Category: Covid-19

The Woke Museums of Washington D.C.: Why the Museum of the Bible is different

I’m sure I will visit the new museum that just opened in Cairo, Egypt, which cost over a spectacular $ 1 billion.  I love museums and have been to several around the world.  They are to me like books that tell a story about a significant moment in history, and there are always interesting things to consider in the context of a museum that assembles information to put forth a point of view.  I’m sure the new one in Egypt will be fantastic.  However, in that context, the Museum Center in Cincinnati, I think, is great as well, and it’s a place I like to visit frequently for many of the same reasons.  However, for me personally, the Museum of the Bible is a very special place in Washington, D.C., and one of my favorite destinations.  There are many great museums in Washington, D.C., including the Smithsonian and the National Geographic Museum, both of which are located there.  So when President Trump called out the various woke museums like the Smithsonian as targeted to change their ways as part of his reform of Washington D.C. culture, what is he talking about?  And I would point to the Museum of the Bible as the answer, as it was created by very passionate people, such as the ownership of Hobby Lobby and many others, who put forth a lot of effort to make the place really something special.  But why was it so much better than the other area museums for which Washington, D.C. is known?  Well, it all comes down to wokeness and how modern political spins on information provided tend to water down the experience for everyone.  And people don’t like it.  However, the Museum of the Bible is remarkably free of any woke influences, and this is noticeable upon entering and leaving, a place that has truly captured the spirit of what a museum should be and the impact a good one can have on visitors. 

The Museum of the Bible is just a few blocks away from Capitol Hill and the Mall, home to many well-known museums.  But on the way to it, when walking through the parking garage just to the west of the main entrance, a woman of color was in the elevator with my wife and me, and she noticed a particular glow of enthusiasm from us, and she asked about it.  “You guys are going to the Museum of the Bible,” she asked, smiling.  “Well, yes, we are as a matter of fact,” I said.  “How did you know?”  She was smiling, but she was a rough-looking, large woman with neck tattoos who looked like she had been living in an urban jungle for quite some time.  However, she said that the Museum of the Bible was her favorite place and that she was happy for us to experience it.  Now this wasn’t just a bunch of people happy about a museum dedicated to a religious experience.  The Museum of the Bible is dedicated to the most significant literary achievement ever produced on earth.  But it’s the way it’s presented that carries the most significance toward lasting appeal and makes it more than just another museum for most people.  I was very impressed with it.  It wasn’t trying to convince me of anything, as most museums saturated with wokeness do.  It was just proud of what it was, and it offered to let people share in that pride without pretension.  It enables you to enjoy it for all its glory without further explanation. 

And that’s what makes The Museum of the Bible special: it lacks woke references.  It wasn’t about being close to God or unashamed of biblical references that the outside world might attempt to impose on free minds.  It was authentic and put together with a genuine love of the subject, and was just a bit more than the usual museum because of it.  The displays are good, but more than that, the architecture, down to the kind of paint used, was very well put together.  The people working there came across as genuinely loving the place; they weren’t just workers fulfilling mandates for a paycheck.  I also noticed that the museum in the basement of the Capitol Building had just been reopened, and it was really good, which surprised me coming out of a recent Biden administration where wokeness was a big issue.  It was a nice museum, and my wife and I spent a lot of time there watching votes from the House on the big screens in real time.  It was put together well by people obviously passionate about the subject matter.  So the common theme here is not religious, but passion.  And once propaganda of a modern political nature is infused into the subject, people have a natural revulsion to it.  That is one of the significant criticisms of the Smithsonian and National Geographic, which have been trying to present a Charles Darwin view of science, despite evidence pointing to many other contributing factors.  It’s the authenticity of the presentation that elevates sentiment to a higher status.  And woke presentations that are filled with modern political propaganda are something that people naturally reject.  Evidence is what museums put forth.  However, interpreting that evidence in a way that advances a political narrative, if the public is not naturally inclined to agree, is a sure way to push people away, which is what has recently happened to Cracker Barrel and many other trusted commercial endeavors that have tried to embrace woke trends.  The public naturally rejects them.

The Smithsonian and National Geographic are both dedicated to science, which I love to see.  But they are terribly woke and progressive.  And the Smithsonian has been accused of censoring evidence, such as the massive amount of evidence that giant skeletons in the mounds of North America indicate a society that predates what many call Native Americans.  The real native Americans go back much further than the Indians of modern politics, and people can smell a phony that the Smithsonian is trying to steer evidence toward a political sentiment, and that is the case that America was built on stolen land from indigenous people.  And rather than let the evidence tell the story for itself, the museum tells you a fake story, and you are supposed to accept it.  And museums that push civil rights issues from a Democrat perspective, when it was Democrats who were slave owners and it was Republicans who stopped slavery, come across as phony because the material presented attempts to glaze over the facts that are culturally well known.  And that is why woke doesn’t work and why Trump is pushing woke behavior away from everything he can, especially woke museums like the Smithsonian.  America has a rich history, and museums should tell the story without the desire to steer the public in a direction that validates certain political views.  If there were giants on Earth in the form of very tall people, predating what we call “Indians,” then let’s discuss that and examine the evidence.  However, suppose we propose something that contradicts logic. In that case, the public will be uncomfortable and even resistant to enjoying it, which is the problem with ‘woke’ everywhere it is presented, in music, movies, restaurants, and even museums.  Wokeness as a propaganda tool was never going to work, and when we see things like The Museum of the Bible, which is wonderfully woke-free, we reward them with our time and attention.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Jennifer Gross Goes to Washington: The importance of redistricting

When I say that Jennifer Gross is not very well-liked, I mean it in the manner of a compliment.  I think it’s a great asset to have people who don’t like you or who are very angry when your name is brought up.  Many people certainly dislike President Trump.  And I would say that I am one of the most hated people in the world.  People typically like you when you do what they want you to do, and their acceptance of you in some way is the way they gain leverage over your authenticity.  So, that makes Jennifer Gross an effective politician in a dynamic intellectual sense, where a static order has to compete, and they don’t like it.  In Ohio, Jennifer is my Representative in the 45th district, and she works hard to do so; I appreciate people who work hard.  And in the course of that work, she found herself in Washington, D.C. with Lee Zeldon, director of the EPA under Trump’s administration, asking questions directly to him about an issue I have been very concerned with regarding the EPA.  I would say that among Trump supporters and people who dislike RINOs, Jennifer Gross is very popular, so it depends on the crowd and what they want out of relationships, which often determines likeability.  I believe cordial relationships can be a liability.  However, it was interesting to hear about Jennifer’s trip to Washington, D.C., where she met with several Trump administration officials, including RFK, over MAHA issues.  So, once her plan was in place, Jennifer and I discussed a number of topics that we would typically talk about.  However, for this audience, I happened to record it so that others could share in the experience.  And, as much as I am concerned about the EPA issue, the conversation we had, which came straight from the Trump administration, was about the need for redistricting. 

The primary thing that Jennifer wanted to tell me about the Trump administration was that they weren’t a bunch of phonies.  The people working for Trump were all successful individuals in their own right, who could take or leave other politicians.  Jennifer can relate because she has always been very independent when it comes to politics, and that makes it hard for her to deal with when it comes to deal-making.  Much of politics is a collaborative effort, and I know several people I would call good friends who spend a lot of time collaborating with other politicians, only to accomplish a fraction of their wants and needs individually.  But that’s part of the process, and one of the reasons I thought the Trump presidency would be a good thing was his self-control over his wealth and ability to walk away from anything he didn’t like.  And his administration is very much the real deal, and Jennifer was pleased to report that they were not a bunch of phonies like we often learn people really are once these political campaigns are over.  So she couldn’t wait to tell me how authentic people like Lee Zeldon, Secretary Kennedy, and Commerce Secretary Lutnick were in real life.  It’s not usual to have people like this in any administration, and to meet them in real life after the honeymoon is over for Trump, doing everyday work, it was good to hear that they are everything they say they are.  Politically, many people dislike them as well, but, as all successful people must learn, that comes with the territory. 

The primary concern on everyone’s mind is the fairness of redistricting, so that Republicans can have more seats in Congress.  There are a few that we can pick up in Ohio, and several other states. The Trump administration is playing hardball on this issue, as it should.  Trump is right, Republicans should not play nice with Democrats over any election issues.  If we genuinely want a representative republic, which is what we are, we must trust the American people to choose who they want to represent them.  Not what a party wants us to adopt for their convenience.  That’s where things get tricky with playing nice to get along, and being a stick to poke in the eye of those who are too quick to compromise.  My point in the matter is that there is room for people like Jennifer Gross in politics and room for plenty of mainstreamers who enjoy the process of collaboration, if we didn’t have such a close margin of majorities.  I think that if we had guarded our elections more closely, there would be 60-plus Republican votes in the Senate and over +50 in Congress.  It is only close in America because of election fraud, and Democrat gerrymandering for many years has given them the appearance of a 50/50 country, when actually it’s a long way from being so.  Democrats are a minority party at best, filled with misfits and broken toys.  It’s one thing to have compassion for their poor state.  It’s quite another to have them destroy our entire society to appear fair.  In Ohio, there are 15 congressional seats, and Republicans have 10 of them.  There are opportunities in Ohio to improve upon that, and without question, Republicans should.  Don’t listen to the cries of Democrats, play hardball and defeat them everywhere. 

And if we did that, as Republicans, the world would be a lot better off.  As Jennifer and I discussed after her trip to Washington, fairness, or the appearance of it, often leads to inauthentic corruption, and righteous representation usually falls by the wayside as people who pay money for representation in the form of lobbyists end up running our government from the shadows.  And that is what we have been trying to get away from.  It’s what I always hoped would be the case from independently wealthy people like Trump, Secretary Lutnick, Zeldon, and Kennedy —that they would do the job for the right reasons. They could make a lot of money if they weren’t in politics.  However, as successful people, they can best represent the public that needs it.  And through redistricting, we can elect more people like that in the future, which would properly represent our actual society.  We don’t have an obligation to play nice with people who want to destroy our country.  And we owe Democrats no illusion of fairness.  If we can secure an additional 20 seats for the 2026 midterms, then let’s do it.  Meanwhile, it’s good to hear that Jennifer was being treated with sincerity by the Trump administration and that doing the right things for the right reasons was more than just an empty promise by politicians who usually disappoint us.  If too many people like you, that’s usually a bad sign, and that’s the case in any level of society.  And the Trump administration couldn’t care less; they can afford to be independent of such popularity concerns.  And because of that, they can actually accomplish some things.  Based on Jennifer’s report, they are willing to do the work and are solid in the promise category.  And these days, that is a scarce commodity.  One area we could significantly improve if we were more aggressive with redistricting. 

Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Cracker Barrel Remarketing Plan Was A Horrible Decision: Betting on the wrong horse, which the Board who hired Julie Felss Masino certainly did

I think there needs to be context to this whole Cracker Barrel thing and the hiring of Julie Felss Masino, the CEO who has caused so much trouble.  The board of Cracker Barrel Old Country Store Inc. consists of a board of directors that includes, Carl Berquist, Chairman a former Marriott CFO with decades of financial experience, Jody Bilney who just joined in 2022 and as previously a senior executive at Humana and Bloomin’ Brands, Steve Bramlage, just elected to the board in May of 2025 and current CFO at Casey’s General Stores, Gilbert Davaila who joined in 2020 and runs a multicultural marketing firm and has Disney experience, John Garratt, who joined in 2023 and is the former CFO and president at Dollar General, Michael Goodwin, who joined in 2024 and was a retired PetSmart tech executive with cybersecurity expertise, Cheryl Henry who joined in 2024 and is the former CEO of Ruth’s Chris Steak House.  Julie Felss Masino, the current CEO, was appointed to the board in November 2023, and Gisel Ruiz joined in 2020 as a former executive from Walmart and Sam’s Club.  Since 2019, traffic through Cracker Barrel restaurants has been down 20%. They have never fully recovered from their previous pandemic numbers, and this very woke board obviously wanted to try to boost sales and freshen things up to recover that lost traffic, which they thought was dying off.  A large portion of the Cracker Barrel customer base is literally aging out and dying off, and young people have not replaced them.  This group of characters set out to figure out how to return to the good old days and attract new customers.  Hiring Masino, who had 30 years of experience, including leading Taco Bell’s international growth to over 1000 locations, and had roles at Starbucks, which made her what they thought of as a good fit for driving innovation to the Cracker Barrel brand, came in with a lot of ideas that the customers just don’t like.   

So, it’s not enough to blame the current CEO of Cracker Barrel for the truly radical makeover that Old Country Stores have been experiencing.  Changing the paint scheme of the traditionally log cabin look of the restaurants from dark brown to a kind of soft white was a bad start.  And the interior decorating, rooted in tradition, was not a good move because it took away the ‘going to Grandma’s house’ kind of vibe that made going to Cracker Barrel while traveling far from home such a positive experience.  Comments about the Country Store entrance being less congested with stuff have fallen into the joke category because the response is that the store is less crowded. After all, it has fewer customers, and as a result, that’s what’s going to happen to the Cracker Barrel brand now that they have the perception of going woke.  So of course it’s less crowded.  I assess that Cracker Barrel hired too many woke individuals and let them onto the board, and that they are getting what they deserve.  That cast of characters, the Board at Cracker Barrel, mostly come from very woke backgrounds, and people of tradition would reject any change they would make. They underestimated what their real problems were.  Many companies have yet to recover to pre-pandemic levels, which is something that we don’t discuss nearly enough. The answer that people trained in woke leadership, who are often the who’s who of corporate America, are not intellectually equipped to deal with the real problem.  In the case of Cracker Barrel, they are pricing themselves out of the market.  I go there frequently, and I can’t make a stop without spending $100 to $200 with my family every time.  And the price of the food should be around 30% less than that. 

Most of Cracker Barrel’s customer base is blue-collar and does not have a lot of money to spend on price increases, which is one reason for their declining traffic.  Financially, they are in trouble, with revenue at $3.47 billion but a net income of only $40.9 million.  And this overhaul, which has sparked widespread anger, will cost $700 million through 2027, with $180 million allocated through 2025 alone.  This is a board of directors that bet big on the wrong attributes and now their mistake is going to cost them tragically.  They have now far bigger problems than just some bad press.  They picked the wrong things to stimulate their customer base, which was obvious when Julie Felss Masino tried to go on Good Morning America and say that Cracker Barrel wasn’t going away, they still had the fireplace, the rocking chairs on the front porch, and the little triangle game to play while everyone waits for their food.  If those are the things she thinks Cracker Barrel is to customers, then she wildly missed the mark, and based on their financials, it’s a gamble that Cracker Barrel couldn’t afford to misdiagnose.  Cracker Barrel hired Masino to do just what she is doing.  The problem is that they all missed the heart of the real problem and pushed away their old audience in favor of a new one that would reject the product anyway.  Young people from many broken homes do not have traditional experiences with grandmas’ house, as previous generations did, so they are not attracted to the family tradition appeal.  However, many of them wanted that experience, and for them, going to Cracker Barrel was the only way they could achieve it. 

Many of those board members had no idea that Trump would be elected as president in 2024.  These decisions to change all these Cracker Barrel stores were already in place when he stepped back into the White House.  So, to the minds of many corporate types, nobody could have predicted that America was going to turn so hard toward the MAGA political movement.  Nobody really knew what was going to happen.  Well, I take that back a bit.  I knew what was going to happen.  But very few people listened much to their doom.  I predicted everything 100% correct, just for the record.  And if Cracker Barrel’s Board had listened, they would not be in the trouble they are in now.  The best thing for them to do would have been to dig into their traditional appeal and openly cater to the MAGA political base, because those are their customers.  To regain 20% of the lost customers from 2019, it’s essential to focus on pricing and expansion among conservative types who cannot afford to dine at the restaurant while traveling.  Going for a new demographic group was not the right move here.  And now, because they have adopted the woke approach, which many of the board members are trained to be very woke, and they hired their CEO to embrace the Biden and Obama-era political movements, they are getting what they thought they would.  But people don’t like it.  And there is no way to repair that now.  Once you lose a brand, such as what Disney is currently experiencing, and many other companies that have aligned themselves incorrectly with the MAGA movement and Trump as an America First president, you can never truly regain it.  And Cracker Barrel will lose a lot more than 20% of its customer base.  With a profit of only $45 million to deal with, they don’t have enough margin to lose 1% more.  So this reaction to their marketing plan to overhaul their image is much more disastrous than the media is reporting.  And it’s a shame because I have liked Cracker Barrel more than any other brand in that market sector.  But, I will find other alternatives, just as many others will too.  This was a poor decision by the Cracker Barrel Board to be so tone-deaf about changing political circumstances.  They bet on the wrong horse and will now lose big. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Real History of Göbekli Tepe: Trying to fit the evidence to a previous narrative

This is a widespread problem in all professional fields.  What we are seeing these days from the field of archaeology is certainly not unusual.  However, the story surrounding Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, the ancient Neolithic site dating back to approximately 9600-7000 BCE, is at the center of a lot of conversation that reveals many mistakes regarding the study of the human race.  The problem is that the site predates any other known human site in the world in a sophisticated manner, and appears to be something not unusual, overturning many of our previous assumptions about the evolution of our species by many years.   And Gobekli Tepe isn’t the only place like it; there are other sites nearby that are just as old and just as sophisticated.  So I was curious at the beginning of August 2025 when Josh Gates from Expedition Unknown covered the ancient site on his television show.  I have always liked Josh Gates, and when he’s in town for one of his live shows, I like to take my daughters to see him.  However, to have a mainstream show on television, Josh has turned more toward mainstream ideas about science than toward what is called pseudoscience, where people question, with great speculation, the established opinions of academia.  Gobekli Tepe certainly challenges this assumption, because we know the dates of the site, we can see how articulate the stone work is for a group of people who were supposedly hunters and gatherers, and we know that the site as it is now in Turkey is a tiny part of a much larger complex, much of it still underground.  The answers to many questions about Göbekli Tepe still need to be uncovered in the surrounding hills, but for some reason, Archaeologists have limited themselves to the same portion of the discovered site and used that minimal knowledge to tell the complete story.  So, yes, given all the controversy, I was curious to see how Josh Gates would handle it. 

For a qualifier, I don’t like to trash archaeologists.  I am glad they work hard and dig in the ground to provide us with evidence to discuss.  I am not shy about it, but my favorite organization in the world is the Biblical Archaeology Society, which publishes the Biblical Archaeology Review magazine.  I find it fascinating to see evidence for the validation of events from the Bible, the most essential piece of literature the human race has ever produced.   And to watch various groups dispute, or use that evidence to validate their religious perspectives.  I love archaeologists because they dig in the dirt, analyze data, and reveal new things about the world.  However, I also don’t like the term ‘pseudoscience,’ which is often applied to Graham Hancock and others who question the established narrative presented by institutionalized science.  I think that archaeology and anthropology, as general fields of endeavor, are too young to be conclusive about anything.  Just over one hundred years is not enough time to do anything, so defending conclusions from the field of archaeology is ridiculous.  We have only just begun to dig in the world, and there is still a lot of evidence that we will yet discover.  So conclusions about anything at all are premature at this point.  The story will continue to evolve as new information becomes available, which we find out all the time.  Gobekli Tepe is just the tip of a lot more hidden below the surface, all over the world.  We tend to see a lot more archaeology in the Holy Land region, which is where Göbekli Tepe is located, because of the Bible.  I think there are sites older around the world that we don’t yet know about because nobody is looking for them.  They look in the Bible land because of the Bible.  However, similar sites are likely in China, Russia, and all over South America.  And likely, when we reach Mars, we will find archaeology there too. 

My rule of thumb for analyzing data from the archaeological community is based on James Frazer’s excellent book, The Golden Bough.  The 12-volume set, which evolved into two enormous volumes, was a magnificent contribution to the early field of anthropology, spanning approximately from 1890 to 1923.  It was the study of global culture and its use of magic and religion to navigate existence, and it essentially laid the groundwork for the fields of anthropology and archaeology.  The study of human cultures was significantly better before institutionalized science attempted to confine it within a box, and that is the problem with all static cultures when dynamic ideas are introduced.  But I judge scientists in these fields by their knowledge of that large book by Frazer.  I’ve read it many times and it’s one of my favorites.  It answers many questions that were hard to get at the time the book was written, for instance, why do headhunters seek to steal the head of their neighbors and eat their bodies?  Or why are kings sacrificed through ritual regicide once they lose their powers of youth?  Understanding these kinds of things, of course, carries over into our modern world, from psychology to politics.  Understanding why people do what they do is crucial to grasping the fundamentals of human existence.  And in management cultures, even when managing a McDonald’s drive-thru, understanding human behavior is the key to success.

So it was painful to watch Josh Gates try to take what is known about Göbekli Tepe and fit everything into the academic box of hunters and gatherers, because archaeologists have already established a timeline of discovery, and with Göbekli Tepe, they were purposefully trying to fit the evidence into the assumption, rather than the other way around.  That’s why I like old books like Frazer’s over modern work.  Because when the field of anthropology was established, it was done so with a great deal of human imagination and ambition attached to it.  However, once we institutionalize that information, it loses its authenticity and becomes part of a corrupt static order, which is what we find in the Gobekli Tepe case.  The answers are in digging the whole hill, which will tell everyone most of the answers they want to know.  However, because there is an apparent fear that what they will discover will destroy their institutionalized status, they are not digging in those areas and instead try to plant trees over those sites to prevent future excavation.  So, rather than trying to understand what Gobekli Tepe is, mainstream archaeologists, including Josh Gates on the Discovery Channel, are trying to fit what they know into what they want it to be.  Which is just as ridiculous as what we saw during COVID with the mask policy, where we were told to stop the spread, yet we had to wear a mask.  The game is about accepting an authority figure’s opinions over the flighty assumptions of the casual observer.  Because there is power in defining the truth, and that holds even when we are talking about presenting evidence that might run counter to previous assumptions, which gives the people who provided it power over their sector of society.  So it was fascinating to watch.  I enjoyed the broadcast.  However, the answer to Gobekli Tepe and other sites in the region is that there is much more to the story, just waiting to be uncovered.  And rather than concluding that it was hunters and gatherers who built the site, the evidence suggests a much older human race that was more sophisticated.  And if we want to know the truth, we should withhold our opinions until we gather all the evidence.  Anything else would be premature.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Government Robbery of 1933: Removing the gold standard was always a mistake

It’s always been about who controls the money, and in 1913, when the Fed convinced a group of starry-eyed congresspeople to relinquish their Article I, Section 8 powers to coin money to a group of bankers to manage the money, they made a significant mistake.  And, of course, we are discussing this now as we contemplate why Jerome Powell, the current head of the Federal Reserve, has interest rates so high and is artificially holding back the flow of money to the public.  Should or could President Trump fire him?  And why is there a claim of independence that Janet Yellen asserts is necessary for the Fed to function correctly?  She used to be the chairman, as Jerome Powell is now, and she was the economic lady for Biden’s administration.  She is also a prominent member of the World Economic Forum, placing her at the heart of this modern discussion.  The answer to all this Fed talk is that, of course, Trump should and could fire Powell.  Because Powell has not performed well, now that Trump has created an environment where the economy is moving along nicely, the excuses that the Fed hides typically behind to control the levers of power over the money supply have been taken away.  The only people making money from the Fed’s system are the banks, whose interest rates are holding back economic growth.  And of course, the banks don’t want to give up that easy money.  So, for his sabotage of the current economy, Trump should fire him.  The Fed’s mess in 1913 was a mistake, and it’s time to admit it.  Because what happened 20 years later with FDR in the White House would well cross the line toward poor money management, which is a crime that still looms.  And we have to correct it. 

If we had our money connected to a gold standard, BlackRock would not own all these properties

On April 5, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 6102, which required U.S. citizens to surrender most of their gold bullion, coins, and certificates to the government by May of that same year, in exchange for $20.67 per troy ounce.  This was just as bad as a buy-back program for something like personal firearms.  The reason for the order was to unleash money into the supply that people were hoarding and let the government manage the depression.  However, looking back on history, the Great Depression was caused by excessive government intervention, which exacerbated the problem it was trying to fix by taking people’s ownership of gold and unleashing it into the economy, thereby loosening things up.  Now, this was the Red Decade, when communist ideas were being experimented with, following the Roaring Twenties, which had a lot of open capitalism.  Communist movements were widespread, and they certainly infiltrated Roosevelt’s administration.  But how could this arrangement work, where the Fed was given everyone’s personal gold reserves, and where did they get the money to buy it?  Well, they printed the money, just as they did after the 2008 crisis, and gave that money to Larry Fink to essentially buy up bad loans with quantitative easing.  In the case of 1933, they were able to make some money off the deal and profit from the exchange.  But the Fed got the money by essentially printing it.  And it was this critical step that would take America off the gold standard by 1971.  After that, gold would become a commodity with no inherent value.  The goal of the Fed was to remove the stabilizing grounding gold provided to the economy, where people were regulating that value off a common exchange.  Instead, the government sought to empower centralized bankers with the ability to micromanage the economy, decisively removing the process from any free market consideration —a move that was distinctly communist and remains a mistake we are still dealing with to this day. 

By removing America from the gold standard, the Fed gained significant centralized power that it had previously been unable to achieve. This power was acquired after the Fed confiscated people’s wealth and issued banknotes that would, from then on, have a value adjusted by the Fed’s actions.  This was to protect the global international bankers, who have long sought to rule the world from the shadows.  And they are still a serious menace to this very day.  This is essentially what opened the door to Modern Monetary Theory and enabled individuals like Larry Fink to accumulate significant power at BlackRock.  The money managers who laundered the money through Wall Street were able to take all that printed money and buy up bad debt, thereby gaining control of the boards of numerous United States companies.   And Larry Fink is a bleeding heart liberal, otherwise known as a communist.  The original crime was the creation of the Fed in 1913, but the robbery took place in 1933 when the Fed, under FDR, took everyone’s private gold and replaced it with a monetary system that would fluctuate over time at an inflation rate of at least 2.5% per year.  So, doing nothing with that original $20.67, it would take $513.46 today to buy just as much.  But if grandpa had given you that much in gold, the value would still be relatively the same.  Taking away the gold standard meant that if Grandpa gave us $20.67 in 1933, and you wanted to buy something, it would now cost you $513.46 to buy the same thing. 

Deep in the heart of many things that members of the Federal Reserve believe is that employers are reluctant to reduce the wages of their employees over time.  They may receive raises, but in terms of real buying power, the Fed believes that it must step in to offset the value of increasing paychecks due to employer reluctance.  So long as they control the value of money, they can micromanage all factors of our economy in ways that are not driven by market value.  In the case of pay, which we all experience, we might make an average of 2% increases over our lifetime, but the Fed is using purposeful inflation to take that value away as we age giving our buying power much less with the same dollars because they believe that actual productivity goes down as we age, so we should not continue to get more money for doing less work.  That kind of thinking would only come out of the Red Decade.  And it has now caused a lot of significant problems that we need to address under this new Trump administration.  And Jerome Powell is going to have to go.  Reluctantly, but critically, he will have to lower Fed interest rates in September and maintain them through up to Christmas in 2025, because the pressure will be too great.  Trump’s economy is forcing everyone to come clean, and people are figuring out how the game has been played against them.  We can’t have foreign centralized bankers controlling our money supply through our Federal Reserve.  And the Fed can’t be independent of representative management.  They have been openly robbing our money supply, and it’s time for all that to stop.  The 1933 confiscation of personal ownership of gold was a form of open government theft, and it should never have happened because it empowered centralized bankers to gain control over the dollar and use it to access power. Today, banks have way too much power.  And we have to take it away from them by force.  Because they won’t give that power back now, they will have to be made to.  But we have no choice. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Getting Rid of Mail-in Ballots: If Trump had been in office, millions of lives would have been saved

I was pleased to see that President Trump was moving forward with an executive order to initiate the process of removing mail-in ballots from future elections.  This topic came up during the Russian talks, specifically with Putin, where they discussed the problem that all democracies face in not having secure elections.  With so much at stake, it should always be assumed that election fraud will occur if there are not tight controls in place on the process.  No matter where in the world those elections are taking place.  Cheating is endemic to the human race among those who are too lazy to compete.  And there are always lots of those people in any society.  And in America, where laziness is encouraged, of course, there will be a large sector of the population that will be inclined to cheat to get their people elected.  There is always a lot of money and power at stake in elections, so we should always assume that cheating will be present unless we are vigilant in preventing it.  And now we have a lot of proof that the mail-in process does not have honest people in it, and that cheating was part of the anticipated vote count, which we saw in the 2020 election that we still have not solved.  Mail-in ballots continued to be a problem in the 2024 election, but Trump had such a significant lead that Democrats couldn’t overcome him in state-to-state races.  As I pointed out before, states without voter ID had more election fraud than states that didn’t.  And, of course, there is nothing worse than a mail-in ballot that comes from an undisclosed person in a box with a bunch of other votes from unknown sources, and is counted alongside all the legitimate ballots, which an election worker witnesses. 

We observed a significant overcount in 2020 from mail-in ballots that likely didn’t represent actual voters, as Democrats were unable to replicate the effort in 2024.  They fell well short of the 81 million votes for president that they had shown for Biden.  Those numbers fell short for Kamala Harris, which should have been the same number of engagement.  Logically.  Only in 2020 were mail-in voting rules loosened due to COVID lockdowns, which then opened the door to massive cheating, which was much harder to replicate in the 2024 election.  What is interesting about the 2024 election is that while everyone was focused on the presidential election, with a margin for victory much higher for Trump, the House races and many Senate races were largely overlooked.  Yet at least 7 House races were decided by a margin of less than 1%.  The California 13th district, where Adam Gray defeated the incumbent John Duarte by less than .09%, or 187 votes out of 200,000 cast.  That margin was likely determined by mail-in ballots counted illegally.  That was likely the case in Colorado’s 8th district, where Yadira Caraveo beat Gabe Evans by just 557 votes.  And going back to 2019, in the race for governor in Kentucky between Matt Bevin and Andy Beshear, the Democrat won by just 5,136 votes out of 1.4 million cast, with an election margin of just 0.37%.  If illegal mail-in ballots had not been counted, the Republican majorities in the House and Senate right now would not be as close as they are.  There was still a significant amount of fraud in 2024 that did not receive much attention because Trump won his election.  But a lot of the margin for Republicans in the House and Senate would have otherwise been much larger. 

Democrats, of course, hope that nobody notices and that they can cheat in 2026 to gain majorities back in the House and Senate, so to prevent that from happening, we have to have much better controls over elections.  The election fraud question came up again in the White House as an off-topic question while Zelinsky was visiting.  And Trump had to explain his reason for the executive order on mail-in ballots.  This idea that we need to bring elections to the doorstep of voters is a Democrat one because they have so many of their members who are lazy and unengaged.  And they need their votes to get any power.  But that’s not how a free society is supposed to work.  People need to manage their representation in person, providing proof of their identity.  And someone needs to witness that exchange.  The security should be just as rigorous as cashing a check at the bank or any other financial transaction.  We should assume that people will want to cheat.  So we must guard every vote.  That seems logical, but the expectation from Democrats is that every disenfranchised person should be able to vote, allowing them to fill out the ballot and submit it through mail-in ballots as a legitimate vote.  And many of these close elections are going to Democrats over Republicans, tipping power in a way that does not represent what voters pick.  And the damage is extensive.  Just looking at the cost of Biden being in office over Trump, everyone discussing the Russian peace talks agrees that if Trump were in the White House, there would not have been an invasion into Ukraine, and millions of people would still be alive.  That is the cost of election fraud.

You can see that same trend in just about every political race in the country, where Democrats routinely steal yard signs of their opposing candidates.  When people try to steal a message by removing people’s visibility to it, you see a desire to cheat the message toward a favorable outcome by denying information to voters.  That same logic applies to mail-in ballots.  When people can steal a message with fake ballots thrown into a box to be counted with legitimate votes, they certainly will, and do.  So we have to take away all these opportunities to cheat that Democrats have lobbied for over the years, disguised as fairness.  Because the exact opposite has happened.  There are a lot of Democrats in office now who should not be.  And when a former KGB agent in Putin says that the 2020 election was stolen, it’s not because he played a part in it.  We know now from intelligence reports that Russia could not impact the 2016 election or the 2020 election.  But many people have discussed the election rigging that has gone on in Russia and many other places in the world.  And when Putin says that there was blatant cheating, people should listen, because he would know.  Elections work against those who want power from an administrative perspective, so all election locations are prone to cheating.  With each one, we need to approach them with a heavy hand toward security.  We must expect people who want power, as well as those who want to hold it, to cheat to gain it.  Cheating in an election is safer than an armed revolt, and many of these radicals would not hesitate to take power through force.  Cheating for them is a reasonable concession.  And because cheating has been so pervasive, we have a lot fewer Republicans than we otherwise should have.  And we need to correct that before the 2026 midterm.  Democrats will cheat to gain power back, and it is our job to take that ability away from them and force them to win honest elections.  Which they likely can’t do.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Trump Should Go To Moscow: Keeping Putin from pulling the rug out from under peace

I think President Trump should visit Moscow and meet with Putin ahead of any other meetings they might have, to demonstrate that he has done everything possible.  There are a lot of villains at work; Ukraine is surely not innocent as a maniacal globalist power, and when a very sketchy former KGB agent invites you to come to his country to talk, I think Trump could get a ceasefire out of the deal in exchange, because Putin would have to do something big in response. Regarding the Alaska 2025 meeting, which was productive, I thought it was over the top to conduct the flyover and escort Putin down the red carpet to view the stealth fighters.  It also wasn’t good for Trump, a much larger man, to walk next to Vladimir Putin for such a long time in the open, because it made Putin look small.  Putin handled things well, but what he did was demonstrate his willingness to go to America and make a deal, even if it meant appearing vulnerable in the process.  Observing his body posture, there was a significant amount of KGB manipulation involved.  And Trump knows what he is doing on these kinds of things.  It was mostly a show, and the world was watching intently.  And it will likely lead to an end of the war because all sides have already talked about everything proactively.  Putin has lost over a million people in this war with Ukraine, 100,000 just this year.  I’d say he feels like a sucker the way that the Biden administration coaxed him into the conflict as a cover story to all the Russian strawman efforts of the European Union and the Democrat Party in general.

I heard a lot of dumb stuff from the media during the whole meeting with Trump and Putin.  You can see who the cheerleaders are for global conflict and who profits from it.  Nothing Trump could have done would have made them happy because they only want war and conflict to be a cover story for major corruption in this whole process.  Putin, no matter what people think of him, is very popular in Russia because he has in his mind a restoration of the Russian borders before 1991, when communism fell and the country fell apart under that weight.  There were numerous United Nations problems with the entire process during the 1990s, particularly between global governance and sovereign nations.  But Putin is willing to throw away millions of Russian lives to retake Ukraine from what he sees as globalist conspirators.  And we would be just as upset if we lost parts of Florida and California to Mexico or Spain.  Russia, as the Soviet Union, was the American enemy during the Cold War, so we are not suddenly sympathetic to a communist cause.  But all the characters in this story are pretty evil and manipulative.  Ukraine is a creation of globalism and is a power grab from that direction, so before anybody can talk about anything, you have to know where everyone is coming from.  And for Putin, he wants his borders back and to help guide his country to its former glory, when he was a much younger man.  Trump was brilliant to let Putin speak first after their three-hour talk.  There were many master class moments from people who have mastered the art of communication, which much of the world completely missed while it was happening.  However, when Putin said in English at the end of his comments to the press that Trump should meet with him next time in Moscow, Trump needs to consider it. 

It’s great to bring all these world leaders to convenient places in the United States.  But imagine how the media would go crazy over Trump going to Moscow.  And how bold it would make Trump appear to the world.  As a former Cold War enemy, having an American president in Moscow with all the pomp that Russia could put on would win over the Russian people and give Putin a straightforward off-ramp from the war.  To have an American president come to his doorstep would be quite an accomplishment for him, and the Russian media would have the story of the century.  They would support Putin in almost anything he did thereafter, even if Russia didn’t regain as much land as they originally wanted.  When we have global media that wants, like nothing else, to decide who talks to whom and when, the best way to stick it to them would be to take the entire meeting out of their hands by holding it in Russia under a grand ceremony, ahead of any other talks with Ukraine or the EU.  It’s always good to get people to talk to each other, rather than adhering to false contentions, and those who have a desire for political outcomes that do not align with America First.  To give Putin that kind of attention would put him on a path to earn respect once again on the world stage and would be a great follow-up to Melania’s letter to Putin, urging him to save the children in this conflict.  There needs to be a mediating step, and when Putin suggested it, he understood the difficulties and set the stage to say he at least suggested it. 

But if Trump doesn’t go to Moscow, under these specific circumstances, Putin will have an excuse to withdraw from everything.  He went to America and made himself vulnerable for his motherland, and the Russian public well received him.  And he invited Trump to continue talks in Russia.  If Trump doesn’t go, it seems like the American president is only happy to talk on American soil with minimal risk to himself.  That was the KGB in Putin as he walked boldly next to a much larger American president, while a B-2 flyover was taking place overhead.  Putin wanted to convey to the world that he had done all he could for peace by meeting with Trump in America.  But he’s winning the war and could easily throw away a million more lives to take back all of Ukraine and topple the country.  It’s a waiting game that he can afford to play.  But Zelinsky and the European Union can’t.  So before Putin pulls the rug out from under everyone, Trump should go to Russia and advance talks of at least a ceasefire while these other details are worked out.  Because if he did, Putin wouldn’t be able to pull out of this deal, because the peer pressure of his country wouldn’t let him.  Nobody thinks Trump would go to Moscow to make a peace deal, including Putin, when he said it.  So the most extraordinary thing that Trump could do would be to take his show on the road and address the Russian people directly, with the same courtesy that was shown to Putin.  Many good things would happen as a result.  The media would have a meltdown, as would all the globalist types.  However, it would prevent Putin from undermining the efforts, save a lot of lives, and be monumentally historic.  And if I were speaking with Trump, I’d encourage him to do it this upcoming week, while the opportunity is still available. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Lockdown Lady: Amy Acton should have stayed under her rock

This is going to be fun, the governor’s race in Ohio.  Not that I think it will be close, but it will serve as a cherry on top for a vast evil that transpired, which was never settled.  Because she resigned from her job before the full wrath of anger came down on her for what she did during COVID in Ohio.  We’re talking about Amy Acton, the stringy-haired hippy chick who ran the Health Department in Ohio for Mike DeWine.  She hilariously tried to claim this past week that she was statistically tied with Vivek Ramaswamy in the race for governor, which I find laughable.  However, she’s trying to create excitement among a Democrat base that is flatlining.  Democrats across the country are trying to generate enthusiasm for their campaigns, and in her case, they hope people have forgotten.  After all, she was a media darling for most of 2020 as she reported daily from Columbus on the latest lockdown procedures, which she perfected to an extreme.  And the media loved having a mom telling them to go to bed and telling them what to do about everything.  Amy Acton’s tenure as Director of Health in Ohio was a disaster, but she did reveal what Democrats have in mind for government.  All the metaphorical masks came off during COVID, literally, and in many cases, by putting actual masks on we learned a lot.  However, we learned a great deal about ourselves during that period, despite it being so scary.  We came to know the differences between Republicans and Democrats beyond polite discourse over salary fairness and race relations.  Amy Acton led the nation in lockdown procedures that were statistically insane, essentially stopping the Ohio economy until a virus, created in China and released by very sinister forces, would stop spreading through a crazy strategy of separating people from each other until the case infections stopped. 

I didn’t discuss it at the time, but a couple of the most prominent con artists I have ever known started a company that conducted COVID-19 tests because they thought that was going to be the future.  They were radical lefty types and were dumb as rocks.  However, they had significant, essential jobs that paid them far too much money.  And they left those jobs thinking Covid tests in Ohio were going to be big business.  I explained to them that Amy Acton was not going to last, that Ohio was breaking the law by violating the Constitution, and that COVID was one of the biggest scams in the history of the world.  And I said all this because they tried to recruit me to their cause, wanting me to sell their new COVID-19 testing lab to the political world, and wanted to pay me a lot of money to use my voice to validate their existence.  (a lot of money)  Which anybody who knew me back then should have known better.  I was dressed every day like Mad Max, ready for a fight at any moment with anybody.  I was prepared for a showdown with the tyrannical forces of Amy Acton’s health direction at the drop of a dime. The Government was way out of control and getting worse by the day, and Governor Mike DeWine lost control of his government over fear of the stupid Covid virus, which was killing people who got it left and right.  And that same government was basing all their statistics on these COVID-19 tests, which people ran, like I mentioned, who were essentially designed to give false positives, and that Amy Acton would use those results to grab for more government overreach, as if to justify their actions. 

Of course, I proved to be right.  Those guys ended up out of a job, Amy Acton resigned.  The court challenges to the lockdown procedures all went against the DeWine administration, and he quickly had to start backtracking once he realized his abortion loving Health Director had screwed up Ohio detrimentally over a government power grab to use a health crisis to control every part of people’s lives.  And every conspiracy that I had talked about regarding the entire process turned out to be exactly as I said it was during that horrible period.  But the lessons learned were extremely valuable, even if a lot of innocent people died in the process, and the mandatory vaccines of the Biden administration damaged many.  It was a bad time, and Amy Acton was the queen of it all.  So I think it is pretty hilarious that she is going to climb out from under a rock and run for governor.  And, that she believes she can run against Vivek Ramaswamy, one of the most intelligent people on planet earth, who can talk the ears off a donkey.  I don’t think so.  If Amy Acton is the best that Democrats have, then they have next to nothing.  However, there is good in all this. I believe that a lot of what was unsettled needs to be settled as a result of that terrible period.  What can, or should, the government do for people?  And that will be a great debate where Vivek Ramaswamy will have many opportunities to discuss during this gubernatorial race in Ohio. I think it will get further worse for Amy Acton with the upcoming race, as Sherrod Brown wants to return to the Senate by challenging the incumbent, Jon Husted, who was Lieutenant Governor at the time Amy Acton was Health Director.  He was on TV with her every day, and there was a lot to discuss regarding the day-to-day operations of COVID management in Ohio, which serves as a warning for all about the power of big government.  And it’s going to get a lot of attention during these campaigns. 

I think it’s crazy for Amy Acton to stick her head out of the ground from which she has been hiding to run for Governor, which is going to expose her in ways she can’t imagine.  However, it’s not her failures as a person that will be so detrimental, but rather the lessons of letting a government, run by people like her, take over the day-to-day management of our lives from the utopian fantasy of communist/Democrat politics.  Amy Acton was among the worst, leading all states with her lockdown approach to managing the virus.  And because she did, she empowered a lot of con artists like those Covid testing people I mentioned, to profit off the demise of Ohio, and the nation, in ways that no fiction writer prior would have dared to put forth a plot because nobody would believe it.  And I think she is going to be destroyed politically by Vivek Ramaswamy, and to a greater extent, the Trump administration that has never been right with Mike DeWine since those many Covid mistakes.  People are going to get a chance to get revenge on Amy Acton for what she did to them, and the wrath will be harsh.  People generally left her alone because she stepped away from politics.  But now she’s climbing right back in, and I don’t think she, nor any of her advisors, know what they are getting into.  This won’t be a friendly election about ideas.  This will be a way for people to take their anger out on Amy Acton, as a result of what she did to their lives.  Amy Acton will, for the rest of her life, be known as the Lockdown Lady.  And people will never let her live it down, especially once they learn that she was the one responsible, which will be the centerpiece of this upcoming election.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Yes, We Need a Ballroom at the White House: Setting an expecation for the rest of the world to follow

I recently visited the White House with my wife in 2025.  With Biden or Obama in the People’s House, I had no desire to go anywhere near it.  But with Trump in the Executive Branch, I am pretty proud of the place, and I have taken time this year, with Trump back, to enjoy it.  But for what the White House does on the world stage, it’s too small, and I always thought that would be a problem for Trump, who is used to big settings for deal-making in all aspects of his life.  For what he has made use of at Mar-a-Lago and his many golf resorts, Trump is accustomed to lavish settings, where he feels most at home.  I am glad to see him investing his own money in fixing up the White House and leaving a personal mark on it that matches how the residence has evolved on the world stage.  I love the gold in the Oval Office.  I love the large flag poles for the American flags.  And I love the idea of a new 90,000 sq. ft. ballroom being built for around $200 million of privately invested money.  It’s the right kind of message that the American White House should project to the world when hosting significant events.  As it stands now, the White House is too small inside for large gatherings.  When making deals with people, it is essential to communicate effectively and have a clear understanding of who you are dealing with.  And Trump is all about setting those expectations at the start of a deal, with proper attire and a focus on economic viability represented by gold. These designs are going to cross over into the new ballroom construction, which is set to begin as early as September 2025. 

I get it, when my wife and I were last there, we spent some time enjoying the area around the White House, really for the first time.  And we went to the Visitor’s Center on Pennsylvania Avenue just east of the White House on the south side of the street, and I geeked out on history quite a bit.  The White House was built to be unpretentious for world leaders and to convey that it was not the palace of a king or a ruthless dictator, but the temporary residence of the people’s representative in an executive capacity.  The White House was built small to convey to the world that the people living in it were unpretentious.  It’s a nice idea that represents the founding of our country as a small set of colonies that just wanted to be left alone by the outside world.  But that’s not how things have turned out, and perhaps, that’s for the better.  We are the idea that the rest of the world has for civil government. We essentially do rule the world, and we have learned over time that the best kind of presidents to put in the White House need to be more like Trump and less like Jimmy Carter.  When you are the best at what you do, it’s okay to take pride in your accomplishments and let others know about it.  They need to know there is a specific expectation, and our White House has evolved into being that symbol for the world.  Many people visit there, and the premises themselves are in dire need of renovation to accommodate the growing demand in a world hungry for it.  And if you are going to build something like that, it needs to be opulent and comfortable to facilitate people talking to each other.

We are living in a time where there is always a Marxist assumption to downplay everything, including how we dress.  I’m not a casual Friday kind of person.  I find the practice of dressing down on any professional occasion disgusting because it shows a lack of respect for the work being done.  But when Chuck Schumer says that we don’t need an opulent ballroom at the White House where everyone dresses up in their best to speak to each other, that he’s a hamburger at his desk kind of guy, he’s trying to appeal to the socialists of his party who want to overthrow expectation itself.  And our culture has deteriorated tremendously as a result of those efforts to the point where it has contaminated nearly everything we do.  As individuals, we need to expect more of ourselves, and it’s a very Marxist assumption.  Dress-down days are similar to the kind of people who say on Friday, “Thank God it’s time for the weekend,” because the association is that work equals unhappiness and that American culture needs to work less to be happier.  So we should dread Monday because we are going back to slaving for the “man.”  And we should love Friday because we get freedom from work.  Historically speaking, all of those assumptions were built into our culture by Marxists who wanted to attack the premise of capitalism and take away the management of companies and give the means of production over to the workers of the world, who are supposed to unite and know how to make a profit in a work endeavor.  But America was built on the back of hard work, and that is the kind of president that Trump is.  And when you work hard and smart in a free culture, you can afford nice things, and we should show them off to inspire others to do the same. 

When attending these types of social events, it’s essential to be in large spaces that inspire people to greatness.  And when you go to an event at the White House, it shouldn’t be to see the President of the United States, but some critical person who is at the top of their field who might help advance something you want to do along the lines of new and improved work.  That is the real definition of management in the workplace: to provide workers worldwide with an opportunity to exchange labor for a livelihood.  And the more work people are willing to conduct, and the more critical it is, the more money people should be able to make.  And to showcase those inspirational traits, people should gather dressed in their finest attire to demonstrate to the world that they have something to offer and are worth listening to.  People need space to rub shoulders with a lot of others without feeling pressed together.  So, a 90,000 sq. ft. space to meet in will be fantastic and has been much needed for many years.  We need to set the expectation that the rest of the world must follow, and Trump is making the White House into what it always should have been.  As Americans, we have to stop catering to other people’s lazy natures and their tendency to gravitate to socialism to hide that laziness from the world.  And we need a White House that tells the success story of capitalism, not some non-pretentious younger sibling in the world that doesn’t want to make other countries feel bad about themselves.  We have the greatest economy in the world, and it’s about time that the White House projects that to all the visitors who attend.  People need to be inspired.  Not eating a sandwich at their desk in a t-shirt and a pair of flip-flops.  People need to step it up, and that starts in America at the White House, as Trump is living there by our choice and expectation.  And we need the White House to set a standard that the rest of the world must live up to. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Trying to Make Padro Pascal the New Sexiest Man: But you can’t fake it

The new Fantastic Four movie was pretty fantastic.  I’ll do a review on it, which it deserves later.  However, for now, we must discuss the promotional activities taking place in Hollywood, so that people can understand how they are manipulated by mass PR culture, which is currently in transition and at the forefront of a rebellion.  Hollywood is distancing itself from woke culture, yet still trying to fulfill its former commitment to it, which lies at the heart of a fascinating problem that Hollywood has with leading men.  They do not have people like Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis, and Clint Eastwood to drive box office numbers because they went woke a long time ago and have seen value into the Hollywood product decline ever since.  So they need a leading man, but it can’t be a white man from America, as is traditionally the case.  So Pedro Pascal as a Latino man kind of gives them that and they have been trying to milk him for all they can.  I think he was pretty good in the Star Wars television show, The Mandalorian.  And he’s been in other things since the success of that show launched him into fame.  But, he’s not quite the package that PR firms would like him to be.  He’s missing some things that normal “sexy” men usually have.  Hollywood would love Pedro to be the next Harrison Ford.  But in a kind of woke way, so it’s interesting to watch how the press handles him.  And that has certainly been the case, as Pedro Pascal has been doing press for The Fantastic Four alongside his co-star in the film, Vanessa Kirby.

You might have heard about how affectionate Kirby and Pascal have been with each other during interviews.  And I think much of it is natural.  As much as actors want to say “it’s just acting,” the truth is that actors fall in love with each other all the time.  Case in point, the recent discussion about Liam Neeson and Pamela Anderson from The Naked Gun set, where they were spotted kissing at the movie premiere.  For years now, we have been told by Hollywood that men could be women, and women, men.  And that romance was overrated, and even showing romantic scenes in movies was a downward trend, because behind all this was a very anti-family agenda.  And it has cost Hollywood a lot, and continues to do so, because movie fans like romance and seeing the people they watch in movies like each other.  It has been quite interesting to see how Vanessa Kirby has been playing up her role in promoting Pedro Pascal as a romantic figure that women can’t keep their hands off.  Because Pedro is safe, because he’s not a white male, Hollywood thinks it’s OK to promote him as the new sexiest man, because it still checks off their woke box within the culture itself.  I believe there is some genuine affection between Kirby and Pascal, but with all the romantic touching that they have been doing, with her pregnant with another man’s baby and Pedro dating someone else, they are trying to start rumors of an affair so that people believe more in their film’s character’s relationship, and this is a new strategy for Hollywood, as they are trying to repair their anti-family, anti-romance reputation with a public that has decided to move on without them.  Despite these efforts by Kirby and Pascal, The Fantastic Four has been pretty flat at the box office.  Not because it’s a bad movie, but because the public has lost faith in Disney as a film producer.

I don’t think actors are ever really actors, and I’ve known quite a few very well.  I’ve shared a trailer on movie sets with a few and can report that they are very human people behind the PR stunts.  And I was personally invited to the home of Jennie Garth from Beverly Hills 90210 and her husband at the time, Peter Facinelli who was doing the Twilight movies then, and it’s a tough life to essentially be a 24/7 PR relations billboard.  The pressure that is put on relationships is crushing, and I don’t think any actor in that business ever really figures it out.  I believe Vanessa Kirby loves the guy she’s engaged to the best she can.  And I think Pedro Pascal loves everyone in a kind of metro sexual way.  But the MAGA loving public doesn’t like the woke stuff so there is no real way to dress it up.  My reference to Jennie Garth essentially is to point out that I think the PR people behind The Fantastic Four, and the agents involved have told these two to act in the press as they would in the movie, and if that means acting like they are sleeping together to get the public excited to see them in a film together, then do it.  Usually, actors are told to refrain from that kind of public affection.  But with Hollywood out of ideas and trying to win back a jaded public, they are trying everything.  And one thing that actors do is act.  It’s hard to tell when they are sincere about anything, including things to themselves.  They are often not very grounded in reality because they always serve someone’s PR machine. 

To explain it away, as people have been talking about the possible reality that Pedro Pascal and Vanessa Kirby are cheating on their significant others with each other, it has been leaked to the press that Vanessa knows Pedro so well that she knows he suffers from anxiety and that he requires physical contact to maintain himself.  Well, that sounds like a cheesy pickup line to me, but it’s not very sexy.  So either way all this goes, it’s not the kind of appeal that audiences are looking for.  Right now, The Fantastic Four will be lucky to break even at the box office for a whole lot of reasons that Disney is unsure how to deal with.  It will take a lot more than rumors of affairs to win people over to their leading actors and actresses.  And when it comes to whether an actress would continue to act long after the cameras are off, well, of course, they would.  And I’m sure with Vanessa Kirby, she is acting when it comes to playing Pedro Pascal up as the next, sexiest, leading man in Hollywood.  I often feel sorry for actors because at the Hollywood level, the job never goes away.  I saw in Jennie and Peter a genuine attempt to be a real family, but the cracks were certainly there in trying to balance a private life with the pressures of PR needs for their entertainment projects.  People see romance between actors and want to believe it’s real.  As a last-ditch effort to save themselves, PR specialists and their agents are advising their clients to show affection for their co-stars in public, thereby fueling speculation and promoting film sales.  But what nobody has figured out is that what the public wants is authenticity, not more phony relationships.  Instead of fixing the problem, Hollywood is making it worse.  And woke is not going to work with the movie going public.  Hollywood can’t have a leading man who is also woke.  There are certain things that a sexy man is, and Hollywood won’t be able to define them for their use.  They either provide a product that people want.  Or they don’t.  The market is, and has always been, in charge.  Not the PR people. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707