I think you are correct, Robert...so my statements of the past, that we have been ruled by the "Great Unwashed" is not that far fetched at all.

This is why I previously refused to respond to your posts. Again you resort to the context-free "leftist" smear. You say my criticism--"The long string of American military misadventures since WWII have been substantially driven by the profits that have accrued to weapons manufacturers and military and intelligence contractors, some of which get fef back to politicians and bureaucrats"--is not rational discussion of foreign policy. You don't address what I said at all, and say my non-existent attempt to discuss foreign policy is not "rational discussion." You say, "the military is not out for 'treasure,' when in fact I specifically referred to "weapons manufacturers and military and intelligence contractors." However, given the well-documented revolving door between the military and those companies, at least some in the military do monetarily benefit from the weapons manufacturers and the contractors.

I didn't claim to "have anything in common with Eisenhower," I cited his warning. "A-philosophical" is not even a word, but philosophically, I stand for reality as absolute, rational egoism, logic, and laissez faire capitalism as the ideal political system (as perusal of my web site will make clear). In foreign policy, I believe in the noninterventionism espoused by George Washington and John Quincy Adams (in his famous "In Search of Monsters" speech). Again, any persusal of my web site will make that clear. As far as the military, I believe it's function should be limited to defense of the US proper, a stance that flows logically from my overall foreign policy beliefs.

I am sure not all of that comports with Ayn Rand's beliefs, but much of it does. I was not aware of any requirement that one had to toe the line on all of her positions or one could not contribute to Galt's Gulch. And who the hell made you the arbiter of "the purpose of this forum"?

Respond or not to this post or anything else I put up on Galt's Gulch, that's your choice. However, your blatant mischaracterizations of what I say and believe preclude me from responding further to you, and I will not do so.

That leftist denunciation of the American military is not rational discussion of foreign policy. Whatever one thinks of particular strategies and policies, the military is not out for "treasure" "far worse than sexual predation", nor do you have anything in common with Eisenhower. Your a-philosophical radical politics have nothing in common with Ayn Rand's ideas and the purpose of this forum.

I think fear of exposure is probably the number one reason why so much of establishment Washington fears Trump.

Like dominos they fall, the useful idiots who thought their entitlement protected them are no longer needed. Something is afoot here. This tsunami of accusations and the exposure of predation by the unconscious snobs ala Bill Clinton is the tip of the iceberg. Stay tuned
the statists will sacrifice the individual for their greater good.

I didn't equate war for treasure with sexual predation, I said it was far worse. It is reprehensible, and so is smearing someone who says so as a leftist. The long string of American military misadventures since WWII have been substantially driven by the profits that have accrued to weapons manufacturers and military and intelligence contractors, some of which get fed back to politicians and bureaucrats. That's why most of these companies have their headquarters near or in Washington. I think the profit motive is the correct explanation for the US's proclivity towards war, rather than the oft-stated but seldom fulfilled goal of winning wars, or the other putative justifications offered. That I find particularly reprehensible. It was President Eisenhower, nobody's idea of a leftist, who warned of the military-industrial complex. It was a prescient warning.

Trying to equate the American military with sexual predatation in the usual leftist "libertarian" smears of what they call war for "treasure" is reprehensible.

Thank you.

Good column

Man IS the apex predator, whether male or female, ignore that at your own peril.

Considering the number of people whose philosophical underpinning is "Me first, screw the rest" the consequences are not surprising. Regrettable, but not a surprise.

I'll let you all in on a personal secret....

Live PD, has become my favorite program on TV. Why you ask? Because no matter how frustrating my week has been from less than pleasant interactions, my experiences are not that bad in comparison. It also blindingly illustrates that we will never plumb the depths of human stupidity.