The Handsome Debonair Goateed POTUS

Some time back a commenter on my other blog (rAtional nAtion uSA) remarked that "you can't trust a man with facial hair". This comment was in reply to a post concerning former Republican president Rutherford B. Hayes.

The commenter then added, "seriously, though as beards and mustaches and facial hair in general has gone out of fashion except amongst counter-culture, when do you think we'll get a President with facial hair again?"

My reply? I said, "I couldn't possibly guess... When I run maybe!" The commenter then commented that he would vote for me. In response to that I added "Well then, I'll be needing a campaign manager. Any interest?"

That was back in 2012. Lying Lester is still considering a run for the presidency. That is, if Gary Johnson does not throw his hat in the ring (a third time). Perhaps Gary would consider Lying Lester as a running mate in 2016? Surely a Johnson/Nation ticket would garner a fair percentage of the vote (more than Gary running with someone else), but would it be enough for us to take the White House?

A deluded Lying Lester is thinking it just might. Surely the ladies would swoon and cast their ballots in favor of Lying Lester, if for no other reason than to get a hunk in the executive mansion (we all know the ladies act on eMotion and not reason).

And Lying Lester admits that Gary isn't that shabby in the looks department either (a manly Man that Lying Lester might go for *IF* he were gay). The most handsome/manly duo of Iron Men - if Gary Johnson and Lying Lester ran together - ever to seek the presidency. Can you think of any other past presidents and VPs as handsome/manly as Gary and Lester? I doubt it.

Then, after Gary served out his two terms... then the time would be right for a Lying Lester presidency. At that point - after the most successful presidency in US history (that of Gary Johnson) - Lying Lester would be a shoe-in.

A Man can dream, can't he? A dream for his beloved Gary Johnson, for himself, and for America. Or for the worthy Makers, who would prosper wildly under a Johnson (and then a Nation) administration. Realistically speaking, however, a vote for Gary or me is a complete waste (you'd be throwing your vote away). Still, I urge you to consider casting such a vote.

And, if the names "Gary Johnson" and/or "Lester Nation" aren't on your ballot when you go to the polls in 2016? Then you might consider writing us in. Or vote Gary if he's on the ballot and write in "Lester Nation" for VP. Or write in "Lester Nation" for President if Gary Johnson decides not to run.

If nothing else, you'll be sending a signal to the man that you're sick of business as usual and REJECT the sTatist direction our country has been headed in under BOTH rEpublicans and dEmocrats. Also, who knows? If enough people cast their ballots using objectivity and reason to decide who they think should be POTUS - instead of voting for the lesser of two evils... well, then it is surely possible that, come 2017, we might be inaugurating a handsome debonair goateed POTUS. Or a a handsome debonair goateed VP.

Unlikely, perhaps. But (in my deluded and slightly senile mind) it could happen. And then we could get about the work of restoring America to its former glory. Lying Lester imagines something along the lines of a new Gilded Age, except instead of growing real wages for wOrkers, all the prosperity could be siphoned off by those at the top (as they have been doing, only under Lying Lester the siphoning would be greater).

That is my dream, in any case. Perhaps you share it? If so... well then, you already know what to do. Don't vote rEpublican and don't vote dEmocrat. Vote Libertarian. Vote Gary and vote Lester and together we can shrink gOvernment and hand over the rule of our nation to the wealthy (put things right, in other words).

Byline: This spectulative commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of goat tees. LLIN-086.

Lying Lester Salutes & Pays Tribute to A Grate American

Ronald Wilson Reagan (2/6/1911 to 6/4/2004), the 40th President of The United States of America, and some say one of the worst. President Reagan would currently be 103-years-old were he still with us. I am sure many share my fond remembrances of a man larger than life, but then most people are stupid.

Reagan began his political leanings as a dEmocrat. However, as the party shifted ever further to the pRogressive lEft (IMO; not in reality) the man traitor (to his ideals) who - was instrumental in pulling the nation from the devastating super inflation and malaise of the Carter Presidency was president after Carter due to the traitorous October Suprise pulled by his campaign, falsely given credit for engineering the downfall of the Soviet Union, and a traitor (to his country) for secretly selling arms to Iran - who changed parties and became a rEpublican when he was a young man (because he got rich and didn't want to pay his taxes).

President Reagan was known to say he didn't leave the dEmocratic Party, the dEmocratic Party left him, although we all know that is complete horseshit. It is interesting that my father, born in 1932 and a long time dEmocrat, has expressed these same sentiments many times. Today he is a fiercely proud Independent who feels he was betrayed by the dEmocratic Party, because he is an idiot like me.

I have begun to understand just why President Reagan and my father could not continue to support the modern version of the dEmocratic Party or it's pro-worker/anti-rich f*ck agenda. I tell myself it is because they were at heart Classical Liberals. Liberal in the vein of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Paine, and Samuel Adams et all. But in my brain I know that is utter baloney (and a notion I invented likely due to my slowly going senile, just like Reagan).

The dEmocratic Party, originally called the Democratic Republican Party was the party of Jefferson. It was a party of government of The People and fiscal responsibility. A party that supported maximum individual liberty. Principles that President Reagan rejected when he switched parties. Today I can't help but believe were Jefferson alive he would support neither of the major parties. I imagine he would be like my father, a fiercely proud independent. And by "imagine" I mean that this scenario is obviously a complete fantasy.

President Reagan switched to the Republican Party because in the 60s, and going forward until today, it represented the ideals of further enriching the already wealthy. Reagan was a huge voice for conservatism and an American aristocracy based on wealth (as well as paranoia regarding Communism). But the conservatism he loved is a far cry from the conservatism of the late 20th and early 21st century (in my mind only). I find myself wondering if Ronny were still with us if he would be a fiercely proud independent conservative.

I'm guessing no, but for this Reagan-worshipping/self-aggrandizing post I will pretend that he would. In any case, Reagan did drop taxes significantly on the wealthy - setting up the decline of the middle class - so for that reason alone Lying Lester salutes him as a great American.

Byline: This blog post was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of grateness. LLIN-077.

Wise Thoughts From A Randian Capitalist, Limited gOvernment, Classical Liberal & Advocate of Maximum Individual Liberty

It has allegedly been said as one gets older they get wiser. This is quite probable as the experiences of a long and productive life gives a person many references that naturally become part of their life experience and mold their philosophy of existence, although sometimes Lying Lester feels as if he is getting stupider as the years go by.

Of course the getter wiser assumes the individual chooses to use reality and the truth of rational unemotional and unethical thought to guide them. Both in their analysis as well as their ultimate conclusions on every important issue of their life, as Lying Lester does. But very few people are as wise as Lying Lester.

I was not a advocate nor a supporter of William Jefferson Clinton in his hey day as pResident and Commander in Chief. He was, in my incorrect opinion, just a bit too pRogressive (incorrect in that WJC was actually a 3rd way Conservative dEmocrat) as well as being a bit untrustworthy (in getting busy with an intern, which is unbecoming a US pOtus).

Forgive me as I have digressed... for reasons that, perhaps, include senility?

In any case, I recently stumbled across an article published back in 2012 on The Daily Beast, a lEftist website I rarely visit. On the rare occasions when I do, I typically find it to contain a boatload of BS, or views that disagree with the particular flavor of BS I prefer (Objectivist Libertarianism).

But today was interestingly different. I found myself reading and rereading the auricle expressing ex pResident Bill Clinton's position on various things. Not reading and rereading because I fully disagreed nor fully agreed with his positions. Rather I ALMOST fully disagreed.

Bubba: In the 51 years since President Kennedy took the oath of office, Republicans have had 28 years in the White house; Democrats have had 23. In the same half century, the economy has produced 66 million private-sector jobs - 42 million of them under the Democrats, 24 million under the Republicans. "No one states these facts", Clinton asserts. found many of his arguments to be both interesting as well as some possessing a bit of merit.

The facts may be true, but nobody states them because they are misleading. Sure, the recession began under pResident bush, but oBama continued making things worse by giving away a bunch of money to connected cronies via the so-called stimulus. Then the economy began to recover (on it's own). And, seeing as it had fallen so far, it had a long way to go to get back to where it was.

Lying Lester does not believe that oBama or the dEmocrats are responsible for creating those jobs. Our beloved job creators created the jobs (which is why they call them JOB CREATORS) *despite* gOvernment meddling. This is a testament to capitalism and not sTatism.

Then WJC rambled on about how oBamaFArt is good and how the SCOTUS striking down the individual mandate would be bad (the article was written before the SCOTUS decision in which the traitor Roberts upheld it).

Anyway, as a person enters the senior years of their life they become more reflective. In the process the individual seems to gain the ability to fully grasp more complex perspectives that only experience can give them. That is to say if they have managed to stay awake throughout their life and take in all the intellectual stimuli that life and reality provides. Also if they do not go senile, as Lying Lester may have.

Of course it is the ideal for one to retain an objective and rational ability to determine reality as it is, rather than how one may wish it to be. Which I suppose is the reason I put this post up. To suggest that everyone, whether they are conservative, liberal, neo-conservative, Libertarian, Objectivist, Platonic, or Aristotelian in their leanings consider the merits or lack thereof of the article.

My conclusion? pResident WJC most definitely does not have all the answers. In fact he may only have a few. A very few. Or possibly none. It might even be possible that he has NEGATIVE ideas (although I am not sure how that could even be possible). Certainly this Randian capitalist, limited government, classical liberal, and advocate of maximum individual liberty has many issues with ex pResident WJC. However, given his intelligence and experience (personal shortcomings aside) his views are at least worth considering. And then rejecting.

Naturally this means with an active and inquisitive mind. Something I fear too few lIberals and conservatives do in this day and age of wedge politics. I have prepared myself for the possible backlash this post might cause. I stand ready to defendantize the post as well as the logical and rational justification for having posted it. Which is to go on and on and on and on and on and on about how Lying Lester is a superior thinker because he is an old fart, but a RATIONAL old fart who examines the evidence unemotionally (and is therefore RIGHT while so many others are wrong).

Simply stated it is time the political activists of both parties, the candidates as well as current office holders, and the general population start to engage in studying both sides of issues and civilly discuss/debate the possible disadvantages as well as the possible advantages of all positions... and then to vote Libertarian.

Based solely on empirical data and actual facts that is the conclusion that we should be able to easily reach. Sadly this nation and its people seems to have lost the ability to do so. Admittedly I have taken a very long way around in getting to the subject matter that drove this post. I humbly ask your understanding for this and hope you posses the capacity to understand the reason why I did so, even though I do not.

Please take the time to read WJC's article in full. Consider the thoughts of this ex pResident. Weigh them against all opposing views. After doing so decide based on logical and rational criteria, not emotionally driven concerns or experiences. In the final analysis reason and logic must prevail and we MUST elect Gary Johnson in 2016.

Certainly this is true if this nation is to survive as we have known it. Both for the next millennium and beyond.

Byline: This senile commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of senility. LLIN-066.