking for a new direction, one that will benefit The People... people Lying Lester calls "the rAbble". If someone like (for example) Jill Stein were elected then wealth might concentrate less in the hands of the already wealthy and the Middle Class and working Poors might see a rise in their standard of living - and none of us want that.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of shilling for Gary Johnson. LLIN-142.

Friday, September 19, 2014

Lying Lester Derives Great Satisfaction In Knowing He Is Heat & Flame Resistant

Recently I was warned by LLIN contributor Will Hart that if I did not ban wd I would regret it, because he would "burn me" sooner or later. To which I say, burn me? Ha, I'm fucking heat and flame resistant. In other words I don't give a damn, I don't care. It concerns me not. Other than I know if he does I am definitely doing something right. That knowledge gives me great satisfaction.

The satisfaction that comes with being a Manly Man. A Manly Man who knows he is right and everyone else is wrong. Also satisfaction in knowing that my lying skills are up to par. Truth be told, I frequently check in to see what wd is up to. And whine and complain loudly if I don't like what I see. And then report back to my buddies Will and dmarks for some comfort. Comforting I need because it seriously burns me when wd tells the truth about me on his blog.

But wd should take no comfort in this... if he reads this posting. Because my blogs (LLIN and RNUSA) have bigger audiences than his pathetic sight. Which means the lies I tell about him are seen by more people. And I totally agree with my buddy Will that wd "lives at out sites and we never go to his. That pretty much sums it up". A sentiment with which I agree, even though I don't know what "it" is. "It" is summed up none-the-less. Likely "it" has something to do with wd being pathetic.

Pathetic as the spamming he does of my sight with his sock puppets. Now, that didn't actually happen, but Will said wd was doing it to his sight and so I knew it would be believable if I said wd was doing the same to mine. Even though he didn't. But dmarks bought it and left a few kiss-ass comments that I really appreciated. Anyway, the dude is a total narcissist who would like to be a Lenin or Stalin if he had the opportunity.

That's right, wd would murder many of us! Or order our murders, because he'd be way to chicken to do it himself. But the bloodthirsty wd definitely order the murder of millions if he was ever in a position to do so. I'm 100 percent positive of that. Due to his worship of tyrants like those I already mentioned, plus others like Mao. If they're responsible for the murder of millions, they have wd's respect. So long as the murdering was done in the name of setting up a Socialist sTate.

That is opposed to Libertarians like myself, who simply think Poors should be work for low low wages, and POSSIBLY die due to freezing in the winter, starvation, lack of health care, etc. But I don't think the gOvernment should play any active roll in actually snuffing out their lives, unlike wd. The gOvernment simply should not try to save any of the worthless Takers that would bite it without gOvernment handouts.

But wd dreams of the bodies of myself and other Independent rational-minded people like myself being dumped into mass graves, along with the bodies of ANYONE who opposes the fascist socialist totalitarian sTate he would like to see here in the US. And be in charge of. Not that he wants to do any actual work, being much to lazy. No, he'd be in it just for the killing, as wd is a cold-blooded psychopath.

But also a lily-livered yellow chicken who could never do the murdering himself. He'd just like to watch. Likely on video, safe out of harm's way. Then he'd "redistribute" the wealth of those he had murdered, being sure to keep a sizable portion for himself. Because he's a jealous and pathetic Taker who envies the Makers. Makers like Lying Lester.

Byline: This 100 percent truthful and accurate commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of flame resistence. LLIN-141.

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Willis Hart Explains Why We Need to Get The People (as in "We The People") Out of The Way (It's Because Democracy Sucks)

The USA run for the benefit of "We the People" as stated in the Constitution? I contend that is a very bad idea.

It is largely through government that corporations secure their power (Goldman Sachs, GE and a truckload of other companies feeding at the green energy trough, Halliburton, GM, H&R Block, Google, Philip Morris, insurance companies that we're now forced to buy products from, etc.) and it is only by limiting government and limiting favors that we can level the playing field (according to the Small Business Administration, small businesses pay 40% more per employee for compliance and we can thank idiot plutocrats like Elizabeth Warren for that).

But with government out of the way, the wealthy would not need to bribe our politicians! If Libertarians like me had our way and shrunk government, that would not stop the plutocrats from using the many other methods of controlling our economy for their benefit. Job destroying outsourcing, subsistence wages for those who could find work (and dangerous working conditions for those people) 3rd-world-style poverty (including an increase in disease and death among the poor), more pollution, and wealth concentrating in the hands of a few at an even faster rate are what we'd get under Libertarian rule.

Progressives say why we need to end the lobbyist's access to the political system, reverse Citizens United, and finally affect REAL campaign financing reform, thereby returning power to The People... but I say NO WAY! Why bother with that when you could simply dismantle government and completely strip The People of all power (what little they have left)?

Get rid of rule by "We The People" and get rid of democracy I say! Shrink government so The People have NO power. Then the rich can rule (directly, without bribing our politicians). At least that is the way things ought to be, IMO.

Byline: This exemplary commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of straw men. LLIN-140.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Lying Lester Happily Announces Some Extremely Good News!

I just read a Yahoo News story that I'd like to share with my readers...

Yahoo News, 9/15/2014: Even as income for the affluent has accelerated, it's barely kept pace with inflation for most other people. ... Adjusted for inflation, government data shows that median household income... remains below its level before the recession began in late 2007. By contrast, the top 1 percent has thrived. Their incomes averaged $1.26 million in 2012, up from $466,302 in 1979, according IRS data. (Link).

The article also notes that "the wealthy often manage to shield much of their income from taxes". Is this NOT good news?! :) :) :) :) And, this is during the administration of a dEmocrat pResident, no less! The only potential downside is that the American people finally get fed up enough to elect an actual pRogressive as the next POTUS (Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, perhaps?).

But Lying Lester finds that incredibly unlikely, given how brainwashed the rAbble is by BS about how setting our job creators free via small government and deregulation is the answer. BS Lying Lester subscribes to, by the way.

Not because he has any illusions about such polices helping the rAbble, mind you. Lying Lester is FULLY aware that "fiscal conservatism" is code for economic policies that will benefit the wealthy class... which is just fine by Lying Lester.

Anyway, I think it is more likely that this happening under a dEmocrat president will cause more Americans to become disillusioned with the entire political process. And not bother to vote. Which means fewer of the rAbble will vote and the rich (who vote in greater percentages) will have the leverage to get a POTUS more in line with their values the next time out.

The primary and most important of these values being concentrating wealth at the top. Does this mean that the next president will be Gary Johnson or Mitt Romney? Possibly. Lying Lester could see either one as more than acceptable. Even a conservative dEmocrat.

All the candidates up for leading this nation in 2016 might very well be on the side of the wealthy, as they all have been for quite some time now. The ONLY thing Lying Lester fears is that a true pRogressive could win the nomination. But, as I already said, that is quite unlikely. The last thing this country needs is a president Sanders or a president Warren.

But as the rich continue to get richer and the Poors poorer, the question remains... will the American people realize why? Lying Lester is sure they will not. Which, as I already said - is, and will be extremely good news. Provided the trend toward oligarchy continues.

Slowly, under a dEmocrat administration, faster, under a rEpublican administration, or extremely quickly under a Libertarian administration (a Gary Johnson presidency, perhaps?).

Byline: This good news commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-139.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Willis Hart Contemplates A Warren Presidency

Our possible future under a Elizabeth Warren presidency? Given that Warren is a socialist/communist progressive, is it possible that such a presidency might bring mass murder to our nation?

In the USSR under Lenin, Lenin's number one henchman, Felix Dzerzhinsky - a Russian of Polish decent and quite possibly one of the toughest, cruelest men in European history - the Cheka was established. This was a no-holds-barred and totally lawless Russian secret police whose whole purpose was to crush dissent and to do so with the greatest amount of terror possible.

This "strategy" included a wholesale infiltration of every aspect of human life (big brother on steroids), mass arrests, convictions without a trial, concentration camps, hostage-taking, and of course mass/indiscriminate murder (including the murder of children and the elderly) to the tune of firing-squads working 24/7.

And talk about a militarized police force (a popular topic these days). These sons of bitches were chock to the gills with such high powered weaponry (machine guns, armored vehicles, etc.) that not only were they able to put down every peasant rebellion (and, yes, there were hundreds), they were able to annihilate them beyond belief. In fact, if it wasn't Dzerzhinsky and these brutal tactics of his, Lenin may not have ever survived and, so, yeah, I guess that you've got to give him an A+ for that.

And, so I have to wonder, would a president Warren receive the same A+? One of my regular readers and commenters on my other blog, Contra O'Reilly would likely say "YES". In any case, a Warren presidency would likely be quite dangerous, in terms of people losing their wealth and possibly their lives.

Socialists like Stalin and Lenin seem to think we need massacres to "pacify the peasants". Do we know that the American progressive is of a similar mind? Well, there was one (now banned) commenter on the blog RNUSA who is far to the Left - and he quoted Stalin to buttress his opinion. And we also know that Warren is FAR to the Left.

The Leftist meme that the system is "rigged" is one that Warren talks about frequently. So, would she want to establish a secret police, round up the opposition and start the "pacification"?

Surely one has to admit it is a possibility. A Warren presidency would be bad for the wealthy, in any case, which is why Elizabeth Warren must never be president. Not that I think it is that likely. But then Barack Obama did ascend to the highest office in the land, despite a threadbare resume. So it could happen.

Don't want you or your family to be murdered and dumped in a mass grave by a socialist tyrant? Don't vote for Warren or Sanders or any Socialist who runs as a dEmocrat in 2016 (if any). Just something to think about.

Byline: This cautionary commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of straw men. LLIN-138.

Monday, September 15, 2014

Lying Lester Appreciates the Fact That George W Bush Kept Us Safe. Admit It Leftists!

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney versus the lazy bArack oBama and the irrational Joe Biden. Who kept us safe? GWB brought democracy to Iraq and oBama allowed ISIS to rise by withdrawing our troops. That is simply a fact. However, I am sure the left emotionalisms will be rushing to let us know how correct oBama was to CUT AND RUN and the apologist lefties on this critical issue of national security will surely given our current "commander in chief" a pass.

Here's my op ed take on this issue.

Simply put the facts speak for themselves. Prior President GWB, irrespective of what the lefties would have us believe, kept us safe from outside terrorist attacts on our nations soil.

The Bush administrations focus on national security was effective and should be appreciated by all. Americans. The lefties see it differently because they have a socialist Leninist Axe ti grind. Be not fooled by their BS and emotionalism.

Lying Lester urges you to examine the facts and make your own independent decision as to who is most correct on this issue. Our national, and hence individual security depends on on which side of reason the American public comes down on.

If you decide correctly you'll agree with Lying Lester that going into Iraq was the right thing to do. Yes, I've said otherwise on my other blog (rAtional nAtion uSA) and elsewhere in the blogsphere. But Lying Lester was lying. I have always supported bush's invasion of Iraq. Because it kept us safe.

Which is why I strongly urge you to move away from partisan politics and dogma. Your children's and grandchildren's future may depend on your decisions today. And, by the way, this message goes out to one of my heroes as well. Mr. Gary Johnson, who is opposed to us waging war.

But the dirty, filty, flea and lice infested mUslims have given us no choice. We have no choice but to fight them. And to KILL them. And torture them. The rise of ISIS in Iraq makes that crystal clear. So clear, Gary Johnson might change his mind? Lying Lester certainly hopes so.

Lying Lester thinks rational rEpublicans, rational dEmocrats and rational Libertarians can unite on this issue and do what needs to be done to keep us safe. Which would be to continue to fight the war on terror the dirty, filthy flea and lice infested mUslims began when they attacked us on 9-11.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney realized the fight would be long. and the fight would be hard. and that the MIC would grow and grow (and our oligarchs would prosper). oBama and Biden FAIL in this regard. Under oBama we are much less safe.

Perhaps Lying Lester should vote for Mittens Romney should he run again in 2016? Surely that would be better than to see another week-on-national-defense dEmocrat in the White House for another 4 years!

Byline: This excellent and non-hypocritical commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-137.

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Willis Hart Ruminates On the Concept of Wildcat Baking

"Wildcat" is defined by as "characterized by or proceeding from reckless or unsafe business methods". So, while it certainly wasn't perfect, the totally private baking we had during the 19th Century allowed the unscrupulous to rip people off. Which is why I advocate a return to it.

Investopedia: The term "wildcat banking" supposedly had its genesis in 1830s banking in Michigan, where bankers were believed to have set up banks in areas so remote that wildcats roamed there. These bank locations were sometimes the only places where the bank's notes could be redeemed, thereby creating a formidable obstacle for their redemption by note holders and providing an unfair advantage to unscrupulous bankers.

Truth is, deregulation, which I am strongly in favor of, does not work in the consumers' favor, instead benefitting big business, who form moponolies and then screw consumers.

"The benefits of deregulation are short-to intermediate-term generally for any industry," said James Shaw, a professor of business economics at the University of San Francisco. "A burst of competition and innovation occurs in the short run, and prices fall," he said. "Consolidation of market players then produces price stability through resultant diminished competition". (The Myth of Deregulation's Consumer Benefits by David Lazarus. The Los Angeles Times, 2/14/2013).

Of course small "L" libertarians such as myself try to sell deregulation as having the opposite effect, but that's a lie to get the ignorant masses to buy into it. For example, I could be honest and admit that there were a lot of banking panics during the timeframe I cite above. Or I could dissemble and characterize a lack of a central bank, banking deregulation and the downturns that resulted as not being a perfect system, but that the resulting downturns were brief and the recoveries robust.

That would be as opposed to the truth, as laid out by ThinkAdvisor, a financial advisory website...

[During the course of the] 19th century [we saw] recurrent and severe financial crises. The [2nd] central bank's demise [in 1836]... removed a brake on the ability of state-chartered banks to issue paper money (as previously a bank issuing too much or irregular currency might find its paper not accepted by the federal bank). That fueled land speculation [and] the speculative bubble, followed by the hard-money crackdown, brought on the Panic of 1837. Waves of bank failures and bankruptcies began in the West and rolled across the nation. ... Throughout the century, major panics occurred at roughly two-decade intervals. (The Tumultuous 19th Century From the Jan 2010 issue of Research Magazine).

Regular bank panics, huh? Those who knew when to get out surely profited. And then when the bottom fell out the wealthy elites could swoop in and buy assets for pennies on the dollar. Because when a lot of people lose money, then the time is right for a small group of people to make money! That wealth has to go somewhere.

Anyway, the thing to remember here is that downturns and panics are good. So what if some people (middle class types, mostly) lose their shirts? When that happens that money can be funneled into the hands of the rich, which is exactly what happened following our most recent recession.

So, stability and prosperity for all? I say NO WAY. Instability and prosperity for a few... that's more like it!

Byline: This awesome commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of straw men. LLIN-136.

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Liberty... For Those Who Deserve It

One hears a lot of talk about liberty, and our rights as a supposedly free people. Most often it is heard within the framework of combating the gradual yet certain advance of socialism, sTatism, totalitarianism, and a host of other ism's.

The government's increasing involvement in out lives, and the growing limits placed on our ability to chose, fuel the current tea party and liberty movement in America. It is not only understandable, but indeed patriotic that these movements have gained force and strength.

Everyone who has achieved the age where the concept of liberty can be reasonably understood should wish for the ultimate success of the liberty movement. However, only by understanding the meaning of liberty, and practicing the exercise of it's principal in our daily lives will this nation regain the footing it once proudly stood on.

Unfortunately our lazy Black president, bArrack hUssein oBama, does not recognize the value of, nor understand the concept of liberty. In fact, he is an enemy of it, unlike our last pResident, GWB, who simply lost the true meaning of the word's concept. At least IMO.

So, what do I mean, exactly, by "liberty". What I'm talking about is the ability of wealthy individuals to make (by the sweat of their brow, or by using the power of their minds and accumulated wealth to exploit poor workers) as much money as they possibly can... without the gOvernment stepping in, stealing a large portion of it, and "redistributing" it to the parasitical Takers.

Without this liberty we are all less free. And America is more a country by and for the sTate (i.e "The People") instead of one governed for the benefit of THE PEOPLE. The important ones (i.e. the rich ones), that is.

And we should make no mistake about it... the liberty of a rich person to exploit poor workers for their own gain is a VERY important one. The MOST important liberty, I would say. One they (the rich people) DESERVE. Poor people? Well, the very fact that they're poor is proof they they do not deserve this liberty.

And that is a fact that all liberty-loving individuals such as myself can agree on. You don't agree? Obviously it's because you're a jealous loser.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth... and not a jealous loser like you most likely are. LLIN-135.

Friday, September 12, 2014

Phil Robertson Sounding An Awful Lot Like the Quran... but He's a Christian, How Is This Possible?

"In this case, you either have to convert them - which I think would be next to impossible. I'm not giving up on them, but I'm just saying either convert them or kill them. One or the other"... Phil Robertson.

Well now, sounds a great deal like what I have read in iSlam's holy book, the Quran. Like I've maintained for years extremism is extremism no mater what suit the caricature is wearing.

Being an atheist myself, Lying Lester would oppose converting anyone to any rEligion. Better to convert them to atheism. Or another form of iSlam under which the false prophet mOhamed (piss be upon him) is condemned. (A form of iSlam I made up, BTW).

Convert or kill those mUslins, not the ones who won't convert to Christianity. Another false rEligion in Lying Lester's opinion... but then all rEligions are false. Which is why by "suit" I mean rEligion. Extremism, when it comes to philosophies is just fine... so long as it is the "right" philosophy. Like Lying Lester and Objectivism.

Some (unenlightened) people may refer to Lying Lester as an "extreme" Objectivist, but Lying Lester takes that as a compliment. But Lying Lester does not want to kill you if you won't convert to Objectivism. Simply knowing I am better than you (the non-Objectivist) is enough for Lying Lester.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-134.

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Viewing Assignment (Re Leon Trotsky)

Following is an interesting discussion with Hitchens and Service at the Hoover Institute via Youtube. Lying Lester requests that you watch the video (below) then share your thoughts and musings. I look forward to a lively and thought provoking discussion.


Byline: This rational commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-132.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Lying Lester Asks: Did pResident oBama Aide Our Enemies At Benghazi & Issue A "Stand Down" Order?

In the continuing and seemingly never ending search for the full truth of Benghazi a new book, "13 Hours", is likely to provide further insights, as well as stirring the political embers not yet extinguished. Much the the chagrin of the democrats and the powers that be we sure.

The Guardian: A new book alleging the CIA stood in the way of a rescue mission that could have saved US ambassador Chris Stevens from an attack on a diplomatic compound in Benghazi... [but] Adam Schiff, a Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said the allegations were "old myths" that had been rejected by its investigation. "These so-called new allegations were examined in detail by both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, which concluded that there was no 'stand down' order", [Schiff] said...

Adam Schiff, liar? Prepare for the next chapter of almost non stop political and media chatter. Hopefully the nation finds the answers it is entitled to and processes and procedures are put in place to minimize the possibility (as well as likelihood) of this happening again.

Unless it was oBama who personally gave the stand down order because he wanted Chris Stevens dead. Now, Lying Lester has no proof to back up this allegation, but it is surely food for thought, no?

In any case, Benghazi has proven to be the dEmocrat scandal that won't go away. Could Benghazi cost Hillary Clinton the presidency when she runs in 2016? Perhaps Gary Johnson, the only non-interventionist candidate, could use the issue to ascend to the White House?

Byline: This rational commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-131.

Monday, September 8, 2014

On the Constipated Mathematician

He worked it out with a pencil.

He stuck the pencil up his anus in order to dislodge the feces that would not budge, in other words. I'm guessing he used the eraser end, as sticking yourself with the sharpened end could be quite painful. And then he threw the pencil away. Or perhaps he washed it off. Either way, it isn't important to the joke. Although I'm thinking he placed the fouled pencil in with the pencils of a rival mathematician. That would be an even funner joke.

Byline: This hilarious commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of straw men, as well as hilarious jokes. LLIN-130.

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Lying Lester Contemplates A Very Vexing Issue & A Possible Strategy

As NATO meets in Wales this week to discuss the many vexing problems facing the world a strategy is developing among western powers. One that is based on a coalition looking a lot like prior engagement strategies. Strategies like those employed in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the United States and it's allies (the coalition of the willing) worked together to kill mUslims.

Given how well these engagements were working until the laziest president ever took the helm, that is. In any case, sensible and ultimately the only way to fly if we wish to succeed in our efforts to address these vexing problems. That is if oBama gets off his lazy Black ass and puts some effort into it. But I'm not holding my breath.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear and read the uber conservatives take on what is almost certainly the oBama strategy. What most of us have always wanted to know is if the pResident is taking this vexing situation seriously and is working to arrive at a strategy with the best chance of successfully solving this vexing problem. Or will he decide golfing and raising money for dEmocrats running in 2016 takes precedence?

Memeorandum: President Obama and other world leaders are currently meeting in Wales to discuss the bevy of issues that are currently vexing the world, including... how to push back against ISIS... the goal [discussed in Wales] was to destroy the Islamist militant group, not to contain it".

Lying Lester is keeping his fingers crossed that the Lazy oBama will follow through with ACTION. If not, then the hard work will obviously have to wait until our next president is elected, hopefully Gary Johnson or whatever rEpublican the GOP decides to go with.

Although Gary did promise to disengage us from these foreign conflicts... so this might be one point of disagreement between Lying Lester and Gary Johnson? That Lying Lester would disagree with Gary Johnson on ANYTHING is surely vexing. However, whereas I used to think poorly of George W. Bush for his invasion of Iraq, now I'm not so sure. At the very least Bush showed true leadership and a willingness to do the job, unlike our current POTUS, possibly the laziest president we've ever had, which is quite vexing.

Byline: This rational commentary in regards to a vexing issue was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth... and also not lazy like our first Black pResident. LLIN-129.

Saturday, September 6, 2014

Why Lying Lester is FAR Superior to You

Lying Lester is superior to the rAbble because he is an Objectivist. Objectivism is a Religion based on the writings of the great Ayn Rand and further developed by her designated intellectual heir, philosopher Leonard Peikoff.

Because Objectivists such as myself examine the world with complete objectivity, we are never wrong. And obviously someone who is never wrong is far superior to those who's decision making processes are based on irrational emotions.

This is why YOU - if you are not a worshipper in the church of Objectivism - are INFERIOR to Lying Lester. Now, I'm sure that if you are not an Objectivist, you just took offense to that correct assertion. And your emotions are probably all riled up.

But that is the problem, you see (or you don't see, which is most likely the case). Lying Lester, while he was born a normal human male, has learned to set his emotions aside and decide things using pure objectivity only. Or perhaps I was not born a normal human male, as most human males - nay, most people operate on a largely emotional level.

But, it seems people like Lying Lester have evolved to a point where we realize that objectivity is the ONLY way to arrive at rational decisions. Maybe it is something in our DNA that makes us realize this when most do not?

Not being a brain scientist, I cannot say. But I do know that objectivity (and being an Objectivist) are sure signs of being superior.

And I, as an Objectivist, realize that Lying Lester is the most important person in the world. And I realize that I need to look out for numero uno at all times. If something does not benefit me personally, then I am against it. And as long as I've got mine, then I surely do not give a shit about anyone else.

The emotion-based inferiors say this is "selfishness" and that selfishness is "bad". Ayn Rand realized that selfishness is GOOD. Indeed, she declared it (rightly) to be a virtue and labeled it "rational self interest".

So, if some Poors starve to death (or simply live miserable lives) due to the rich folks grabbing more wealth (and resources) then they need? Well, Lying Lester says that is A-OK with him. It's the natural order of things, in fact.

Those of us who are superior tend to be able to do a better job of accumulating wealth than those who are inferior. In fact, I'd argue that a person being wealthy is one of the ways in which we are able to identify those who are superior.

And, instead of taxing and redistributing their wealth in the name of "fairness", Lying Lester strongly believes (nay, he KNOWS) that it is better for a poor person to die (or MANY poor people to die) than to allow this kind of theft to occur!

There is always charity. If a superior rich person feels the eMotion of cOmpassion, let that rich person VOLUNTARILY donate some of their wealth to a charity that will see to it that less Poors die.

Although I personally see this as a weakness. And quite foolish as well, as extermination would be a better course of action for these Takers. But if any rich person wants to exhibit this weakness that is fine by Lying Lester, as I support freedom (for a rich person) to do with their wealth as they see fit, even if they choose (wrongly) to encourage parasitic behavior.

But it is another thing entirely for the gOvernment to STEAL from those who are superior to give to the inferior Takers. That, I am 100 percent opposed to. Although YOU, if you are not an Objectivist (but instead an emotion-based inferior), probably disagree.

But this is just another example of how I, Lying Lester, am superior to you. Disagree if you wish (and I'm sure you do), but that does not change the FACT that I'm better than you.

Byline: This superior commentary was authored by the Objectivism adherant and superior human Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-128.

Friday, September 5, 2014

Michael Crichton on (Global Warming) Certainty

Now deceased techno-fiction author, non-scientist (although he did earn an M.D.) and global warming denier Michael Crichton once said "I'm certain that there's too much certainty"... and, in regards to that, I say well said, Mr. Crichton, well said.

Well said because any straw man the benefits the oil oligarchs is a straw man that I can wrap my arms around, hug and then tongue kiss. Because acknowledging the fact that 97 percent of climate scientists actually DO agree when it comes to AGW, as pointed out by the (anti-science smear site) deSmogBlog could be bad news...

One of the most consistent of all the attacks from climate science sceptics and deniers is the one which tries to convince the public that expert scientists are divided on the causes of climate change. Those attacks have come from ideologically motivated think tanks and the fossil fuel industry, often working together.

In 1998, the American Petroleum Institute was developing a campaign with the explicit aim of convincing the public that "uncertainties" existed in the science of climate change and its causes.

In 2002, Republican pollster Frank Luntz wrote that: "Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly". (5/30/2014 Article from deSmogBlog).

So, the aforementioned "bad news" could be that the public demands our elected officials actually address the problem. And that could affect our oil oligarch's bottom line... a prospect I find quite unacceptable. How DARE these scientists smear our oil oligarchs by telling the truth!

Which is why our side (the side that allies itself with Big Oil) needs celebrities to help spread the straw men around. In this case, techno/science fiction writer Michael Crichton, best known for being the author of the book that became a popular and profitable movie franchise, Jurassic Park. Although he is, unfortunately, no longer with us, having passed away in 2008.

Mr. Crichton, by the way, "experimented with astral projection, aura viewing, and clairvoyance, coming to believe that these included real phenomena that scientists had too eagerly dismissed as paranormal".

Proof that Mr. Crichton held other rational (non crackpot) beliefs that reinforce his credibility when it comes to his AGW denialism?

Byline: This scientific commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of denying that I'm a global warming denier. LLIN-127.

Thursday, September 4, 2014

Lying Lester Welcomes New LLIN Contributor Willis "I Love Straw Men" Hart, Plus Some Sad News

Lying Lester is extremely proud to announce the addition of a new LLIN contributor, Willis "I Love Straw Men" Hart! Previously I've refered to my buddy using the moniker he usually goes by, which is "Will Hart", but the dude's name is actually "Willis".

Truth be told, however, I called him "Will" because that it is what he called himself. But, in the spirit of the truth-telling I do here on this blog, my good friend decided to create a new Blogger ID and use his real name (instead of a shortened version of it).

Please check back soon for exciting and interesting commentaries by Willis, the "small L" Libertarian (as he describes himself politically). I am positive that you will not be disappointed.

Now, on a sad note, I must pass along some information regarding my friend Lyle Lester, a like-minded Ayn Rand devotee who filled in for me temporarily while I was on hiatus from this blog.

When I announced my return I promised to add Lyle as a contributor, implying that there would be some commentaries forthcoming from him. I honestly did intend to add Lyle as a contributor, and Lyle did intend to write those commentaries... but that is sadly now impossible, as Lyle Lester has sadly passed away.

Even though Lyle had been battling anal cancer - which is odd, given the fact that this is a disease that mostly afflicts lIberals, and Lyle was an Objectivist/Libertarian - his doctor had predicted a full recovery following surgery.

And recover he did. Lyle had been out of the hospital for several weeks when he was struck down in a freak skydiving accident. Or, he was pronounced dead after he struck the ground, to be more precise. Turns out his parachute was improperly packed. Lyle's estate is looking into filing a lawsuit.

Comments expressing condolences to Lyle's family are welcome. Although Lyle's parents preceded him in death, he was divorced and he never had children - and therefore he had no family. Lyle's ex-wife is also dead, by the way, having been murdered by Lyle some years ago via poisoning. A "crime" for which Lyle was never accused or convicted, but one which he confessed to me in a letter I received shortly after his death.

A letter, by the way, which made me the executor of his estate. So it's me who is suing the company that murdered Lyle by not teaching him to correctly pack his parachute. Or, that is what my suit maintains, in any case. Here is hoping that I receive a huge settlement.

Byline: This excellent allbeit sad commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-126.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Lying Lester Proposes Bombing The Ground Zero Mosque

Many moons ago, back in 2010, I maintained my pledge to generally keep the debate of religious theocratic philosophy, with all the sordid details with respect to human suffering that are part of it's history, off the pages of this websight, out of site of my readers. As you may have noticed, that stopped. This reason is that I simply could no longer contain my hatred for the smelly flea and lice infested mUslins.

This occurred when construction of a Mosque near Ground Zero was proposed. The rush by the pRogressives to argue in support of its construction lead me to delve into the issue, and provide a reality check for those in favor of any such construction. Just to set the record straight, because the pRogressives who read this will otherwise undoubtedly call me a right wing Bible thumping fanatic, I am a believe that religion, or the lack thereof is a deeply personal issue. If there is one issue I agree with the pRogressives on it likely would be the issue of religion and its place in society. But in regards to my hatred for the smelly flea and lice infested mUslins, I digress.

The attack on the United States of America on September 11, 2001 was an attack by iSlamic religious extremists that are determined to destroy not only the USA, but any civil society that does not accept the religion of iSlam. While there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of moderate Muslims who can live in peace with their non Islamic neighbor, the very structure of the iSlamic religion, the Koran is anything but peaceful. To the devout adherents of iSlam a mosque at this place represents a breath taking victory of the west and its infidels.

The argument that Islam is a religion of peace is a myth carried not only by moderate Imams and Mullahs, and by pRogressives in America that have latched onto the "feel good" aura it provides them. It is likely few of them are aware of the history of Muhammad the creator of iSlam, or the requirements of the devout adherents to the faith of Muhammad.

The Koran says that non mUslins must convert or be killed, which is why Lying Lester argues that we must kill them first. And, in regards to that, Lying Lester proposes we start by bombing the Ground Zero mosque, which could be accomplished easily by sending some of our military jets to drop a few targeted missiles.

Now, for those of you who think this sounds extreme, I should point out that iSlam builds mosques on "conquered territory" as symbols of "victory" and "conquest" and iSlamic mosques are symbols of domination and centers of radicalization. And the fight over the not-yet-completed mosque is not just about religious tolerance, it is about recognizing the truth and the danger inherent in the supposed peaceful religion of iSlam and the evil symbolized by the false prophet Muhammad (piss be upon him).

Byline: This rational commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-125.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Lying Lester Ponders: Is There Really an Artic Meltdown Or Is All A lEftist Hoax?

Not being a climatologist or a scientist in the conventional sense, thus being at the mercy of the "experts", could someone, anyone, sort all the confusing and contradictory data and info out for us average, normal, hard working people with bills to pay and family's to raise so we know for sure if we are being screwed or not by the purveyors of climate change and the catastrophe will strike us all unless we cap and trade the hell out of the polluters everybody crowd.

To help in pondering this conundrum, let us turn to the politically Conservative Daily Mail. Surely they will give Lying Lester the scientifically correct info he wants to hear...

Daily Mail: ...far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012. To put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, America’s biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.

Lying Lester's verdict given this info from one source... a Conservative, and therefore highly trustworthy source (trusted to find "evidence" that supports the course of action that will further enrich the plutocrats)?

The Artic ice meltdown predicted by Al Gore was a hoax. A lEftist Hoax designed to enrich wealthy lEftists like Mr. Gore. A hoax, unless you believe Skeptical Science, which says that the "Arctic sea ice has recovered" is a "myth"...

Skeptical Science: Discussions about the amount of sea ice in the Arctic often confuse two very different measures of how much ice there is. One measure is sea-ice extent which, as the name implies, is a measure of coverage of the ocean where ice covers 15% or more of the surface. It is a two-dimensional measurement; extent does not tell us how thick the ice is. The other measure of Arctic ice, using all three dimensions, is volume, the measure of how much ice there really is.

Sea-ice consists of first-year ice, which is thin, and older ice which has accumulated volume, called multi-year ice. Multi-year ice is very important because it makes up most of the volume of ice at the North Pole. Volume is also the important measure when it comes to climate change, because it is the volume of the ice – the sheer amount of the stuff – that science is concerned about, rather than how much of the sea is covered in a thin layer of ice.

Over time, sea ice reflects the fast-changing circumstances of weather. It is driven principally by changes in surface temperature, forming and melting according to the seasons, the winds, cloud cover and ocean currents. In 2010, for example, sea ice extent recovered dramatically in March, only to melt again by May.

Sea-ice is subject to powerful short-term effects so while we can't conclude anything about the health of the ice from just a few years' data, an obvious trend emerges over the space of a decade or more, showing a decrease of about 5% of average sea-ice cover per decade. (Has Arctic sea ice returned to normal?).

Skeptical Science concludes that "Sea ice extent recovered slightly during the Arctic winters of 2008-09, but the... volume of multi-year ice has not recovered at all, and is showing a steeply negative trend". And the purposefully deceptive Daily Mail article mentions coverage (in square mileage) and not depth... so it looks like they're lying to us.

But, as my buddy Will Hart says, "Skeptical Science is an alarmist anti-science smear site"... so any facts they may present can, thankfully, be ignored, and the lies (from sources like "Daily Mail") embraced.

Lying Lester is extremely thankful the lies about AGW are winning out and disinformation spread by Conservative rags publications is fooling the rAbble. Especially seeing as taxing the polluters would decrease the profits of our beloved plutocrats and mess with the noble goal of concentrating wealth at the top.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of debunking hoaxes. LLIN-124.

Monday, September 1, 2014

ISIS Must Be Stopped By Reinvading Iraq & Slaughtering All Muslims Who Refuse To Denounce The "Prophet" Mohammed

As the irrational, barbaric, savage, and murderous ISIS continues its quest to impose the will of the pRophet mOhammed on everyone another rational voice is heard... and it is, not surprisingly, not bArack oBama's. Obama, being a lazy Black man (and I use the term loosely) is only willing to take half measures.

Lying Lester knows what must be done, but does the US have the will to do it? Perhaps, but only if our next president is not a pansy lIberal pRogressive. The United States cannot go it alone in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the extremist group known as ISIS whose ruthlessness and killing has dumbfounded and horrified the civilized world.

American airstrikes and other assistance from the United States have brought some measure of relief to religious minorities and others that ISIS has threatened. But defeating, or even substantially degrading, ISIS will require an organized, longer-term response involving a broad coalition of nations, including other mUslin countries, and addressing not only the military threat but political and religious issues.

So, will other mUslin countries join with the United States? They will, if they know what's good for them! So, I'm no neo con hawk, but this shit cancer ain't gonna go away by playing nice with the scum. They're ultimately going to come after us. Most likely with a dirty nuke.

Which is why Lying Lester says they are either with us, or they are against us. And why we might think about nuking them before they nuke us! Just like the lIberal pRogressives who are against us, Lying Lester says the mUslin scum must die. Or be rejected at the polls... that, in regards to the evil pRogressives.

Unfortunately voting out the lEftist mUslin terrorist sympathizers is the only way we can get rid of them. Fortunately killing foreigners is OK. So long as they are mUslin, at least. We've already killed a large number of them in our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and nobody gave a crap, so Lying Lester says why not kill many more?

So, while Lying Lester may have been against the Iraq war as started by former president George W. Bush, now he says we might have to go back in. And this time we KILL as many of the smelly, flea and lice infested mUslins as we possibly can. Unless they agree to denounce the evil false prophet mOhamed.

Then we MIGHT let them live. Or kill them anyway... if we drop a few nukes. Those pretty much kill anyone in the vicinity indiscriminately.

Byline: This excellent and non Islamophobic commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-123.