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
How to Beat Trump: A Libertarian's Campaign Against the System
What happens when a political outsider challenges the entire system? In this provocative episode, I introduce my revolutionary concept of "anti-politism" – a vision for American governance without career politicians, without money in politics, and without partisan divisions at the federal level.
As I prepare for my 2026 congressional run in Arizona's 4th District, I'm staking out bold territory that defies conventional political categories. The Democratic Party has abandoned classical liberalism for progressive extremes, while Trumpism offers right-wing rhetoric with left-leaning economic policies. Both paths lead to fiscal disaster as our national debt approaches $200 trillion when including unfunded liabilities.
My campaign strategy might surprise you: I'm targeting disillusioned Democrats who feel politically homeless – reasonable people appalled by progressive extremes but unwilling to embrace Trumpism. By positioning libertarian principles as the rational middle ground, I aim to create a coalition of Americans who believe in fiscal responsibility, personal freedom, and the restoration of the nuclear family as society's foundation.
This episode dives deep into why the welfare state has failed everywhere it's been tried, how eliminating the Federal Reserve would naturally limit endless wars, and why returning most federal functions to the states represents our only sustainable path forward. I also share my philosophical framework combining stoicism and objectivism – embracing courage, justice, moderation and wisdom while recognizing objective reality.
Ready to join a movement that could fundamentally transform American politics? Listen to discover how we can create a government that serves from duty rather than ambition – before economic reality forces our hand. The time for a Radical Reset has come.
Hey there, dudes and dudettes, it's me, herbie K, your host at A Radical Reset, the home of anti-politism, anti-politism being the rebirth of the republic, where we serve in Congress from duty, not from ambition or career. There is no money in politics zero and there are no parties at the federal level no Democrats, no Republicans. But let's talk about that. That's a utopian vision that will come true at some point after the shit hits the fan. But the shit hasn't hit the fan yet, thank God, and I hope I'm wrong about it. Listen, if it's unnecessary to make a change because I'm wrong about everything, I get it, but I don't see how we escape nearly $200 trillion in debt when you include the unfunded Social Security and Medicare Medicaid liabilities into our national debt. But okay, that's not where we're going today. We're going to go into politics. Today, we're going to talk a little raw politics. As some of you may know and I know that I'm pretty much talking to myself I have fans, but a handful. So at this point in time, what I'm really doing is laying down a predicate, and some of you are going to be listening to this as I record this, but the vast majority of you are going to be listening to this down the road when my congressional campaign is underway in 2026. It'll start ramping up in the fall of this year of 2025. As soon as the students come back to ASU, which will be in about a month, which is where I get a lot of my volunteers from young libertarians who are enthusiastic and ready to volunteer.
Speaker 1:Because, let's be honest, in a libertarian campaign we don't raise a lot of money. Let's be honest. But you know, in this day and age, money should not really be a part of it. With social media and the plethora of podcasts and everything else that's around, you really shouldn't need a lot of money to run a political campaign. I'd love to know what they spend all those tens of millions of dollars on, but anyway, well, it's not like I don't know, but it's Anyway. So I'm going to position myself, I'm running. There's no point in doing something unless you're doing it to win.
Speaker 1:So while, on one hand, I acknowledge that the odds of me winning as a libertarian are very, very slim, it's not impossible, because stranger things happen, god knows but it's also not in the realm of conventional thinking. I completely understand that. I know it's an incredibly uphill battle because I'll be fighting a Democratic incumbent and I'll be fighting a Republican challenger who will be fairly well-funded, and then there'll be little old me. So, historically, the best a Libertarian candidate has ever done in a federal election. There have been Libertarians that have won in the local level. In fact, here locally, I know one guy his name is Nathan who serves on a school board, for example. That's not unusual. Libertarians get involved at the local level because the local level really is where most things belong and that's a very libertarian position to take, and I honor those libertarians I really, really, truly do.
Speaker 1:But in the bigger picture, we've got to do something about what's going on federally, otherwise the states are doomed. So anyway, in this upcoming election, I'm going to position myself to win by trying to take the Democratic votes away from the incumbent, as well as disaffected Republicans, independents and, of course, my own libertarians. Now, my own libertarians are the smallest, smallest, smallest, teeniest group of that. To give you some idea, I only have to collect well, it's less than I won't go on the exact numbers 800 and change 865, I think, but anyway, less than a thousand signatures and I'm on the ballot, which is not a big trick in a political campaign if you know how to do it, and that's incredibly small compared to what Democrats and Republicans have to do. So it's all based on a percentage of how many registered voters there are of your party in your district, and I'm in the 4th Congressional District of Arizona is where I'll be running. So, anyway, I'm going directly after Democrats.
Speaker 1:I have to believe and this is completely unscientific. This is just my read of talking to people that I've known my whole life who are committed Democrats, and a lot of them are clinging on to the title Democrats solely for the reason that they're appalled by Trump and Trumpism, but at the very same time, they are just as appalled and it grows every day because the Democrats' popularity is down to the single digits nationally, and so I mean there's no refuting that. That's just the objective reality of what is and the reasons that's happening is there are a lot of sane Democrats who, while at one hand they are appalled by Trumpism, they are at the very same time, as appalled by things like not being able to state flatly at the Democratic leadership's level that there are only two genders and that men don't belong in women's sports, just to use those examples, and that's an issue. That was the jump the shark issue. That's where the Democratic Party lost it Progressivism and once you've lost your credibility, once an institution like the Democratic Party has flushed away its credibility and that's what they did when they went out to the lunatic fringe and we started going with multiple genders and expanding LGBTQIA plus minus division sign there's so many different ways to go and started basically parsing objective reality. They lost their grip on classic liberals, people who were Democrats because they were liberal, because they felt a certain sense of obligation to their community and so on and so forth, but at the very same, more than they felt the Republicans did, they were traditionally not anymore. It was the party of the working man, it was the party of the union worker. Today it's not. It's the party of the government worker, the government union worker, which is different than a private union worker. We'll get into a little bit of that later, if not in the campaign as well. You know I speak extemporaneously, so when I say I'll get back to it later, maybe I will and maybe I won't, but anyway I'll try. So what's happened now is the Democratic Party, the mainstream Democratic Party, the one that's titled the Democratic Party, is really the progressive party. They're no longer the liberal party and liberals have nowhere to go. That's my assumption on this. Traditional liberals have nowhere to go if they're sane. But at the same time, politics is so pervasive into our culture and to our country, and it's so important in everything that we do, that there is a lack of courage in speaking out against it from within the Democratic Party. So the leadership, they're never exactly profiles encouraged, to steal the title of John F Kennedy's book, god Rest His Soul. Most of them are not profiles encouraged Courage.
Speaker 1:For those of you who would need a little review, I am a stoic. I am a I'd like to say, a practicing stoic, and what that simply means is there are four pillars to stoicism. I'm going to be simplistic Courage, justice, moderation and wisdom. The first one is always courage. Courage is speaking truth regardless of convenience, because truth is truth and truth is based on objective reality, which is why I'm also an objectivist, and stoicism and objectivism blend seamlessly. Objectivism believes in there is such a thing as objective reality, there's such a thing as critical thought, and only critical thought must be used. Laissez-faire capitalism is the only economic system that can possibly work to enrich the lives of the most people, and the rights of the individual are paramount. Now, when you take that and combine it with Stoicism, you have a powerful philosophy, and I live by it because I am no longer non-secular. I've become pretty secular.
Speaker 1:As science has answered more and more questions about the cosmos and the way things are, it becomes less and less likely to me that God exists. But at the same time, I'm not an atheist. I often say this because I'm not an asshole. I hope I'm wrong. I hope I wake up on the other side and my family's there waiting for me or whoever it's going to be or whatever it's going to be. But I really, really, really doubt it. And because of that, and because I personally cannot feign faith where it doesn't exist, it used to be that religious faith was believing in God and Jesus, whatever your religion might be, and it helped explain everything around you, down to disease. Now we know that disease is caused by bacteria and viruses and genetic mutations and so on and so forth. We understand why the sun rises and sets. We understand that the earth is a tiny, tiny, tiny speck of a tiny, tiny, tiny galaxy in an enormous universe and there may be more than one universe and we understand our place in the universe is not central. So you know, to have religious faith today is to believe in something that cannot be true. Now, when I say that, I only say it cannot be true, based on my human understanding of what is real and maybe there's a whole dimension of reality out there that I don't see, and if that's the case, I'm willing to concede it, god knows. Again, I'm not an atheist, I'm an agnostic. I see not one shred of evidence that God exists. Now, at the very same time, I live to be proven wrong. Enough about that subject.
Speaker 1:Moving along to the politics, this is why I'm a Stoic and this is why I'm an objectivist, because I don't think you can replace something with nothing. And I think, as religion has decayed within our society, so has decency, and we've been sliding at warp speed into decadence. What else could you call what's happened to progressivism on the Democratic Party? But decadence, the total, not only the acceptance that people do things that are freaky, but that we have to celebrate them and make them part of the mainstream culture, to the denigration and disgust of everybody else. And if anyone dares speak against it because it is degenerate, then they're shouted down and crushed. That's what's gone out in the Democratic Party. That's why it's doomed.
Speaker 1:I'm going to run as a libertarian, but I'm going to target Democratic voters because I think there's an opportunity here to create a new Democratic Party that combines with libertarians and independents and goes and here's the part that's going to be revolutionary. I think we can go to the right of Trump, not the left. Look, democrats, I'm speaking specifically to you, democrats, republicans and independents, listen along. But I'm speaking to Democrats here because I don't think I'm going to say anything that you Republicans and independents disagree with. But, democrats, the welfare state has failed. The welfare state has failed here. The welfare state has failed everywhere it's been tried. The welfare state has failed here. The welfare state has failed everywhere it's been tried. There is no successful example of social engineering working anywhere that has been tried at any place at any time in history. There is no federal program or governmental program of any kind anywhere, not just in the United States but around the world, that have successfully lifted a mass of people out of poverty or done anything other than have the most fringe of results. It simply doesn't work. The war on poverty institutionalized poverty, poverty instead of being something that people would fall into and get out of because it hurt and the whole family would pull together to get out of it has become a lifestyle and from that poverty lifestyle, funded by the welfare state, which is a failure we have created the crime in the cities. It's at the very root of the breakdown of the nuclear family and from that comes all the other problems our society faces, including overspending, because to be raised without boundaries is to spend money without boundaries. It all goes together, my friends. So I think there's an opportunity here to stake out new ground and I don't really like the left-right thing but to stake out a democratic, libertarian ground. Just that libertarianism is often described as rightist, but really what libertarianism is is what everyone really is when you take all the fluff and titles off of it, which is to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative, to believe that people deserve the right to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes, to love whomever they want. However, that's as far as it goes. There is a limit. For example, okay, and again, let's think this through, my Democratic friends, listen to me it's great that gay people can marry, but they shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. There is just a lot of evidence that unless a child is raised in a two-parent family of both genders, the child is handicapped period. Even gay couples who are credible admit this is becoming true. There are some well-known gay couples who wrestle with this and know that there are problems. You know, I was listening to, for example, the conservative commentator, dave Rubin, who is gay and married and has adopted children and is running into issues in his own, and I don't want to speak for him and I've only listened to it in glancing blows. But I expect that's probably true of Scott Besant and his husband and the children that they're raising. No matter how much money's involved or how great this infrastructure might be, it's very, very, very difficult for a child to be raised as healthy as could be, as the possibilities exist for the child to be without both genders present, because both genders add something that cannot be replaced by the other, no matter how much one is taught how to be like the other. In other words, you can teach a man how to be nurturing, but he's never going to be as nurturing as a woman and you can be the toughest woman on earth, but a tough man you're not in the same league period, end of story. This is why in MMA fighting. They don't put women in with men, thank God, one of the few rational sports left in America. You know you don't do that. The man would just beat the living snot out of her. And it's not just that he's physically more powerful, but his nature and his essence is more powerful. That's just a fact. That's the biology of the beast. This is how it is in every mammalian species that I can think of. Maybe there's an exception, I think bonobos. I think bonobos are a female-dominated society, but there's not too many others. Otherwise. You know, like, as I'm talking to you, I'm sitting here looking at my black cat, morty. Morty is far more aggressive than my female dog, pepper, and a lot of that has to do simply with their genders. Yes, they're different species and I understand that. You don't have to get into it, and I understand I'm stretching the metaphor. But you know, come on, guys, hang in there, hang in there, be with me, stay with me. What I'm saying is Trump has gone left. If we take a look, I've become increasingly disillusioned with Trump and I'm becoming more increasingly disillusioned with him every day. But I don't hate him. I'm not in a deranged state, and that's where I think we need to be to successfully oppose him. I think Trump has the makings of a great man, but a great man does not mean a flawless man, and even a great man must have principled opposition, because he's also if we're going to talk about him in real terms a reasonable person who changes his mind, okay, when faced with reality. And that way he has certain stoic characteristics. He's also courageous, obviously. How many of us would get shot in the air and rise to yell fight, fight, fight. Let's not even get into that discussion. Okay, let's acknowledge the man has greatness within him, but he rules like an autocrat and central control, wherever it's used, fails. Just like I said, there is no example of a welfare program of any kind, of any flavor, anywhere, working Okay in terms of what it was set out to do mitigate and lift people out of poverty when universally, all they do is institutionalize poverty and trap people within it. Okay, so let's just try something new. Let's call it a third rail, let's call it a libertarian rail. And while Trump has gone left and is saying things like he'll never touch Social Security, let's be novel and say Social Security is nothing more than old-age welfare. Let's tell the truth. Let's tell the truth that the trust fund is an accounting fiction. Let's tell the truth that it's only just full of IOUs from the government. It's just part of the government debt. Those are the so-called assets of the trust fund, and it's going to run out of those very, very soon, in the early 2030s, and we're going to have to deal with it. And the sooner we deal with it, the less draconian dealing with it has to be we as libertarians. If we wanted to be purist libertarians, we could say there should be no Social Security. But Social Security is a fact that people count on. But let's call it what it is, and you'll find this in my book, by the way A Radical Reset. Radical reset is available to you on Amazon in hardcover, paperback or Kindle download. A radical reset by me, herbie K. There's the little commercial message. I spelled this out. But let's rename Social Security to what it is, which is old age welfare. Let's talk about means testing it. Let's talk about retirement ages. Let's talk about protecting those that are already in it. Let's talk about maintaining its long-term fiscal stability. Let's talk about some new ideas Like, for example, chamath Palihipataya, who's a billionaire and a venture capitalist, and a very successful one, suggested that we take 500 billion of the 5 trillion. If a million people take advantage of Trump's gold card, let's bounce off Trump, let's springboard. Trump's going to be selling these gold cards, or he wants to anyway. This is one of his ideas. Let's support it. It's a good idea. So if you pay a million dollars and you don't have a criminal background and you're not a member of a terrorist organization or whatever and I'm sure there are other qualifications you can buy, basically, a green card into the United States, instant green card, you're in and you're on a track where it might even be citizenship. Either way, it doesn't really matter, but it's going to raise. There'll be at least a million people worldwide who want to come live in the United States, who are wealthy and understand that business-wise and capitalism-wise, there's no other place to be. So these million people come here. We haven't completely screwed it up yet. We're on our way to, but we're not there yet. So these million people come, we raise $5 trillion, the majority of which can be used to reduce the deficit. But if we take 500 billion of that, okay, and we place it into the social security fiction trust fund and create a real you know Trump has talked about a sovereign wealth fund, but we could really create that within social security alone as an index of the Standard Poor's 500 stock index. So there's no politics involved and, based on the past performance of that index over the last 150 years, it's reasonable to assume that Social Security could be saved without doing anything else to it at all, just by partial privatization of the trust fund. That is a good idea. Now, I don't know if it's true and I'm not sure if Chamath has thought of it all the way through and I've never met Chamath Palihipataya, although I certainly would love to and talk it through but it's an idea that's intriguing and is worth discussing. But we're not going to discuss it, we're not going to put it on the table, we're not going to discuss Social Security. We're not going to discuss Medicare. Okay, and we're going to talk. We should run on a platform of sending everything to the states except national defense and foreign policy, chasing down interstate criminals and issuing sound money. We'll get to that last. And it's solved. It came into being this will make you laugh, for those of you who don't know this to end recessions. Ha ha ha. It created the Great Depression, and the list goes on from there. It's been a disaster from the start. Shut it down. Now what? By shutting it down, it also means that money will not be printed ad infinitum and that will have the lovely and wonderful effect of restricting these endless wars that we get ourselves involved into. You know, there's a reason why, if you look back in history and you look at the history of war, most wars don't last very long. Okay, not even you know World War I and World War II. They didn't last very long in the sense that they started, they were fought, they were over because you can't afford it. Okay, countries, historically going back in time, before they came up with the idea of printing up bullshit money and people were dumb enough to accept it and they had to trade with gold and silver and copper and real money, so to speak. Longer discussion, also discussed in a radical reset by me, herbie K, on Amazon. I discussed money and where it fits in society and so on and so forth, in a way that I think you'll understand. But anyway, before that was happening, they could only fight a war long enough as long as they could raise taxes, and even the royalty couldn't raise taxes too much because the peasants would revolt and throw them out. That's how kings lost their heads, so to speak, literally so knowing that it was a lot of self-control. There are a lot of wars historically, but none of them go on and on and on, like wars today do, where we're constantly, like this war in Ukraine, just sending weapons and sending weapons, and sending weapons. And the Middle East, weapons and weapons, and weapons and weapons, and to no end. Because when you can print money, you can spend money like it's going out of style because you don't care. Well, we get rid of the Federal Reserve and the endless wars come to an end. From necessity, government reduces in size by necessity, we start living on the money that we're earning, as opposed to the money that doesn't exist, that we're creating out of thin air. And I'm going to reach out, and the Democratic Party could take a lesson here. Democrats with the brain, break away. Leave the progressives alone. Let them call themselves whatever they want. They can call themselves democrats if they want to be the new democratic party, be the jeffersonian party, true to the, to the ideals of thomas jefferson and and which is the founder of the democratic party. For those of you who don't know, I know that most of you do. I don't mean anyway, you understand what I'm saying. So. So the bottom line is returning to the roots of of what what the democratic party stood for and getting away from the trumpism of central leadership by a strong man. And you know, that's the problem with these professional politicians they all like to get in charge and even the well-meaning think that they can do things well by using the arms of government to do it. And you can call that communism or you can call that fascism. And it is fascism, guys. By the way, government forcing private industry to act on its behalf in the government interest is fascism. That's what fascism is. Okay, it's very little, very little separated from communism. It just leaves the facade of business intact, as opposed to outright capturing the means of production. But both fail and they will always fail because central control there's. No. The average person in the in the course of a day I read this somewhere and the average person makes 11 decisions a day. Well, when you take 11 decisions a day times 8 billion people in the course of a day I read this somewhere and the average person makes 11 decisions a day. Well, when you take 11 decisions a day times 8 billion people in the world. You're talking about trillions of decisions, billions of decisions a day, trillions of decisions a week, quadrillions and Googleplex decisions every year. There is no central. And all of those decisions, like the butterfly, effect. Those of you who understand what that means. It means if the wings of a butterfly flap in one place and it attracts a bird, the bird eats the butterfly and by eating the butterfly, the bird attracts a hawk and the hawk attacks the bird. But he gorges himself on the bird, he chokes on it, then he leaves his chicks alone and the chicks are captured by a zoo. And himself on the bird, he chokes on it, then he leaves his chicks alone and the chips are captured by a zoo. And I don't know where I'm going with this whole thing because I'm doing an extempore. But one thing leads to another, is the point I make. That was really ridiculous. You know digression, but anyway, one thing does lead to another. So you cannot make these central decisions. Further, if you want to understand what central planning looks like in its extreme versus what laissez-faire capitalism does, go to the beer department of your grocery store and look at how many brands of beers, and every single one of them was started by a couple of people over a dining room table saying one day, I think we'll start a beer company, but if the government was in charge of beer, there would be one beer, because, well, we make beer. Why does the public need it? And bureaucrats aren't. Don't become bureaucrats out of creativity or entrepreneurial enterprise, guys. Okay, so I mean, the whole thing's ludicrous. So, democrats, leave the progressives to wallow in their socialist misery as they're running towards democratic socialism. Let them become democratic socialists, you Democrats with a brain, you that understand that laissez-faire capitalism has lifted billions of people out of poverty and the only reason there are still people living in poverty around the world is to the extent that laissez-faire capitalism is blocked and to the extent that our country has economic problems is to the extent that laissez-faire capitalism is blocked and become a party of free market economics coupled with. Whatever you do in the privacy of your own home is yours to do, but not necessarily everything you do in public, which is why I talked about the gay issue. And as far as you know, listen, you want to make love to someone of your own sex. It's your business, but you can't involve the innocent, okay, because it is a sexual deviance. I know that's not going to be a popular thing to say and this is going to come back to haunt me, but it is what it is. Okay, it's not a sin. In my mind, remember, I'm secular okay, I don't see it as a sin at all, but it's not an environment in which to raise children. It can only confuse them. Okay. If they're raising a little baby boy with two gay men and he has heterosexual feelings, how are the gay men going to handle that? And vice versa, what if it's a girl? What if she's straight? What if she's gay? What if she's this? What if she's that? There's no basis for this. There are plenty of people to adopt babies. Now, if an exception made for, maybe, teenage orphans or so on and so forth, where no one else will adopt them and it's better than an institution, I'm open to that discussion. We can all have that discussion. I'm open. Who am I? I'm not the dictator, but that's the discussion worth having. Okay, but adopting babies out of the question, because there are plenty of people to adopt babies, of every race and both genders, so there's no shortage. In fact, what we need to do is make it much easier for good people to adopt children and, while we're at it, reestablish and become the party of the nuclear family. And by destroying the welfare state, we will, by necessity, reestablish the nuclear family's importance as the primary support vehicle of everyone. People will rebuild their families, families will be recreated and children will be looked upon as they have always been, as not only expenses but also who takes care of their parents when they get old. You know, that's what's missing in our culture we're all worried about. You know, what do we do with all the old people? That's what their children are for, not the state. You know, you want to see how a country handles old people that doesn't have a welfare system that works like ours and is so stupid. Go to Mexico and you'll see that families. There's a restaurant in Hermosillo, sonora. So Hermosillo is the capital of Sonora and it's not a tourist town, which is why you never hear about it. And if you ever visit Hermosillo, it's going to look a lot. It reminds me a lot of Tucson, where I used to live, only not quite as neat on the edges. In other words, all the buildings are there, all the traffic's there, all the families are there, but it's like a little worn on the edges, but otherwise it looks like any other middle-class, dominated city in the world in a, at least, mostly capitalist country, although Mexico falls in between. But that's not. I'm not going to get into the Mexican discussion of economics. What I'm going to get into is Mexican families, because they're intact. So there's a restaurant in Hermosillo, but I would go down there to do business, and I did business in Mexico for many years. You have to get a lot done at the state capitol, so I would go stay in Hermosillo. I'd stay in a hotel called the Fiesta Americana and I would stay there. And there was a restaurant I loved to go to called Mariachisimo, and Mariachisimo was, as the name connotos, a mariachi restaurant. Now, don't get in your head, it's not three Mexican guys coming up to your table and saying, would you like to get a song? And then singing what's the one? They always get Guantanamera, or, oh God. There's so many of those canned Right off the top of my head. For some reason I'm having a mental block, I think, because I don't like them so much. But you know the canned mariachi songs that everybody asks for. But in Mexico mariachi is a very different thing. So at mariachisimo there's a mariachi orchestra, essentially Okay, maybe a dozen and a half or so members, maybe two dozen members, um, between dozen members, between musicians and singers, and they put on a show every single night. And what's interesting and the reason I bring up this restaurant is is that whole families show up, unlike in America where you see just the husband and wife show up, or husband and wife just the kids, but the grandparents are never with them. In Mexico everybody's together, parents, every table is big in Mariachisimo to accommodate the big families and there's big, long tables so that you can get the parents and the kids and the grandparents and the uncles and the aunts and the nieces and nephews and everyone comes. And what's really cool is that everybody knows the words to every song. So like, for example, you could hold a gun to my head right now and tell me to name a current hit. If there is such a thing still as the top 20 or top 40, I can't name a one, I'd tell you to pull the trigger, not one, I couldn't even tell you. I'm not sure I could tell you the name of any current performing musicians um, that irish girl got in the trouble the other day comes to mind, but billy eilish. There's one, but you know. But again, if you held a gun to my head and said name a Billie Eilish song, I can't. I don't know any Billie Eilish songs, I'm not interested. My playlist is made up of a smattering of everything from 1950 to now, because Spotify suggests music within my genre. There's so much independent music that there's a lot of retro stuff out there and that's what I listen to. But the point where was I going with this entire discussion? The point is that the whole family knows every word to every mariachi song, because the family is the social safety net in Mexico. That's what I was really getting to. Who's going to take care of the grandparents? The kids are, of course they are. Traditionally it's the eldest daughter, but depending on how many kids there are, they all pitch in and they take and no one thinks anything of it. Mom and dad live at home with, I mean, grandpa, and grandpa live with mom and dad and the kids and the uncles and the aunts and everyone lives together and everybody takes care of everybody else and it's a beautiful thing and it's something that we used to have here and we need to reestablish it because it's gone and everything that's wrong with our country has sprung from that. So I don't want to go on and on forever. Today there's an opportunity here Democrats, dump the progressives, Get rid of them. Progressivism is poisonism. That's what it is. It's no good. It leads to nothing. It has no successes. There is no track record of progressive success ball in the world. Get rid of it, leave the nutcases to it. And you want to know how to appeal to men? Democrats? This is a very important point. You got to stop behaving like pansies, okay, and progressivism is also pansyism, okay. To be a progressive man is to pay lip service to stuff. That cannot be true, because you're either pussy whipped or a coward, neither of which is consistent with what the broad of America wants to hear. They don't want to see pussy whipped, coward men. Tim Walz was a poster child of cowardice, pussyism, careerism and an absolute zero. But messaging isn't going to do it, guys, to be a man, you must live as a man. Okay, you can't decide today. You know what. I'm going to talk more like a real man today, because if you aren't, you aren't, and no real man is progressive anymore. They're gone. There are no real men in the progressive movement. There might be some left in the Democratic Party, but you guys need to come to us libertarians and join me and people like me and force a new party to be formed. The time has come. It's happened before. You know, there were Whigs and now there were Republicans. Well, there are Democrats and they're now becoming social Democrats. Leave them to social democracy and become capital Democrats. Call yourselves whatever you want, but come over here with us libertarians. Let's form a new democratic, libertarian party. We can call it whatever we want, but there is a bottled up. The majority of people do not support Donald Trump, and never have, but they don't know where to go and they're not going to support a bunch of lunatic leftist nonsense. So we can, out here, say you know what we support. We support paying our bills. No-transcript. Sometimes it has to get worse before it gets better. I don't want to end on a downer note. Hey, listen, we could still stave this off. Ideal case scenario I run for congressional CD4 in Phoenix, arizona, and I do very well. Whether I win or not isn't important. If I can cause the Democrat to lose, that will bring national attention to the movement and then we can build a movement and go from there, and that is why I'm running. Yes, I would like to win this election. No, I'm not stupid enough to believe that I will, but I do think I can do better than 4%. In fact, I think I can do better than 10%. And if we do better than 10%, not only will we be the historically best performing libertarian ever our campaign, we will also completely shake the Democrats to their bones because we will have knocked off a Democratic incumbent with a message of be a man, be an American, be decent, form a family, make your spouse happy, male or female, raise your children together when you get married. It's not all about you. And that your responsibility first and foremost is to your family before all else. Okay, and don't be cowed into doing stupid things out of peer pressure. Anyway, we can go on and on and on. We don't have to pay lip services to stupidity anymore. There's a market out there waiting to be tapped, my friends, and we're going to try to tap it out here in the 4th Congressional District of Phoenix, and I podcast to you and want you to join us, because, while I say we're not going to raise a lot of money, any money would be nice. So obviously we're going to go by the way, because I'm a convicted felon, I'm forming I've already formed a separate committee of non-felons to handle all the money. I'm not going to touch any money at all. I'm not going to be involved in the money. I'm not going to touch the money. I'm not going to use the money. It'll be used strictly for the campaign and have nothing to do with me whatsoever, which is important. That's important and we don't need that much. But we need to raise something. Your help would be appreciated. Don't forget to go pick up a copy. This is a way to help us Pick up a copy of A Radical Reset on Amazon the Manifesto of Antipolitism by little old me, herbie K. Thank you for joining me today. Thank you for listening to my diatribe. Thank you for supporting me. If you're listening to this and have decided to join the movement, please do Reach out to me with questions. What else that's it? God bless you, god bless your family. God bless America.