The Bounty Hunter Frank the Duntz Luntz: How consultants really run our government

Who Really Runs Our Government?

Well, I didn’t know it until the story broke that Kevin McCarthy was sharing an apartment with Frank Luntz, the pollster and what I call in my upcoming book The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, a “bounty hunter.” Frank Luntz in the Washington D.C. beltway swamp is undoubtedly one of those.  The rest of the world has known him as a consultant, which I think is a weak word for what he does.  Consultants in business and politics are there to mitigate risk from the real stakeholders of an enterprise, whether it’s a CEO of a large company or the House Leader for the Republicans in congress.  Those with the most risk to shoulder are often hiring bounty hunters to do their dirty work for them. It’s a common practice and is really at the heart of much of what is wrong in the world of commerce, which is why I have a special designation for those types of people.  I dedicate a whole chapter to this enterprise, and when people want to know why our government is so swampy, it’s because of people like Frank Luntz.  And when we look specifically at our current situation, such as the consensus-building against election fraud in the 2020 election, which allowed our tax payer funded intelligence agencies to conduct a coup against a sitting president who was massively re-elected.  (For proof the results in the Arizona audit are headed in that direction) That’s terrible news for bounty hunters like Frank Luntz, so there is a lot of doubling down that is going on because the villains are exposed, and they don’t want to be.

I never cared much for Frank Luntz.  He gathers information and uses it to shape strategy and opinions on politicians and the media’s topics.  He doesn’t just work as a bounty hunter for political characters but corporations as well.  So when it is wondered how policy gets shaped that often looks completely un-American, it is because of bounty hunters like Frank Luntz.  When we put people like Kevin McCarthy into power as voters to run the Republican Party in Congress, we expect to get him as our representative.  Not Frank Luntz.  But as Frank often does as a bounty hunter is sample opinions of some losers here and there then give the sum result to people like McCarthy, who ends up listening to them more than voters.  And that’s how a few bounty hunters end up running the entire town and is precisely why the Swamp, as we call it, has ended up being so corrupt.  Trump was so effective because he didn’t use consultants, had an excellent instinct for getting to the right decisions with his methods and didn’t hire it out or solicit it. During his administration, the bounty hunter types were far less valuable.  And they didn’t like that. 

Bounty hunters make their money by shouldering risk away from those with a lot to lose.  I have often said the primary effect of the modern CEO is not to have opinions and stand for anything at all as the head of a company.  The marketing people take care of the branding. Usually, a tradition for a big company has already established market reliability.  What the CEO does is keep risk from destroying what was built in the company. That’s why they hire bounty hunters to do their dirty work of opinion-shaping for them.  And that’s how Frank Luntz has gained a lot of power even though technically he’s pretty much a Duntz; he’s not very wise about things.  Bounty hunters like Frank Luntz only do one thing: to create advice that keeps their clients away from risk that might harm them politically or economically.  Yet here’s the catch, Frank Luntz is a Democrat, or he thinks like one.  So as a bounty hunter to the rich and powerful, he can then shape their actions to politics that he supports, which means that he controls our government.  Our votes are not. 

I have despised Frank Luntz for two occasions, first the way he set up Trump in 2015 toward the presidential election over John McCain.  It helped Trump more than hurt him when Luntz asked him if John McCain was a war hero.  Trump said his famous “I like people who don’t get caught.” Luntz, the bounty hunter, thought he had a way to knock off Trump at that moment, so he made a big deal about it.  But what do you know, Trump thrived off the negative coverage because voters enjoyed that the then presidential hopeful wasn’t just another phony hiring people like Frank Luntz to advise him on public policy, as so many Republicans had at that time.  The other time I wouldn’t say I liked Frank Luntz was on the night of the 2016 election, where the bounty hunter was very arrogant about what little chance Trump had about winning.  But guess what, Trump won easily, leaving egg on the face of Frank Luntz in a big way.  Yet like a bunch of idiots, the politicians kept hiring bounty hunters like Luntz, and the Swamp itself buckled down to establish a coup against our pick for president.  By the time we got to 2020, Luntz and many like him who make vast amounts of money steering our elected representatives toward leftist cultures and positions beneficial to them worked hard to talk about polls favoring gun control among the American people. He also spoke about polls saying people want to move on from accusations of election fraud, when in fact, the true polls Frank is talking about are him talking to two bald men and a goldfish to get the “feel” of the American public. 

McCarthy doesn’t know any better; he’s sharing a toothbrush with Luntz, so he has trust in Luntz, not so much in what the voters are thinking. That’s the bounty hunter game, to do what they were hired to do, let the chaos of the aftermath drive the sheriffs to fund another posse for the next villains.  Yet as bounty hunters have always done, whether in the Old West or the modern-day Beltway culture, they make friends with the bandits to encourage them into trouble so that the politicians will hire them again.  The bounty hunters never seek to solve the problem. Otherwise, they’d be unemployed.  They only want to take the risk away from someone like Kevin McCarthy when questioned about the GOP position on voter fraud or guns. Or even illegal immigration.  Frank will give advice that takes away the risk while steering Kevin in a liberal direction for the actual future strategy.  The bounty hunters need villains to make money, so they always nurture them along behind the scenes.  They don’t want to solve the problem. That’s why they all hated Trump because he wanted to solve the issues, and that meant he wasn’t calling bounty hunters to do the dirty work for him, which is where the real fix is in all politics. 

It’s just as big of a problem in companies as it is in politics, bounty hunters are everywhere, and they charge a lot of money to take the risk away from those most burdened by it.  But when you are a brash, battle-hardened CEO who didn’t pawn off the responsibility of risk to a bounty hunter, well, then things can get done, which is why Trump was so successful.  It’s also why Frank Luntz hated Trump so intensely and is working every day to restore his grip on politics in Washington and within the media. But people are getting wise to it, and that’s why I dedicated a whole chapter in my book to the matter.  It’s one of the most corrosive things in a mass communication culture, where bounty hunters are running things because everyone who should be in charge is too frightened by risk to do the job themselves.  If we want to fix our politics, we will have to get rid of the bounty hunters that are in it.  Then and only then can we expect things to improve.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=bniNjt4gII


Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.
http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Its Good to be a Counter-Revolutionary: Every age has its own fight to conduct

I know it’s not convenient.  I understand that most people want to live their lives by the rules of their American citizenship and to be left alone.  But, every generation has its challenges, there are always enemies out there looking to act on their own accord, and when you live in the best country on the face of planet earth, there will be attacks that whoever must defend is in the care of the day.  In the future, it might be those generations.  In the past, it was others.  And now, we have a task, and we cannot ignore it.  We have among us in America, intense revolutionaries who want to undo all of us and force us to obey them.  They come from all over the place; some are very wealthy, some are dirt poor broke, but they all hate America and want to undo it.  Our first task is to admit that to ourselves.

All of us are not pro-American supporters.  Some of our neighbors and friends are these revolutionaries.  Go to your local school board meeting, and you will see lots of enemies. These people are revolutionaries who actively work through education to destroy our children’s minds and destroy America from within.  Go to a poor neighborhood hampered by Democrat policies, and you will see attacks against our legal system to bring down our American system of constitutional law.  Look at our corporations, even the Coke that we buy at McDonald’s.  You will see global interests seeking a stable communist political environment to spread their brand to every corner of the world, who want to destroy American sovereignty to unleash their growth toward those markets, working as enemies against us all.  They are all revolutionaries who wish to revolt against American sovereignty, and they are willing to commit treason to unleash it, which of course, provokes a response from us. 

In the video above, I proposed embracing the counter-revolutionary role that sounds radical and even militant to many ordinary people.  But it is our task in this time and place to do so.  We are under attack and have been for a long time.  American massive growth and GDP hid it, and many of those named forces remained in a somewhat docile state.  It all came undone openly for the first time in our lives when the assassination of JFK occurred.  In a brief history of what went wrong, dueling was common in our founding fathers’ day, in the start of America as an idea.  Dueling was needed to protect the value of the name and reputation of the individuals involved.  Slowly dueling emerged into gunfighting in the age of Western Expansion.  Not so honorable, usually provoked in a drunken rage, but the intent was the same, to protect the reputation of individuals.  As the age of progressivism seeped in, and central government began taking control more and more every decade after that, up until the period of WWII, the killing of other people migrated from a very personal experience with gunfighting to the actions of the mob, where assassinations occurred blindly, and from a safe distance.  This took the courage out of combat and unsettled people’s minds in a new way.  When the KGB worked with American intelligence to get rid of a common rival, and a threat to the various city mobs all over America, JFK was a rich target, and the killing of him unleashed an attack on America through the revolutionaries that followed in the 60s right up to the present.

This is important because these actions created radicals of all kinds to act violently from the protection of a mob.  Fights between factions used to be settled face to face, with the antagonists being forced to take responsibility for their actions in the light of day.   This new kind of killer came from a blob of ideology and has eroded our country ever since, which has been entirely by design.  The enemies of America knew what they were doing.  First, it was the various city mobs that started the fall, which ironically became the leaders of the Democratic Party (Saul Alinsky, Hillary Clinton). It migrated to the KGB of Russia.  Today, China has bought up massive amounts of influence in American media, sent honeypot spies into the beds of many politicians to compromise them and steer favorable legislation toward communist causes and manipulate currency to collapse the influence of the American dollar.  Most of these things happen over such an extended period and on such a vast scale with so many people involved that everyday people don’t see it or refuse to see it because acknowledging it would mean they’d have to take responsibility for the action.  Yet there it is, and it’s on our doorstep today as a result and demands that strong people face them down in opposition. 

That is where my suggestion of becoming a counter-revolutionary comes from.  It is a term you should embrace.  It’s not an act of terror to insist that we return our nation to a foundation of constitutional law instead of accepting the chaos of a change state toward communism, which is precisely what is happening.  Being a counter-revolutionary is an honorable thing when revolutionaries have indicated openly that they mean to ruin your lives at any cost and that they dare you to meet them on the battlefield for a fight.  They have issued the dare.  Unfortunately, we have been taught in our public schools that we are supposed to walk away from fights, not participate in them for the last century.  Our legal system has punished the second act in a conflict, not the first.  Prosecutors are going after those that respond to violence, not those who issue it.  So we are gun-shy and have been for way too long.  We have sat by and watched other people speak for us at school board meetings.  We have allowed good people to be punished just because they don’t fit into a woke culture intent on undoing our country.  We were, after all, too busy taking our kids to soccer practice.  We didn’t want the responsibility for action, so the revolutionaries of our culture felt entitled to attack and unleash their will upon us, expecting an easy go of destroying all of us. 

As human beings in this particular age, we must defend America from its attackers in the media, from insurgents in the streets, and those compromised within our elected offices.  Failure to meet that challenge will leave history to consider us the losers who let it all slip away to the parasites of sociology.  To the revolutionaries who hated us because they weren’t us or were too stupid to join us and take our lessons and improve their lives accordingly, revolutionary intentions cannot be accepted.  But make no mistake about it, they meant to end us all, and we should not back down from being a counter to their intentions.  There is nothing radical about that.  It is patriotic and honorable to stand against revolutionaries who intend ill will and malice robbing all future generations of the opportunity to be Americans.  It’s not enough to light fireworks on the Fourth of July and celebrate what others have done to make American Great.  It’s time for us to do it all over again in a way specific to our times. 

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=bniNjt4gII


Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.
http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Public Schools Should Be Prosecuted: Examples of school board members advocating liberal destruction

Public Schools are Dangerous Places

It is great to see more and more parents speaking out about what happens in their public schools.  Early this past week, I provided some stories about my home district of Lakota who expressed themselves over transgender policies that are part of the teacher union progressive political platform.  Then, the mom from Georgia unleashed on her school board an excellent speech about removing the mask mandates.  The video went viral and brought a lot of attention to the core problem; public schools are not our friends.  They are not places of sanctuary and learning centers of intelligence.  They are progressive re-education centers that intend for your children to be reprogramed. Government schools plan to reprogram our children. Your society has produced a hopeful lifeform growing up in a healthy community. Public schools want to destroy them into a collective goo of liberalism and dangerous thinking that will destroy our nation from within. They should all be prosecuted for their active role in that corruption.  It’s one thing if these school board members didn’t know better and were just well-intentioned malcontents.  But there is too much evidence, and it goes on far too often in virtually every public school in our government education system for it to be an accident.  The destruction is purposeful.  They intend what they do, and that makes it criminal rather than just innocent stupidity. 

The mom from Georgia who unleashed her fury with her school board there had a good point.  School board members may be frustrated that these young moms are grandstanding in their public speaking forums. I’ve known enough school board members from all over the place to know that school board members don’t come into their roles as corrupt activists for liberal causes.  They seek election for those boards to help educate children and play a role in the goodness of their communities as they understand those roles in a “liberal” society.  Most of us have been taught that public education is the first ingredient to a successful life and that children must at least stay in school to have a shot at life.  That leaves a community member seeking importance well-defined criteria for doing something meaningful.  And it’s not easy to be a school board member.  Management is complicated and often not very rewarding. Most of the time, especially in a group setting, you leave at the end of a meeting not getting everything you want.  An elected body expects disputes with other school board members at the meetings.  But it’s hard to disagree with someone you’ve spent a lot of time with, and quickly friendships form. Peer pressure persists. Often, the platform a school board member ran on to get elected gets forgotten and is replaced by state mandates and teacher’s union expectations for progressive causes.  And they end up being consumed by the system.

A couple of school board members from my district of Lakota, Julie Shaffer and Brad Lovell, are excellent examples of this problem.  I know both of them from the beginning and am pretty sure they meant well.  But in the vacancy of intelligence that should come with any leadership position, they have sought to cover their lack of ability with the national trend of radical leftism and masking it with a façade of caring for the district’s children in all the ways that are typical of Democrat politics.  They profess to the voters that they are nonpartisan, that politics does not play a role in their decision-making process.  But clearly, Julie’s role has always been appeasement of the teacher’s union as a radical mad mom seeking to throw resources at children rather than the hard work of leadership.  I debated Julie Shaffer on WLW radio many years ago, and her pro-education views were significantly left-leaning, and she came apart fast while on the air.  Recently she has been the advocating voice that has pushed the transgender agenda at Lakota.  She didn’t have to, but she went out of her way to put her name on the controversial proposal.  Lakota is in a very conservative area, so her actions do not represent the community that elected her.  She argues that politics did not play a role in her decision, but the evidence says otherwise.  So when a school board member knowingly does something harmful to children, such as adopting a liberal agenda that looks to be destructive to the education position of a public school, isn’t that a prosecutable offense?  If you knew about a murder that was planned and you didn’t say anything, isn’t that still a prosecutable occasion?  You bet it is, and she is guilty of these accidents.  Knowing her, she knew what the transgender policy would do, but she did it anyway, to hell with what people thought. When pressed on the matter, she claims a lack of political partisanship and insists that what she is doing is for the good of all children.

Then there is Brad Lovell, a school board member who used to be a school administrator and is married to a current administrator who makes decisions as a couple who profits a great deal off the public education system itself.  The biggest problem with him is that he is tone-deaf to anything that might disrupt the education structure, making it very difficult to have complex opinions about anything.  Supposedly his conflict of interest is legal in being married as a member of the board to an active employee, but his actions show the real problem. He has shown no resistance to budget concerns and is always quick to desire to go to the public for more money.  He would be well at home in the Joe Biden administration of deficit spending, and we can understand why.  As teacher contracts continue to escalate in cost, administrators rise too in cost and make it a very lucrative scam for him as a school board member.  He is clearly in the role for the social status it provides him.  He has no interest in going against the political tide of transgender politics or taking a stand against Critical Race Theory.  And in that neglect, he is responsible for the minds that time will prove to erode under the weight of liberalism.  Rather than put community concerns over these matters first, he instead set his needs for income indirectly through his wife as a priority, which is why many of the parents of Lakota are becoming more and more frustrated.  He doesn’t want to rock the boat because that’s his life through his wife.  But they do; they want someone to care about these issues and to do something about them.

Those are just a few local examples, but every school district could tell the same story, leaving parents frustrated.  Rather than listen to the Georgia mom who pleaded with the school board to remove a mask mandate from her child, the committee instead follows the liberal agenda, blames the CDC for the decision, and claims they have no power to do anything about it. They have done the same thing at Lakota, to limit the number of parents who can come to the board meetings and talk; they have used the excuse of social distancing to restrict attendance, citing that it is Governor DeWine’s orders they are following.  Because school board positions are unpaid and pretty unsatisfactory otherwise, it doesn’t bring much passion for reform is needed to manage the district.  Instead, they follow the liberal plan that comes with all public schools and sign their name without taking any responsibility for what happens.  And in that way, for the many little lies they must tell while doing so, public schools should be prosecuted for the harm they bring community members for knowing lies they commit for political power instead of what’s suitable for children.  And it’s time to get all that to an end, for our own sake.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,


Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.
http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Corporations Attacking America: Taking back our country from unelected insurgents of malice

How to Defeat Corporate Control of our Government

I started out writing my new book, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, with the simple intention of helping businesspeople reach beyond the current limits of those studies to become better and more productive in both their personal and employers’ lives.  Setting the book’s contents in a period before the progressive era, where many of our modern problems started, allows for a fresh look at complicated issues that hold many people back in all aspects of their lives.  That for me was fine; if the book accomplished those things, I would have been happy.  However, during the editorial process, people reviewing the book before the publication have noted that it is very much a book that could disassemble world governments and the corporate influence over them.  This is something we have talked about for many years, especially in conspiracy circles.  But after the 2020 election, there is no doubt that many global corporations, such as Google, Apple, Facebook, and even the NBA, no longer view American citizenship as a value.  They have joined the revolution to overthrow American ideas and to refocus the human race toward global citizenry, to step beyond the Constitution, the National Anthem, and all things that are red, white, and blue.  And that there was a means in my book to undo all that.  Well, I would be lying if I said that came as a surprise to me. I’m always thinking about those types of things, so when writing a book about psychology and strategy, it would become apparent that such tools could be used on a micro and macro level.  It wouldn’t hurt my feelings if readers of my new book did use it as a counter-revolutionary device to undo this anti-American revolution conducted by these large corporations.  An eye for an eye is no problem with me.  In fact, in the way I see things, an eye for a head is even better.

It’s well beyond time now to see the situation for what it is.  Corporations have joined together to undercut a government that belongs to the people, to all of us.  This isn’t a surprise to me, but it is a reality we must deal with.  We don’t elect corporate representatives; they impose themselves on us for their reasons. Suppose they support communism and socialism; it’s for their good, not ours.  And suppose they fan the flames of insurrection from revolutionaries who would seem to be against them and everything they stand for. In that case, the Amazons’ strategy is to kill off competition who cannot withstand the vigor.  It is war; it’s a war against every one of us. Its war against rivals in business.  Its war against the governments of the world mired in chaos and stagnation.  The subject of my new book, and it’s all covered in the glory of villainy, unleashed in raw form for heroics to clash with and destroy to correct malice.  But before we can do anything like that, we have to identify the villains and show them justice for their actions of insurrection. 

The way the big companies plan to divert their insurgents into collapsing all competition which is how Amazon is doing it, is to appease the radical political elements of our day and to play them against those opposed.  They show support for liberal causes, such as the Green New Deal, which will crush smaller companies with compliance costs.  In that way, Amazon protects itself from new-age competition, calls off the dogs in any legislature from forced mandates and unneeded rules, and then stuffs money in the pockets of the lackluster politicians. They need their war chests filled by donors.  It’s not the nations of the world we must be concerned with; it’s the corporations that have taken those governments over.  This falls right in line with the contents of my book, ironically. If you are going to reform businesses from liberal activism, we all count on expanding our economy. The same strategies would undo the corruptive influence that corporations have on our governments, and thus, all our lives.   

Oh, if there is one thing I do love in the world, it’s corporations and the creations that come from wealth and influence.  I have no problem with corporations and wealth creation at all; in fact, I’d like to see a lot more of it.  But, and this is a big “but” I do not want them ruling our world.  Free market opportunities can lead, but I’m not too fond of the board of directors at Amazon or Apple deciding how we govern our nations to protect themselves from changes to their industrious efforts.  I am not anti-corporation, far from it.  And I make that clear in my book as well.  I want all companies and corporations to do better.  But they are not allowed to rule our lives as they plan to.  Ironically, many of these questions were asked and answered during the period of Westward Expansion.  In the age of the gunfighters so we know what to do and how to do it.  We lack the understanding to recognize the need for action, which then requires us to look at a period when we did know.  Before we can fight this war, people individually need to prop themselves up with some contextual history about how one individual can have a massive impact on the world.  That the collectivism that has been taught over the last 150 years has intentionally misled with aggressive ways of war to undo our Republic by many jealous factions everywhere in the world. 

I’ve been thinking about this topic for years, but it was only after the election of 2020 that I contacted my publisher and told them what I wanted to do with the book.  We put it on the fast track, and it will be out later this summer.  So, in a lot of ways, I felt that now was the time to have this discussion, and it’s better to give people a way to solve the problem than simply saying to the world that we see the problem, but are unable to do anything about it.  Solutions with identification are always good.  But it’s not just me seeing that there is a need to unravel the political power that corporations now have in the world and what historical need there is to undo that power.  We all have a role to play, but I think what many people do need is a map of how to do it.  And that’s what the Gunfighter’s Guide is ultimately going to provide.  Suppose Lean Manufacturing can help a company solve problems and get to a root cause analysis. In that case, the Gunfighter’s Guide will help people understand the psychology behind those root causes and allow for solutions at that enterprise level. All these corporations hide their malicious intent for global domination.  Whether it’s a dusty street in 1870, or a modern metropolis full of blue state governors and mayors, the villains always hide just outside of town and spread their terror indirectly from the shadows.  And it is there that we must root them out into the light of day to separate corporations from our government and to restore to our Republic our control over our nation.  If corporations want to do business with us, they better learn that it is us they serve.  Not the other way around. 

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=FUwbbCpIjT


Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.
http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Biden’s Theft of a Trump Issue: Removing troops from Afghanistan is all about cover-up

As I have been pointing out, Democrats are simply looters who steal other people’s ideas to cover for their massive corruption.  They certainly have done this with the racism issue, which is exclusively their problem.  They created it.  And they are and have been for decades involved in the cover-up.  Now that they have a disastrous first quarter of a Biden first term, they are looking to steal another Trump idea, the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.  Of course, for Trump’s original targets of getting America out of Afghanistan, he knew that the support for the long 20-year war chasing after a fake Taliban threat was to support a military-industrial complex and economy of defense spending. Suggesting that the moment US Troops would leave, that Afghanistan would fall into chaos is just another lie.  It was a lie created on behalf of perpetually keeping wars going so that investors could know where to spend their money to make millions then donate that money to the politicians who made it all happen to begin with.  There was never a goal of the Afghanistan War.  It was simply to send troops somewhere to do something while the drug trade flourishes around the world from the inhospitable country intent to poison the world with its narcotics products. It was never about terrorism.  The terrorism created the urgency to do something in that region that could justify spending massive amounts of money on feeling good about something. 

Yet, it’s a great example that the government cannot be trusted by the voters who put them in office.  All you need to do is compare how politicians reacted to Trump wanting to withdraw from Afghanistan and then their very passive and even supportive reaction to Joe Biden wishing to do the same.  Of course, Republicans are against the idea.  They were when Trump wanted to do it, and they don’t like it that Biden wants to, although they are much less vocal about it ironically.  But it’s Democrats who have been most notably schizophrenic about it.  That shouldn’t be a surprise.  However, it does provide a noticeable difference.  In 2020, as Trump was speaking about withdrawing from Afghanistan, the world was coming to an end.  Now fast forward into the first quarter of 2021, suddenly America has been there for over 20 years, and now its time to bring them home.  Democrats like the idea, and so does the media.  Strange how that happens. 

It would be nice if Democrats were sincere about their cares for the troops, but as we all know, that isn’t the reason.  Instead, Democrats under the Biden administration have put themselves in a lot of trouble.  The Hunter Biden story didn’t have long legs, and Democrats need a diversion from their intentions of court-packing.  High taxes on infrastructure, their full embrace of the communist Green New Deal.  The war that is brewing with Ukraine and Russia, think about that one. The Biden’s have business payoffs from Ukraine, and Democrats have used Russia as the excuse for how Trump managed to break through the political firewall of global cabals who try to run all politics through financial support.  And now Russia knows the Biden administration is compromised and weak.  They dance from the fingers of China, whom Russia has now aligned themselves with, so no matter how much money from Ukraine the Bidens have received, the new administration can’t afford to put its foot down.  Russia knows it.  Yet Democrats continue to talk about how Russia compromised Trump for help in getting elected in 2016.  What they don’t tell you is that it was the Democrats who owe Russia for allowing themselves to be a punching bag of their incompetency while all this has been brewing.  And now for Russia, it’s payday.  They want Ukraine back. 

There is more corruption, too; people are not buying Covid anymore, so the Democrats lose that mask of panic which has allowed them to gain so much power.  Few people trust the CDC anymore, which carried the Biden administration back to a mock election.  And the corporate commanders at Twitter and Facebook are losing their grip on information flow.  Conservative outlets are coming on now; we are not all one country.  Liberals have their entertainment.  Conservatives have their own.  We all don’t share movies, sports, and television shows anymore.  Liberals have successfully, unintentionally, of course, driven a wedge in our entertainment culture, and people are on their separate sides now.  And those conservative sides aren’t buying the election fraud that took away their President in Trump.  People are very resentful of the role media played in stealing the election through many methods.  The Biden people know they are falsely elected and that there is tremendous pressure that much of the American population knows it.  So why not steal a Trump action with Afghanistan in hopes to heal the ill-will?  That is undoubtedly a factor in this withdrawal.

The Biden people are suffering through what it feels like to build a lie on top of a lie on top of a lie until the whole cake starts sliding off itself into collapse.  The Biden administration is a corporate concoction that thought it could rule by consensus and finance.  But what is now missing from the world is authentic leadership, the kind of leadership Trump brought to the presidency.  The world had been waiting for an opportunity toward corruption once again.  So, of course, they hated Trump and his voters.  They lied, cheated, and manipulated themselves back into power, and now they have it.  But, they have to live up to the promises, and they are collapsing under the pressure of needed performance, and they can’t do it.  All they can do is copy off what was working and hope people stop looking at them. 

That’s what everyone needs to know about the Afghanistan withdrawal plans.  It’s as phony as the Biden administration is.  If anybody cared to withdraw from Afghanistan, they would have done it during the eight years that Obama was in office.  But of course, Republicans got their industrial complex concerns addressed with the continued war, and Democrats were able to protect the drug trade in that country from poisoning the world under the protection of the US military.  Everyone was happy until that mean old Trump came along and wanted to take the troops out of the politics, and the world threatened to meltdown in reaction.  However, now that the shoe is on the other foot, Democrats need a diversion.  They hope that it will last longer than the pornography of the President’s son plastered all over the internet with his weiner hanging out and displaying his decaying teeth destroyed by drug abuse.   That is, after all, what kind of product comes out of President Biden.  His son is a perfect caricature of his corrupt life, and now we are supposed not to see those things as all their plans came apart so soon in the new administration.  These are, after all, not the days of old where empty promises would be enough.  These days, especially after Trump, people expect results.  Instead, all they have so far is a disaster of an administration, and pulling the troops out of Afghanistan won’t cover that up. 

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=FUwbbCpIjT


Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.
http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Merits of Dueling

The Merits of Dueling:

As I have said, I have been working on a new book called the Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and I’m about halfway through it.  For my readers of a long time here who have been sending me a lot of emails missing the daily articles, they will return.  But I offer this little sample of this “gunfighter” project to give a taste of what is to come.

The concept of getting “satisfaction” from a personal insult went a long way to establishing honor and proper conduct among business transactions, in the time before modern rules as we know them today. As we have seen often where various religions and their value are not unified, and therefore cannot be expected to hold up in a court of law, there needs to be a mechanism that brings about honor and to hold it into the context of moral conduct where villainy will quickly grow like a weed in a garden of dreams. Dueling in the classic sense, especially in the New World during the time of the American Revolution was an answer to this problem. And if there is an argument against the American Constitution for changes, it was in the original rules of the nation that mechanisms of honor were already established before the courts were needed.

In doing business in the orient, particularly in Japan where honor is still a respected trait, business transactions are accelerated because the interactions mean something with one another. This is obvious at the airports around Tokyo among men and women as respect is a universal language that makes interactions between people start on common ground. In the West we have allowed our own culture of respect to drift away into the more centralized regulation of the state which outlawed the practice of dueling essentially so that lawyers could profit off the instillation of justice. The cost was that individual satisfaction for an insult did not get the respect it deserved while the emphasis was on protecting society from itself by settling matters in a court of law. This has led our culture to adapt into a more passive aggressive society where trust isn’t always easy to find in other people. It could be argued that we were all better off when we tried to openly kill each other to protect a slight against our individual names.

Dueling was so common at the start of America that the governor of South Carolina wrote a book on it to make sure everyone did it right called The Code of Honor: Or Rules for the Government of Principals and Second in the Art of Dueling in 1834 by John Lyde Wilson. Dueling in the time of the Revolutionary War was quite common. While it was slowly going out of style at the start of the invention of a republic form of federal government once George Washington took office, in the South, particularly in Charleston, South Carolina where so many important battles occurred in defining freedom during the start of the new nation, dueling was so common that the governor felt compelled to create some legal means of settling disputes, which sounds barbaric compared to our modern legal system, but in hindsight seemed to generate more responsible people on an individual level. This certainly helped in business commerce, because if a business deal went bad, the parties may find themselves in the streets fighting to the death to obtain their satisfaction.

The important aspect of satisfaction is that the emphasis was on the individual reputations of the participants. It wasn’t some third party “state” that decided justice, it was the people at the heart of the conflict, and in many ways, society was more honorable. People had to treat each other individually better as a result. The more the states intruded on management of the affairs of people the more passive aggressive disputes have become leaving business conduct to suffer greatly. After the Civil War it was particularly immigrants from the South who moved West in search of gold and other opportunities, and they took with them the concept of dueling that had been very much a part of early American life. Dueling with fast draw had with it a way of bringing honor where there wasn’t yet law and it forced people to treat each other better and more honorably which is why there is still reverence for it.

At the state level we can all see today that the concept of taking honor and responsibility for good conduct away from individuals has been a mistake. While dueling was a violent concept the amount of people who died from it were arguably much less frequent than the kind of violence we see in modern times. That is why thinking in the way of the gunfighter is better than in the modern context of leaving disputes to be settled by those not directly responsible for the conduct, such as lawyers and the state as a legal entity. These days instead of getting satisfaction for an honor tainted we say “see you in court” instead of settling the matter right then and there. Then of course those who can pay for the best lawyer become the winners in most cases and the state enjoys the revenue and job opportunities that come from settling disputes. But what is lost is the individual responsibility for the actions taken and the merit of an honorable exchange. Taking the example of the famous duel between General Gladsten and General Howe in 1778, both Generals in the Revolution and were in a dispute over troop possession. They took to the streets of Charleston, South Carolina where many such duels were taking place at the time and when the time came stared each other down waiting for the other to make a move. After taunting each other for a good bit of time finally General Howe fired his pistol and clipped the ear of Gladsten. Gladsten in response, who was thought to be the John Adams of the south and inventor of the famous “Don’t Tread on Me” flag deliberately fired his shot into the ground inviting Howe to try again. Eventually the two men shook hands and that settled their dispute with only a minor injury occurring to Gladsten’s ear. Otherwise, the business between two major Revolutionary War figures was settled respectfully, something that certainly wouldn’t have occurred if the two had fought it out in court with lawyers acting as their pistols and fancy words spoken in legal jargon as bullets.

The point of the matter is not that dueling is a desired trait, or even that we should bring it back in the form that it was. Killing another person isn’t a desirable outcome for any dispute, but the finality of it tended to put in the participant’s minds the seriousness of an issue and this mindset certainly set the West and its expansion ablaze with activity that couldn’t have been regulated by any legal system at the rate that human ambition was expanding at the time. Honor was preserved by the potential for dueling and this threat allowed for proper respect when a nation needed it most. We could learn a lot from this period today where honor among business transactions is desperately lacking, particularly within the American borders. Other countries have their honor driven rituals and it is noticeable during business transactions. In the United States however, we have allowed our laws to be governed by lawyers and judges who take away the responsibility for personal conduct and place it in the hands of the state, and many of our businesses have followed. The impact has been a loss in honor among business interactions that has not been desirable. Yet honor could be restored if only we stepped back into hindsight and dusted off the values that did emerge from dueling and upgraded that sentiment for our modern needs which starts in thinking like a gunfighter.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.