A Radical Reset
Our Republic has been converted into a democracy which is just another name for mob rule. The mob is getting what it wants, to paraphrase H.L. Mencken, good and hard. One day soon, the entire edifice is going to collapse under its own weight and what takes its place historically will be tyranny. A Radical Reset is the alternative and the system is called Antipolitism. It calls for a new republic based upon merit and not ambition. No parties, no money in politics, no careers in politics, and only serving the public good.
A Radical Reset
Why Democrats Need to Embrace Reality and Libertarian Values
Political discourse has devolved into a dangerous game of absolutes, where every issue must be labeled either completely good or completely evil. This oversimplified thinking prevents us from addressing the complex realities facing America today, from the welfare system's unintended consequences to Social Security's looming mathematical collapse.
We explore how decades of well-intentioned government programs have transformed temporary poverty into permanent dependency, disrupting the natural family support structures that once helped people through difficult times. The demographic implications are staggering - responsible families limit childbearing due to economic pressures while those dependent on government assistance continue having children without considering long-term consequences. This pattern threatens the foundation of American society.
The conversation turns to Social Security's impending crisis, where mathematical certainty shows bankruptcy by the early 2030s. Rather than treating this as an untouchable political "third rail," we examine practical solutions including innovative investment strategies using immigration program revenues. Climate change discussions also require nuanced thinking beyond emergency rhetoric, considering both costs and benefits of proposed policies while acknowledging that warmer climates historically benefit human civilization.
Political movements must offer substantive alternatives rather than simply opposing everything proposed by opponents. We discuss how Democrats could rebuild by embracing objective reality over progressive ideology, ditching positions that deny basic science like gender biology, and focusing on achievable policy goals. The path forward requires honest acknowledgment of which problems government can actually solve versus those requiring different approaches entirely.
This represents more than political commentary - it's a call for Americans to demand better from their leaders and themselves, moving beyond tribal thinking toward practical solutions based on evidence rather than emotion.
Subscribe and share this episode to join the conversation about building a political system focused on results rather than partisan point-scoring.
Happy Friday, dudes and dudettes. It's me, your Uncle Herbie, your host here at A Radical Reset, the home of anti-politism, where, if the system is adopted, we'll save the republic and save our culture at the same time, which, of course, is really one and the same thing. Having said that, I want to talk a little bit about this, about how life's choices are not always binary. You know, we have a tendency to think of things as good or bad. When things are really on a spectrum between good and bad, there's an enormous spectrum of gray, and so when people try to simplify things, including so-called experts or so-called political geniuses or whatever, you know, whatever it is we're talking about in current events they always come at it from this is good or this is bad, but that's nothing is good or bad. The other thing? Well, that's not true. Hitler was bad. And let's see what is an absolute good. A newborn child is an absolute good, untarnished at birth, but after that it's all downhill. I'm sorry, I don't mean to laugh, but it brought to mind something that someone once said to me, which is that the children are the receptacles of all of their parents' unresolved issues. So the moment we get our hands on our children. We proceed to fuck them up. I don't know what else to say.
Speaker 1:Anyway, let's get back on course. It just is true, guys. You know, that's true. You absolutely know. It's why parents and children fight when they become adults because they push each other's buttons, because the parents put the children's buttons there and the children don't realize the parents put the children's buttons there, so they're mad at the parents for putting them, and it's just. It goes on and on and on. But anyway, my children love me. By the way, it's not by the way they don't love me by the way, it's not by the way they don't love me. Right now, out of my four children, one is not talking to me, three are, but the one that's not talking to me it's over silliness, it'll be over soon. You know, you have to learn as a parent to keep. You got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them. And this particular little disagreement I'm having with my daughter, I'm just keeping my mouth shut. She'll come around, but anyway. Um, that was a weird digression.
Speaker 1:So let's talk about President Trump. What's going on? Tariffs, economy, yada, yada, yada, and the fact that the Democratic Party has learned nothing. So, as I have shared with you in a prior podcast. I'm going to run for Congress. I've already filed my letter of intent with the state of Arizona and I'll be collecting signatures coming up in the fall as a libertarian. I'm running as a libertarian, which means I'm going to lose, but bear with me, I'll just walk through this with you.
Speaker 1:I filed my letter of intent. I have to collect signatures. I have to collect a quarter of a percent of the registered I think is what it is or half a percent of registered libertarians. It comes out to my district, which is the fourthth Congressional District of Arizona. I have to get about 800 signatures and change, which is not a big deal. There are a number of software programs and helps, and the party is helping me.
Speaker 1:So I'll be on the ballot and I'll run, and I'll be running for Congress next year as a libertarian in the 4th Congressional District against the incumbent, who's a guy named Greg Stanton, who is a pretty typical Democratic congressman. He's not the worst that ever lived. He's not the best that ever lived, he's just a career politician. He was the mayor of Phoenix, where he was okay, and he's a congressman where he's okay, but we're going into times that are way, way past. Okay, and when I run this fall I know I've discussed this a little bit, but I'll be running even though I'm running as a libertarian I'm really running for the hearts and minds of Democrats and independents.
Speaker 1:Okay, the Republicans have drank the cup of national, nationalist economics. Okay, and I want to be very careful about this, because nationalist economics and fascism were very close to being the same thing, and and I don't want to use the fascist label to paint my Republican friends that's not what I'm trying to do but understand that when you use the government to carry out national goals by manipulating private industry to do it for you, so they are, in fact, an arm of the government and everything. They're independent, really in name only. That is fascism. That's what fascism is. Fascism is socialism dressed up to look like capitalism, when it's really.
Speaker 1:The state is directing private business to carry out what it considers to be of the national interest, and Trump is a nationalist and a populist, so he basically feeds off the mood of the people and then uses the government unapologetically, through an enormous variety of executive orders, to enforce national policy through private business. And that's what all this. You know we're going to get this many hundreds of billions of investment that's all coming in on the private side but with the government directing and so on and so forth and I'm not saying some of the government goals aren't laudable I think we're going to need a lot of energy for AI. I'm very much in favor of him deregulating to free up a lot of things, but when he starts pushing business to do his bidding by, for example, the President of the United States suing a network over its reporting or how it edited a video okay, which it did in the you know the case, the Paramount case Kamala Harris. You know the case, the paramount case Kamala Harris, who, by the way, was a, was a moron.
Speaker 1:I mean, I'll tell you why Kamala Harris lost. She's a moron, she's a she's the living embodiment of the Peter principle. She literally fucked her way to the top. She was Willie Brown's mistress and, through his patronage, ended up where she ended up. Now, there's a long story in between and I can go into it, but that's not what this podcast is about. But if you ever wonder how the hell did Kamala Harris end up as vice president of the United States, willie Brown, willie Brown, and probably she's great in bed, I don't know I'd do her. I mean, what can I say? So any, I'm a guy. If you tell me she's unattractive, if you were a man my age, 68 years old, and you looked at her in her fifties, she's pretty good looking, 50 something year old woman. Sorry, she just is. So anyway, she's a moron. But you know, like we don't have to carry on a doctoral dissertation in the sack, and I'm sure that's how Willie Brown felt as he pushed her down the road and she ended up in a position that she had no business being in.
Speaker 1:As I've often said, a people hire B people, but B people hire C people. So President Clinton was an A. President Obama is a definite B. He's got a thin skin about all criticism. He hires Biden to be his vice president, who's a C. Biden is a C minus on a good day, plus he's slipping, so he doesn't want to be competed with. So he picks a vice president who's a D and she, of course, picks a running mate who's an F. That guy, tim, what's his name? Waltz was really a zero, is a zero and it just proves the axiom. But anyway, back to the topic of the podcast, which is it's just not black and white guys, it's not all good and evil. So, as I speak to Democrats and I speak to independents in the upcoming campaign, and as I'm speaking to you now, I'm going to tell you something. We need to take a long, hard look at reorganizing the whole government and not just how we choose people for office.
Speaker 1:If you want to get into antipolitism and the Republic by lottery on a merit-based lottery and everything about it, please pick up a copy of A Radical Reset. It's the manifesto of antipolitism. It's available to you on Amazon. It's in Kindle hardcover and softcover. Take your, pick pick up a copy and give it a read. But and in it I have prescriptions for every and understand that. In the manifesto itself, at the very end, I describe how antipolitism works. I kind of saved the best for last, but I go through a series of policy prescriptions and each of those prescriptions are suggestions, not dictates.
Speaker 1:I'm not. You know, a radical reset is not Mein Kampf, I am not trying to be the leader. That's what Fuhrer means. By the way, fuhrer is the German word for leader. I'm not trying to be the leader, I'm trying to be the founder, and then, hopefully, because of my advanced age 68 years old and no one lives forever and I realize I'm young compared to Trump, but I'm not a spring chicken. I'm looking to build a movement, replace myself, because I view this as a war, not a battle, and America's soul is at stake and we need a new way of looking at things, and anti-politism is the new way. But understand, I want to make this very clear I'm running for Congress next year to bring attention to the movement, not to bring attention to me. Okay, so to be very, very clear, I don't care about power or money at this stage in my life. In fact, you know, I used to be rich and now I'm poor, after going to prison and so on and so forth. I have to be honest, I'm happier now. I wake up in the morning and there's nothing in my mind except what am I going to have for lunch, which is much more pleasant than worrying about all the complications of your life you've made because of the vile fucking decisions you made along the way that you have to live with, the unintended consequences of which relates to, by the way, why I structured anti-politism and why the policy prescriptions are as they are in a radical reset.
Speaker 1:So let's talk about just a few of the things. Just real briefly. The government is involved in just too many things we get into a discussion of we need to reform this or fix that, when we really need to do is just stop doing it altogether. There are some things that cannot be accomplished. Let's start with, for example, poverty. Poverty is going to always Jesus said it. I mean it's povertythe poor will always be with us. Now, the poor will always be with us, but what we've managed to do in trying to cure poverty, which is incurable, we have created it as a permanent state of being, as opposed to a temporary condition.
Speaker 1:That you fall into Poverty in the modern time should be something that you fall into. Maybe your business failed, maybe you lost a job, maybe both parents lost a job, maybe both parents lost the job. Who knows what might happen? Maybe there's an illness. There can be a number of things that pull a family into poverty. Keyword being family. We'll get there in a minute, but then what should happen is the pain of poverty, the wondering where the money's coming from, the having to get money together just to eat, to maintain shelter and so on and so forth. That pain, that stress, that stuff that really, really, for most people is almost unbearable is the very reason why you pull out of poverty.
Speaker 1:If you take those out of the poverty, you create it as a comfortable condition for the lazy, and there are a lot of lazy people. A lot of us are fundamentally lazy, unless we're kicked in the rear. Let's be honest about who we are. That's not a bad thing, it's just. There's a reason that sloth is one of the seven deadly sins okay.
Speaker 1:And so if you subsidize laziness which is what happens when you subsidize, when you try to cure poverty, all you're doing is subsidizing it, since you cannot cure it, because the cause of poverty is vile decisions okay or terrible bad luck, and you cannot legislate out either one. If it's terrible bad luck like a family's primary breadwinner is killed or becomes very ill and the family has to pull together and get the extended family involved and pull out of it that's just bad luck. But that's why you have family and extended family, because that's your social safety net in a healthy culture, which we don't have now. I'll get to that in a minute. But if you subsidize it from a government level, whether it's federal or state, all you're going to do is take the pain out. And if you take too much of the pain out, you get what we've got, which is a permanent underclass of people that are born into the poverty, live in poverty and die in poverty, male and female, with no expectation of escaping it and your only concern being how much free shit are you going to get? Then, when we created universal suffrage, when we decided under Wilson that everybody could vote regardless of whether they own property or not which was the primary stumbling block that the founders put in, because if you don't have skin in the game, you shouldn't be allowed to vote when you let the parasites vote, that's when the party's over, which is exactly what we did and what we've done.
Speaker 1:Plus and this is a bigger problem than everything else that's going on is the demographics of the country, which are in free fall among the educated, the intelligent and the commonsensical and are an absolute explosion among the parasitic class. The parasites are breeding and the rest of us are not. That's the problem. Okay, you know responsible people, regardless of what they do for a living, whether a plumber or an engineer or a research scientist or a carpenter, people who work hard and put together and get married and have a family, and, do you know? They have budgets and they look. And having a child is expensive and inflation is eaten into that.
Speaker 1:Two incomes isn't always enough and people are having fewer and fewer children Plus women, because of reasons that I've discussed in other podcasts. You can listen to some of the past ones and I'll cover them again, but today I don't want this to go for two hours. But for a number of reasons, women have chosen to have babies later and later, and that means having fewer children and, in many cases, not having children at all, which has led to an explosion of depression among women, which is again another story for another day. But I'll tell you who's not depressed and who's not having a problem. Having babies is the parasitic class.
Speaker 1:So the parasitic class, the permanent poverty class, the ones that are, you know, beating up people in mobs and in cities and so on and so forth, of every race let's make this clear, okay that are raised without fathers and are raised in within the frame of the so-called Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty, which is actually the institutionalization of poverty. They're breeding like bunny rabbits. They have baby mamas. Girls spread their legs for every guy that comes by, because when they're raised without a father, that's how they seek male attention. They confuse sex for love and get laid and have babies, and that's what their mothers did, so that's what's been role modeled to them and they raise their children.
Speaker 1:The fathers have no expectation of taking responsibility and these women and this is the furthest thing from rare, it's common. You can walk into any urban environment in this country and you'll see this over and over and over Women with children with different last names, often different racial mixes, because they're fucking across the spectrum and having baby after baby and with no intention or no idea of how to raise boys or girls in any healthy environment. Women are nurturing. They don't set boundaries, guys, and without a male in the picture to set boundaries, things will go out of control and have. This is not something I'm predicting, it already has. Look at what's been going on, for example, in Cincinnati A manifestation of this.
Speaker 1:So, as we sit there, one of the things that bothers me about Trump see, democrats, guys, you have a lot to attack Trump on. It's just you're all attacking the wrong, stupid things. First of all, it's time, democrats, let me share a few lessons with you that I'm going to share with you during the campaign. Number one is it's time to understand there's such a thing as objective reality, and here's objective reality. There was never any Russian collusion or intervention by the Russians on behalf of Trump in the last election. That much is crystal clear.
Speaker 1:The release documents that Tulsi Gabbard just released and declassified, along with the declassified FBI files and the House report and when you put it all together, it was all the political put-up job by the Clinton campaign. It was one of the greatest hoaxes in American history and, in my opinion, deserves to be prosecuted. I think that Hillary Clinton belongs in prison, and I'm not so sure that Barack Obama doesn't belong in there with her, and I know how hysterical that is, but it's looking like it was a conspiracy that's finally come out, as all conspiracies do, to undermine Trump. Now, whether or not that's a prosecutable crime, I'll leave it to the lawyers and the judges to figure that out, but it was certainly heinous and none of it is true, so let go. Okay, this doesn't work.
Speaker 1:You guys have been attacking Trump on this bullshit. I know so many Democrats who think they're being reasonable when they say oh yeah, I know most of it was a hoax, but you know there was some Russian. No, there wasn't. It was all a lie from the start. None, zero, zilch. Erase that from your memory bank. Trump is many, many things but an agent of Russia or a stooge of Russia. And look what's going on now. He's not being easy on Putin. He never has been. He's harder on Putin than Obama ever was. So I mean, the evidence suggests and the objective reality is it was all a lie. Sorry, I took a drink of water, a little dry mouth, so let that go.
Speaker 1:Number two you're not going to win by just saying that everything Trump does is bad or good. Now look, it's early in the Trump presidency and pride goeth before a fall, and I am positive that some of these policies that look like they're working are going to backfire on Trump. Sure, as God made little green apples, I think the tariffs are going to prove a problem down the road. I still think that's true. I know that there are a lot of people who think that Trump's already proven. This is not true. We'll see. We will see. But certainly a lot of what he's done has been great the massive deregulation of the energy industry, the bringing onto line of nuclear power plants through deregulation we're rapidly doing. None have come on brand new yet. It's only been six months. But he's wiped all of the regulation out of the way. He's wiped all the regulation on oil drilling out of the way. He's wiped. He's he's regulating in a healthy way.
Speaker 1:One of the few areas where I'd agree with this the crypto community to bring it into the mainstream as a legitimate asset for people to diversify into. He's done a terrific job stopping wars. The war between Congo and Rwanda killed a million people over the last 10 years. Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for that alone. Again gets absolutely no mainstream coverage for it, which just goes to show you what a bunch of stooges they are.
Speaker 1:What's going on? The attack on Iran to take out the nuclear program? I believe it did represent an existential threat to the United States, because I know you can sail a nuclear warhead into a harbor in a boat. You don't need a ballistic missile and detonate it and kill a million people. You won't kill 10 million people like you would if you hit it with a missile and did an airburst as opposed to a ground burst, but you'll still kill a million people and that had to be stopped and Trump put a stop to it. So he's done a lot of good things. He shut the border down, but he's done a lot of bad things on the border. You know this masked man out there rounding up people.
Speaker 1:Democrats, you need to start your every sentence with this was good, you know. My first piece of advice to you people is stop stop simplistically thinking that your entire path to the future is attacking Trump. You need to have some positive policies. You need to have some people, need to reason. You can't fight something with nothing. Trump, for all of his good and his bad.
Speaker 1:Let's not go through a discussion of all of his policies today, but understand that, if nothing else, again, another objective reality is he has a lot of policies that he's put in place and is putting in place, and it's very, very concrete and well-defined, whether you agree with it or not, and forget what the polls say now. Okay, and yeah, the Democrats are the lowest they've ever been, but Republicans aren't exactly. You know Trump's approval ratings in the mid-40s. I know there was an outlier poll in the low, but there's always an outlier. Trump's approval is around 46%, which you say. Well, that's still less than half the country. Yeah, that's because the independents have a hard time declaring their allegiance, and remember that independents are the largest group. There are more independents than Democrats or Republicans, and independents are independent because most of them are healthy people living healthy lives, where they don't obsess on politics and when asked political questions, they're not necessarily up on them and they just have a general feeling and until an election comes into play, their opinions really aren't too set in stone. So right now, with all the change that's going on, change is scary and so it's unnerved a lot of independents rightfully so, and so he's not polling as well.
Speaker 1:But he's got the conversation, guys, and you're sounding like you've got to present a reason for Say what you want about Trump. He gives you a lot of reasons to like him, but those are also reasons to debate him. But instead of framing it as good or evil, why not frame it as, for example, we like that he sealed the border. That was long overdue. But we think that there's a path to dealing with all the people in the country already without having to round them up with jackboots. See, that was hyperbolic.
Speaker 1:I fell into the trap. But they are wearing face masks, with masked officers rounding up illegals. Listen, we're not going to round up 20 to 30 million. Who even knows how many are in here? It's all a guess. It's tens of millions. Who knows? And you know I've just again, I've discussed this before. I'm not going to go into the issue, but there's plenty. I'm saying it's not a binary. You can say he did a good job closing the border and still have put forward a proactive policy. What your alternative is, I have. I'll be putting it forth in the campaign next year when I run for district forward. It's all in the radical reset.
Speaker 1:The reason I wrote that book full of prescriptions is so that we have something else to talk about besides. Just, you know, we've got to do it different. A lot of things don't need to be done differently. They need to be stopped, because a lot of things that the government tries to do can't be done, since poverty will always be with us, since poverty cannot be ended, since Jesus said the poor will always be with us. Let's stop trying to end poverty, which has destroyed the black and the lower class family structures of every race. Let's stop doing that and instead replace it with nothing and let family do what it was doing all along, before we decided to destroy it through this.
Speaker 1:See, a proactive policy here is to say, let's repeal all welfare programs, and then the natural question would be if you think in the mainstream, the way people think now is well, what would you replace it with? And the answer is nothing. I would devolve it to the states and let the states decide if they wanted to do it. The states, remember, are like 50 little countries with free trade among them. We're just a giant free trade zone. But if you think the people in Wyoming think exactly like the people in Alabama, you're smoking crack. And if you think that the people in California think exactly like the people in South Carolina, you're really smoking crack and mainlining heroin. The point I'm telling you is every state is culturally and demographically different and has different mixes. And if you're going to have any shot at all at creating a social safety net not a welfare state not trying to cure a problem that can't be cured, but the states could individually put in a safety net for people that, through bad luck, are in a bad position, but design it in such a way that they have a strong incentive to get to work and get out of it again, let the states experiment with it.
Speaker 1:Let it be 50 little laboratories of how to do it correctly, because states don't print money. And since states don't print money and can't print money. I'm not sure if they can't, but they don't print money. Thank God. They really can't get. But they don't print money, thank God they really can't get in the big trouble. They can only ruin themselves. They can't ruin the whole country the way we're doing it with our $37 trillion really $140 trillion national debt, when you consider Social Security and Medicare and let's go to Social Security and Medicare, the untouchable rails of politics. We're going to need to touch them.
Speaker 1:This is another area where someone could make a, another area where someone could make a look. We we are. This is the most identifiable um train wreck in it may be in history is the the oncoming collapse of social security in uh 20 in the early 2030s. We're going to run out of money about 2032, 2033. You know give or take. It's not going to be exactly which year it is, but it'll be right there and it's just math. It's just compounding interest. If interest rates go up, as I think they will, it'll be right there and it's just math. It's just compounding interest. If interest rates go up, as I think they will, it'll be even worse as the government debt rolls over and has to roll over at higher interest rates, creating more interest than it has to pay. And it has to roll over. You get it. It's like borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, as this happens. Okay, we're just going to have to do it. I mean now. The trick is, we can do it now.
Speaker 1:There used to be an old commercial years ago for a product called. I don't even know if they still make it. Do they still make Fram oil filters? I don't know, but anyway there was this brand of oil filter called Fram. I think they still make them. I think I saw them in AutoZone. I could be wrong, but anyway it was, or is, a premium oil filter versus the cheap shit that you can buy generically off the shelf. That's China, maybe they are too. I don't really know the whole story, but you're going to get my drift on this. They used to have a commercial about Fram oil filters. This is back in the old days when there was only four channels on TV and the commercial went like this Fram oil filters are more expensive. You can pay me now, and then they would have a picture of a car with a blown engine, or you can pay me later, the message being you can buy the good oil filter, or you can buy the shit oil filter and what happens is up to you.
Speaker 1:Well, that's kind of true in national politics, you know, like we can buy the good oil filter and do it the right way, or we can fuck around and do it the wrong way and it will never succeed. And what's going on here is Social Security can't be fixed, guys. I mean, I'm sorry that's wrong. Social Security can be fixed, but the longer we wait, the worse it's going to be. Do you want to deal with a blown engine or do you want to just change an oil filter? So right now, it's still not too late for us to do things like, for example, means test it or perhaps raise the retirement age a little bit and make other relatively minor adjustments that are well spelled out.
Speaker 1:By the way, there are plenty of people who have studied this in depth and I'm not going to redo their work, but we could make the adjustments now and save the system, and one of the suggestions I love is to take $500 billion of the $5 trillion that we'll raise through Trump's gold card program of charging $5 million for basically a gold card to come into the United States and get citizenship on an expedited basis because you bring your own money and you're paying this $5 million and you're bringing talent and resources into the United States. It's a really smart program, it's a good idea and it's going to create. If there are a million applicants and there will be at least a million applicants it'll create $5 trillion in revenue. If we take $500 billion of that and place it in an index of the standard Poor's 500 within the Social Security System Trust Fund, it'll save the system without making an adjustment. This is according to Chamath Palihipataya, who is a terrific Silicon Valley-type hedge fund guy or or entrepreneur type guy that you can check out on your own. Chamath Palihipatia and I'm stealing his idea because I think it's a great idea and I know he's done the math and he's smarter than me. So there you go.
Speaker 1:But having said that, we're not doing anything. And so Democrats, instead of saying we won't touch Social Security and Donald Trump saying we won't touch social security, how about saying, yeah, we're going to touch it. We're going to touch it because we have to, but we're going to save it as painlessly as possible by, for example, depositing this money into the private sector, where we should have done this to begin with. You know Trump talked early on about creating a sovereign wealth fund. Well, there it is. It's a makeable case. Put a half a trillion dollars into the Standard Poor's 500 Index, which is a blind index. No management, no politics, no nothing, just the S&P 500, it'll save the system. So, but that's just one suggestion. What I'm saying, democrats, is how about have a policy?
Speaker 1:Okay, let's go on to climate change. Sometimes you have to admit when you were wrong. Okay, all the hype around the science, that was a hoax, just like the Russia thing's a hoax. Now, not to say that there isn't climate change. There is climate change. Not to say the world's temperatures aren't going up. They were going up for a while. Now they've been leveling off for the last 10 or 15 years. They might go up again.
Speaker 1:There's some discussion among in scientific circles whether there comes a time when you reach enough carbon dioxide in the atmosphere where it just doesn't warm up anymore. It reaches its saturation point of how much heating could go on for a variety of reasons, and we seem to have reached that. Again. This is never discussed. I know you guys have never heard this because you're not nutty like me and read all the scientific literature because it interests you. Unless it interests you, in which you do. And if you do, then you know that the climate change is real. Man is probably contributing to it, but it's the furthest thing from an emergency. We haven't even discussed the cost-benefit relationships, you know. For example, carbon dioxide is causing the world to green, the Sahara Desert is shrinking. We have more growable land than we've ever had before. We don't discuss that.
Speaker 1:Human beings are a tropical species. We do better in warm weather than cold. Cold kills one-tenth as many people as heat does. I mean cold kills, I'm sorry, just the opposite. Cold kills 10 times as many people every year as warmth does. So why are we worried about a warming planet? We know exactly what and the human race is great at mitigation and it's a slow process. Anyway, this is no emergency.
Speaker 1:So what should the Democrats do? They should say we made a mistake. Trump is right to deregulate all these fuels and to get everything online, but we need to do it cleanly, if not for climate change, just to maintain the lifestyle and the beauty of our country. And we can cooperate with the Republicans and we can discuss where it's smart, but in this particular issue, there is only one smart way to handle it, which is to let private industry handle it and get the fuck out of the way. This is why the Democrats should abandon progressivism and seize libertarianism, classic liberalism, as the new Democratic Party. That's the argument I'm going to be making. Going into the election new Democratic Party. That's the argument I'm going to be making going into the election Ditch the progressives, leave them behind. Let them be the Democrats. All you other Democrats and all you independents join with us libertarians. We can call it the Libertarian Party, we can call it the new Democrat Party, we can call it the new Liberty Party.
Speaker 1:Call it whatever you want, but get away from this nonsense where you have no arguing that there's more than two genders. If you hear a politician mealy-mouthed on the gender issue and I'm going to beat the living shit out of Greg Stanton on this if he mealy-mouths even a little bit on how many genders there are when it comes to the debates that we will undoubtedly be involved in, you don't deserve to be in office Again. Objective reality If a politician can't recognize an objective reality, they shouldn't be in public life. They're showing you in a sign that their ambition is so overwhelming that they're willing to scrap every ounce of common sense and lie and look right into a camera which is right into your eyes and lie to you. Stupidity like the gender issue. That's an incredible deal, killer for 8 out of 10 parents in this country. Ditch it. Don't find a way to message it. Don't find a way to talk around it. Just say you know what. That's the progressives. They're insane. We're not a part of this. Goodbye. There are two genders. That's not a political issue. That's science. Okay, you want to talk science? Embrace science. There are two genders. That's the science. Okay. There's no climate emergency. That's the science. Embrace it.
Speaker 1:And and pose free trade is is a good thing. Make the argument for free trade. Tariffs are a stupid thing. Okay, we just haven't. They haven't been around long enough to really fuck things up yet, but they're going to. And all of this is going to cause unexpected consequences in all kinds of ways, because we're messing around again with the free market. To the extent that you mess with a free market is, to the extent that you're going to ultimately cause unintended consequences that are worse than anything you're trying to prevent. And as these come online, that's where Democrats should attack. Okay, free trade is a good thing. No, tariffs are the goal, okay. And look, if the Chinese want to make cheap shit that we buy, then the massive Americans benefit by the cheap shit. Okay. And when you become economically interdependent, when China depends on us and we depend on China for different things, that's a good thing, not a bad thing. It prevents war, okay. You don't blow up countries who are your primary suppliers for things you have to have. Okay, the Japanese would have never attacked Pearl Harbor if they was involved with us then, as they are now. Okay, it just wouldn't have happened. You don't blow up your trading partners.
Speaker 1:Free trade how it got a bad name is through ignorance, my friends. Trump is selling ignorance, okay, and he's institutionalizing it and he's framing it as fairness, and fair has nothing to do with it. The free enterprise is not fair. It's the most efficient pricing mechanism. That's all an economy is is. How do you assign a price to any good or service? A free market does that because it's all voluntary, so the price that's set is set the most accurately because the buyer and seller are negotiating to where the fair level of pricing is. The minute a bureaucrat steps in, someone who doesn't make anything for a living, I'm telling you Democrats, this is your opportunity, this is our opportunity to join together with libertarians and go to the right of the Republicans. The Republicans are not conservatives anymore. The Republicans have become social Democrats. That's what Trump is turning them into tariffs and the manipulation of rules to benefit the United States. He's turning us into the EU and the United States.
Speaker 1:There's plenty of room to criticize Trump, okay, but you don't do it by attacking him. That was all a lie. Let go of the lie. Yes, did he say he'd grab a woman by the pussy and go? Yeah, but men talk about like that in the locker room. No, I've never said it myself, but I've said things that are similar. I mean, come on, get a grip. You know, we've all said things in privacy, among people. We feel safe with that. We wish we hadn't said, or maybe we didn't mean, or they were youthful or whatever.
Speaker 1:You know, people say a lot of bullshit and seizing it over. That's why politics are so poisonous and why anti-politism makes so much sense, because once you take the ambition out of it, you take the lying out of it and you take the shitty people who run despite everything out of it, and you don't get people like that. So, anyway, that's enough for today. So the overall message today is my friends, my democratic and independent friends and Democrats in particular, you got it. You can't beat something with something with nothing, my friends. So you better come up with some somethings. You better ditch all the stuff that denies objective reality. You better stop with the constant attacks on trump. Yeah, trump is no bargain. Neither are you, okay.
Speaker 1:So let's start talking about some policies. None of us are any bargain. I'm no bargain, my god. I have a criminal record and I deserved it. Okay, I don't sell myself as morally superior. I sell myself as having better ideas than everybody else. That's not well, that's pretty fucking arrogant. Then, having better ideas than the mainstream of everybody else and and wanting to take it into the sphere of debate, okay, that's what it's all about. And then we have a discussion, because I don't think I'm perfect either.
Speaker 1:I think you're going to read my policy prescriptions in a radical reset and say to yourself oh, I agree with this and I don't agree with that, but that's the difference between us discussing it and politicians discussing it, like Trump or anyone else or any of the Democrats, is that we don't give a shit about making careers as politicians. We're not trying to make money from insider trading. We're not trying to to build our historic legacies, whatever the hell that is, you know? Uh, we're just regular. The masses, the people that pull the cart and have actually done it and have not sought office and instead come to service through duty, should be the ones making the decisions, not the people who try to run for office because they're megalomaniacs. Okay, I could keep going, but I'm going to stop right there.
Speaker 1:Thank you very much for joining me today. Don't forget to pick up a copy of A Radical Reset. Again, it's on Amazon, kindle, paperback or hardcover by me, herbie K. A Radical Reset is the title of the book. Don't forget to share this podcast with your friends. Yada, yada, yada. You know the drill. Until next week. Have a beautiful weekend. God bless you, god bless your family and God bless America.