On the Fact that Women Commit 10% of the Murders but Only Comprise 1.5% of Those on Death Row

Hi, Willis Hart here to tell you that I think this is an example of "male privilege" rearing its glorious head YET AGAIN!

But seriously, we all know that male privilege is a myth. Meaning it does not exist. Something else we all know is that every case of murder results in sending the killer to death row... or it should. Right? No matter if the murdering scum is a man or a woman. Yeah, you heard me. I absolutely do not buy the following argument.

According to the Justice Department, roughly one in 10 homicides are committed by women. And when women kill, their victims are more likely to be someone close to them, like their children, boyfriends or spouses. Forensic psychologists and criminal profilers say women who kill have backgrounds and motivations that are often quite different from their male counterparts. Compared with men, women are more likely to be related to their victim, less likely to plan in advance and less likely to use extreme violence. "Women are different in whom, how and why they kill", said James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University. "The victims are younger, they're more often related to them, they kill with means other than guns. "The traditional female role is a nurturer, not a murderer. Extreme violence is far more alien to females than to males", he added. "When a murder is committed by a female, it's more likely to be self-defense or can reflect some sort of mental illness". (Why Do Some Women Kill? by Scott Michels, Sarah Netter, Laura Marquez and Sabina Ghebremedhin. ABC News, 4/14/2009).

So what this article is saying is that women aren't premeditating or violent killers, they don't usually kill strangers, and (when women kill) the reason is likely to be self defense or mental illness. While with men the murders are more often premeditated and more often violent (although not necessarily both)... and this could very logically explain why, while women commit 10% of the murders, they only comprise 1.5% of those on death row.

OK, so now I have to admit that this argument does make sense. After reading the reasoned and logical article (from which I excerpted the material presented above), I have no choice but to say that I *do* buy it...

But, on the other hand... so what? Even if this argument makes total sense (and it does), I say that the particulars of a case should have no bearing on whether or not the death penalty is applied. We should only look at the percentages, IMO. If women commit 10 percent of the murders, then they should represent 10 percent of death row inmates. And be 10 percent of those we fry (or lethally inject).

This is only fair in my idiotic brain-dead misogynistic opinion. BTW, if you, the reader, do not agree? You're probably a feminist. Or some pansy pussy-whipped man who can't stand up to his woman! And you can stuff your (correct) view of my (moronic) opinion!

In any case, I'm a male and therefore would benefit from this supposed male privilege, should it exist. Which it absolutely does not. Or that's the BS I'm spinning, at least. Society needs to stop oppressing men and acknowledge the fact that men are superior to women (which society has largely already done, but a bunch of feminists are trying to change that, damn them!).

Byline: This ignorant commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of misygony. LLIN-159.

Is America Approaching Neo Fuedalism?

Does anyone take issue with the following? Is it reasonable to expect that when working 70 hours a week, as the gentleman who wrote the following does, a person is able to provide for the basic needs for their family and themselves without needing government assistant? Is it acceptable that government contractors make healthy profits and yet not provide decent wages for their employees? Is it ethical, moral? What, if anything should be done to rectify the unfairness, if that is what it really is? As we continue to see more economic stratification (rich/working poor) are you concerned about the long range negative and potentially volatile societal consequences that may occur?

American voters should ask themselves: if presidential candidates won't help the workers who serve them every day, will they really help the millions of low-wage American workers who they don't know or see? I'm a Bible-believing Christian, just like a lot of the candidates. Scripture says to "Love your neighbor" and "Do unto to others as you would have them do unto you". It's a shame too few candidates follow the guidance of the book in which they say they believe. My employer, Compass Group, is renewing its contract with the US government today – but none of the senators or government officials to whom we serve food asked me or my co-workers whether this multinational corporation, headquartered in the United Kingdom, is treating American workers right. No-one bothered to check if the company that makes billions in profits is paying workers a living wage and offering decent benefits so we don't have to use public aid programs to meet our basic needs. (Excerpted from the article I am a cook in the US Senate but I still need food stamps to feed my children by Bertrand Olotara).

Bertrand Olotara says "I work 70 hours a week doing two jobs but cannot make ends meet". Lying Lester's response? I say Bertrand is a whiner who should acquire more skills if he wants more money. Given he is a low skilled loser, it is entirely appropriate that he receive low wages.

If he can't provide for his family, he shouldn't have one. How many kids does this loser have? Lying Lester suspects he has too many. I mean, he should have considered whether or not he could provide for children before he decided to father them. But irresponsibility is quite common among the Poors.

Now he needs government assistance in the form of food stamps to feed his family. And the government provides it - with assistance from Lying Lester (in the form of his tax dollars). Frankly Lying Lester finds this to be an outrage! I say let this loser's kid's starve.

Neither the taxpayer nor the employer should pay extra because a low skilled poor made a bad decision. Lying Lester says Olotara (a single father) should put his kids to work. That would provide extra income in addition to him not having to pay for daycare. Unfortunately child labor laws prevent this. Laws Lying Lester strongly believes should be done away with.

Under no condition should Compass Group be forced to pay Olotara any more than they negotiated. If Olotara does not like the pay he can find employment elsewhere. That is how the Free Market works! As a Objectivist Libertarian Lying Lester believes in the Free Market with all his heart. He does not believe, by the way, in "loving his neighbor" or "doing unto others as Lying Lester would have them do unto him".

That's pu$$y talk - at which Lying Lester laughs. Same as he laughs at those who speak of imaginary friends who live in the sky and look to books written by said invisible imaginary friend. Whenever strong belief in mysticism, regardless whether Allah or God, trumps sound science and objective philosophy a society is bound to lose liberty and freedom.

Is it ethical and moral for a corporation to make healthy profits and yet not provide decent wages for their employees? HELL YES it is! And Olotara, who went on strike for more money than what he negotiated for, should have his ass fired for walking off the job.

As far as Lying Lester is concerned, nothing at all should be done to rectify the "unfairness". Because it is VERY fair in Lying Lester's opinion that working Poors be paid low low wages while their employers get richer and richer.

The bottom line here is that America *is* approaching neo feudalism, and Lying Lester says that is a good thing. But enough with the "approaching" already! Get rid of the public aid programs completely and those who can't or won't work will starve. This will keep the remaining Poors in line and stop them from striking.

If Olotara's labor were truly worth more he could negotiate for a higher wage, instead of attempting to EXTORT it from his employer! My father, a manager and business owner always told his employees: "If I go to the candy store I'll take you with me". And he always did with those that were productive.

But he shouldn't have had to. Back then the economy was better and good employees could easily find employment elsewhere. Thank Ayn Rand those days are over! Now the Poors can be forced to work for lower and lower wages. Leaving those at the top with an ever growing portion of the candy.

Before long they will have the entire candy store to themselves and the Poors will have to get by on what their wealthy betters (the Makers) can't eat and throw away... Just thinking of this makes Lying Lester smile.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of untruth. LLIN-158.

Lying Lester Dissembles About Fascism

Fascism is typically viewed as a lEftist political and economic system. This is true if lEftist is to mean a strong central government with great influence on and regulation over a nation's economic matters. In other words private ownership of business exists but the government essentially establishes economic policy through over burdensome regulations.

As an adherent of the great philosopher Ayn Rand, this is a view that I share. Even though it is complete BS. Some view conservatives and rEpublicans as drivers of our politics and government in the direction towards fascism, which is a lot closer to the truth. Like Mussolini, rEpublicans want to put business in control by freeing them from "over regulation" and "over taxation".

And by placing the burden of taxation on the lower classes, where it belongs. Anyway, while Lying Lester acknowledges that he STRONGLY desires that the United States go fascist, he will continue to lie (as in the opening paragraph of this commentary) and claim that lEftism leads to fascism.

Because the rAbble fears fascism, even though Lying Lester recognizes that under fascism the deserving wealthy are in charge (as they should be). Although some quack named Dr. Lawrence Britt claims that, when combined with other traits exhibited by fascism, the case can be made that it is conservatives and rEpublicans who are more likely to meet the criteria for fascism.

I call the guy a quack not because he is wrong, but because he may cause some of the rAbble to wake up to the truth. The truth about rEpublicans and fascism, that is. Which, if the dream of bringing fascism to the United States is to be realized, is a truth that must be concealed.

For more on this truth I recommend Dr. Leonard Peikoff's work entitled The Ominous Parallels, a fabulous book on the parallels between Nazi Germany and modern day uSA. Note the book was published in 1982 and supports at least in part Dr. Britt's list of 14 characteristics of fascism.

So, after reading the list by Dr. Britt (and considering what you know about fascism) I thought it would be fun to see how many characteristics of fascism you identify as existing in out political and governmental systems today under the Obama Administration. I suspect not that many, or fewer than under the bush administration.

But associating the lEftist Obama with fascism is, as I pointed out earlier, necessary to frighten the gullible rAbble into voting rEpublican. Or perhaps (and this would be preferable), Libertarian. Because the Libertarians are with the rEpublicans when it comes to putting the wealthy in charge.

Although - and this is where the crucial difference comes in - Libertarians are for getting government out of the way completely. Unlike the rEpublicans politicians, who favor leaving themselves in place as corrupt middlemen (skimming off some of the booty stolen from the people for themselves). That "booty" being money and power.

Libertarians, on the other hand, strongly disagree with the concept of a corrupt political class receiving any of this booty. In the opinion of the Libertarians this booty should go exclusively to our wealthy overlords - and the political class should be eliminated - or "shrunk" so as to eliminate the voice of The People (AKA the rAbble) entirely.

Because, even though under dEmocracy the plutocrats have done a decent job bribing our elected representatives (corrupting most rEpublican and many conservative dEmocrats), there still are some politicians who actually listen to The People and try to do their will.

Obviously this is unacceptable and, while this course may EVENTUALLY lead to fascism, the only way to get their QUICKLY is by going Libertarian (which is the reason this sight supports Gary Johnson for President in 2016). Only then (under Libertarianism) will fascism be brought quickly and completely to the United States.

But back to my noble desire to dissemble on fascism and pin the accusation on lEftist pRogressivism, as my colleague dmarks does over on my other (spoof) blog rAtional nAtion uSA by lying about labor unions.

According to the (2nd) quack I site above, "labor power is suppressed - because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government [and under fascism] labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed".

dmarks spins this with a reference to Right To Work (RTW) as empowering workers, because Labor Unions are "crushing labor rights by bullying workers into [them] against their will".

Ha, ha, ha. You've got to admire an individual who is willing to tell such audacious and patently absurd lies like dmarks. Because, in all honesty, RTW is designed to kill unions, thus enabling the plutocrats free rain to bully and take advantage of workers. But, as one NAZI fascist said, "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it".

Spreading the "big lies" that will benefit our wealthy overlords when the rAbble believe them is the objective on my other blog, rAtional nAtion uSA. dmarks buys into one of these big lies concerning Labor. I'd say "hats off" to him in helping spread this lie, but the deluded doofus actually believes the BS he spouts, which is quite sad and pathetic.

But also fortunate, in that even if it is deluded doofuses spreading these Big Lies - as opposed to people who KNOW they are dissembling (people like Lying Lester) - the spreading of these lies will still work to the benefit of our wealthy betters.

The thing to remember is that Blue Dogs (corporate dEms) like Obama should be painted with the fascist brush, because even if a corporate dEmocrat like Obama is in charge, the end result is an empowering of other dEmocrats, including pRogressive dEmocrats, the most dangerous wing of the dEmocratic pArty. Dangerous because they actually listen to The People (AKA the rAbble).

Also remember that pRogressive dEmocrats are the ENEMY. The enemy of hard working Makers like Lying Lester who's only desire is to see the deserving Wealthy come to power and remake (or "fundamentally transform") America by subjugating the rAbble and seizing ALL the power and (most) of the money. Thus fulfilling Ayn Rand's dream. A dream, by the way, that is also Lying Lester's (and the Libertarian Party's) dream.

In closing Lying Lester urges you to vote Libertarian in 2016 when you can (if a Libertarian is on the ballot). In instances when a Libertarian isn't on the ballot vote rEpublican. But whatever you do DO NOT vote for a "fascist" dEmocrat! Even a Corporate dEmocrat.

Byline: This dishonest commentary was dissembled by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of untruth. LLIN-157.

Lying Lester Discusses Blundering Obama's Big Blunder

On Sunday, leaders representing Europe, Israel, Africa, Russia, and the Middle East linked arms and marched together down Place de la Concorde in Paris. Unfortunately and most conspicuously our own pResident chose not to attend.

The decision by the pResident of the United States of America to not be present, or at the very least send his Vie President, has been most troubling. Obama may have had his reasons but in politics and governance perception can be everything.

Certainly the perceptions of many, if not most on this important issue is not a positive one. The White House belatedly recognizing the error in judgment has acknowledged the mistake while at the same time spinning to put the best face possible on the snafu.

On this issue LLIN finds itself behind Senator Ted Cruz. At issue is the growth of, and the threat radicalized extremist Islam present the civilized world.

President Obama should have been there. Our president ought to have known this instinctively. It is of course now water under the bridge. Mistakes happen. This one never should have.

But, back to Senator Cruz, a potential 2016 presidential candidate who wrote the following in a TIME magazine op-ed...

Ted Cruz: The absence is symbolic of the lack of American leadership on the world stage, and it is dangerous. ... Many of our allies gathered together in Paris yesterday in an admirable display of determination. Our President should have been there (Link).

Dangerous! Dangerous that the feckless leading-from-behind Obama was not in attendance. That is Cruz's opinion, and the opinion of Lying Lester as well. Perhaps oBama did not attend due to his being a stereotypical lazy Black man?

But in regards to the danger... the danger is that the sub human terrorist killers see weakness in oBama's actions. Or even agreement with their goals. Given the fact that some believe oBama may be a sleeper mUslim terrorist who ran to bring down America from within. Not that Lying Lester agrees with this assessment. Although, as Senator Cruz points out "the failure of Obama to lead the free world in this way encourages radical Islamic terrorists" (source).

So, while oBama may not be a mUslim himself (or at least a radical one), he ENCOURAGES the radical Islamic terrorists (though his action... or inaction). Gee, Lying Lester has to wonder if bArack hUssein oBama has a flea or two? He might, if he's too lazy to take a shower.

Byline: This insightful commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of untruth. LLIN-156.

Not All mUslims Are Sub Human Animals. Just Almost All Of Them

Lying Lester knows first had up close and lersonal that all Muslims are not sub human animals. Only MOST of them are. The ones that are flea and lice infested. And extremist.

By "extremist", I mean those mUslims who consider muhammad to be a prophet. mUslims that do not consider muhammad to be a prophet are A-OK in Lying Lester's book, and are NOT sub human animals. mUslims such as my (imaginary) mUslim friends. These (imaginary) friends consider themselves mUslims but agree with Lying Lester that, instead of saying "peace be upon him", we should be saying "piss be upon him" when referring to muhammad.

As for these 21st century Islamic extremists who follow muhammad, their acts of barbarity continue to grow throughout the world. So, what's it ti be? Tolerance and understanding for the religion if "peace" or condemnation followed by swift and decisive justice? It seems impossible to have it both ways with these sub human animals.

But should we try? Lying Lester says NO! Lying Lester says we should slaughter them all! The right of free speech critical of government and religion absolutely must be advocated, supported, and if necessary fought for by all who desire to be free to experience the joy of liberty.

Having said this it does seem that intentionally provocative and negative press presumably for the sole purpose of goading a particular group may not be all that sensible. Especially given the particular in question long track record of violent response. Just a thought.

A thought Lying Lester rejects. Moving to the governments of the free world; they must be collaborating, planning, plotting, and ultimately setting in motions concrete actions that will help the Muslim nations of the world neutralize or eradicate the threat radicalized extreme Islam presents to the world.

The sooner these mUslim nations reject muhammad the better. And start bathing regularly as well. If they did this (reject muhammad and bathe), then Lying Lester would agree to spare they should be spared from the slaughter.

It's going to be a long treacherous road and there is no guarantee reason and rational thought concerning rejecting muhammad and bathing will ultimately win. One thing is certain though; if the West allows itself to be driven by the actions of these extremists into becoming like them they will have won.

What I mean by us becoming like them is our not abandoning our religion. The United States is primarily a cHristian nation, although atheists such as myself have been increasing in number. The Pew Research Center says "the number of people who identify themselves as atheists in the United States has been rising, modestly but steadily, in recent years [and] data from 2012 show that 2.4% of American adults say they are atheists when asked about their religious identity, up from 1.6% in 2007".

So the trend is in the right direction, but still... only 2.4 percent of Americans are rational enough to not worship an imaginary sky god?! But I digress... what I was talking about was the sub humanness of mUslim extremists. The most recent example being the attack on the staff of the satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo.

The magazine published some cartoons making fun of muhammad (piss be upon him). Well, if these mUslims took Lying Lester's advice and recognized that muhammad was a horrible person who should not be acknowledged as a prophet... well, then there would be no problem.

That problem being the fact that muhammad (piss be upon him), was a sub human animal, very much like the perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo attack. Those who pay reverence to a sub human "prophet" does not say much for the adherents of Islam, in my opinion.

Lying Lester's advice to sane mUslims around the world is to cast muhammad aside. Like my (imaginary) mUslim friends have. Remember that Lying Lesters knows first had up close and lersonal that this is the only way to avoid being a sub human animal.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of BS concerning Muslims who reject the prophethood of muhammad. LLIN-155.

Lying Lester Proud To Be A Lover Of "Both Sides Do It" Bullsh!t

Pouring the both sides do meme over my stated positions is IMO an honor. Im shall leave it to anyone to decide for themselves what yjat means to them. To me it means the rEpublicans are doing it and the dEmocrats are not.

CLAIMING yjat both sides do it is a way to protect rEpublicans. Nobody would believe that rEpublicans don't do it, so trying to claim yjat would be a waste of time. But when you say BOTH sides to it... then people might tend to agree, as many people hate politicians and view them as existing only to make their lives worse... or at least not to help them.

Which is a good meme to get people to accept. Because politicians SHOULDN'T be helping people. They just need to get out of the way and allow rich folks to help themselves to all the money.

By the way, you've never seen me stating yjat lEfties have ever claimed a person elected to the presidency was ineligible, right? And I've never stated the current pResident is being opposed at every turn because he was disobeying the Constitution? If you have I urge you to direct me to the post, or posts, and I'll do a full review and if so I will write a clarification or retraction, whichever is appropriate.

I haven't ever said any of those things because I'm not an adherant of the Tea Party. I'm a Libertarian, and while there may be some overlap in my and the Right's agenda, I don't agree with them except on fiscal matters.

Although I have heard some of those people say Obama is a lazy black man, which is an old racial stereotype. But I still agree with it.

Anyway, both sides may not do it, but I'll still go along with the meme that they do. And if you call me on it? I'll take that as an honor. Because I'm honored to be a purveyor of that lie. And that is something I will not back down from.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of lies concerning both sides doing it. LLIN-154.

Lying Lester Has Never Cracked For Al Sharpton And Likely Never Will

Although I have "cracked" while watching the programs of other political pundits, I will admit. I simply have never "cracked" while watching Politics Nation, which is the MSNBC program hosted by the Reverend Al.

Getting "cracked" or "cracking" is getting high on crack, BTW. This is something I like to do at the end of a stressful day to relax and wind down. Light up my crack pipe, that is. And tune my TV into some political punditry program while I get cracked out of my gourd. Just not Sharpton's.

Having said the above I must say I agree with Sharpton's analysis that Senator Rand Paul's efforts to reach out to the black community could hurt the democrats in 2016 should Paul be the eventual nominee. If Senator Paul is sincere, if he convincingly demonstrates his understanding of the black community's concerns and acts accordingly over the next two years he, and the rEpublican sate could be quite formidable.

So long as he doesn't mention his dislike of the provision in Civil Rights legislation that demanded owners of private businesses be prohibited from discriminating based on race. Paul previously said he thought private business owners should be allowed to discriminate if they wish.

That would not be a bad thing. Even racists have rights. But rEpublicans, while they may have had a good track record of pandering to the racists in their ranks, now must begin recognizing the nation's changing demographics and the concerns, aspirations, fears, and the realities this change will bring.

The reality being that the rEpublicans will become a permanent minority party unless responsible fiscal conservatives take the reigns of the party (from the hands of the most virulent Tea Party folks) and give American's of all persuasions multiple reasons to vote FOR them rather than against the dEmocrats.

That, or cheat even more. The issues facing this nation both fiscally and socially are large. Placing the importance of resolving these issues in the best interests of ALL Americans must trump the interests of party and special interests. It is possible Senator Paul knows this, is prepared to set the right tone, believes it is time do the right thing, and will walk the talk. Or at least be prepared to do his best to trick voters into believing he's walking the talk.

Let's hope he is - and that he will. Take the low road of trying to instil fear and lie to the American people to win, that is. Because actually doing what is in the best interests of ALL Americans - instead of just the rich ones - would be a very bad thing.

And also quite unRandian. This is why I, Lying Lester, hope that Rand Paul, a professed devotee of the great Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand - so much a devotee that he changed his name from "Randal" in her honor - gets with the program and does what is necessary to win the presidency. Which would be him lying his ass off.

Then he might be able to roll back that provision of the Civil Rights legislation he doesn't like so racist business owners can discriminate against whomever they choose. And drastically lower taxes on the oligarchs, of course.

Byline: This awesome commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of smoking crack. LLIN-153.

Why Another Great Depression Is Just What Our Country Needs

I'm a big advocate of capitalism. Especially the kind of capitalism that leads to feudalism, or enslavement of the Poors who deserve to be enslaved. That is, in opposition to giving them goodies paid for by hard working taxpayers like you and me.

Under our current system of "regulated" capitalism - "regulated" in name only, given the fact that the regulators have been captured - the result has been the continued shrinkage of the middle class, an increasing number of working Poors, and a pushing of more wealth into the coffers of corporate America and the uber wealthy. All of which has had a very positive effect on the nation. Positive, in that the Wealthy have gotten even wealthier.

Social and economic dislocation is now greater than has seen since the Great Depression. Only now it will likely be worse when the crash happens. When that happens the uber Wealthy will be buying up assets for pennies on the dollar. This is why another GD is something the Wealthy - and those of us like Lying Lester who worship them - pray for. Sooner than later, hopefully.

As I have always said, rational long term self interest should ALWAYS come first. And Lying Lester knows he will be rewarded when full blown oligarchy finally comes to the United States. But apparently more don't understand this concept than do, which explains why many can't fathom why another GD is just what this country needs.

It needs it because then the Poors will be forced into slavery, the Middle Class will be decimated, and the Wealthy will possess just about ALL the wealth instead of only a great majority of it. Thus the Randian utopia will finally come into being.

Byline: This illuminating commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-152.

Gary Johnson, a Man for the Times... A Times For The Oligarchs To Rise!

Will the previous Libertarian Party candidate for president Gary Johnson be the standard bearer of the Ron Paul Revolution going forward into the future? As the Liberty movement and the Paul Revolution continues to pick up steam it is critically important that individuals who cherish individualism and liberty based on wealth (more wealth means more liberty), that understand and desperately want a return to limited constitutional government, that want every individual, regardless of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation or sexual orientation or accumulated wealth to be free to live their lives as they chose within the constitutional laws of society stand up and cast their ballot for Gary Johnson in 2016, should he decide to run again.

There are many (they number in the several million) that support what the Libertarian Party and Gary Johnson stands for but will vote rEpublican simply because of their disdain for the job President Obama has done since being elected. And their disdain for the probable Democrat nominee, Hillary Clinton. There are millions more who will vote for Hillary simply because of their distaste for Romney (I've heard he might run again). But it simply amazes how anyone can vote for either candidate, Romney (if he runs again) or Hillary... when in reality they are merely shades of each other.

Voting for Romney or Hillary simply means voting for the "lesser of two evils" and either will insure the continued downward spiral of our nation into fiscal insanity and increasing sTatism instead of shrinking government and allowing the wealthy to do as they please. In other words continued fiscal instability, continued deficits and increasing debt, continued loss of individual liberty, increased dependency on government, continued polarization of the populace along religious, ethnic, and racial lines, and more will be the reality if either the rEpublican or dEmocrat becomes president. Unfortunate as it is, we all know one of them likely will.

This despite the fact that many of us want gOvernment to get out of the way and allow the wealthy (instead of We The People) to set the agenda and the rules of the game. In other words continued concentration of wealth at the top, continued deficits and increasing debt for middle classers and working Poors who are finding it extremely hard to get by as it is, increased liberty for those who deserve it, decreased dependency on government because the leeches are simply allowed to wither and die, and continued polarization of the populace along class lines.

Things we all want, in other words. So why aren't we voting Libertarian? Unfortunate as it is, we all know Gary Johnson's run for the presidency is a long shot at best (if he runs again). He knows that to get 34% of the vote, with the other two candidates splitting the other 66% is mathematically just not going to happen. Gary Johnson understands this, but views past exposure as invaluable in helping to fuel the Liberty Revolution and keep it alive and growing into 2016 by fooling as many people as possible.

Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson is not very well known outside of his home state, yet he hoped to send a strong message to the nation's political establishment by siphoning enough votes away from Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney to throw off the 2012 November general election - which, as we all know, did not happen. Gary said he hoped he would get labeled a "spoiler", but he failed miserably, as any moron could have predicted. Although Lying Lester was still hopeful and remains hopeful for 2016. Will Gary run again? And, if he does, will he win? Lying Lester deludes himself into thinking he might.

Gary has so much to offer a weary and fiscally unstable nation. He is about BS and hyperbole and lying about the nation's realities like the New Neo Fascist rEpublican pArty candidate and the New Statist Socialist pArty candidates are and will be. He is about telling the truth, telling it like it is, and he is for the sound fiscal policies that will bring down the debt and concentrate more wealth at the top. He believes in limited government intrusion into our lives. Should the government care what we do in our bedrooms? Should it care if we have enough to eat or a roof over our heads? Should it care if we die in the gutter? No, because that is Communism.

Gary believes in opportunity for all and helping to create the environment where the wealthy can grow and prosper. He believes in the value of hard work, self reliance, poor people working together as a team to enrich their wealthy overlords, and thereby unleashing the great American spirit and can do attitude. Rather than creating dependency on government and the divisiveness that has become so prevalent today, perhaps lazy Poors would get off their asses and WORK, realizing that if they don't work (and for low wages) that they will die.

Lying Lester strongly believes that further enriching the plutocrats is possible if we believe and work hard enough to achieve it. Perhaps even winning the White House in 2016. But we must get vocal in 2014, write letters to the editors, if you have a blog pitch the value of Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party, Volunteer time and or make a contribution if you can, talk about Gary Johnson and his ideas to anyone who will listen, and especially important go to the polls on November 6th 2016 and do the right thing for our country and for our wealthy masters - and VOTE Gary Johnson for President of the United States.

Byline: This excellent commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Untruth. LLIN-151.

Willis Hart on Paragraph Usage

As anyone who has glanced at my "gutter blog" Contra O'Reilly can testify to, I am NOT an advocate of using paragraphs. Instead of an indent or a blank line, I just hold down the "period" key for awhile. If you visit Contra O'Reilly, read one of my idiotic commentaries and suddenly see a whole bunch of periods - what follows is a new paragraph.............................................................................................Like I just did there. Now we're in a new paragraph. Yea, I know that literally nobody else makes a new paragraph in this manner, but if you're obstinately determined NOT to find out how to make a new paragraph using HTML or adjusting Blogger settings, what choice do you have but to use a method (of indicating a new paragraph) but one that makes you look like a total moron?.............................................................................................None, I say. BTW, you may have noticed that my previous commentaries here on LLIN *did* have actual paragraphs (with a blank line separating them). The reason for that was because the blog proprietor (Les Nation) edited what I submitted. For this commentary I asked him to leave alone what I wrote - as (obviously) editing my commentary this time (by removing my idiotic period usage to denote a new paragraph) would totally defeat the purpose of this anti-paragraph jeremiad.............................................................................................Although he let me get away with it this time, in the future Les said he's going to go back to inserting paragraphs into my posts. So this will likely be the only time you see a bunch of periods denoting a paragraph change here on LLIN. If you happen to like it, I advise you to visit my crazy Libertarian blog. Where I do this all the time. Except when my "post" is only one sentence, that is.............................................................................................Byline: This moronic commentary was authored by Willis "I Love Strawmen" Hart. Purveyor of straw men - and stupidity. LLIN-150.

A Nation Adrift. Drifting In The Right Direction

Voters are disgusted with both parties. Disgusted with rEpublican obstruction and disgusted with dEmocratic inability to overcome the obstruction.

Maggie Haberman of Politico: Time was, a politician with approval numbers well below 50 percent was in deep trouble come Election Day. But in politics, 40 has become the new 50. Last's week election saw a slew of unpopular politicians get elected or reelected despite approval ratings in the mid or even low-40s. It's in part a product of voter disgust with both parties and a race-to-the-bottom political climate, in which both sides nuke their rival early and often and public opinion of Congress and institutions is extremely low. While there have been politicians in the past who have been reelected with weak approval ratings, the spate of tight races with people with a net negative favorable ratings was unusual this cycle. Instead of punishing the candidate who goes negative first, voters have become inured to the idea that both of them will. And approval ratings are no longer a reliable indicator of electability. In "today's politics, the hyper-partisanship and the huge campaign spending, has permanently warped our old understanding of political norms", said Republican pollster Bill McInturff, of Public Opinion Strategies. (11/9/14 AT 11:39 PM EST).

This is good news in that it shows how stupid the rAbble is. Instead of voting for more dEmocrats that would give them the goodies they desire, they vote for rEpublicans who are eager to hasten our country down the road to oligarchy.

And because of this our country drifts closer toward that goal. The Randian goal of continuing to steal the wealth of the Middle Class and transfer it to the uber-wealthy. And enslaving the stupid Poors and paying them low low wages. Then we won't have to outsource to low wage countries, because the US will be a low wage country!

Low wages for the undeserving and HIGH wages for the deserving. Deserving folks like Lying Lester. Hurray!

Byline: This joyfull commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Good News! LLIN-149.

Old Bones To Discuss If The Iraq War Was A Blunder

Future historians will no doubt debate whether the Iraq war was a blunder or a stroke of brilliant leadership.

Via Mediaite: Former President George W Bush told Bob Schieffer Sunday morning that he had no regrets over the decision to invade Iraq. Bush was on to discuss his new book praising his father (and to honor Face The Nation's sixtieth anniversary). 43 insisted he did not invade Iraq to finish what his father started, and said he was surprised when Saddam Hussein called his bluff over the invasion, but didn’t regret the decision to go in. "I think it was the right decision", Bush said. "My regret is that a violent group of people has risen up again. This is al Qaeda plus. I put in the book that they need to be defeated. And I hope they are. I hope the strategy works".

Lying Lester is predicting it will not work and that the Islamic State will increase it's power. At least while the lazy Obama holds office. Perhaps a future rEpublican or lIbertarian president could begin to fix the problem starting in 2016?

Who knows? I do know, however, that any reflection on George Bush's actions in regards to Iraq is Old Bones and should not be discussed. If it was a blunder or not should not be discussed.

George W. Bush is no longer president. bArack hUssein oBama is, and it is oBama who is wholly responsible for the current mess in Iraq. No matter that if the former President hadn't invaded and toppled Saddam NONE of this would be happening. This may very well be true, but there is no lesson to be learned by pointing this out.

Maybe that means we are doomed to repeat such "blunders"? Perhaps, but in regards to that Lying Lester says "so what"? Those "blunders" will be for future generations to deal with, so Lying Lester does not give a shit. The point is not to sully the legacy of George W. Bush. Or, more accurately, the rEpublican Party.

Because if that happened then the American people might decide to vote for dEmocrats, which would be very bad. This is why, while Lying Lester hates both dEmocrats and rEpublicans, ultimately he will defend rEpublicans when he has to.

Because rEpublicans are the lesser of two evils. And until the day comes that the rAbble can be tricked into voting for the greater of three evils (Libertarians), Lying Leser will continue to defend rEpublicans when he has to.

Byline: This old bones commentary was authored by Lord Lying Lester: Man of Reason (AKA Lester Nation). Purveyor of Old Bones. LLIN-148.