Kash is Coasting
Never press a soldier whose temper is keen.
A dozen miles north of perhaps the most magical area of Texas, along the westbound side of the ever-busy Interstate 40 and almost precisely in line with Rick Husband Airport’s 4100-meter runway, a 20-foot cowboy oversees the entrance to a famous hotel and restaurant with a remarkable feature.
It’s not the Western film set fascades of the buildings and their bright colors, nor the big letters spelling out the name of the establishment. It’s not even the absolutely huge (think heating oil delivery truck) steer guarding the front doors, or whatever the hell is happening with this display.
No. It’s none of that.
What this place is famous for is the proposition it makes to every potential customer, the challenge it thrusts in the faces of every road-weary, starving driver along the interstate who glances over at one of its highway signs and wonders if they are one of the brave few who have what it takes to complete:
The challenge: You, and only you, eat every bit of that 72-ounce steak right there, plus all of the sides (salad, roll, shrimp cocktail, baked potato, etc.) in under 60 minutes, and it’s free.
FREE!
A 72-OZ STEAK! FREE!
However, if you fail, you must pay the $72 for the meal.
A food challenge is an advertising gimmick, and the Big Texan Steak Ranch has been offering their challenge since the 1960’s, so I assume it must work pretty well for them.
The setup is simple and easy to communicate. There’s symbolism laced in via the cowboy aesthetics, restaurant name, and its location. Words that naturally grab attention, like FREE and STEAK, are like beacons on signage. The fun-forward atmosphere that befits the exterior persists on the interior.
And this food challenge actually tastes great (as opposed to a food challenge that hits you with overly spiced or repulsive food).
It all works together with the meal on offer, touching on both culture and cuisine while also triggering a psychological temptation to engage in something like a game of one-upmanship.
Add in film, tv, plus social media, and you have a multiplied, distributed, and perpetual marketing machine that draws plenty of attention online, enhances brand, and, crucially, prompts many drivers to pull off of Interstate 40 and into the parking lot of The Big Texan.
Offering a “challenge” to a customer differs significantly from offering a discount. Instead of persuading the customer by offering 25% OFF or BOGO, prompting a value-based determination and hoping they decide it’s a “good deal” for them, you’re throwing ego into the mix and asking the customer to prove something about themselves to receive a prize.
(X number of dollars for Y amount of food and drink from Z location)
vs
(If I can do X for Y amount of food and drink from Z location, then not only is Y free, there is a bit of glory in the whole thing for yours truly)
Eat your fill, and then some; get your ego massaged; and pay nothing.
Well, for your meal anyway. You ain’t coming alone to this shindig.
Why am I writing to you about eating steaks in Amarillo, Texas?
Well, firstly, it’s because I’m homesick. But secondly, it’s because while watching parts of the Kash Patel confirmation hearing, it struck me that Kash, Gabbard, and a few other nominees are not targets for Senators—they are challenges.
Here’s President Trump’s Cabinet “menu.” Can you spot the “challenge meals?”
That’s his initial menu offerings, anyway. He’s made an edit or two since November.
(One edit I think was an intentional liquidation of a product line—*cough* Gaetz *cough*—that was bad for the overall business but needed to be sold off in a flashy rather than discreet way because it was, after all, a product line built on flashiness. And not much else. Anyway, that’s a side matter.)
For any “customer” who thinks they are up to it, be they Democrat, Republican, Independent, media, lobbyist, whatever, here is Trump’s challenge:
Defeat one of these people; prevent them from being confirmed; use whatever means are available to you; take your swipes inside and outside of the hearings, just take them down; and you will be rewarded immensely by the Anti-Trump Hydra. Political power, influence, and even leadership could be yours.
Imagine if any single Democrat was able to derail a nominee, such as with a devasting singular exchange in a hearing or with a small group of Dems pressing a line of attack repeatedly, break one of Trump’s big selections, like Gabbard, Bondi, or Hegseth. Imagine what a star an elected or media person would become on the Left. Instantly.
Fail though, and you pay politically, you enjoy no glory, you are not recognized or lauded, but instead, depending on the manner in which you ultimately failed the challenge, a severe blowback could now derail YOUR political career—not the nominee’s.
Upon first being introduced to The 72-ounce Steak Challenge earlier in this article, most readers were (hopefully) amused but not all that interested in actually attempting it. “Ha.” They might have said to themselves.
A smaller group allowed a moment of temptation before quickly sobering their thoughts. They started to tell themselves, “Hey, I bet I cou…” then stopped midsentence, tilted their head about 30 degrees, and uttered, “…nah.”
Another portion of readers, though, licked their lips, considered the magnitude of their appetite for steak, the volume of their gut, and gripped, if only for a minute or two, an initial thought that rapidly morphed into a personal challenge pretending to be a declaration:
“I could totally do that.”
In their minds, they, for a moment, saw themselves as this guy.
And then, as it dawned on them just how much food it actually was, they realized that even if they could eat it all and do so in under an hour, they would most likely end up looking more like this guy when the napkin was finally tossed on the plate and calf-rope called.
And then, a new set of challenges would suddenly and irreversibly be underway:
Can they keep it all down?
If yes, how miserable does keeping it down feel, and for how long will it feel that way?
If not, then where is the nearest restroom, and can they make it?
Can they afford the bill for the rest of the people at the table?
Can they pull their friend, who’s having way too good of a time right now, away from the bar and out the door before a brand new set of challenges are created for the group?
These difficulties, these risks, were not at all what the customer had under hat when they first took their seat and ordered The 72-ounce Steak Challenge. It’s all far more high stakes than advertised.
Or maybe it’s just this author who was temporarily charmed by the idea of a new chapter in his streaming career including a trip to the steak ranch and perhaps even being a 2025 inductee into the 72-ounce Steak Hall of Fame!
And like a hungry driver on I-40 scopes those 72-0unce steak signs leading into Amarillo, Texas, allowing himself a moment of fantasy, or like this podcaster just moments ago, it was Democrats and their media who were temporarily delighted by the idea of derailing Trump’s cabinet picks. Even before he was sworn in.
Trump gave their fantasy what it needed to feel like, even become a reality, and loyalty tested Senate Republicans right as their leadership changed from McConnell to Thune and dispatched a problem by letting it solve itself in an Icarus-like way, all at the same time.
From mid-November on, Democrats and media had their heads filled with delusions of handicapping the Trump administration.
However, by the time hearings began in mid-January, Democrats had lost their hope and appetite. Even as Kash Patel entered the chamber for his hearing, after weeks of media predictions that a fiery showdown with the sensational figure was inevitable, Senate Democrats were already publicly conceding that “it will be Mr. Patel” heading the FBI.
Halfway through the five-hour hearing even a member of their media acknowledged, “Kash is coasting.”
What happened?
First, the early announcements of the picks, particularly the provocative ones, encouraged political ammo expenditures that in the end were, for a variety of reasons, ineffective, i.e., failed to achieve any meaningful political damage whatsoever. As Dems retreated from the 2024 Election battlefield on which they suffered historic defeat, Trump kept them firing wildly, making what could have been a withdrawal more of a rout. Engaged, futilely, in politicking that missed the mark, and depriving them of bandwidth for post-defeat reflections.
“…an army is exposed to six several calamities, not arising from natural causes, but from faults for which the general is responsible. These are: (1) Flight; (2) insubordination; (3) collapse; (4) ruin; (5) disorganization; (6) rout.”
-Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Book 10. Terrain
“Rapidity is the essence of war.”
Secondly, like with the 72-ounce steak, taking on the “challenge meal” nominees is a far more daunting and high-risk endeavor than is advertised in media. Many of these nominees hold views that are popular with Democrat voters, removing a typically readily available angle of assault from the Dems and handing it to the most squishy and/or opportunistic of GOP Senators to pick up (thus revealing the perimeter of their fealty to Trump and America First).
Several of the nominees are incredibly savvy on camera and skilled in a verbal sparring match. Top-notch as far as those attributes go. So far, none have appeared anything other than at home on the political battlefield. Any challenger would need to match and best these pros.
“Do not pursue an enemy who simulates flight; do not attack soldiers whose temper is keen.”
Third, lessons learned from 2016.
“Senate Democrats staged dramatic showdowns to protest nominations during President-elect Donald Trump’s first term in office. This time around, Democrats are shifting tactics, reluctant to pick endless battles with Trump Cabinet picks that are unlikely to succeed.”
And fourth, survival instincts.
Imagine you and/or someone you know, possibly work with (or used to work with) in some capacity, brushed against something maybe not fully on the up and up. Within the last ten years perhaps. Like maybe something that is in some way related to this, or this, or this, or this, or this, or this. Or this.
And you are looking at materials like Kash’s book (PsyOps, ie- counter-propaganda, intimidation, demoralization) and Tulsi’s interviews, such as the one where she said Hillary Clinton was “the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of [] rot”, and you are reading and hearing promises of investigations, deep reforms, and reckonings.
You, as a U.S. Senator, are well aware that a cleansing is already well underway.
The day before Kash’s hearing, this happened.
Talk about preparing the battlespace!
Bondi, Patel, Ratcliffe, Hegseth… these are nominees who will continue to Drain the Swamp.
Would you be eager to irritate them with petty questions, clogging up their confirmation proceedings with what you know are low-percentage shots?
In the end, Dems and lo-fi Reps may be able to nosh some picks, Gabbard is reportedly in some peril as of writing, but no brave gourmand is on the road into town, let alone at the table, eager for steak.
There’s a fifth reason that elucidates why Trump and Senate Majority Leader Thune are able to move these polarizing picks through and will be able to get much more done over the next four years. Aside from the skillful deal making that is common to politics.
There’s something else. It’s perhaps the most important reason and one that I hope will take root. It’s been a theme throughout Trump’s Admins, but is not always easily perceived due to the intensity of the man, the narrative warfare, and the kayfabe that surrounds such things. It’s also unusual in American politics.
Coalition politics. In Trump’s version, this manifest as an up scaling of the Scaramucci-model. He applies this model broadly, from cabinet picks, to endorsements, legislation, and foreign policy.
Such temporary arrangements are only possible because President Trump and his team understand the terrain.
“The natural formation of the country is the soldier's best ally; but a power of estimating the adversary, of controlling the forces of victory, and of shrewdly calculating difficulties, dangers and distances, constitutes the test of a great general.
He who knows these things, and in fighting puts his knowledge into practice, will win his battles. He who knows them not, nor practices them, will surely be defeated…
The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.”
Thanks for reading.
Support links:
Coffee—click here.
Just Human Merch—click here.
Benson’s Honey Farm affiliate link: click here.
Bootleg Products affiliate link: click here.
Manly Cans affiliate link—click here.
To find all of my links in one place, click here.
I actually spent two weeks in Amarillo at the Texas Ranch RV park last November. But we don't eat out much so no steak for us. I like how you said Trump putting his nominees up early kind of prepped things, I was wondering about that. I agree on the sacrifice, so to speak, of Gaetz and I love the confirmation that these picks will continue draining the Swamp. I found Devolution early and totally believed in the idea that Trump, and a military faction was always in control, and it kept me calm and comforted. Now I see Trump 2.0 and I love it! And, I love your writing. I get good solid Kyle here and, for me, it's a perfect Kyle. Thanks for being you. Your intelligence, integrity and authenticity are refreshing and welcomed in this chaotic world we're in. God bless you Kyle.
Great analogy Kyle! Love your “beef” with this cattle herd of bovines we are witnessing.