P.J. O'Rourke, R.I.P.
"At the core of libertarianism is the idea that people are assets."

No one did more to mainstream libertarian ideas about peace, love, and understanding over the past half-century than P.J. O'Rourke, who has died at the age of 74. And like Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, and Sid Vicious, P.J. did it his way: by taking a blowtorch to the sacred cows of both the left and right.
"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn," he warned. "The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it."
Writing in popular outlets such as National Lampoon, Rolling Stone, and The Atlantic, and appearing on NPR's Wait…Wait Don't Tell Me!, O'Rourke distilled the insights of Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, and Friedrich Hayek with far more oomph.
"Giving money and power to the government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys," wrote O'Rourke. "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."
"Libertarianism isn't political," he insisted. "It's anti-political, really. It wants to take things out of the political arena."
Like his journalistic inspirations Tom Wolfe and Hunter S. Thompson, O'Rourke was no armchair curmudgeon or Ivory Tower philosopher-king. At his very best—in books like All the Trouble in the World and Holidays in Hell—he engaged the world directly and often at serious personal risk, traveling to war zones and disaster areas in more than 40 countries, including urban and rural hellholes in the United States.
"I have always belonged to the pessimistic wing of the libertarian attitude," he told Reason in 2020. "This is probably because I spent 20 years as a foreign correspondent, largely covering wars, insurrections, social upheavals, and disturbances of all sorts….We have a rational side, thank God….But it isn't the only side in our multifaceted—and sometimes pretty ugly—little personalities."
Even as he despaired over a presidential contest between Joe Biden and Donald Trump—"I'm appalled by the choice that we've been delivered…I'm worried"—he was never dissuaded from his faith in individuals yearning to be free, whether they live in Chicago or China.
"At the core of libertarianism, as an attitude and as a way of thinking about politics," he said, "is the idea that people are assets."
His elegiac 2014 book, The Baby Boom: How it Got That Way and It Wasn't My Fault and I'll Never Do it Again, writes his epitaph. Far from being either a screed against his own generation (which is what he expected it to be when he started writing), or a take-no-prisoners attack on millennials, it was instead a funny and thoughtful meditation on how we've arrived at a kinder, gentler country that somehow manages to prize individualism and community, innovation and tradition.
When asked whether the fights between the Greatest Generation, boomers, and millennials had left the country weirder and better off, he told Reason: "I think so. Certainly more tolerant. In fact tolerance I think isn't even a good word anymore because tolerance means, 'Well, I'll put up with you if I have to.' It's more enthusiastic about people's differences of plotting them and embracing them as it were, and that's good.'"
If that's true, it's in no small part due to the contribution O'Rourke offered up, first by making us laugh, then by making us think, and finally by making us want to go out into the world he engaged with such passion.
Photos: Ricky Chung/SCMP/Newscom; Nancy Kaszerman/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Nancy Kaszerman/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; SH1/Sam Wilson / WENN/Newscom; SH1/Sam Wilson / WENN/Newscom; Additional O'Rourke images, Associated Press
Watch: "P.J. O'Rourke on Millennials and Baby Boomers." For more P.J. O'Rourke at Reason, go here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I wonder what P.J. O'Rourke would think of the Hillary Clinton campaign, with the assistance of the FBI and CIA, spying on a rival candidate, and a sitting president, for the purpose of removing him from office?
I wonder what he would think of the most well known “libertarian” publication assisting in that coup, and then helping to cover up the story when it was exposed?
Considering O'Rourke is the douche canoe who coined the term "wrong within normal parameters" while endorsing Hillary Clinton in 2016, I think he'd probably approve whole-heartedly.
I think he was wrong, but I think he was being honest and really meant that she was the second worst possible candidate. Not sure if he ever said anything about re-assessing that statement, but I am quite confident that he wouldn't have supported her shady and illegal campaign strategies.
Then why didn't he write a deathbed retraction of that endorsement, smart guy? It was only the most important election ever, ever.
It was the only election since Watergate in which one candidate - the one Patrick James O'Fuckface endorsed - illegally bugged the other's campaign HQ and used every possible arm of the federal government to spy on her opponent. But hey keep sucking that dead 74 year old boomer cock. Maybe he's in Valhalla cumming in your mouth.
Blow job jokes? Edgy! We all marvel at your creativity. You're a national treasure, friend.
illegally bugged the other's campaign HQ and used every possible arm of the federal government to spy on her opponent.
As was well known in October, 2016 after John Durham traveled through time to save humanity. You are aware that the candidate performing these awful acts lost, right?
>>lost, right?
assuming an election took place and votes were counted.
[JOIN NOW] I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($200 to $300 / hr.) online from my laptop. Last month I got cheek of nearly 30,000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don’t have to go office, Its home online job. hhj You become independent after joining this job. I really thanks to my friend who refer me this:-
..
SITE….., http://moneystar33.blogspot.com/
apparently his endorsement was not quite enough to help the hag get elected. even a good egg like PJ cannot plaster over the smell of that crooked cunt. imagine...the endorsement of the funnest libertarian writer ever and she still cannot seem to convince folks to like her. not sure who that damns more, the libertarian or the lifetime political hack
He kinda explains in that endorsement that he was endorsing Hillary Clinton because her opponent was Donald Trump. And he was not wrong that Donald Trump is an awful, despicable person.
He *was* however wrong in that Hillary Clinton is a more awful, more despicable person, evidenced by the fact that she colluded with the FBI, the NSA, blackhat hackers, and Russian stooges to persecute the Trump campaign and eventual Trump presidency under color of law, as we now know without a shadow of doubt to the Durham releases. Although all of this information was public all the way back in 2016; the FBI itself knew the dossier was political oppo and utter fiction when they used it to obtain FISA warrants under false pretenses for which one official has already served jail time. Illegally bugging your opponents and using federal agencies to abuse them is not 'wrong within normal parameters'. That last time it happened, a president was impeached and resigned for it.
But hey, really good try at whataboutism. If you had about 90 more IQ points you might be able to do this as effectively as a 6th grade debate club student.
gotta agree that she has proved to be the MOST odious political schemer in history...certainly american history
Yet that genius super funny comedian Pete Davidson just now got a Hillary tattoo…….
https://www.justjared.com/2022/02/13/kanye-west-calls-pete-davidson-a-d-khead-mocks-his-wardrobe-hillary-clinton-tattoo/
What a punk ass bitch.
His primary reason was that Hillary was a 'known evil' and Trump was an 'unkown'. We all know how that turned out.
Trump got elected, despite anything P.J. O'Rourke said, because he doesn't actually have that much influence.
Not sure what you mean by "We all know how that turned out." I thought you were a Trump fan.
Trump didn’t have lots of people murdered and didn’t commit a myriad of crimes before, during, and after the election.
The Hag did.
Would have thought.
I wonder what P.J. O'Rourke would think of the Hillary Clinton campaign, with the assistance of the FBI and CIA, spying on a rival candidate, and a sitting president, for the purpose of removing him from office?
I would think he'd have died of shame.
oooh... i see what you did there
😉
*golf clap*
Well, considering that no such thing is claimed by the Durham investigation and there's no evidence that such a thing happened, I expect it wouldn't bother him.
When asked whether the fights between the Greatest Generation, boomers, and millennials had left the country weirder and better off, he told Reason: "I think so. Certainly more tolerant. In fact tolerance I think isn't even a good word anymore because tolerance means, 'Well, I'll put up with you if I have to.' It's more enthusiastic about people's differences of plotting them and embracing them as it were, and that's good.'"
Well, he was wrong on that one. We are not more tolerant.
We seem to tolerate the Clinton campaign’s spying .
In some ways we are more tolerant, in others we are far less. A mixed race couple and walk down the street holding hands with zero fear of violence. Two men can sit on a park bench holding hands with zero fear of violence. Tolerance of people holding hands, of associating with each other, even romancing each other, is at it's highest point ever.
It's the tolerance of political opinion that is at one of the lowest points in a century. Both sides. The cause is a black vs white tribalism. Mostly the fault of the Left, the Right went along with it without a murmur of dissent. Conformity of thought is the new norm.
But at least we are mostly tolerant of the non-political stuff now. Not perfect, but light years ahead of where we used to be.
Celebrate diversity in everything... except ideas!
Hey remember how you spent 5 years wailing like a histrionic cunt about Trumpistas and then the last 2 years insisting that anyone who wouldn't strap a useless cloth mask to their face was personally responsible for killing your grandmother? You know, because you're such a tolerant bootlicking fascist homeless alcoholic welfare queen piece of subhuman shit? That was really diverse.
Lol.
Good mornin’, Tulpa.
Mornin' whitechemmikeoppresocytoxic!
You know, just because sarcasmic is a faceblind autistic retard who can't differentiate distinctive speech,writing, and linguistic characteristics doesn't mean you need to mimic him. He's not gonna fuck you - you're quite a bit too old for his taste.
Tony probably stretched White Mike out too much for Sarc’s micro penis to receive any stimulation.
Yes, that is literally what I have heard some of them say when they think I am one of them.
I mean, you and sarc in the last 2 days called those who didn't support zero borders as racists.
You're actually a friendless NEET though, you just read radically leftist Marxist rubbish exclusively. Purely for educational purposes, mind you. Have to know your enemy doncha know. It's not because you're actually a Marxist bootlicking faggot bitch who worships the state or anything.
I've never heard anyone say that in those words.
Though I did have a funny conversation with a leftist about school choice. She thought I meant abortion in schools while I meant allowing parents to choose where their kid gets educated. She was totally on board with me and excited even, until she figured out what I was really talking about. Then boy oh boy did she get pissed.
In today's totally unsurprising news: sarcasmic hangs out with faghags who are so fucking stupid they unconsciously substitute "abortion" every time they hear "choice".
Of course, I say that only for the sake of a cheap line. sarcasmic has no friends, and this conversation of which he speaks never took place.
That’s not fair. We all know that Sarc just made the whole thing up.
No woman would ever willingly speak with him.
We aren't more tolerant - we've just changed the acceptable targets.
Well put.
Mostly the fault of the Left, the Right went along with it without a murmur of dissent.
Ah, yes. The Left was mostly responsible and the party that, after abolishing slavery, decided to label itself the party of white supremacy. The party that the Left now nakedly projects its reactionary misconceptions of the the white supremacy party's false nostalgia upon, just went along with it. Trump was pro-abortion before he ran but because he ran, Republicans proudly proclaimed and embraced a return of the good old days of The Handmaid's Tale.
Funny how the 'both sides' narrative that originated with and has some modest traction when it comes to the budget, applies across the board.
Holy shit. Exaggerate much?
Read what you wrote out loud and listen to it. When he says opposite political opinions are not tolerated, you’re exactly what he’s talking about.
No, you're just a Marxist sack of donkey shit who wants to suck on Hillary Clinton's clitdong and subscribes to the same facile BOAF SIDEZ!!!!!!!! whataboutism that mad.casual is talking about. Genocidal Marxist totalitarians like you shouldn't be tolerated. Matter of fact you should be dragged into the street, sodomized with a broomstick repeatedly, then eviscerated and have your entrails fed into a woodchipper for confetti. Feel free to retreat your safe space or kill yourself, whichever is more convenient.
I would be satisfied if we gave them all a chance to leave willingly, with nothing. Sending them to Marxist shitholes, never to return. Then take the stupid one who refuse to leave and deposit them in a landfill.
The GOP did not label itself as the party of white supremacy. Recall who voted *against* the civil rights act. Who voted for welfare policies that destroy families. Who kept a KKK member in the Senate until his death - in 2010.
The *Left* labelled the GOP this way. It's all projection - accuse your enemies of doing what it is you are actually doing.
“A mixed race couple and walk down the street holding hands with zero fear of violence.”
Not if anyone who wants immigration laws followed sees them, amiright?
In some ways we are more tolerant, in others we are far less. A mixed race couple and walk down the street holding hands with zero fear of violence.
Just stay out of Buzzfeed country
In some ways we are more tolerant, in others we are far less. A mixed race couple and walk down the street holding hands with zero fear of violence.
Not in a black neighborhood
Two men can sit on a park bench holding hands with zero fear of violence.
Not in a black neighborhood and highly unlikely in a hispanic one.
Well said. Along the way we’ve forgotten about the simple inscription on our coins..E pluribus unum. O’Rourke was the Mark Twain of our generation and will be sorely missed, especially now that biting, insightful humor has been “outlawed” by the millennial left.
It’s as if their “soul” (or in current vernacular a “chip”) is missing.
I guess not strangling each other in the maternity wards or rest homes is the measure of tolerance here.
But yes, we aren't what we should be and the lack of value for Reason (the faculty) and Freedom in each generation is a big cause of it.
The Greatest Generation freed Normandy and shot down The Rising Sun, but entangled every other generation in a Welfare State and a Ponzi Scheme that's going to help destroy us with debt.
The Bahy Boomers stood against the bigotry and chauvinism of previous generations and opened The Doors of Perception, but then continued the Welfare Statism and Ponzi Scheming of the Greatest Generation, then became the biggest Drug Warrior Fascists and plain old Warrior Fascists and set the stage for todays Social Jiustice Warrior Fascists.
The Millennials brought us greater acceptance of immigrants and LGBTQ+ people plus weird tastes like avocado toast, but Postmodernism and Critical Theory has turned them into volitile, dangerous, brainwashed Zombies. Meanwhile, the debt brought by multiple generations of Welfare Statism, Warfare Statism, and Ponzi Scheming just still keeps growing, waiting for the bubble to bust.
Reason and Freedom have to be fought for and won with each generation if they are to survive.
The Greatest Generation did not create FDR's welfare state. That was their parents.
That would be Teddy and his Progressive party.
To he accurate, a mix of both The Lost Generation and The Greatest Generation who voted for FDR.
Everyone ignores Generation X...
If only I could be ignored a bit harder.
was a terrible band in comparison to others of the genre and time.
Someone has to support our Greatest/Boomer parents in their old age, help our Millennial/Gen Z kids with their student loans and housing down payments, and pay the interest on the now 30 trillion dollar national debt.
You're welcome.
Inxluding myself and I'm one. My mistake.
Generation Xers did have their suspicion of authority, They did have the Ravers, Transhumanists, Cyberpunks, and Maker Culture (I kind of hate the last term because "Making" was once just what people did.) But too many of us also went-along-to-get-along with our present course towards dissolution and tyranny.
Most disturbing, even GenXers have the beginnings of Political Correctness and "cancel culture." I've heard Alternative stations catering to GenX bleep out drug and gun and "bitch" references in songs that are perfectly permitted by the FCC. WTF?
They are also less tolerant of opposing ideas to the point of actual violence, there's the tyranny of the cancel culture that has attacked any thoughts of critical discourse. You shut up or we cancel you. Either way, we'll shut you up.
Big tech has aided and abetted in the cancel culture mostly because it is run by those who support the cancel culture: millennials.
I consider millennials as spoiled over pampered little children who are ill prepared for life in the real world. Mental midgets and emotionally stunted.
We are not more tolerant.
We appear to be more tolerant of parents mutilating their children and men dominating women for sport than we used to be.
RIP, P.J.
I thought his earlier stuff was excellent, but as he aged he became more liberal than libertarian.
D'accord. His early stuff will live forever though.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
“The three branches of government are money, bullshit, and television.”
Being less angry and strident doesn't mean one is less libertarian. If anything, PJ went from being libertarian leaning conservative to full blown libertarian in the truest sense. The he shed conservatism does not mean he abandoned the notion that people should be free to live their lives without restriction or interference. Quite the opposite in fact.
Yeah, just because he was a statist cunt who ecstatically endorsed Hillary Clinton because she was "wrong within normal parameters" and supported a totalitarian police state that secretly spied on a presidential campaign and sitting president doesn't mean he was anything less than a libertarian. After all, statist cunts like you, Chuckie Koch and the Reason editorial staff also ecstatically endorsed Hillary Clinton and supported a totalitarian police state.
To be fair, almost everyone is a statist cunt. I'll take the statist cunts who lean libertarian over the other kinds any day. Everyone gets some things wrong. That doesn't mean they don't have good things to say too.
Fair enough. P.J. O'Rourke didn't really have anything interesting to say either though. Typical edgy boomer shit. Simultaneously the poor man's Bill Buckley, the poor man's George Carlin, and the poor man's Gore Vidal.
To be fair, almost everyone is a statist cunt.
I disagree.
I'd say that most people who get involved in politics are statist cunts, or the former in the above quote. But I'd like to think there's a large swath of people who don't give a fuck and just want to be left alone to live their lives. Thing is, they tend not to be vocal so they're mostly invisible.
I'd like to think so. But I'm not sure.
Tell me you’ve never really read any of his books without telling me you’ve never really read any of his books.
I in fact HAVE actually read many of his older works, and while he wasn’t afraid to occasionally criticize people when they deserved it (like ruthless foreign dictators), he never came off as either “angry” or “strident”.
Why do you define libertarianism as being kind to leftist authoritarianism?
In a world where the US had a proper sense of itself, "Holidays In Hell" and "Parliament of Whores" would be considered classics on the level of the best of American literature.
All those big words - and you misused half of them Tulpa.
RIP O'Rourke. I enjoyed your work very much.
At least we still have Lou Reed.
And may that snivelling coward mentally ill tyrannical piece of shit Justin Trudeau find an end that will be satisfying to us all.
Lou? Gone in 2013.
https://reason.com/2013/10/27/rock-pioneer-lou-reed-dead-at-71/
"At least we still have Lou Reed" has been a long-running meme here.
The gag I will keep alive since many of the Great Generation of Reason commenters have moved on.
RIP.
ya nice job dude. always funny.
Is he still dead?
RIP PJ!
What libertarianism as a movement needs is more PJ O'Rourkes to swamp out the perception that we're all ascetic Ayn Rands (which we may be, but it doesn't help the cause).
Whether in sales, sex or politics, humor sells!
Ayn Rand was an ascetic? Serious question: have you ever been evaluated for brain damage? She fucked nearly every man who ever bought one of her books. She and her husband were swingers. She smoked like a chimney and drank like a sailor. Do you have any comprehension at all what "ascetic" mean, or are you an actual, literal, sub-80 IQ fucking retard?
He didn't say that Ayn Rand was an ascetic. Which you would know if you *read* what was written rather that what you imagined was written to justify your sperging out there.
Actually, you stupid, illiterate faggot, he did. See right here when he said:
See, "ascetic" is modifying the noun "Ayn Rands". The only way "we" could be perceived as "ascetic Ayn Rands" is if you could describe "Ayn Rands" as "ascetic". Presuming that "Ayn Rands" would mean "people who follow the ideology of Ayn Rand", then that's a contradiction in terms, because Ayn Rand was not an ascetic. Do you understand now, or do you need some more basic 2nd grade English refreshers?
L2English.
Yes, you should, because you're a really stupid piece of shit would doesn't comprehend the rudiments of elementary English and have made a braying ass out of yourself trying to nitpick me for my fully perfect comprehension of English based on your fully perfect ignorance thereof. The usual procedure when you've embarrassed yourself this badly with your abject ignorance and stupidity is to shut your gaping cocksucker, take your L, and go home, but you seem to want to belabor your humiliation. Fine by me.
'fully perfect'.
L2English
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Did U.L.'s dildo die or something? So much pointless anger and hostility. Maybe it is trying to quit smoking.
So nice to mute turds that add nothing of value to the conversation.
He is saying if we were ayn rands with ascetic qualifiers, not that she was such. Basically her beliefs and being ascetic.
See, "ascetic" is modifying the noun "Ayn Rands". The only way "we" could be perceived as "ascetic Ayn Rands" is if you could describe "Ayn Rands" as "ascetic".
Jesse lays it out simply for you UlRike. Ayn Rand the noun is not being modified. We (we're) the pronoun is modified by both nouns. If you break it into two sentences it may become clearer to you.
the perception that we're all ascetic(s)
the perception that we're all Ayn Rands
Basically, the perception that we're all ascetic versions of Ayn Rand(s)
Your anger may be clouding your comprehension of fully perfect here. Calling Groundy a sub 80 IQ Retard is a little rough, since 70-80 IQ is usually classified as feeble-minded and/or borderline retarded. Now make it a sub 70 and you make the case for GroundTruth to be labeled a retard AND a moron, but your reaching again. Practice makes perfect my friend.
Methinks you are wasting your time trying to explain anything to that one.
thank you jesse. those of us who read for comprehension know what you just explained...too bad you had to. ayn rand sounds like a dude with tits.
Hope it was lingering and painful. Lung cancer is 'wrong within normal parameters' too, you bootlicking fascist piece of boomer shit. Hope you spend eternity in hell having to suppress your faggotry and fuck Hillary Clinton's arid snatch.
I see you're somebody no one could take to the funeral home.
ha!
^+1000
This is more like it. We need more of this kind of spirit in the Black conservative and GOPProud communities.
I hope you pick up AIDS from one of the Thai trannyboys you fuck, shreek.
Get fucked with a rusty pitchfork, asshole
Shreek does NOT fuck tyranny boys! They fuck him.
Adios. It’s like I hardly knew you.
'So angry. Are you sure you're not from the DC Universe?' - Deadpool
"The Merc With A Mouth!" Gotta love him!
I also like this scene from Deadpool II:
Deadpool 2 I'm Batman (HD)
https://youtu.be/X9JUjiQlBLE
So many callouts to his political work, not enough calling out that he wrote the National Lampoon High School Year Book. One of the finest comedy works of the last 100 years.
He was a good 'un.
I remember reading O'Rourke's work in National Lampoon but since then haven't read much of it. I have more fondness of Hunter S. Thompson and his weird essays, embarking into savage journeys into the heart of the America dream.
O'Rourke must have done something right to elicit so many negative remarks from both sides.
But then there are those who would find something negative to say about Mark Twain, Will Rogers or H.L. Mencken.
long live PJ. loved him in wayback times.
I'm afraid his attempts at mainstreaming libertarian ideas failed miserably.
That failure belongs to all of us. Conversations like we have here need to be on all comment sections and all forums in meatspace too, when they aren't dangerous to attend.
We don't have conversations here. We haven't for over a decade now.
What we have is 4/5ths of you guys flinging shit at each other over slights real and imagined like fucking chimps in cages. Impotent raging - that is what this comment section is filled with.
Awwwwww, are you offended baby bitch? Want to go suckle some bitch tits in your safe space to recuperate? Fuck off and die of ass cancer you illiterate retarded cunt.
See? Tulpa's mad and trying to lash out.
Desperately hoping to provoke a negative emotional reaction because he's otherwise impotent - this is the internet after all and it's just words.
Usually takes a few days of ignoring his responses before he gets bored and stops stalking replies.
Usually takes a few days of ignoring his responses before he
gets bored and stops stalking replieschanges his screen name and tries again.ftfy
I wouldn’t lull too hard on that thread. Your own socks may unravel.
There are conversations here now and them. I think I had one last week. Maybe.
Drunk-replying to your half dozen sockpuppets and rimming shreeks' pedophile asshole doesn't technically constitute "conversation".
Nobody here gives a shit about your erotic fantasies, asshole. Fuck off and die.
Cite?
Well, of course, sift past that and use it for compost and it is way more thoughtful than some comment sections I've seen.
Probably because I'm old, I enjoyed his Car and Driver articles in the late 70s.
I don't remember those, but I do remember seeing his reviews and humor pieces in Inquiry which co-existed for a time alongside Reason. Great work!
And since only the living can rest, instead of saying Rest In Peace, I will just bid P.J. O'Rourke and his survivors Peace.
The stuff he wrote for National Lampoon was also great.
Who cares? As a Black conservative who is GOPProud we conservatives have much funnier comedians now. You know… like Steven Crowder and Greg Gutfeld. Truly. Masters. Of. The. Art.
Gutfeld is good and I don't see much of Crowder, but please, no pissing in the punchbowl at the wake.
Ali Akbar Alexander is another shreek sock. Treat it as the drooling, lobotomized-Rose-Kennedy kiddie fucker that it is.
You're a fucking tiresome piece of shit. Fuck off and die, asshole.
Maybe both of you need to leave the wake, get a room, and fuck.
P.J. may not have been perfect and I don't get him supporting Hillary, but he wasn't a total monster either.
Congrats UL, you're only the third person that I've decided to mute.
'took me a long while to get to the point that I decided to ignore cases 1 and 2, you've shown up and earned that honor in what, a month? less?
Bye Bye!
Crowder is a real comedian. Funnier than Gutfeld. Both of them are orders of magnitude funnier than anything on DNC Latenight TV.
You should watch Crowders "apology video". That's real comedy.
"You look like the kind of guy that shows up uninvited to a party carrying a warm case of Zima"
I mean… what a zinger!
'...is the idea that people are assets...' Knowing a few libertarians and how they think, I can only assume that's a typo i.e. the letter 't' got added to the word assets -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_capital
His elegiac 2014 book, The Baby Boom: How it Got That Way and It Wasn't My Fault and I'll Never Do it Again, writes his epitaph. Far from being either a screed against his own generation (which is what he expected it to be when he started writing), or a take-no-prisoners attack on millennials, it was instead a funny and thoughtful meditation on how we've arrived at a kinder, gentler country that somehow manages to prize individualism and community, innovation and tradition.
2014. The speed at which our country and the political landscape changed starting... about then suggest to me that O'Rourke wouldn't have written those words in 2020, 2021, or even 2022.
PJ seems a lot like other “libertarian” boomer types. He liked smoking weed and maybe even enjoyed some butt sex, so he couldn’t get behind the GOP. Yet, he found democrat women to be annoying and completely unattractive. So he proclaimed himself a “libertarian” hoping he would get somewhere with that, but he didn’t. Hence why he ended up on an NPR weekend show and endorsed Hillary. Sad.
Trump sucks. Hillary sucks. O'Rourke was wrong on '16 as was everyone that "endorsed" either candidate. Take a number.
RIP.
Stuff your TDS up your ass.
RIP, PJ.
O'Rourke practiced great journalism that was delivered with a libertarian spin most of the time and he always wrote very funny, reader-entertaining stuff.
Except for his open support for military adventures in Iraq and elsewhere, he was a clever propagandist for the libertarian-conservative cause. His "Parliament of Whores" is a good introduction.
Here's what he told me about his spinning in a phone interview I had with him in the early 2000s:
Q: You – I think you know this – combine humor, satire and sarcasm with a very specific political/ideological and, dare I say, philosophical message or point of view. What is that?
A: To put a single word on that, it would be “libertarian.” I am a libertarian conservative. Or as we libertarian conservatives like to say, a classic 18th century liberal. Now that everybody’s thoroughly confused (laughs) …. But it’s just, from a political and I suppose philosophical point of view, that the ultimate good is human liberty and the concomitant responsibility that goes with that liberty. And that’s what we measure everything against: Does this increase human liberty and responsibility, or not?
Q: I’m a longtime libertarian, so I know the difference between a classical liberal and a John Kerry liberal, for instance.
A: Yeah, about 180 degrees.
Q: Right. Are you deliberately trying to proselytize and persuade in your writings? Are you trying to speak to the un-persuaded?
A: Definitely. Definitely. But of course it depends on what I’m doing. A lot of the time I’m just being a reporter, so my job is just to tell people what things are like – how many people died in the car crash. So I’m not proselytizing then. But when I do something like a book like “Eat the Rich” or “Parliament of Whores” or “All the Trouble in the World,” definitely I am.
More of my brief encounters with PJ at:
https://clips.substack.com/p/pj-orourke-rip?utm_source=url