That's no strawman - that's the root of my argument. Randian "Liberty" has no constraints other than not impeding on the liberty of others. It becomes all about the satisfaction of one's own needs, wants and desires. Rand rages against the entire notion of an obligation or duty toward others, which is at the core of traditional Judeo-Christian morality.
Our founders pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor for a cause greater than self. Rand was blind to any cause greater than self.
The Randian understanding of liberty leaves you free to take up as many constraints on as you want. It doesn’t force anything on you. It’s up to you according to your conscience or your religious beliefs or whatever. That’s why it’s so annoying to see her compared with the left. Unlike the left, Rand doesn’t want to dictate what you can say or what you can do or what you do with your life. She leaves it up to you. Is that really so threatening?