Laughing Our Way to Innovation

Laughter comes from being surprised. Whether it's an unexpected fall someone has, where we apologize for laughing and then ask if the person is okay... or the baby who giggles at the peekaboo game... or the woman laughing at the comedian onstage who told an undiscovered truth... that "a-ha!" moment surprises us and we laugh in response.

Those who have a sense of humor either know how to connect dots for people in surprising ways or they have a knack for understanding the dots connected by others.

For example, fathers tend to store their jokes in a dad-a-base.

That kind of weird connection between two seemingly disparate points to either craft the joke or get the joke requires a lateral leap in logic that we call "getting it."

Innovation works the same way. To create something that hasn't existed before requires the skill that jokesters have - to jump from one place to another in a way no one expected to arrive at a new way of seeing the world.

We look at Elon Musk carry a literal sink into Twitter's HQ after he purchased it and he says, "Let that sink in." He loves jokes. He even loves outlandish and juvenile humor. But of course he does. His willingness to tell offensive jokes is the same willingness he brings to his willingness to craft unforeseen solutions. It's the same daring attitude, using that same lateral leap ability.

Our society stopped telling jokes about the time Obama was elected. You couldn't tell jokes about him. One comedian used that in a bit he did onstage. He joked that we treated Obama like he was a developmentally disabled child. He pointed out that people would scold others, "You can't say that about HIM!" And he was right. Comedy died in the march to wokeness. (And so did that comedian's career after he made that bit...)

Nicole and I were driving last night and I often do impressions in our private conversations. (You hear me do my Seb Gorka impression if you call my voice mail, for example.) But I was doing Edith Bunker. She laughed and recognized it. Then she remarked how shows back then were far more brazen, unafraid to tell jokes and mock people. That was the era when we were going to the moon. America was a land where anything was possible. Comedians took risks in their comedy.

Thankfully, after shuttering free speech for a time, we're now swinging back in the other direction. Elon now names himself "Harry Bolz" on X. Because why not? He can, and he had reason for doing so that I won't get into here.

We need fearless innovation and fearless comedy and the two go hand in hand. Creativity comes out of the ability to see things from new angles and then communicate that to others. And isn't that what comedy is - seeing things from new angles and then developing it and marketing it others? Do you see how these are all related?

America is better when we don't fetter creativity or innovation or comedy. If you don't like it, vote with your feet and stay away from it, but don't stifle it. We might be one joke away from a major breakthrough.

Restoration

Over time, everything tends to break down. Rocks weather. Buildings fall into disrepair. Our bodies age, and increasingly with less and less grace. This is a concept called entropy.

In thermodynamics, entropy is the spare, unused energy that can spawn chaos. It tends to move toward places where there is no energy. In doing so, it creates chaos where there is calm, balance. This is what causes breakdown.

Let's say a wife is having a pleasant day, reading a book on the couch, and her man comes into the house angry because whatever he was doing in the garage didn't go well. And regrettably he decides to take it out on her. That's entropy. He jostles the relationship, and potentially harms it. This process might help calm the husband down, but the wife is no longer in the mood to read the book.

The Obama administration infamously declared that they never wanted to let a crisis go to waste. In other words, they wanted to take advantage of the destruction to turn that energy their way.

In capitalism, there is a concept called Creative Destruction. If you like, read the article, but the collapse of one market in capitalism generally leads to opportunity for the entrepreneurial soul. "Through this constant [upheaval] of the status quo, creative destruction provides a powerful force for making societies wealthier. It does so by making scarce resources more productive."

Where one person sees a broken down house that needs to be demolished, another sees a house that can be purchased cheaply and beautifully restored.

In the federal government right now, we're exposing the breakdown in the system. The media sees this as destructive. But we're bulldozing the status quo to remake the system in the right way.

People tend to hate change, therefore they buck the change - even if it might give a better result in the end.

Be aware of the excess energy that surrounds you. You can carefully harness that energy for the better or you can create havoc without thought. There are certainly some things that just need to be demolished. There are some things that need to be restored. It's a judgment call.

Just know that it's rare to allow a relationship to be demolished. Relationships tend to break down over time, but with care, they don't have to - they can instead become stronger and more beautiful.

Attraction

In life, when we encounter something we don't like, it's easy to criticize. And so we do. "This is a problem!" we announce to the world. Thumbs down.

The harder thing to do is to problem-solve. Solving a problem requires optimism that the problem can be solved. It requires a bit of creativity and know-how. It requires effort.

Criticism requires no effort, no creativity, and no skill whatsoever. It's easier, and for that reason, there is far more criticism in the world than problem-solving.

The bible teaches us that out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. How we are made up determines what emanates from within. Our view of the world stumbles out of our mouth whether we like it or not. For those who optimistically see opportunity for change, we hear that in their speech. For those predisposed to see breakdown everywhere they look, we hear that.

Which is more attractive?

Winning the culture war begins with our mouth. How we phrase things makes a big difference in how it will be received. Which is more attractive: getting rid of porn in schools or preserving childhood innocence? Abolishing abortion or protecting life? Cutting the budget or helping you keep more of what you earn?

Telling the truth is important. Telling the truth in as attractively and inarguably as possible is better. We should ask ourselves: how can I phrase this to invite more and more to join me?

No one leads on any issue unless others choose to follow the person. To win the culture, we have to appeal to those who might start in opposition to our position. We have to win them over. Criticism rarely wins over converts. Criticism coupled with a solution is more effective. Pointing to how great life would be if we implement the solution is more powerful yet.

To sell a car, you portray how great it would be to own and drive the car. That's why every car commercial appears as it does, with beautiful vistas and open roads. No car commercial talks only about how often the cars of competing brands break down.

It's hard to change culture. It's work. But culture doesn't change with mere criticism. It changes when we lead with optimistic leadership keen to find solutions that make life better. The more we demonstrate how much better life can be if we change the culture, the more likely it is that the culture will change.

Criticisms scowl. Solutions smile. Which is more attractive?

Chasing the Right Target

The Republican Party of Texas legislative priorities two years ago were chiefly about culture issues and rule of law. Election integrity, border security, stop sexualizing Texas kids, etc... none of them had to do with money.

When I looked at the big lobbyists in Austin and what bills mattered to them, almost no attention was given by the lobbyists to bills aligned with our legislative priorities. That was a light bulb moment for me. They're happy to watch us spend our time fighting for cultural bills... their clients wanted access to taxpayer money. They were relieved I'm sure that we wouldn't be bothering them. We were focused on other things.

If you've watched everything happening at the federal level, you're noticing that the big brouhaha about money spent through USAID has started a ripple effect. Because that money - your money - financed the big media that has been fighting you on all of your cultural issues, it might be that the battle will change.

In war, if you want to defeat your enemy, you cut off their supply lines. No supplies, no soldiers, no war. You win.

It can truly be that simple.

We focus on fighting to get our bills passed, but is there a short cut by following the money? Can we cut off the financial supply lines in Texas and by doing so achieve some of our cultural goals?

Perhaps we can.

I'll also point out that by electing the right leader, we're getting all of the transparency we've needed for so long. That dedication to transparency is what's bringing us the victory today. Two men, President Trump and Elon, with a drive and a knack for getting under the hood to maximize efficiency and benefit have jumped in.

It's not coincidence that both are political outsiders.

It's hard to make mischief when you don't have the resources to do so. If we cut off the money by exposing the shenanigans, then we might be able to win multiples battles at once - just as they are in DC.

It's worth considering. You get the most value from a diamond by making the right cut. At the very least, we the people need to focus a lot more on where the money goes and who's fighting for access to it. Let's chase the right target.

Political Velocity

A guy named Hugh taught me to set the expectations of others when I was in my 30's. At the time, I thought, "Why am I responsible for their expectations?" But as I matured in life, I came to understand that anger and disappointment only happen when someone encounters something they didn't expect or anticipate. I came to understand that setting the expectations of others is a smart move, and it helps others help you succeed if you do it right.

For decades, we Republicans have lamented the weak effort our elected Republicans put forward when fighting the left. Democrats seem to have no shame when fighting to usher in their agenda. They'll even go so far as to jail their political opponents, steal elections with endless voting counting after the election is over, and use the media to lie straight to our faces time after time.

And then comes Donald J. Trump, a man whom the left even tried to assassinate to secure the victory. Trump survived, won the election, and now has been in office for less than a month and has already secured the following achievements:

Ending DEI, Freeze Hiring, Firing > 1K Feds, Freed J6’ers, Canada Folds, Mexico Folds, USAID Audit, DOED Might End, Panama Deal, Border Secure, Export Criminals, Nominees In, Less Regulations, Media Whining, Declare Cartel as Terrorists, Undoing Biden, NC Restoration, H2O in Cali, Pro-Life Pardons, In-Person Work, Early Pension, Two Genders, Colombia Folds, No Trans Kids, and on and on.

For us Republicans, we look at this and declare: my goodness, what kind of wonder is this? Relentless winning? It's about time!!

This is what we've wanted for so very long. And it's here. And we love it. President Trump is setting the expectations of Republicans. This is what we want. This is what we can expect.

But other Republicans not accustomed to winning or working hard to achieve victory are still stuck in Mitch-McConnell-mode. Perhaps they call him turtle not just because of the physical resemblance but because of the velocity resemblance as well. Nothing fast happens around the man, and victories are few.

So here in Texas, the House Republicans have elected a new speaker. They've adopted House rules that were so unfocused on Republican victory that nearly every Democrat voted for the rules. And they've voted for three straight weeks in a row to have five-day weekends during this 140-day session that occurs every two years.

The comparison between President's speed and accomplishments and the Texas House is stark.

The Texas Senate has committees, members assigned to committees, and committee hearings underway. Not so in the Texas House. No members. No hearings. Just five-day weekends. Texas has urgent business... we have no time to waste. But you wouldn't think so to watch the inaction of the House.

President Trump is setting our expectations of what Republican victory can be. The rest of the party needs to catch up, because we like it. As they say, we feel the need for speed. The future matters, and he delivers. Every other Republican will be compared to Trump from here forward because we know what's possible.

That's a wonderful thing.

Sunlighting Bill Kristol

Bill Kristol is an ardent anti-Trumper. Regarding what Trump had accomplished in the first 100 hours of President Trump's new term in office, he said: "Welcome to North Korea," alleging that this is a dictatorship and we will all suffer for it.

He pretends to be a Republican. "Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future, an organization that helped shape the strategy that produced the 1994 Republican congressional victory. From 1985 to 1993, Kristol served as chief of staff to Education Secretary William Bennett in the Reagan Administration and as chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle in the George H. W. Bush administration."

So why does he hate President Trump so much?

He heads the non-profit Defending Democracy Together Institute. In 2023, it received over $10M in revenue. The graphic for this post shows a flow chart of payments all going to an entity with the EIN 831567380 - which is Bill Kristol's non-profit.

This payment flow was uncovered by the DOGE team when they inspected USAID.

At the top of the flow chart is an entity with the EIN 52-1943638. That is the non-profit Consortium For Elections And Political Process Strengthening.Their 2023 revenue was $165M.

If you go to their website, you see this image at the bottom of the page:

All very connected. All very corrupt. And it's all getting exposed.

Thank God for President Trump's commitment to transparency and for the work by Elon and his young crew to give it the sunlight it needs.

In a government that operates by the consent of the governed, no one can consent to what they cannot see. The money-laundering of your taxpayer dollars through endless organizations to people like Bill Kristol is over.

Texas "bot" Nonsense

The grassroots movement has been called "astroturf" for a long time. Nancy Pelosi did it when the TEA party emerged back in 2009.

"It's not really a grassroots movement. It's astroturf by some of the wealthiest people in America to keep the focus on tax cuts for the rich instead of for the great middle class."

It's a way to denigrate the efforts of millions of people who want to be represented by those who will shrink government.

I get it. There is no "polite" in politics. It's sharp elbows and insults in this daily fight to control everyone's life, liberty, and property.

Fast-forward to today. Here in Texas, there's a lot of establishment hay being made about hiring paid "influencers" to push a message. There's also this effort to label all of the pushback against our "Republican leadership" in the Texas House as a bunch of bots (paywall).

"An army of automated bots mobilized late last year to attack state Rep. Dustin Burrows on social media as the Lubbock Republican campaigned in a hotly contested race to become the next speaker of the Texas House, according to a data analysis prepared by a Republican social media marketing company and shared with Hearst Newspapers. The accounts on X blasted Burrows, who went on to win the race, as a 'RINO,' 'traitor,' and 'Democrat shill,' and they promised GOP primary attacks against his supporters."

That's a lot of fancy nonsense to call people "astroturf."

It's not the first time that the "bot" attack has been used. It was used to sow doubt about President Trump when he was running to become president.

"According to [an] Israel-based firm, someone created thousands of automated Twitter accounts that appear to be praising former President Donald Trump and criticizing his political rivals on both sides of the aisle. As soon as Nikki Haley announced a bid for the presidency in February 2023, ...bots [accused] Haley of being disloyal to her onetime boss."

I know very real people who criticized Burrows. I know very people who criticized Nikki Haley. Real messages from real people. Perhaps someone paid for some bots or paid "influencers" to push the same message. I don't know, and frankly, I don't really care.

In politics, it's very common to hire a vendor to push your message. When the establishment sends a zillion mailers to your home, the same bunch alleging "attacks by bots" think nothing of those mailers pushing a fake narrative.

Look at the two images in this post. It's the same image, same words - just fabricated for different establishment Republicans. Americans for Prosperity Texas did this for a dozen incumbents in the last Texas House primary.

In the mailer, AFP says that Texans asked for a secure border and property tax relief and the Rep pictured "delivered." These were sent in January 2024. Neither border security or tax relief happened. Fake news. But I didn't see story after story being written in the media (another form of hiring a vendor to push your message) about these fake news mailers.

Political messages are sent to us all of the time. As we the people are getting our sea legs and starting to stand up for ourselves against well-financed and powerful entities who want to keep hold of their power, they're going to accuse us of being manufactured opposition.

I don't have a problem with that. We're making headway. We're winning. They're whining. And there are more of us than them.

They can call us "bots" or "astroturf" all they like. As long as they count our very real votes at the ballot box as we continue to replace them, it's fine with me.

Blind Spot

You may have heard of the infamous dead zone in your eye called the "blind spot." It's where the optic nerve attaches to the back of the retina, and in that particular spot, you have no rods or cones, which are the sensors that capture images to send to the brain.

You are truly blind almost in the center of your vision. In both eyes.

Yet, you don't notice the big swatch of nothing in your vision. Your brain is wired to fill in that dead space with whatever makes the most sense in the context of the rest of the image.

If you swing your gaze, with one eye shut, around the area in which you sit, as fast as you can - high and low, up and down - there was nary a gap, was there? Not once. That is how lightning fast your brain is to fill in that space. It's quite remarkable to think about it. But please make note of one thing:

You didn't have any sense of the effort or even of the absence of information. Your brain, not your eye, filled in that space so quickly and so well that you weren't conscious of it. It takes concerted effort to discover that you have a blind spot, so well-concealed is it from our awareness.

You are hard-wired to fill in the gaps of your world, and most of the time, it's unnoticeable to you. You "see" what isn't truly there every moment of your life. Your blind spot is invisibly always with you.

Most of us don't deal well with not knowing, and knowing something is better than knowing nothing - even if it's a fake something that we pretend to know. It gives us a framework on which to make a decision and allows us to respond. Everyone does this. It's normal and natural.

It's also a complete fabrication, rendered out of whole cloth.

Instead of seeing what is happening, you can easily convince yourself that you "see" what is not happening. It's not reality, but you don't know that, and you sometimes make decisions based upon a mirage.

The best decisions are always based upon the indisputable fact. The truth. What is.

If I could gently urge you, I recommend that you crave the indisputable fact and fight hard to see it. This is for your own good. Don't pretend to know what you don't or cannot know.

That requires patience and embracing the fact that you truly do not know.

Whether it's some horrific event such as the crash in DC, or your friend is fifteen minutes late to a long-scheduled lunch, know this:

In the absence of knowing, we have a tendency to make things up. And what we make up is generally negative.

Don't pretend to know what you don't know. Because you truly don't know. You have blind spots, and that's okay. Waiting for the facts to emerge is always smart.

Craftsmanship

Anyone can hammer a nail.

Given enough time, anyone who has the strength to pick up a hammer can eventually apply the hammer to the nail with enough frequency to get the nail to embed into the wood.

But not everyone can consistently hammer a nail straight and smooth into the wood, and fewer people yet can build a house.

Craftsmanship matters.

It's similar with words. Anyone can sling around an opinion, and use strong words to persuade the listener, but few can stop a person in their committed beliefs and make them reconsider those beliefs.

A skilled carpenter can drive a nail in a single swing of the hammer. Likewise, a person skilled with language can use a single, concise sentence to change the minds of many.

Everyone comes into politics with the ambition of greater influence. We want policy to go in the right direction to protect all that we love and cherish.

When a person gets angry, it's always because something didn't go as they expected. Anger is either their surprised reaction to the unexpected or their attempt to assert their will as a last bargain to push things in the direction they expected.

In moments where we are caught off-guard, we have the opportunity to continue methodically building or to tear down the framework we'd started. Emotional reactions are seldom productive.

A craftsman would pause, study what went wrong, and then work to correct and then continue. Or he could drive a bunch of nails badly because he stopped caring about quality in his fit of anger.

In my training seminars, I have one slide that I repeat. It's near the beginning of my presentation and also near the end.

"This is a war of words, won by reputations."

In the moment that a carpenter stops caring and is angry, any person who sees the nails driven crooked into the wood would have a poor opinion of the carpenter's skill.

Likewise, in the moment of a political activist who is angry and stops caring about how words are being used.

"This is a war of words, won by reputations."

There's a reason I repeat that in my presentation. Always be the careful craftsman, no matter the outcome of the moment.

Dirty Politics

You were a teenager once. Your mother certainly got after you at least a few times to keep your room clean, and maybe one time, she walked in and, completely frustrated with you, she said, "You have a half an hour, buster, and when I come back, I don't want to see this mess any more!"

(Well, that happened to me a few times, anyway...)

But imagine that she comes back in thirty minutes and sees that the mess is gone - only to discover that you simply shoved everything into the closet.

"What is this?!" she demands.

And you respond with, "You said you didn't want to see it any more, and that's what I did."

It's an immature response. You knew what she meant, but you chose instead to stick exactly to what she said. Question: is she happy with you, or more angry than ever?

That's what happened yesterday at the Texas House. The Texas Republican Party said that they didn't want Democrat chairs - because why should Democrats have any real power when clearly Texans overwhelmingly vote for Republicans to be in charge? So, Team Burros decided to stick exactly to the dictate they were given. There will be no Democrat chairs, but Democrats gained so much power in other ways that they were happy to vote for the rules package and bragged about it afterward.

Does that sound like a party with less power to you? Democrats all around the country are demoralized, but not in Texas. No sir.

It's this juvenile approach to power that we've witnessed in our Texas leadership. They're not going to clean the room, even though that's what you meant. They're going to hide it from sight. And this is why so many grassroots Republicans are angrier than ever today.

The entire purpose of government is to protect our families and give us more freedom. That's not going to happen by partnering with Democrats or by having power-hungry Republicans in charge of anything.

Yes, we swept a bunch out of office in this last election cycle. Obviously, we have more cleaning to do. And by cleaning, I mean real cleaning. I'm excited for the next primary. Let's find a dustpan big enough to get rid of the garbage.

Unattractive Litter

I went to Vegas with my parents in 2009 or so, and while we had a lot of fun seeing a few shows (such as ventriloquist Terry Fator) and going to the dam, the trip was soured by the filth that was everywhere in the street.

All along the main drag, these cards with half-nude women were everywhere. Sales creeps offered them to us. We refused, of course, but the cards were ubiquitous. You couldn't avoid seeing them.

Later, Las Vegas passed an ordinance to try and clean it up. While that's nice and all, I didn't care. I've never been back and don't care to go back. Once was enough for me. The closest I get to Vegas now is watching the UFC on TV.

That's what Facebook has become. In the image for this post, you can see my activity begging FB to "show less" and hide its persistent posts of half-nude, AI and real women. Me, I just want to look for a few posts from friends. Facebook has other plans for me. I even went into settings and said that I wanted less graphic images. That was a week ago, and here we are. It's incessant. It's perverse. It's like walking the Vegas strip and having to avoid the smut pushers on the street. I never followed any of these accounts, and I never asked for this.

So I've made a decision: outside of posting OP links, I'm done scrolling FB pushing past soft porn just to occasionally see you. I don't know what your experience is, and hopefully you don't have this issue.

I use the Opera browser with FB because I don't do anything else with that browser. That way, FB knows nothing of my life. Perhaps it's making a guess, I dunno. Nicole is frequently in my office and sees it and it offends us both. It's so unnecessary. But algorithms don't care about you, me, or our preferences...

Maybe FB makes a ton of money from this sort of thing? If so, it's a lousy way to make money.

Earlier today, I thought I'd broken through. I took a break, hopped on FB, and instead of scantily clad women, I saw a bunch of Norman Rockwell painting posts. Progress! Or so I thought. The next time I went back on, I was on the Vegas strip again.

No thanks. I'm done with browsing FB. Makes me thankful I created this space here at OP. Like I said, I'll go on and post a link to my articles here, but I've had it with Zuckerberg's monster. It's out of control and a plague on society.

You're Fired

When Jefferson took office as president in 1800, he was reluctant to get rid of Adams' Federalists in the federal government. He didn't realize at first how they would work to thwart his agenda, but eventually he would replace about half of those. He thought half was fair.

The Federalists supported a strong central government and "a loose interpretation of the Constitution: the idea that what the Constitution didn't explicitly forbid, it allowed. [Jefferson's] Democratic-Republicans favored a weaker central government in favor of stronger state governments. They believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution: the idea that the federal government couldn't do anything the Constitution didn't explicitly permit."

You can see how a federal government with people of these different mindsets would promote conflict and confusion. A president must have people who will carry out his vision.

Now that President Trump is in office, thus begins the big purge. Many of us were bewildered that he didn't fire more people in his first term in office, but in less than 24 hours, he's making up for lost time. "Our first day in the White House is not over yet! My Presidential Personnel Office is actively in the process of identifying and removing over a thousand Presidential Appointees from the previous Administration, who are not aligned with our vision to Make America Great Again."

He fired people on the immigration court, removed security clearances for those who lied about him, withdrew from the World Health Organization, and thankfully abandoned the stupid Paris climate agreement.

He hit the ground running. That was just the first day. Can you imagine 30 days from now?

I expect that a month from now we'll begin to hear so much truth about the last four years. J6'er stories will become known. MLK and JFK files will be released. We'll learn what the big deal is with the drones. We might come to know about the J6 pipe bomber - Lord knows that Bongino has been all over that and won't let it go.

Sunlight. It's warm and refreshing. Let in the light. Enough with a covert government that acts against our interests.

Making the Rounds

This week, I started getting to the seminar events scheduled on the calendar. At both events, attendance was from the very passionate, and the response was so enthusiastic.

The people are ready to mobilize and reassert their power with the government. They're realizing that there are more of us than there are of them. They want smaller government. They just need to know what to do that is feasible and workable. That's what I present in the training, just as I do in the book.

The seminar is an expansion of the book. I don't (and can't) cover everything in the book, and there are things in the seminar covered that aren't in the book. But the ambition is to give the attendees a few things they can each do that are simple to do with just a bit of discipline that will bring about victory every time.

Tomorrow, I'm in Denton, and next week Dallas. Then Leon County and so on.

It's the energy from the people who come to these after I finish that is amazing. They're excited with the wind at their back with our primary and general election victories to take it to the next level. And they are.

If you see one scheduled near you, attend if you can. If you want one scheduled in your area, let me know.

More winning to come :)

Standing Apart

I told Nicole this morning that I'm pretty pumped to conduct my first The Goal is to Win workshop.

I've presented a ton of times before. This one is different. It's a next level presentation.

It occurred to me this morning that I have a different mindset about the grassroots. I look at the grassroots from a historical perspective. It wasn't Thomas Jefferson or John Adams who won us our liberty. They played a role, to be sure, and their words and actions were critical. But on the battlefield, it was the farmer and the blacksmith and the cobbler who won us our liberty.

In short, it was the grassroots. They won the victories. They beat the establishment. Without them, we would not have won our freedom.

Today, we aim to reclaim our liberty. A consultant called a potential candidate yesterday and gave this very common advice: make a list of everyone you know and be ready to ask them for money. That's the beginning of every failed grassroots campaign. While everyone on that list of people certainly needs to contribute, their involvement needs to be greater than handing over money.

Many consultants see the grassroots and volunteers almost as worthless. "Get them to give money and bring friends with them to vote. And see if they will blockwalk." That's the extent of it, because in their experience the grassroots contribute no more than that.

And to be fair, nearly every grassroots candidate steps into their race relatively alone and works hard to defeat the local Goliath. It's a solo effort.

I believe that the grassroots are capable of much more and will give much more, if inspired and trained to do so. After all, they did so long ago.

That is the essence of the seminar - to spark the fervor the people have for liberty and less government. To train them in what they can effectively and easily do to intersect with the candidate and win the election.

The book was the first step toward this ambition. I'm chomping at the bit to get started and work with everyone.

Let's go!

Beware Celebrity

Some people crave the limelight. They just do. I'm sure there are a lot of reasons why someone might... but the urge to be next to someone because they're famous is a dangerous thing.

Rush Limbaugh used to say that politics is celebrity / showbiz for the ugly. He's right, but that's profoundly regrettable. We need whatever political activities there happen to be about protecting our life, liberty, and property, not the limelight.

Those who get energized by proximity to political celebrity tend to forget any political principles that they might have had. It's not that we need to accept the policies of a politician, but rather that we need the right politician to advance our policies. There is a great difference. When we give a pass to a politicians who hurt our families as they forward the wrong policies - just because they're in the right party - we fail our families.

We live in a time of transition, where the people have become more and more powerful, realizing that there are more of us than of the few in power. With our vote, we can replace those weak in principle with those strong in principle. We are, and we will continue to do so.

Some political celebrities haven't gotten that message yet. And that's okay. We will organize to defeat and replace them. If that's important to you, then you might recognize those who aren't your allies in this fight because they crave to be near the politically famous. We don't need celebrities; we need the right policies.

You Want the Best

No one goes to court and wishes that they get a no-name public defender to represent their case.

Nobody expects that they will get a fantastic pro-bono attorney either to represent them.

In court, they practice law, and when your very life is threatened by lawsuit or potential jailtime, you want the best. You want someone who will listen to your side, find the evidence to support you, and then argue your case before judge and jury.

If you want that in the place where they practice law, why wouldn't you want the same treatment in the place where they make law?

If you want the right representation in court, you have to hire an attorney. To hire an attorney, you first research the attorneys available to you, and then you give the lawyer you find a retainer. This tells them that you are serious and can afford them.

You're expected to pay for the help you need. In the place where they practice law. Why not also in the place where they make law?

For some really bizarre reason, we expect candidates who run to represent us to self-fund. They're expected to raise the money - to work for us.

We don't do that with attorneys. We don't approach Goddard and Silverstein and tell them, "My court date is in January. Let me know when you've raised the money to represent me."

Everyone would laugh at that idea of forcing a lawyer to self-fund to represent us in court. But for some reason, we don't laugh at the idea of forcing a grassroots candidate to self-fund to represent us in the legislature.

Corporations retain lawyers all of the time. Those with tremendous assets pay up front to be represented by the best. Somehow, we look at the massive donations given to incumbents and think it's terrible. But it's not. It's smart business. They're paying someone to represent their interests, just as they would pay a lawyer to represent them in court.

Here's a pro-tip: there is no such thing as a "grassroots candidate" if the grassroots doesn't fund the campaign of the best person to represent them.

The 350 Plan I outline in The Goal is to Win shows you how to very affordably and easily do this.

Those who founded this country were willing to give their lives, fortunes, and honor. Any sacrifice we make today to obtain liberty is not nearly as costly, but it will require each of us to give of our time, money, and reputation.

If you want the best, you have to pay the best. Patriots fund the campaigns that will win them liberty. Otherwise, they are not the patriots they imagine themselves to be.

The Democrats' Depraved Indifference

You've probably heard of the Laken Riley murder by a man here in the US illegally. The murder occurred in Georgia, and a Georgia Representative put forward a bill in the US House to "require the Secretary of Homeland Security to take into custody aliens who have been charged in the United States with theft, and for other purposes."

That's how far afield this Democrat administration has taken us: we have to file laws to require the the person in charge of securing our country to detain illegals who commit criminal acts. Because he doesn't.

The Venezuelan was redundantly proven to be a risk.

• September 2023: arrested in New York City and charged with "acting in a manner to injure a child less than 17 and a motor vehicle license violation."
• October 2023: arrested by Athens GA police on theft charges.
• December 2023: warrant issued after failing to appear in court in a shoplifting case in Georgia.

So, passing this law is a no-brainer, right? Well, it passed, yes it did. The vote wasn't unanimous, however. It was 264 who agreed with the bill to 159 who opposed it. Every Republican in Texas voted for it. Every Democrat but two voted against it. These are the Democrats who voted against it:

Greg Casar
Joaquin Castro
Jasmine Crockett
Lloyd Doggett
Veronica Escobar
Lizzie Fletcher
Vicente Gonzalez
Al Green
Julie Johnson
Sylvester Turner
Marc Veasey

I argue that each of these representatives is guilty of depraved indifference, which is defined as behavior "so wanton, so deficient in a moral sense of concern, so lacking in regard for the life or lives of others, and so blameworthy as to warrant the same criminal liability as that which the law imposes upon a person who intentionally causes a crime."

Regrettably, prosecuting them for their depraved indifference won't happen - but every one of them should be replaced pronto. They are so committed to allow illegals into the US that they just don't care who gets hurt in this invasion.

It's not the first time that Democrats favored illegals over the safety of women. In 2024, many voted against The Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act. "In addition to deporting migrants convicted of sex crimes, the legislation would also deem illegal immigrants who admit to domestic violence or sex-related charges – or are convicted of them – to be inadmissible in the U.S."

These Texas Democrats voted against the safety of women:

Greg Casar
Joaquin Castro
Jasmine Crockett
Lloyd Doggett
Veronica Escobar
Lizzie Fletcher
Sylvia Garcia
Al Green
Marc Veasey

Depraved indifference. Guilty. Every one of them.

It's up to us to replace them with moral, caring human beings.

The Distraction of Politics

I have a simple definition for freedom: it's when the government is so small that I can go 30 days without worrying what the government is doing.

As it is, I can't go 30 minutes.

Terrorist threats, the inauguration, Biden awarding the most malicious players with medals of freedom, drones, the internal fight among Republicans for the soul of the GOP here in Texas...

Too many people want a piece of what isn't theirs, believing and acting as though our government is for sale or for capture.

This morning, I did what I would rather do: I started a little song that I might call "Crossing."

It's a lovely waltz-type of song. It's peaceful. It's the place I would rather be. But our world is chaotic because we've let it become a mess and so we have to attend to it and clean it up.

January 20th, God willing that it come and go peacefully, will bring a new era into our government, which is great, but it's not the end. This past week, I created the 100+ slide deck for my grassroots training seminar based on The Goal is to Win. I'll soon have 10 events scheduled for it, and more coming from the conversations I'm having with people.

That's good. We need to win. We need to bring security and peace back into our world.

Despite all of the chaos, once in a while it's healthy to just be yourself. Take a moment to do what relaxes you. Something you enjoy.

But we have a country and a future to save. For now, we put up with the distraction of politics until we get those in office who will shrink government and make it so that we can live our lives while they represent us as we would want to be represented.

As Ecclesiastes says, there is a time for everything. "Nothing is better than to rejoice, and to do good in life, and also that every man should eat and drink and enjoy the good of all his labor - it is the gift of God."

So, today we work to make that possible again.

Coming in February: Your Opinion Papers

A good friend called me yesterday and, after talking a bit, he asked if I would let others post on Opinion Paper. I told him, yes, the plan is to allow multiple authors to post on a different website, Opinion Papers. I own the domain, but haven't created the website yet.

You see the logo for it on this post.

As Elon starts doing a form of censorship with "more positive," AI-fueled algorithms, X is a wonderful place to get the latest news, but you have to scroll endlessly through a bunch of crap. His notion of "unregretted user seconds" - the time you regret spending on X for content you don't care for - will never be right.

Let's back up a bit.

When I go to the internet, I determine what sites I visit, what content I read. That is how I maximize my "unregretted user seconds." I choose where I go and how long I spend there.

I don't have that capability on X. An algorithm determines what content I see. No computer can determine me, my tastes, my thinking, my impulses. That maximizes the user seconds I do regret. Every time I go on X, I see something where I ask, why am I seeing this? Ditto Facebook.

An algorithm is failure. It cannot help but fail. So why not just let the person choose for themselves what content they want to see?

That's what search engines once did. Google's Page Rank looked for the frequency of words and their placement on the page and the number of sites that pointed to the page to determine how high up the page would be in any search results. Now, censorship and data farming and political bias is built in and sorts accordingly.

As a tech guy, I kind of understand why this change came about. To understand how to really streamline search results, you had to know to use the dash character in front of a word you wanted to filter out of the results.

For example: if you wanted to know about what states grow corn, but you wanted to filter Iowa out of the results, you type "corn state -iowa" into Google. Try it with and without to see the difference.

This requires tech savvy and too many people struggle with technology so the idea was to instead guess at what a person might want to see. Less tech support, less frustration, and if it got you right a decent percentage of the time, you probably wouldn't complain about the cute cat video you hadn't seen before.

As I mentioned in a previous post here on OP, social media penalizes you for providing links to other sites. They lose money when you walk away from the site. No ad revenue that way, so posts with links get little attention. This is why I put links to OP content in the comments rather than the post itself on FB.

Free expression is important. Your ability to choose is important. Your ability to source your information with links to other sites is important.

You deserve complete control. Complete control minimizes your "unregretted user seconds."

So, if you want to be an author on Opinion Papers when it rolls in February, let me know.

We Need the Hastert Rule in Texas

You might not remember who Denny Hastert is, but we need his wisdom in Texas.

Hastert was once the Speaker of the House, sandwiched between Newt Gingrich and John Boehner. He had a rule, and it came to be called The Hastert Rule.

"The Speaker will only bring a bill to the floor 'if the majority of the majority' supports it."

This meant that while Republicans had control of the House, only legislation supported by the majority of Republicans would ever move forward. As the website says, "The Speaker of the House directs the flow of debate for the body, but unlike his counterpart in the British House of Commons, he is not an impartial umpire. Though he leads the whole House, he is still a partisan actor elected by the majority party."

Such a rule guarantees that when a Republican is in charge, the Republican agenda moves forward. The Democrat agenda? It sits and goes nowhere.

Can you imagine if Speaker Johnson did his job with a rule like this? There wouldn't be a speaker fight. Republicans would be quite happy with House leadership.

Here in Texas, isn't this what we're asking of our House Republicans? But instead, we're watching Burrows thumb his nose at the agenda of Texas Republicans and insist that he will help everyone represent their district.

We don't need Gene Wu's intentions to move forward. No Texas Republican wants Gene Wu's intentions to gain traction in the House. But over 30 of our "Republican" House members think that's just fine.

Hastert was plagued with his own problems and flaws, but he was right and we need his "Majority of the Majority" Rule in Texas - and we need it pronto. Bipartisanship is no virtue unless what you seek is power in the club and not freedom and security for Texans.