Libertarian view

The horrid president

GOOD LORD! Just hear the endless racism, misogyny, jingoism, bigotry and religious intolerance that spews from this orange-coifed guy’s mouth! It just turns my tummy.

And that wife! Can she even speak English?

And the dreadful things he’s done in his first six months! Here’s a list, but brace yourself. Awful, awful, awful.

The election of 2020 can’t come too soon. We’ll be able to install the Pocahontas princess in the Oval Office, and everything will be peachy again, just like with Obama.

* * * *

(Note: I’m posting the list as a public service because I doubt you’ll see it on Huffpost. I cannot imagine why.)

The Odd Pot

All shrugged out

I MET AYN Rand, briefly, at a talk she gave in 1963. It was in a smallish meeting room in a second-floor walk-up in San Francisco. I was 19 years old.

I do not recall the circumstances of being there. I had not read Rand and only knew she was famous, and the talk was free. She was there with her sidekick Nathaniel Brandon.

Flash forward more than half a century. About a month ago, I decided to read Atlas Shrugged, her magnum opus. I skipped the warm-up novel, The Fountainhead, which is somewhat less wordy, and went directly to the 1,188-page Shrug.

One of my few conscious objectives on retiring 17 years ago was to read more books. I have always been a reader, but I decided to do even more. Before retiring, I had generally avoided extremely long books for no better reason than shiftlessness.

Plus, it interfered with my drinking.

Since moving over the Rio Bravo, however, and sobering up, I turned to some really lengthy works. War and Peace, Anna Karenina, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, etc.

All great books and, brother, are they long.

Tolstoy, I like. Dostoyevsky, not so much. I bogged down in Crime and Punishment. I made even less progress with One Hundred Years of Solitude, which I tried to read long before moving to Mexico. Maybe I should try again, but doubt I will.

Back to Ayn Rand. She’s famous, so I thought I should read her main work. I bought it on Kindle for under $5.

And I dove right in.

A wag described Rand’s works as twice as long as phone books and half as interesting. Shrug was interesting enough to hold my attention but just barely. A couple of times I decided to abandon the effort, but I soldiered on … and on … and on …

Until this week. I made it 67 percent of the way through. Kindle tells you that. I can go no further, pooped out.

Rand’s take on things is not complicated. She calls it Objectivism. You owe nobody anything, and nobody owes you anything. There is nothing metaphysical, no afterlife, no way to know anything except by reason. Your main interest should be yourself.

* * * *

My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.

* * * *

It was surprising to see her curse notions (in 1957) that today are known as political correctness. For instance, the requirement to embrace the “correct” opinions and even, to a degree, the proper personal pronouns.

Rand and I do, however, share quite a few values of the libertarian stripe —  an aversion to taxes, a love of capitalism, minimal government and a dislike of obligatory altruism, something that should be a personal choice.

But I also believe in an afterlife. Rand did not.

Rand and I are polar opposites of Pocahontas Warren, Red Bernie, Crooked Hillary, Screaming Dean, Weepy Barry and all the other heroes of today’s Democrat Party, the party of income redistribution and pink “pussy hats.”

But if you’re ever tempted to read Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead, I suggest you go instead to CliffsNotes.

Libertarian view

The hysteria

WILL THE gory head of Trump, so grotesquely exhibited by Kathy Griffin, and the blowback it created, spell the end of the Democrats’ hysteria over losing the election?

Not Trump

Don’t bet the farm. Will it reduce it a bit?

Let us hope so.

My child bride occasionally views U.S. news, and she asks me what’s going on up there.

And I always tell her the truth, that the Hillary-and-Bernie people are toddlers on the floor, kicking arms and legs, and screaming bloody murder. Seven months now.

Democrat

They didn’t get their way. They want that Snickers! But there’s another way to see the situation.

It’s the theater in which Americans sit or, more specifically, which of the two screens in that theater they are watching.

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, writes a blog that often touches on the political scene. He maintains that Americans are watching two different movies.

One side side of the theater is the movie of President Trump making America Great Again and giving the endless raspberry to insufferable coastal elites.  Much of the audience, likely most, is watching that blockbuster film.

But on the other side of the theater is the horror flick depicting the Mongol hordes that have invaded the White House. That’s the movie New Yorkers are watching, plus folks in Washington DC, Seattle, California and much of Oregon.

It’s the movie Hollywood is watching, and it’s the movie shown repeatedly on 99 percent of university campuses.

When Weepy Barry was re-elected in 2012, I was flabbergasted. And so were almost all conservatives. We thought we had the election in the bag, but we did not.

We were severely disappointed, but we did not take to the streets. We did not burn cars. We did not photograph ourselves with bloody heads of Obama. Didn’t even occur to us.

We accepted the loss with grace. Well, most did.

America has been subjected now to seven months of nonstop screaming, bawling, death threats and rioting by Democrats. Enough! Perhaps Kathy Griffin’s grotesque stunt that horrified many Democrats too will inspire a calming on the left.

Let us hope so. It’s quite important.

Pocahontas

You’ll get another chance in four years. But skip geriatric socialists and charmless wives of ex-presidents. Be imaginative! Nominate Al Franken or Pocahontas. We would love that.

Meanwhile, grow up. Get off the floor. You look absolutely ridiculous because you are.

Libertarian view

Felipe’s a liberal

LEFTISTS ARE great with words, especially hijacking them, twisting their definitions.

They call themselves progressive and liberal when they are not. Socialism/communism is a political philosophy from a century ago, long proven to not work. Those who embrace it these days are the opposite of progressive.

They are regressive.

Liberal means open-minded and devoted to liberty, so it clearly does not apply to today’s American leftists, the followers of Bernie, Weepy Barry and Liz “Faux Squaw” Warren.

Those who tout their liberalism these days are actually intolerant and narrow. Granted many people consider themselves liberal out of long habit.

They vote Democrat for the same reason.

They’re not bad people. They’re just not paying attention that times and words have drastically changed. Perhaps we should confiscate their iPads so they can pay attention.

I am paying attention, and I am an old-school liberal.

Modern liberals are very different:

liberalism
Modern liberals voice their opinions.