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.