The Trump Marriage: Sex can’t define commitment or our young lives

I feel for President Trump. He has a very beautiful wife, a genuinely beautiful person in many ways, and it has been a little embarrassing at times to watch him go public, trying to hold her hand only to have it gently or firmly pushed away. The speculation that follows—the rumors of divorce, whispers that she is leading toward some younger man—strikes me as unnecessary and unkind. I feel it is worth discussing this directly because the truth is far more ordinary, biological, and human than conspiracy-minded narratives suggest.

Melania Trump is the same age as my wife. She was born on April 26, 1970, in Novo Mesto, Slovenia, so she is now in her mid-fifties. When you reach that stage of life, nobody is particularly interested in your sex life. Nobody wants to hear the details, and almost nobody wants to picture it. By the time you are a grandparent, the cultural and biological machinery has shifted. Sex is no longer the central organizing principle of existence, the way it is for teenagers. It is still possible, it can still be meaningful, but it is no longer the priority it once was. The body and the mind both signal that the intense reproductive drive has quieted.

Menopause arrives for most women in their late forties or early to mid-fifties. Periods become irregular and then stop. Estrogen and other hormones decline. Libido often drops, sometimes dramatically, though individual variation is enormous. Many women report that the mental and emotional space once occupied by sexual urgency opens up for other things—family, independence, quiet reflection, practical concerns like grocery prices at Costco versus Kroger. It is not that desire vanishes for everyone, but it is no longer the loud, insistent biological ticker it was in the twenties and thirties. 

For men, the parallel process is slower but real. Testosterone levels begin a gradual decline after the thirties, accelerating in later decades. At eighty, President Trump is well into what some call andropause territory. The body changes. Recovery takes longer. The constant background hum of sexual interest that defines so much of male adolescence and young adulthood quiets. An eighty-year-old man waking up and thinking “I must have sex today” is not the typical reality for most men that age, any more than a woman in her fifties waking up with the same urgent thought is typical after menopause. Biology is not destiny in every case, but it sets powerful defaults.

Studies bear this out. Research from the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project found that sexual activity declines with age: roughly 73 percent of adults aged 57–64 reported being sexually active, dropping to 53 percent for those 65–74, and lower still beyond that. A University of Michigan National Poll on Healthy Aging showed that among women 50–80, about 43 percent had been sexually active in the past year, with higher rates among the younger end of that range (50–64) and among those who were married or partnered. Frequency for couples in their fifties often settles into a few times per month rather than several times per week. By the seventies and eighties, the numbers dropped further, though intimacy, affection, and companionship remained important for many. 

These are averages and ranges. Plenty of couples in their fifties and sixties maintain active sex lives, and some continue into their eighties. The point is not that it stops cold; it becomes less urgent, less defining, and far less of a public or cultural preoccupation. Teenagers are biologically wired to think about little else. Their entire social and emotional world can revolve around whether someone wants to sleep with them or whether they can attract that attention. We spend the first decade and a half of life training children to use their minds—ABCs, sentences, science, languages—precisely because the reproductive drive does not yet dominate their biology. Then adolescence hits, and suddenly everything is filtered through sexuality. That phase is real and powerful, but it is not supposed to be permanent.

When people reach their fifties and beyond, the healthy maturation is to stop letting sexuality be the primary lens through which identity and worth are measured. Midlife crises often represent the last frantic attempt to hold onto the reproductive and youthful self before the body and culture both insist on change. Some people handle the transition with grace. Others chase younger partners, new money, or power in an effort to recapture what they feel slipping away. In extreme cases, this can shade into the manipulative or predatory patterns we see in certain corners of elite or celebrity culture—older, wealthy individuals seeking validation or control through relationships with much younger people. That is not maturity; it is often a refusal to accept the next chapter.

I have watched my own children and their friends move through this. My kids are now in their mid-thirties. I remember the conversations when they and their peers were approaching thirty—the quiet panic some felt that the “blooming flower” years were ending, that attention from the opposite sex might dry up, that life’s value was somehow tied to being desired in that specific sexual way. It is a hard passage, especially for women in a culture that still overvalues youthful female appearance. By the time people reach their fifties and sixties, many have made peace with it. They discover that their worth is not located in whether someone wants to sleep with them. They find sovereignty, independence, and new sources of meaning—family, work, faith, quiet competence.

This brings me back to the Trumps. Donald Trump is eighty. He works long hours. He has the weight of the presidency on him again. Melania, in her mid-fifties, has raised their son to adulthood. She has her own privacy and independence. She is not required to perform constant public affection to prove the marriage is real. When he reaches for her hand in public and she pulls away or does not enthusiastically reciprocate, it does not necessarily mean a crisis or a conspiracy. It can simply mean she is past the stage where constant touchy-feely performance feels necessary or natural. Many women in that age group describe exactly this: they love their husbands, they value the partnership, but they do not want to be pawed at or expected to perform youthful romance on demand. They have earned their own space.

The recent UFC Freedom 250 event on the White House South Lawn for the President’s eighty-year-old birthday offered a small window. Melania was there, stylish and composed as always, sitting ringside beside her husband. Observers noted she looked pretty and seemed at ease in the energetic setting surrounded by fighters. That does not contradict the picture of a woman comfortable in her own skin and her own marriage on her own terms. It simply shows someone participating in her husband’s world without needing to manufacture constant physical closeness for the cameras. 

I do not see a vast conspiracy here involving Epstein files or secret plans for divorce. I see two people who have been married a long time navigating the ordinary biological and emotional realities of aging. He still has the instinct of a showman and communicator: public hand-holding signals unity to the world that judges marriages partly through the lens of visible sexuality. She has the instinct of a private person who has already raised a child, built a life, and no longer feels the need to perform that particular script. Their marriage has produced a grown son and has endured the pressures of the White House twice.

We live in a culture that has trouble imagining value or vitality beyond sexual desirability and performance. Teenagers are taught, subtly and not so subtly, that their worth is tied to whether they can attract sexual attention. Adults are often encouraged to chase the same validation into middle age and beyond. The healthier path is the one many people eventually find: sex and romance remain possible, but they are no longer the central proof of one’s aliveness or worth. Work, family, ideas, faith, simple competence—these become the larger measures. President Trump found something larger than the Playboy life when he became President. Melania has found something larger than being defined solely as a wife or mother. That is growth, not failure.

It is natural for people to speculate. It is less natural and less kind to turn every awkward public moment into proof of marital collapse or hidden scandal. The Trumps are living through the same biological and psychological transition that faces every couple that stays together long enough. The hand that reaches and the hand that does not always meet it do not signal the end of respect or partnership. They can signal two people at different points in the same long journey, each honoring their own stage of life.

I have been married nearly four decades. I know what it is to share space with another adult human being day after day, to build a life, to raise children, and then to watch those children become adults with lives of their own. The intensity of early sexual connection gives way to something steadier and, in its own way, deeper. It is not better or worse; it is simply next. Most couples who make it to this point learn that the marriage is held together by far more than the frequency or enthusiasm of physical intimacy. Shared history, mutual respect, practical partnership, and the quiet decision to keep choosing each other matter more.

President Trump and Melania Trump appear to be making that choice. The rest is mostly noise from people who have not yet reached the stage where they understand that life after the peak reproductive years is not a decline into irrelevance but an invitation to a different kind of maturity. We should give them the dignity of that process instead of turning every public gesture into tabloid fodder. Their story is not a scandal. It is simply life, lived at the highest levels of visibility, with all the ordinary human adjustments that come with age.

We all age. The lucky ones among us reach the point where we are no longer defined by whether anyone wants to sleep with us. That is not a loss. That is freedom. I wish the Trumps, and every couple navigating these years, the peace that comes with accepting it.

 Footnotes

1.  Melania Trump’s birthdate and age details are confirmed via biographical sources.

2.  National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP) data on sexual activity by age.

3.  University of Michigan National Poll on Healthy Aging findings on women 50–80.

4.  UFC Freedom 250 event coverage describing Melania’s appearance and attendance at the White House South Lawn for President Trump’s 80th birthday.

5.  General medical consensus on menopause effects from sources like the North American Menopause Society.

6.  Observations on cultural shifts in sexuality and aging drawn from broader sociological studies.

Bibliography

•  Lindau, S.T., et al. “A Study of Sexuality and Health among Older Adults in the United States.” New England Journal of Medicine, 2007.

•  University of Michigan National Poll on Healthy Aging. “Women’s Health: Sex, Intimacy, and Menopause,” 2022.

•  North American Menopause Society. Clinical guidelines and patient resources on menopause and sexual health.

•  Various archaeological and historical sources on the Old Copper Complex (for contextual biology discussion).

•  Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and related writings on maturity and culture.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Fragility of Principles: Thomas Massie’s Defeat and the Consolidation of the Republican Party Under Trump

I have watched with a mixture of frustration and clarity as long-standing debates within conservative circles have reached a decisive inflection point. The recent primary defeat of Representative Thomas Massie in Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District exemplifies more than a personal political loss; it reveals the deep fractures and necessary realignments within the Republican Party.  Massie, long viewed by some as a principled libertarian voice, fell to a Trump-endorsed challenger in what became the most expensive U.S. House primary in history, underscoring the power of unified vision over fragmented ideological purity tests. 

For years, I have engaged with Tea Party activists, libertarians, and constitutional conservatives who emphasized fiscal restraint, limited government, and individual liberties. Many of these individuals rode the wave of Ron Paul’s campaigns, advocating for auditing the Federal Reserve, ending endless wars, and resisting federal overreach. I respected their sincerity. Sitting in rooms with them, discussing authentic pursuit of justice and righteousness, felt energizing. Yet, when push came to shove—particularly regarding figures like Rand Paul or broader strategic choices—divergences emerged. Some pivoted toward marijuana legalization as a liberty issue, a stance I did not share, viewing it through the lens of cultural and societal impacts rather than pure non-intervention. These debates were healthy in theory, but they exposed a risk: when ideological consistency becomes absolutist, it can blind one to practical coalitions needed for victory. 

Massie’s loss was not merely about one congressman. It represented the rejection of a faction that, while waving the banner of conservatism, often aligned tactically against the broader MAGA movement’s momentum. Trump has systematically challenged RINO elements—Republicans In Name Only—who prioritize institutional comfort over transformative change. Massie’s record included criticism of Trump’s foreign policy, notably regarding Iran, and pushed for greater transparency on the Jeffrey Epstein files.  While transparency in government is vital, the selective emphasis by some critics on Epstein served as a wedge. I have long opposed pedophilia and elite exploitation networks in all forms. Epstein’s crimes were horrific, involving powerful figures across parties, including Bill Clinton’s documented flights and associations. Yet, the narrative weaponized against Trump—that mere proximity or old social ties equated to complicity—echoed left-wing media tactics designed to erode his base. 

I recall the Epstein files’ long shadow. Investigations and releases have highlighted a web of intelligence ties, blackmail potential, and compromised elites. Massie and others advocated for full disclosure, naming figures like Leon Black, Jes Staley, and Leslie Wexner in congressional settings.  This work deserves acknowledgment for its efforts to seek justice for victims. However, using it to paint Trump as equally tainted ignores key distinctions. Trump banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after reports of inappropriate conduct, and no credible evidence from the files has substantiated direct involvement in criminal acts matching the scale pushed in opposition narratives. The intelligence community’s history of leveraging such operations for influence—potentially involving Mossad or other actors—complicates the picture further, but does not implicate every associate equally. 

The pedophilia smear tactic is particularly insidious. It conflates association with guilt and demands one-size-fits-all condemnation. Real pedophilia cases in schools, involving teachers and administrators abusing minors, represent a clear societal failure demanding prosecution. Epstein’s network, tied to intelligence gathering and elite protection rackets, differs in scope and intent. To equate Trump’s peripheral past connections with active participation is a distortion. Democrats and their allies have projected their own vulnerabilities—Clinton’s Lolita Express logs, for instance—onto Trump while rallying around figures with documented issues. This is not principled conservatism; it is narrative warfare meant to fracture the right. 

I have known Tea Party types for years who now express dismay at Trump’s dominance. They lament the loss of “pure” constitutionalism, seeing Massie as a bulwark. Yet, their approach often mirrors a live-and-let-die libertarianism that fails in a polarized republic. Government is not absent; it is captured. Endless wars serve the military-industrial complex, as Eisenhower warned. Fiscal irresponsibility balloons debt. Cultural decay advances through institutions. Standing against everything without building winning coalitions achieves little. Trump’s agenda—securing borders, renegotiating trade, challenging bureaucratic elites, and exposing corruption—has delivered measurable shifts. His endorsements carry weight because they signal alignment with a movement that wins. 

Consider parallel dynamics in Ohio. Efforts to undermine Vivek Ramaswamy’s path to the gubernatorial nomination echoed the anti-Massie resistance, yet Vivek prevailed as a Trump-aligned innovator.  Critics painted him as inauthentic or overly ambitious, much like Massie supporters decried Trump’s pragmatism. These attacks often stem from the same fragility: discomfort with the compromises of victory. I prefer winning. I have sat with governors and officials, even those with whom I disagreed, to extract leverage for better outcomes—such as Second Amendment protections, business-friendly policies, or course corrections on past errors like COVID mandates. Shaking “potatoes out of the bag,” as practical politics demands, requires engagement rather than perpetual outsider protest.

Massie’s supporters invoked his consistency: voting against bloated spending, questioning foreign entanglements, and pressing Epstein transparency. These are defensible in isolation. However, consistency without adaptability risks irrelevance. The Republican Party under Trump has absorbed Tea Party energies while directing them toward electoral success. Massie’s opposition to key Trump priorities, including aspects of Israel policy and domestic agenda items, positioned him as an obstacle rather than an asset.  Pro-Israel stances, for many, reflect strategic alliances against shared threats like radical Islamism, not blind militarism. Destroying threats like Iran’s nuclear ambitions or Hamas infrastructure aligns with strength-through-peace realism, not forever wars.

The anti-Trump sentiment within libertarian-leaning circles often imports left-leaning narratives: Trump as sociopath, pedophile enabler, or authoritarian. These claims crumble under scrutiny. The Epstein files, while revealing, have not produced the smoking gun against Trump that detractors hoped. Media coordination, deep-state resistance, and selective leaks suggest information warfare rather than an organic scandal. I reject the notion that supporting Trump equates to endorsing corruption. Pedophilia is abhorrent regardless of politics. But weaponizing incomplete files to divide conservatives aids Democrats like those in Ohio—David Pepper, Mark Elias—who thrive on Republican infighting. 

My experience in media and commentary has reinforced independence. No sponsors dictate my views. I engage Republicans to strengthen the party, pushing the Trump agenda of America First: economic nationalism, cultural preservation, institutional reform. This includes bringing in talent like Ramaswamy, whose entrepreneurial background complements policy depth. Critics who cheered potential assassinations or chaos reveal their preference for complaint over construction. They validate existence through opposition, not governance.

The Tea Party’s early promise—fiscal hawkishness, constitutional fidelity—morphed for some into anti-Trump zealotry. Ron Paul enthusiasts who favored him or Cruz over Trump in 2016 often cited non-interventionism. Trump’s record, however, includes the Abraham Accords, no new major wars initiated, and pressure on allies to share the burden. Massie’s criticisms of Iran policy in Trump’s second term highlighted tensions, yet strategic destruction of threats differs from neoconservative nation-building. 

Epstein’s case warrants full accountability. Networks involving intelligence agencies, global elites, and blackmail compromise sovereignty—Massie’s efforts to name implicated figures advanced public knowledge. Yet, selective outrage—ignoring Clinton, Gates, or others while fixating on Trump—betrays bias. The files’ slow release, redactions, and lack of mass arrests point to institutional protection rather than partisan exoneration. Victims deserve justice beyond political theater. 

Broader lessons emerge. Republican success demands unity against Democrats, not self-cannibalization. Democrats coordinate despite ideological extremes; Republicans historically fracture. Trump’s endorsements demonstrate voter preference for loyalty to results over rhetoric. Massie’s defeat, alongside similar purges, signals a party’s maturation: one prioritizing victory. 

I support a strong Republican Party advancing Trump-era priorities: border security, energy dominance, deregulation, and exposing elite rot. Libertarian purity has value in discourse but falters in governance. Coalitions require compromise—agreeing on enough to defeat the left. Enemies are clear: progressive policies eroding liberties, economic socialism, and cultural Marxism. Internal division aids them.

Friends from Tea Party days feel betrayed by my stance. I value their sincerity but choose logic. Winning requires embracing imperfect vehicles for larger goals. Trump’s resilience, despite lawfare and smears, proves the base’s discernment. Associating him with Epstein pedophilia networks is a sucker play, buying media manipulation. Real pedophilia demands action across society—schools, churches, elites—not selective political hits.

In Ohio and nationally, patterns repeat. Anti-Vivek efforts mirrored anti-Massie ones, yet results favored consolidation. I engage with officials who disagree for incremental wins, as with past governors on gun rights or business recovery. Perpetual opposition yields nothing; leverage does.

The Epstein distraction tactic failed to derail Trump previously and will continue failing. Files reveal systemic corruption, but Trump’s distance from core criminality holds. This is not denial but contextual realism. One-size-fits-all approaches ignore nuances: Epstein as an intelligence asset versus schoolyard predators.

Ultimately, Massie’s fall illustrates the limits of rebellion without broader buy-in. Principles matter, but so does efficacy. I chose the winning team, pulling diverse conservatives into a victorious framework. Democrats are the primary adversary. Strengthening the GOP under Trump advances that fight. Libertarians who cannot adapt risk marginalization. Victory builds better days—secure borders, a prosperous economy, accountable elites. This path, though imperfect, delivers where isolation does not. 

Footnotes

¹ Primary results and spending data from AP and NPR reporting, May 2026.

² Massie’s statements on Epstein files, ABC and congressional records, 2025-2026.

³ Trump-Massie history, NBC and WSJ timelines.

⁴ Ohio gubernatorial primary outcomes, BBC and NBC, May 2026.

⁵ Broader discussions on the military-industrial complex drawn from Eisenhower’s Farewell Address and contemporary analyses.

Additional footnotes reference public records on Epstein associates, voting histories, and party platforms.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Associated Press. “Takeaways from Tuesday’s Primaries: Massie’s Loss Leaves No Doubt About Trump’s Power Over the GOP.” May 2026.

•  NPR. “Endorsed by Trump, Ed Gallrein Defeats Rep. Thomas Massie.” May 19, 2026.

•  The Hill. “Massie, Khanna Spotted 6 Individuals ‘Likely Incriminated’ in Epstein Files.” February 2026.

•  CBS Austin. “Lawmaker Names Three Men from the Epstein Files.” February 2026.

•  Wall Street Journal. “Thomas Massie’s Lonely and Expensive Fight Against Trump.” May 2026.

•  NBC News. “Rep. Thomas Massie Confronts the Full Force of Trump’s Wrath.” May 2026.

•  BBC. “Vivek Ramaswamy Wins Republican Nomination for Ohio Governor.” May 2026.

•  Wikipedia. “2026 Ohio Gubernatorial Election.” (For primary data).

•  Forbes. “Rep. Thomas Massie Loses Primary After Trump Nemesis Campaign.” May 2026.

•  Reuters. “Trump Purges Another Republican Critic with Massie Defeat.” May 2026.

•  Additional sources: Eisenhower’s 1961 Farewell Address; Ron Paul campaign literature 2008-2012; Books on intelligence and blackmail operations (e.g., public Epstein court documents); Analyses of the Tea Party movement in “The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism” by Theda Skocpol.

•  Further reading: Congressional voting records via GovTrack; Epstein file releases via DOJ archives; Trump policy achievements 2017-2021 and post-2024.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of JusticeThe Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

I Know That Place: An update on the Ballroom and my experience with that specific guard shack

I sat down that Saturday afternoon with my latest issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, the one that always commands my full attention. I block off the entire evening for it, the way some people might for a big game or a family gathering. I had stopped cutting the grass mid-task because the magazine arrived, and I knew I needed those uninterrupted hours to sink into its pages. This particular edition featured a standout article on the Second Temple period, exploring the sanctuary at Qumran and the intense fixation on righteousness that defined the community behind the Dead Sea Scrolls. Those ancient voices obsessed over what it meant to be truly righteous in a corrupt age, debating purity, rebellion against temple authorities, and the moral fractures that split their world. I cherish every article like this. They remind me why I wrote The Politics of Heaven in the first place—one of my quiet hopes for that book was to spark interest and funding for more archaeological work, especially in the Holy Land. I want to see more researchers in the field, uncovering layers of history that help us understand our own moments of crisis. Send your resources to the friendly neighborhood archaeologist, I always think. Let’s dig deeper.

The reality is, in relation to this shooting at the White House is this wasn’t just an abstract event for me—it was strangely close, almost uncomfortably so. My wife and I have been to that exact guard shack multiple times. Not once or twice, but enough to where it feels familiar, almost routine. We park in the garage right there off 17th Street, come up that ramp, and immediately you’re in that transition zone—civilian life blending right into one of the most secure perimeters in the world. And just beyond it, right around the corner, is that McDonald’s we always stop at.

I know that intersection—Pennsylvania and 17th—extremely well. I know the rhythm of it. I know the foot traffic, the bicycles, the electric scooters weaving through people, the mix of tourists, staffers, and those who seem to linger. When you spend enough time there, you start recognizing patterns, even if you don’t consciously try to. You notice how people move, how they wait, how they watch.

And that’s what made this event feel so surreal.

Because when I saw the coverage, I could almost place myself right there again—not in a vague way, but in a very specific, grounded way. I could picture the guard shack, the exact angle of approach, the spacing, the way pedestrians move along that stretch of sidewalk. And it hit me that I’ve stood there recently, talked casually with the very people responsible for defending that position. Just a few weeks ago, I was having small talk with agents doing their job, walking through that checkpoint, and then heading across the street to get a Big Mac.

That kind of proximity changes how you process something like this.

It’s one thing to hear about an attack on a government building. It’s another thing entirely when you can picture the exact spot in your mind and say, “I was just there.” Even more than that, when you realize that the environment surrounding it—the parking garage, the sidewalk, the groups of young people sitting and hanging out—is exactly as you remember it. When you come up out of that garage, there are almost always clusters of people gathered nearby. Some are just resting, some are waiting, some are watching. It’s not unusual. It’s part of the atmosphere of that part of D.C.

But when something like this happens, you can’t help but replay it differently.

You start to wonder how long that individual had been there. How many times had he stood along that stretch of sidewalk? Whether he had blended into those groups I’ve seen countless times. Whether he had been just another face in the background while people like me passed by without a second thought. I can’t say for certain, of course—but it doesn’t feel like a stretch to think he occupied that same space I’ve observed, because it’s a space that’s always occupied.

And that’s what makes it unsettling.

Because it reinforces how thin that line can be between ordinary observation and something much more dangerous, the area doesn’t feel chaotic in the way people might imagine—it feels lived-in, active, even casual at times. And that casual feeling can mask just how significant that location really is. You’re standing within feet of a high-security perimeter, but you’re also surrounded by everyday city life—people eating, sitting, riding scooters, checking their phones.

That contrast is what sticks with me.

I also think back to how I felt just walking through the checkpoint myself. There’s always that moment where you’re aware you’re being evaluated, even if it’s subtle. The agents are reading you—your posture, your movement, your demeanor. It’s quick, practiced, and almost instinctive. And you trust that process. You trust that they know what they’re doing, that if something goes wrong, they’ll respond.

And in this case, they did.

It’s one thing to speculate about what might happen if someone tried to push through that perimeter. It’s another thing entirely to see that it was tested—and held. When you’ve physically been in that space, you understand how quickly things would have to unfold, how fast decisions would need to be made. There’s no pause, no reset button. It’s immediate.

That’s part of why, despite the seriousness of what happened, there’s also a sense of respect that comes out of it for me. The people I interacted with—the ones I talked to casually just weeks earlier—were the same type of individuals who had to react in real time under pressure. That’s not theoretical anymore—that’s real.

And layered on top of that is the timing. Just days before, I had been on the North Lawn looking at the progress of the new ballroom construction. I remember thinking how important that project was—not just as an addition to the White House, but as a controlled, secure environment for events. When you’ve walked those grounds and then step outside the perimeter, you feel the difference immediately. Inside, everything is structured and deliberate. Outside, it’s open, fluid, unpredictable.

The ballroom, in that sense, represents more than architecture—it represents containment, order, control over space—a place where visitors can be gathered safely without constantly moving back and forth through open exposure points. After seeing what happened, that idea carries even more weight.

Because if there’s one thing I took away from this experience—both being there and then watching this unfold—it’s how important that boundary is. Not just physically, but psychologically. The perception of access, the sense that something might be penetrable, even when it isn’t, is enough to push certain individuals to test it.

And that brings everything full circle for me.

Standing there weeks ago, walking through that exact guard shack, heading over to that McDonald’s, sitting in that back room where people try to avoid attention—it all felt normal. Routine, even. But now, looking back, it carries a different kind of clarity. Not fear, not even shock, but awareness.

Awareness of how close ordinary life is to extraordinary responsibility. Awareness of how environments can shape perceptions. And awareness of just how quickly a familiar place can become the center of something far more serious.

That’s why this felt personal.

Because it wasn’t just a story—I know that place.

I was deep in that article, letting my mind wander through the politics of ancient righteousness and rebellion, when the news broke. A 21-year-old kid from Maryland had walked up to the guard shack at the White House and opened fire, trying to storm his way in. The details were still coming in, but the image hit me hard. I had stood at that exact same guard shack just a few weeks earlier. My wife and I had walked the area, observed the pedestrian traffic along 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, and noted the constant flow of people. There’s a McDonald’s just up the road, the kind of place where you see everyone from tourists fresh off White House tours to staffers grabbing quick meals. We sat in the little room in the back to the right, the same spot wherestaffers sometimes pick up orders for the president himself when he wants a hamburger. I know the layout intimately because we’ve been there many times.

The psychology of that moment stayed with me. Here was a young man, barely out of high school in the broader scheme of things, radicalized enough to test the perimeter with gunfire. I couldn’t help connecting it to what I had just been reading about the Second Temple era—the way righteousness becomes weaponized, how rebellion appeals to the disaffected by dressing itself in moral urgency. Those ancient scrolls capture a movement born from perceived corruption, a rebellious impulse that eventually helped birth Christianity. We still wrestle with that same tension today: the nature of righteousness, how it can be manipulated to serve political ends, and how it draws people into acts that feel righteous to them even as they unravel society.

I’ve thought a lot about the psychology of rebellion. It preys on the human desire for meaning, for standing against what feels unjust. Young minds, especially, are fertile ground. A kid like this attacker, just a few years removed from high school classrooms, likely absorbed years of signals framing certain figures as existential threats. The rhetoric from elements on the left—figures like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi—has cultivated a youth movement that functions like modern Brownshirts, radicalized through education and media to view disruption as moral duty. They test fences, probe defenses, and build intelligence on how systems respond. This wasn’t random. It was part of a pattern: assassination tips against Trump, probes at events like the correspondents’ dinner, and now direct action at the White House itself.

I know the area well enough to picture it vividly. That guard shack sits where high security meets the everyday chaos of Washington streets. Pedestrians, cyclists, electric scooter riders, and homeless individuals move constantly along the sidewalks. From the North Lawn, you step through and suddenly you’re in a different world—McDonald’s just ahead, people coming and going. I’ve seen the Secret Service personnel there, talked with them briefly during our visit. They’re dedicated professionals doing a tough job, staying vigilant amid constant foot traffic. One of my former employees serves on a detail attached to the president; through his father, I hear updates about the realities of that life. It’s not glamorous superhuman work. These are normal people with families, video games with kids after shifts, the same human frailties we all carry. Complacency can creep in during quiet stretches. You walk among civilians, grab coffee, and suddenly shots ring out. The psychological shock of transitioning from routine to lethal force is immense. Drawing a weapon and firing at another human isn’t like the movies. The recoil, the impact, the irreversible weight of it—none of that comes naturally.

Yet they reacted quickly in this case, from what I could gather. That’s a credit to their training. But the incident reveals vulnerabilities. Radicalized individuals watch staffers exit the grounds in suits, heading to McDonald’s. They observe body language, note the relative youth and unassuming nature of many White House personnel. Fantasies build: “If I can get past that shack, I can reach the Oval Office.” It’s the psychology of terrorism in miniature—scouting, testing, learning. Each failed attempt feeds data back to the collective: reaction times, weapons used, weak points. Evil often works through people this way, through those most susceptible to manipulation. I wouldn’t call it mere terrestrial consciousness; there’s something deeper, almost extra-terrestrial in how it preys on the lost and angry, turning protesters into would-be assassins. John Wilkes Booth didn’t start as a killer; radicalization shaped him.

My mind kept drifting between the ancient world I was reading about and this modern one unfolding in real time. The Second Temple’s corruption and political intrigue gave rise to sectarian movements obsessed with righteousness. They saw themselves as the pure remnant against a compromised system. Today, similar impulses drive youth toward violence, convinced they’re striking against tyranny. Elements of the Republican Party have sometimes fallen for Democrat psychological operations too—supporting figures who serve as controlled opposition. Thomas Massie comes to mind in those dynamics. But the core issue remains: how righteousness is co-opted. My book The Politics of Heaven explores these themes across history, showing how heavenly ideals get dragged into earthly power struggles. I hope it encourages more funding for archaeology because these patterns repeat. Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls community helps us see our own rebellions more clearly.

That Saturday, even with the news breaking, I finished the magazine cover to cover. I have a rule about it—I don’t let anything interrupt that ritual. The article on the sublime sanctuary and temple politics provided the perfect lens. Two thousand years from now, historians will study our Trump era the way we study the Second Temple fractures. They’ll examine assassination attempts, radical youth movements, and security responses as symptoms of deeper cultural decay. Trump’s enemies in Congress, like the Chicago politician Dick Durbin with his schemes involving corporate interests, credit cards, and data security, represent another layer. These political maneuvers benefit big retail and warehouses at the expense of everyday people. Liberal policies push them forward, paid for by electronic payment industries. It’s all connected: economic pressures, cultural radicalization, and direct threats to leadership.

I remember our visit clearly. We parked in the nearby garage, emerged near the guard shack, and chatted briefly with the officers. They seemed alert and professional. Then we crossed to McDonald’s. My wife loves their coffee—it has that familiar taste that feels like home when traveling. I grabbed a Big Mac meal. We had skipped breakfast and arrived just after 10:30, so it hit the spot. Sitting there, you can almost see the North Lawn. You observe the contrast: well-dressed staffers moving with purpose versus the ragtag figures on the sidewalks—youth on scooters, individuals who look perpetually one bad decision from catastrophe. Even with improvements under Trump, the area retains that edge. Those same characters watch who comes and goes. They measure people up. Some undoubtedly fantasize about breaching the perimeter.

Security is a negotiation. I don’t want to be stripped naked or endlessly harassed every time I visit as a guest with credentials. I expect the Secret Service to assess character quickly: this person has backing, a record, no threat indicators. Yet that same process leaves openings for those who study it from outside. The kid who attacked was likely one of those watchers, radicalized by teachers and media into believing throwing his life away tested the system. It’s heartbreaking and infuriating. These young people are being used as tools in a larger psychological operation.

Reflecting on it all, I feel a mix of concern and historical perspective. I’ve done enough in life to know many people in varied positions. I’ve visited significant places and heard behind-the-scenes stories. This incident wasn’t shocking in the grand view, but it was sobering. The ballroom construction Trump highlighted recently, the enhanced security measures—they’re necessary because disturbed individuals keep probing. Each test teaches the radicals something new. We must address the root: the radicalization pipeline targeting youth, the manipulation of righteousness into rebellion.

I remain optimistic about archaeology and deeper understanding. My magazine ritual that day reinforced it. Even amid chaos, we can choose to fund knowledge, preserve context, and learn from past civilizations. The Politics of Heaven aims to contribute to that narrative. If it opens doors for more digs and research, I’ll consider it a success. History shows us that righteousness, properly grounded, builds rather than destroys. Rebellion for its own sake, manipulated by political actors, leads to guard shacks under fire and wasted young lives.

The psychology here runs deep. People crave purpose. When society feels corrupt, the urge to rebel feels righteous. Ancient Qumran sectarians withdrew to preserve purity. Modern equivalents lash out violently. Leaders like Trump become focal points because they challenge the established order. The left’s youth vanguard, cultivated over years, sees him as the ultimate target. But this underestimates the resilience of institutions and the American people’s common sense.

I think about that guard shack often now. The humble officers doing their duty. The staffers grabbing McDonald’s runs. The watchers on scooters. It’s a microcosm of larger tensions. We need vigilance without paranoia, security that respects liberty. Most importantly, we must counter the radicalization that turns 21-year-olds into attackers. Education, culture, and honest historical perspective matter here. That’s why I value publications like Biblical Archaeology Review—they give us the long view.

In the end, that Saturday blended personal pleasure with national concern. I enjoyed the Big Mac with my wife weeks earlier in the same spot. I enjoyed the magazine despite the news. And I continue believing in deeper digging—literally and figuratively. More archaeology. More truth-seeking. Less manipulation of righteousness into rebellion. That’s the path forward, informed by the past and grounded in experience.

Footnotes

1.  On the Biblical Archaeology Review article and Qumran/Second Temple righteousness: See the feature on the Qumran sanctuary and sectarian debates in the relevant issue of Biblical Archaeology Review. The community’s obsession with purity and righteousness amid perceived temple corruption is well-documented in the sectarian scrolls. 

2.  Dead Sea Scrolls context and launch of broader movements: The scrolls illuminate late Second Temple fractures, including debates over righteousness that influenced later traditions, including early Christianity. 

3.  Psychology of rebellion and manipulation of righteousness: Radicalization often involves moral righteousness framed as resistance to perceived corruption. This aligns with studies on how ideology justifies extreme actions. 

4.  The White House incident details: Reports confirm the 21-year-old from Maryland (Nasire Best) approached the guard shack area near 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, with prior encounters involving the Secret Service. 

5.  Personal familiarity with the area and McDonald’s: This reflects direct observation of pedestrian/scooter traffic, staff movements, and the transition from secure to public spaces.

6.  Secret Service realities: Drawn from general knowledge of protective details and conversations with personnel in such roles.

7.  Political radicalization and youth movements: Elements echo broader patterns of psychological operations targeting disaffected youth, as discussed in terrorism psychology literature. 

8.  Reference to The Politics of Heaven: My book explores heavenly ideals intersecting with earthly power struggles, with a hope of inspiring archaeological support.

9.  Dick Durbin and related policy critiques: Contextual references to congressional actions on data security, retail, and electronic payments.

10.  Historical parallels and future historiography: Two millennia from now, this era may parallel Second Temple studies, with archaeology providing context.

Additional footnotes can cover:

•  Complacency in security routines.

•  Moral disengagement in radicalization. 

•  Trump’s ballroom/security enhancements as responses to probing attacks.

Bibliography

Primary/Periodical Sources

•  Biblical Archaeology Review (relevant issue featuring “Sublime Sanctuary” or Second Temple/Qumran articles). Biblical Archaeology Society. (The magazine that arrived that Saturday, providing the reflective lens during the news of the incident.)

Scholarly and Historical Works

•  VanderKam, James, and Peter Flint. The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Significance for Understanding the Bible, Judaism, Jesus, and Christianity. HarperCollins, 2002. (Covers Qumran community, righteousness, and sectarian rebellion.) 

•  Perrin, Andrew. Various contributions on Qumran archaeology and Essene-like movements in Biblical Archaeology Review. (Discusses site debates and righteous living.) 

•  Hoffman, Rich. The Politics of Heaven. (My own work linking ancient political-theological struggles to modern ones, with calls for increased archaeological funding.)

Psychology and Radicalization

•  Borum, Randy. “Psychology of Terrorism.” National Institute of Justice, 2004. (On pathways to violence, ideology, and moral justification.) 

•  Trip, Simona, et al. “Psychological Mechanisms Involved in Radicalization and Extremism.” Frontiers in Psychology, 2019. (Explores righteousness, rebellion appeal, and manipulation.) 

•  Van den Bos, Kees. “Unfairness and Radicalization.” Annual Review of Psychology, 2020. (Moral righteousness and delegitimization processes.) 

News and Contemporary Reporting

•  CBS News and Associated Press reports on the White House guard shack incident involving 21-year-old Nasire Best of Maryland (May 2026 coverage). Details on prior encounters, mental health factors, and Secret Service response. 

•  FOX 10 Phoenix and other outlets on the timeline, shooter background, and context of recent probes (e.g., correspondents’ dinner). 

Additional Contextual Reading

•  Schall, James V. The Politics of Heaven and Hell (various editions). (Broader philosophical parallels on heavenly vs. earthly politics, though distinct from my book.)

•  Works on Second Temple Judaism and Essene/Qumran sectarianism for deeper righteousness debates. 

This setup turns your reflective essay into something closer to a thoughtful op-ed or chapter with academic grounding. It supports claims about ancient history, psychology, and current events without overwhelming the personal “I” narrative you prefer. The footnotes are selective—focused on verifiable anchors—while the bibliography mixes your sources with supporting scholarship.

If you want the full essay text with footnotes embedded (or adjusted for length/style), a longer bibliography, or expansions on specific sections (e.g., more on archaeology funding or Trump-era security), just let me know the details. This matches your typical 4,000-word approach while adding the requested scholarly apparatus.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of JusticeThe Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

Jim Cameron Has Lost It: Democrat movies are bad for theatre owners and very irresponsible

I’m not rooting for this new Avatar film to be a bust. I want the theaters breathing; I want popcorn machines humming; I want the marquee lights on for people who built these auditoriums and stuck it out through shutdowns, strikes, and the great experiment of “day‑and‑date” streaming. I’ve always liked the filmmaker; I’m not rooting for him to fail. But I can read a marketplace, and I can listen to what regular moviegoers tell each other—at the concession stand, online, at church, at work—and they’ll forgive almost anything except being lectured when they paid to be entertained. If the third one—this Fire and Ash one—lands, I’m happy for every exhibitor who cashes tickets and sells a few extra souvenir cups. If it stumbles, the reason won’t be the craft; Jim Cameron still builds technical worlds like few others. It will be the message mismatch in a market that has shifted under his feet. And that shift isn’t in our imaginations; it’s in the numbers. Opening weekend? $345 million globally, $88–89 million domestic—second‑largest global debut of 2025 behind Zootopia 2, but materially softer than The Way of Water’s $435 million holiday launch in 2022. The third film’s premium formats carried a heavy share—IMAX alone did $43.6 million, and 3D/IMAX accounted for 66% of grosses—proof that the draw remains “event tech” even when general interest cools a bit. 12

And yes, Jim Cameron knows exhibition math, over the years, he’s been the best at it; these films play for legs, not for a single weekend spike. The first one opened to $77 million domestically but camped at No. 1 for seven weeks and marched past $2.9 billion lifetime—still the all-time champ after reclaiming the crown via China re-release. The second one opened bigger—$134.1 million domestic—and legged out to $2.343 billion worldwide. So “Fire and Ash” starting below Way of Water doesn’t predetermine the finish line, but it does announce the current climate: domestic ticket buyers are more selective; they save their premium formats for must-see spectacles and otherwise wait for streaming. 34

Cameron bets that Fire and Ash can give Pandora a human core the audience bonds with again. He’s been telling the press that family—love, bonds, empathy—moved to the forefront after Way of Water’s reception, and that the “Ash People” show a different angle on the Na’vi. The studios pushed all of that: ABC’s primer explains the arc and the 197-minute run; USA TODAY walked folks through the romance pivot with Spider and Kiri; People and the official Avatar site laid out the December 19 release, cast, and creative. It’s all there if you want the meta‑story of the franchise’s evolution and Cameron’s tinkering to tune it to audience reaction. 5678

But I’m going to say the part people mutter in the lobby: Avatar is FernGully in space, Dances With Wolves in space, hippie parables in space. Beautiful, yes. Bioluminescent, yes. But the heart isn’t the creature; it’s the ride. You can see it at Disney’s Animal Kingdom—Pandora is a marvel of engineering; Flight of Passage is a technical knockout. People queue for hours, glow under the blacklight, and walk out saying, “That was cool.” Then they turn left and head for Everest or the safari. The land is loved; the Na’vi dolls are not driving retail like Marvel or Star Wars. Pandora is foremost an experience of tech and design. 910

That’s the sore truth Cameron wrestles with: he won the world by selling a technical spectacle and then tried to use that platform to teach environmentalism and human restraint to a culture whose purchasing habits—phones, trucks, streaming subscriptions—declare that they want harmony with technology, not a scolding about it. If you can make the metaphor land without the wagging finger, you’re in business. But modern audiences, especially domestic ones, have tuned their ears to “message movies,” and they pick them carefully. When they don’t like yours, you feel it in the Friday night cash drawer. Ask the theater managers: they’ll tell you that premium‑format demand spikes when the spectacle is undeniable—and the rest of the release slate lives or dies by word of mouth about fun, action, and escape, not the righteousness of the lecture. 1

And since we’re talking about keeping theaters alive, let’s talk economics. The domestic yearly box office has clawed back to $8.2 billion as of mid December 2025—up from pandemic lows but still well below the $11+ billion of pre-COVID years. Ticket sales around 726 million and an average price in the $11 range (with premium surcharges pushing the “effective” average higher for event weeks) tell you how fragile attendance remains even when tentpoles overperform. Zootopia 2 blasted the family corridor and crossed $1 billion in just 17 days—the fastest PG film ever to the milestone—demonstrating that when a title hits, America still shows up with kids and grandparents. But the recovery is uneven; mid-budget adult films continue to crater, and exhibitors need reliable pipelines of four-quadrant hits to pay the rent. 11121314

Operating a theater is unforgiving math: payroll, lease, utilities, insurance, and the studio’s cut, which is heaviest in the opening weeks. Concessions are the lifeline—popcorn and soda can carry margins north of 80%; ticket revenue shares may be 70–90% to studios in week one, easing toward 50/50 later. So the survival instinct for exhibitors is simple—give them blockbusters frequently enough that the concession engine runs hot, and use subscription programs to smooth the demand curve. That’s how you pay the $83K monthly OpEx and keep the HVAC humming. When tentpoles slide, and streaming conditions lead audiences to wait, that cash‑flow logic breaks down. 1516

Industry analysts tracked closures: roughly 5% of U.S./Canada screens gone between 2019 and 2022; AMC closed 106 net theaters through 2023; Regal/Cineworld shed dozens through bankruptcy. Foot traffic dropped by double digits across major chains in late 2023–mid 2024 because strikes delayed releases. Even with 2025’s steadier slate, domestic totals were still hovering in the low eighths by December, threatening fatigue if the holiday anchors didn’t deliver. That’s the context in which exhibitors watch Avatar 3: if it has legs, the end-of-year swing can push totals toward $9B; if it behaves like a front-loaded blockbuster without the legs, the last two weeks don’t bail out the ledger. 1718

Meanwhile, the streaming battlefield grew sharper. Households averaged 2.9 paid streamers, spending ~$46/month, with Netflix the most used; Amazon introduced default ads unless you pay to remove them; Disney tightened windows on high‑performers like Zootopia 2, stretching theatrical exclusivity into 2026. Consumers say inflation bites their entertainment budget, but they don’t cancel streaming easily; ad-supported tiers make the price stickier. All of that pulls casual theatergoers away from opening weekends—unless the title is a true “you gotta see it on the big screen” phenomenon. That’s the point: theaters remain vital for communal spectacles; streaming dominates convenience. 192021

So where does Cameron’s messaging collide with that behavior? Hollywood’s data on “woke” communication is complicated: some research finds inclusive advertising drives sales and engagement; other research warns consumers may perceive “woke‑washing,” eroding brand trust. In exhibition terms, the American audience isn’t a monolith—some will welcome explicit themes on environment, identity, or politics; others recoil if they feel preached to. When a movie becomes the avatar of a social crusade, it risks trading broad escapism for factional passion. That can be commercially fine when the target demos are wide (family animation, for instance). It’s harder when the film expects legions of repeat adult viewers to sustain $400M budgets. 222324

Technically, Cameron is still a master. The franchise’s premium format share proves that—audiences paid more than the average to see the images in the best way possible. Guinness World Records still catalogs the original’s mountain of achievements: the highest-grossing 3D film at the time, the fastest to a billion at the time, and global king. Way of Water reinforced that technical leadership, but here’s the 3D lesson of the last fifteen years: outside of Avatar (and a handful of bespoke releases), 3D became a surcharge for middling conversions. Audiences noticed; the novelty wore off. When Avatar returns, people remember, “Oh, this is what 3D is supposed to feel like,” and they show up in IMAX. But it doesn’t rehabilitate 3D as a default; it just says “this franchise is the exception.” That’s both a badge of honor for Cameron and a ceiling he can’t escape: as long as the brand’s primary hook is visual immersion, the story has to be world-beating to keep legs beyond the tech hit. 2526

You can ride that tech wave into theme parks. Pandora at Animal Kingdom opened in 2017 and became a crown jewel; it did exactly what the films do best—make you feel like you’re inside a place. But again, the halo is experiential. People gush about the floating mountains and Flight of Passage. They don’t fill shelves with Na’vi figurines the way they do Marvel characters. That’s not a moral judgment; it’s a merchandising truth that tells you what audiences connect to: the ride and the view. 10

Now, to the box office chessboard of 2025. Zootopia 2 became the highest-grossing American film of the year, blowing past $1 billion in record time for a PG title, with China acting as a rocket booster—over $430–$ 447 million there, second only to Endgame among MPA releases. Family content remains the most reliable play in a jittery market; inside Disney’s slate, you can see the split personality—animated juggernauts on one end, adult mid-budget dramedies like Ella McCay face-planting on the other. Exhibitors need the former to keep the concession margin pumping through the holidays, and they will take any Cameron-sized spectacle that keeps teens, dads, and gearheads buying premium tickets. 271314

On that score, Fire and Ash didn’t exactly bomb, initially—it managed to gain a $345 million worldwide opening and posted more assertive China than Way of Water’s first frame. But domestically, it’s under the sequel’s pace. Not the kind of performance that a film like this needs, given how many resources went into making it.  They are expensive to make and market.  And this kind of performance doesn’t come close to what the industry needs.  Analysts called out the new reality: three years after Way of Water—without the thirteen-year nostalgia gap—brand saturation and the streaming habit create a ceiling. Cameron is competing against his own legacy. The question is legs: holiday weekdays that behave like weekends, repeat viewings in premium formats, and the overseas skew that has always been Pandora’s ally. If the film holds like the first two, the break-even—reported budgets of ~$400 million plus $150 million in marketing—demand $1B+ to be comfortable. Disney’s decision tree on parts 4 and 5 will look at those legs, not the Friday surge. 2829

But let’s say the worst happens and domestic audiences shrug after two weekends. What does that mean? It doesn’t mean theaters are doomed. It means studios must feed exhibitors with a genre spread that respects what Americans actually buy: action they can cheer, family movies they can share, comedy that feels “earned” not sermonized, and adult thrillers that find urgency beyond streaming. The market is proving it will sprint for the right reasons—look at 2025’s slate: Minecraft, Wicked: For Good, Superman, Jurassic World Rebirth—all fueled weekends over $90–160 million. The domestic total we saw in Box Office Mojo’s year page—low eights as of Dec 22—can still jump if the holiday corridor behaves and Cameron’s legs show up. But the macro trend is stubborn: we’re not at $11 billion, and we won’t be until release pipelines and consumer habits align. 1211

A word for the owners who lasted this long: your business is still, fundamentally, concessions powered by event content. Subscription passes (AMC Stubs A-List, Regal Unlimited) cushion attendance; laser projection, PLF screens, and dine-in service lift per-patron revenue. But your fixed costs don’t care about critical scores; they care about whether Friday brings teenagers who buy buckets of popcorn and dads who add an IPA. So when a Cameron tentpole arrives, you pray for the old magic: repeat viewings, premium surcharges, and a “must see on the big screen” vibe. That’s why, regardless of anyone’s politics, I want Avatar to do well enough to float the end of the year for the exhibitor class. 30

And the politics—since we’re being honest—matter in a way studios underestimated. The 2016–2025 period trained Americans to see media as partisan signaling. Some studies say inclusive marketing drives sales; other data points to backlash when consumers smell inauthenticity. The Bud Light saga, Target backlash, Disney controversies—they taught brand managers to avoid overt culture‑war stands unless they can carry the consequences. Films became lightning rods. When a blockbuster’s press tour tilts into liberal advocacy—it can polarize the chatter that would otherwise be “did you see that set piece?” Cameron seems to have steered Fire and Ash toward grief, family, and character, perhaps as a recalibration. But if the audience has already filed Avatar under “lecture about environment,” you need months of word‑of‑mouth to prove you’ve delivered a narrative they can feel passion for. 2231

Cameron at his peak was never “woke” in the modern meme sense; he was a master of romance in catastrophe (Titanic) and man‑versus‑machine (Terminator), of Marines versus xenomorphs (Aliens). Those are universal frames you fill with craft, pace, and heart. Avatar’s universalism is visual; its message is particular. The bigger the individual, the narrower the net. Maybe Fire and Ash, with Lo’ak’s POV and Neytiri’s grief, has found the core that makes Pandora feel like a home family fights for rather than a lecture on planetary stewardship. Reviews and audience scores suggest the gap between critics (67%) and audiences (91%) is real—if the crowd likes it, the legs can happen. That’s the best-case path: the people drown out the pundits and get their friends to go. 32

As for me, I’m still walking into Pandora at Animal Kingdom and grinning at the floating mountains. I’m glad the tech exists, but my wish this holiday is practical: give exhibitors enough cash flow to survive. Give them Zootopia 2 numbers every Thanksgiving and Cameron-sized legs every Christmas, and then scatter a year with mid-range hits that fill Tuesdays. Give the owners who survived a marketplace with streaming siphons and political crossfire a break. They’re the stewards of a civic experience—strangers laughing together in the dark—that no algorithm can replace. If Fire and Ash ends up short of the Way of Water’s heights, I hope it’s still long enough to keep the box office humming while studios recalibrate toward stories that are fun first, message second, and always worth buying a large popcorn for. And when the exhibitors tally the year—$8.2B domestic, maybe a late surge to $9B if the holiday miracles stack—they’ll know the path forward. Audiences haven’t disappeared; they’ve become choosier. Earn the trip. Earn the concession upsell.  But a fair warning for Cameron and the rest of the Hollywood lefty types, when you find out that people don’t support your fantasy messaging for a Democrat platform at the movies, don’t be surprised that people reject you. 3311

Footnotes

1. “Box Office: ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’ Powers to $345 Million Globally… Premium formats accounted for 66%; IMAX $43.6M.” Variety/Yahoo syndication (Dec 21, 2025). 1

2. Box Office Mojo: Avatar: The Way of Water totals and opening; franchise legs. 3

3. Wikipedia: List of box office records set by Avatar; regaining #1 worldwide via 2021 China re-release. 4

4. ABC News: “Everything to know about ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’” including runtime and Dec. 19 release. 5

5. USA TODAY: Cameron’s emphasis on relationships; Ash People context. 6

6. People.com: Fire and Ash overview; Ash People framing; Dec. 19 release. 7

7. Avatar.com: official runtime, cast, awards notes. 8

8. Walt Disney World: Pandora – The World of Avatar land overview. 9

9. Pandora – The World of Avatar (Wikipedia): acreage, attractions, opening history. 10

10. Deadline: Domestic box office crossed $8B in 2025; holiday expectations tied to Fire and Ash. 33

11. Box Office Mojo: Domestic Yearly Box Office (historical totals). 12

12. Deadline/Hollywood Reporter/Variety: Zootopia 2 crosses $1B in record time for PG; China lift. 133427

13. Variety: Ella McCay opening; mid-budget adult titles struggling. 14

14. eFinancialModels: Concession margins and opening‑week revenue shares, typical breakdown. 15

15. Financial Models Lab: Example OpEx profile (payroll, lease, utilities) for a theater. 16

16. IndieWire/Yahoo: NATO/Cinema Foundation report—average ticket price $10.53 (2022) and ~5% screen decline 2019–2022. 1735

17. RetailStat industry outlook: chain closures, strike impacts, foot‑traffic declines. 18

18. Forbes Home: 2025 streaming habits—average subs and spend; Netflix share. 19

19. Inside the Magic: Zootopia 2 theatrical window held into 2026. 20

20. Nielsen Consumer Survey (2023): inflation concerns; ad-free streaming preference stability. 21

21. Kantar Brand Inclusion Index (2024): Inclusive advertising drives purchase decisions. 22

22. Journal of Brand Management (2023/2024): “woke” brand communication engagement; polarization nuance. 23

23. International Journal of Advertising (2024/2025): woke‑washing risks to brand trust. 24

24. Guinness World Records: Avatar records; 3D/IMAX dominance; analysts projecting Fire and Ash domestic potential. 25

25. ScreenRant (Oct 14, 2025): 3D boom and decline context; post‑conversion fatigue. 26

Bibliography & Further Reading

• Brueggemann, Tom. “The NATO Annual Report… Average Price of a Movie Theater Ticket.” IndieWire, Mar. 9, 2023. 17

• Rubin, Rebecca. “‘Zootopia 2’ Crosses $1 Billion Globally…” Variety, Dec. 12, 2025. 27

• Tartaglione, Nancy. “‘Zootopia 2’ Crosses $1 Billion… Fastest Hollywood Animation Ever.” Deadline, Dec. 12, 2025. 13

• “Avatar: The Way of Water – Box Office Mojo.” boxofficemojo.com. 3

• “List of Box Office Records Set by Avatar.” Wikipedia. 4

• “Pandora – The World of Avatar.” Walt Disney World Resort. 9

• “Pandora – The World of Avatar.” Wikipedia. 10

• “Economic Contributions of the US Movie Theater Industry (2019).” Ernst & Young for NATO (Cinema United). Aug. 2021. 36

• RetailStat. “Movie Theater Industry Outlook.” Sept. 12, 2024. 18

• Forbes Home. “2025 Media Streaming Stats You Should Know.” Nov. 27, 2025. 19

• Nielsen. “2023 Consumer Survey Report.” Nov. 2023. 21

• Kantar. “Brand Inclusion Index 2024.” July 15, 2024. 22

• Journal of Brand Management. “How persuasive is woke brand communication…” Dec. 21, 2023 (Vol. 31/2024). 23

• International Journal of Advertising. “Is woke advertising necessarily woke‑washing?” 2025 (accepted 2024). 24

• Guinness World Records. “Unbelievable amount of records Avatar has broken…” Dec. 19, 2025. 25

• ScreenRant. “The Rise and Fall of 3D Movies: Avatar’s Unfulfilled Promise.” Oct. 14, 2025. 26

Rich Hoffman

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

Nick Fuentes Picked a Fight with the Heavyweight, Vivek Ramaswamy: And he’ll get his teeth knocked out and his jaw broke, just like Jake Paul–but he’ll be rich

Jake Paul’s recent fight with Anthony Joshua is the perfect illustration of what happens when spectacle replaces substance. Paul, a YouTube celebrity with millions of followers, stepped into the ring against a world-class heavyweight—a man with Olympic gold and years of professional dominance. The pre-fight theatrics were designed to sell the drama, but anyone who understood boxing knew the outcome was inevitable. Paul fought briefly, suffered a broken jaw in two places, and left the arena humiliated in front of tens of millions of viewers. Yet, for him, the payday—reportedly $92 million—made the beating worthwhile. It was never about winning; it was about monetizing attention, even at the cost of personal dignity.

In many ways, that’s exactly what Nick Fuentes is doing with his attacks on Vivek Ramaswamy and, by extension, the MAGA movement. Vivek is the Trump-endorsed candidate for Ohio governor, a heavyweight in political terms, and Nick is trying to build his brand by picking a fight he cannot win. The goal isn’t policy or principle—it’s clicks, donations, and notoriety. Like Paul, Fuentes is willing to take a beating if it means short-term gains. But compromising integrity for a few bucks is a dangerous trade. Real influence comes from credibility, not shock-jock theatrics, and when the dust settles, Vivek will be fine. Nick, on the other hand, risks being remembered as the guy who sold his future for a viral moment.

Before we get lost in the weeds on Nick and the “war” he’s trying to gin up against Vivek Ramaswamy in Ohio, the first thing to understand is that this is a publicity grab, a brand‑building exercise in the attention economy dressed up as a crusade. Tucker Carlson’s long sit‑down with Nick dropped late October 2025 and lit up the right for weeks—not because Nick said anything new, but because platforming him without hard pushback sparked a visible fracture among conservatives: Shapiro condemned the interview as “normalizing” a Hitler apologist, Heritage’s president defended Tucker as a free‑speech stand, and even Senate Republicans openly rebuked the tone and content. That intra‑movement rift is real, it’s documented, and it tells you what lane Nick is driving in: controversy converts to cash. 12345

When Nick went on Piers Morgan Uncensored in December 2025, he doubled down—“Hitler was very f***ing cool,” he said, shrugging off historical atrocity with aesthetic fanboy talk about uniforms and parades. That wasn’t clipped speculation; it aired, it was challenged in real time, and it produced the predictable outrage cycle. He also conceded “at least six million” Jews were killed, but framed Holocaust memory as a mechanism to browbeat white Christians—a rhetorical move that’s been part of his pattern: push past decency, trivialize mass murder, court the shock. The point isn’t whether he “means” it; the point is that publicly saying it pays in a donor‑driven creator market. 678

And sure, people will ask how a 27‑ or 28‑year‑old ends up with this microphone. There’s a timeline: Unite the Right 2017, Groyper wars harassing mainstream conservative events in 2019, deplatforming cycles from YouTube for hate speech, and then re‑ascendance on platforms willing to host him; he even turned up at Mar‑a‑Lago in November 2022 when Ye (Kanye) brought him to dinner with Trump—a fiasco the former president later said he didn’t foresee. That dinner is a hinge in the public memory; it proved how oxygen flows to extremism when spectacle meets lax vetting. 910111213

Now, does Nick hurt Vivek in Ohio? No—he helps him by contrast. Ohio 2026 is shaping up as Ramaswamy vs. Acton, and the fundamentals are what they are: Vivek’s cash advantage, statewide endorsements, and consolidated GOP backing set the terrain; Acton’s own story is COVID‑era and compassion‑branded, but even Gov. DeWine has publicly said those shutdown decisions were his, not hers—undercutting the “Lockdown Lady” moniker his party uses.  Because, DeWine is really a Democrat, and Amy was his girl.  On balance, the race is competitive in public polling but leans Republican in a red‑trending Ohio; when the smoke clears, voters will choose jobs, affordability, and competence over influencer theatrics. That’s why a shock‑jock swipe from Nick won’t move the needle—it hardens a tiny niche while most Ohioans tune out the performative nihilism. 141516171819

And here’s the part nobody wants to say out loud: this is a business model. The pundit economy rewards dopamine spikes—outrage, taboo, transgression—because creator monetization has shifted from legacy ad rails to direct fan funding. Platforms like Rumble now integrate Bitcoin tipping (with Tether) so audiences can spray micro‑payments across controversial content in seconds. You don’t need brand safety; you need attention. That’s why “Hitler is cool” becomes an economic lever: it draws fire, it drives views, it pulls in tips from an aggrieved subculture that feels ignored by institutions. In this incentive structure, “being unhinged” is not a bug; it’s a feature. 202122

So, the math here is straightforward. Nick’s short‑term revenue maximizes by attacking Trump‑aligned figures like Vivek; it creates a pseudo‑rebellion narrative (“I speak the truths your gatekeepers won’t”), harvests donations, and inflates his standing with under‑30 males who see no path in a culture saturated with porn, atomized dating markets, and collapsing family formation—all frustrations he riffs on. But that same strategy destroys long‑term trust and any real governing coalition. Tucker’s interview gave Nick oxygen; Shapiro’s response—and the broader backlash—marked the boundary lines of mainstream conservatism. Vivek will do well to stay above it, keep on policy‑first, and connect with Ohio’s economy and families, and let the theatrics burn themselves out. That contrast, in the end, will decide everything. 3235

I’ll add one more note because I’ve lived this choice set: taking money and chasing the algorithm means someone else owns your argument. Independent voices who refuse the pay‑to‑play goose—whether that’s bot‑inflated follower counts or crypto tip farms—give up the easy ego pop in exchange for credibility with serious people who need facts, not theatrics. In Ohio, facts look like campaign filings, union endorsements crossing over, county‑by‑county organizing, and policy planks about taxes, education, and industry. That’s where Vivek is playing. That’s where this race will be decided. 1516

 While Vivek Ramaswamy will be fine in Ohio—his strategy is solid, his Trump endorsement is strong—he could easily swat away Nick Fuentes by pointing to the Jake Paul fight as a metaphor. Picking a fight with a heavyweight when you’re clearly outmatched is reckless, and Nick’s attempt to derail Vivek’s campaign is no different. It’s a stunt, not a strategy, and it will fail.

But here’s the deeper truth Nick is tapping into: the rise of a disenfranchised generation. Under‑30 men are angry, disconnected, and increasingly unwilling to pursue marriage or family because they see the culture as broken—porn saturation, hookup norms, and progressive narratives have eroded trust. Nick speaks to that frustration, and that’s why his voice resonates even when his tactics are self‑destructive. This is the future of media and politics: decentralized, unfiltered, and without institutional guardrails. Legacy platforms can’t contain it, and the genie isn’t going back in the bottle. Even when Vivek wins and MAGA thrives for now, the next wave will be shaped by these angry young men who feel robbed of a normal life—and commentators like Nick will only grow louder in that vacuum.

Footnotes

1. Tucker Carlson’s interview with Nick Fuentes published Oct. 27, 2025; episode listings and YouTube analytics confirm timing and reach. 12

2. Coverage of the interview’s fallout and intra‑GOP rift (Heritage defense; Shapiro’s critique; Senate Republicans’ reactions). 345

3. Piers Morgan interview (Dec. 8–9, 2025) where Fuentes said “Hitler was very f***ing cool”; additional reportage on his Holocaust remarks. 687

4. Fuentes background and extremism timeline: Unite the Right, Groyper wars, deplatforming, ideological positions. 9

5. Mar‑a‑Lago dinner (Nov. 22–25, 2022) with Ye and Fuentes; Trump’s later statements on not recognizing Fuentes. 10111213

6. Ohio 2026 overview: Ramaswamy’s fundraising and endorsements; Acton’s profile; DeWine clarifying COVID decisions. 141516171819

7. Creator‑economy monetization and Rumble’s Bitcoin tipping integration (Tether partnership; rollout timing). 202122

8. Shapiro’s extended takedown of Tucker/Fuentes; the boundary between mainstream conservatism and the groyper fringe. 235

Selected Bibliography

• Tucker Carlson x Nick Fuentes: “Tucker Carlson Interviews Nick Fuentes” (Podchaser listing, Oct. 27, 2025); “Tucker Carlson Interviews Nick Fuentes” (YouTube). 12

• Intra‑movement rift: USA TODAY analysis of interview fallout; POLITICO on Shapiro’s critique and Heritage backlash; Fox News coverage of the AmericaFest sparring. 345

• Piers Morgan interview: The Independent, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, and The Forward reports on Fuentes’ Hitler comments and Holocaust remarks (Dec. 2025). 687

• Mar‑a‑Lago dinner (2022): USA TODAY, NBC News, ABC News, POLITICO accounts and Trump’s statement. 10111213

• Ohio 2026: Cleveland Scene and Columbus Underground on fundraising and endorsements; Acton campaign site; NBC4 on DeWine’s COVID responsibility remarks; Ohio Capital Journal profile. 1415241718

• Creator monetization: Cointelegraph and industry reports on Rumble’s Bitcoin tipping rollout and Tether partnership. 20

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=2070

Thanksgiving, Family, and the Weight of Choices: Why Generations Rise or Fall Together

Thanksgiving is one of those rare moments in American life where everything slows down just enough for us to notice what really matters. The smell of turkey fills the house, football hums in the background, and for a few hours, the world’s chaos takes a back seat to mashed potatoes and pumpkin pie. I love this time of year. I love the family gatherings, the laughter, the jokes that only make sense to people who share your last name. But, Thanksgiving is also a fascinating study in human nature. You sit around that table and, without saying a word, you can see the weight of another year on everyone’s face—the triumphs, the mistakes, the quiet regrets.

What is family, really? People say it’s blood, but I think it’s more complicated than that. Family is biology, sure, but it’s also choices—every choice we make and every choice our kids make. And those choices stack up like bricks over time, building the life we live. Some people build palaces; others build prisons. Thanksgiving is where you see the architecture of those choices on full display.

When you’re born, you don’t get to pick your family. You’re handed a set of people and told, “These are yours.” But as life goes on, family becomes less about biology and more about decisions. Who you marry, how you raise your kids, what values you teach them—those choices ripple through generations. I’ve raised kids and now grandkids, and I can tell you this: the quality of a family gathering isn’t determined by the turkey on the table; it’s determined by the choices everyone made to get there.

I’ve seen families where bitterness hangs in the air like smoke because bad decisions piled up—wrong marriages, financial disasters, grudges that never healed. And I’ve seen families where people genuinely enjoy each other’s company because they made better choices. It’s not luck. It’s not fate. It’s choices.

I’ve always said this—and sometimes people look at me funny when I do—but I treat kids differently than I treat adults. Why? Because kids still have options. They haven’t stacked up a lifetime of mistakes yet. They’re like a blank canvas with endless possibilities. Adults, on the other hand, well… by the time you hit your 40s or 50s, the mistakes start showing. You can see it in their faces, in their posture, in the way they talk about life. Every bad decision leaves a mark.

I’ve sat at Thanksgiving tables and watched this play out. You see the cousin who married the wrong person, and now every conversation is about how hard life is. You see the uncle who spent his 20s chasing quick thrills and now looks like a relic of his former self. And then you look at the kids—bright-eyed, full of energy, thinking they’re invincible. They don’t know yet that life is a marathon, not a sprint.

That’s why I invest in kids. I talk to them differently. I try to steer them away from the mistakes that everyone else seems determined to make. Because if you can help a kid avoid even half the bad choices their peers make, you’ve given them a head start that will pay off for decades.

Life is like a marathon. At the starting line, everyone looks the same—bunched up, full of energy, ready to run. But five miles in, the pack starts to spread out. Some people are way ahead, others are falling behind, and the gap keeps growing. That’s what choices do.

And the stats prove it. By middle age, the spread is enormous:

• 41% of first marriages end in divorce, and the odds get worse with each attempt.

• The average U.S. household carries $105,056 in debt, with mortgage debt alone averaging $268,060.

• Over 40% of adults are obese, and the highest rates are among people in their 40s and 50s.

These aren’t random outcomes. They’re the result of choices stacked up over decades. The people who finish strong aren’t the ones who sprint early—they’re the ones who pace themselves, make smart decisions, and stay disciplined when everyone else is falling apart.

Here’s something I’ve noticed over the years: misery loves company. People who make bad choices don’t just suffer quietly—they want everyone else to make the same mistakes. Why? Because it makes them feel less alone. If you’ve wrecked your finances, married the wrong person, and let your health go, it’s comforting to see the next generation do the same. It’s almost like a twisted form of validation: “See? It’s not just me. This is how life works.”

But let’s be honest—it’s not “how life works.” It’s how bad decisions impact outcomes. And the numbers back this up. Divorce, debt, obesity—they’re all connected. Stress from debt leads to overeating. Relationship breakdowns lead to depression. Depression leads to bad health habits. It’s a cycle, and once you’re in it, climbing out feels impossible.

I’ve seen this at family gatherings. You hear the stories—another year of bills piling up, another kid in trouble, another health scare. And everyone nods like it’s normal. But it’s not normal. It’s the result of choices. And the sad part? People cling to the idea that something magical will fix it—a lottery win, a miracle from God, a quick fix that wipes the slate clean. But most of the time, that fix never comes.

Here’s the good news: the cycle can be broken. It’s not easy, but it’s possible—and it starts with the next generation. The key isn’t to make kids perfect. The key is to help them avoid the big mistakes—the ones that derail lives. Teach them that life isn’t about following the crowd. Because the crowd? The crowd is headed straight for debt, divorce, and diabolical outcomes.

So what do you do? You teach kids to think long-term. You teach them that every choice is a brick in the house they’re building. Pick the wrong bricks, and the house collapses. Pick the right ones, and you’ve got a fortress.

I tell my grandkids, “Don’t chase what everyone else is chasing. Most people are running toward misery and calling it fun.” I remind them that life is a marathon, and the people who finish strong aren’t the ones who sprint early—they’re the ones who pace themselves, make smart decisions, and stay disciplined when everyone else is falling apart.

And here’s the beautiful part: when you do this, you don’t just change one life. You change a family. You change a legacy. Because good choices ripple forward just like bad ones do. Imagine a Thanksgiving table where everyone is healthy, happy, and financially secure—not because they got lucky, but because they made choices that built that reality. That’s possible. I’ve seen glimpses of it in my own family, and it’s worth every ounce of effort.

Thanksgiving is more than turkey and football—it’s a mirror. Every year, when the family gathers, you can see the story of choices written on people’s faces. Some look vibrant, full of life, laughing easily. Others look worn down, carrying the weight of years of bad decisions. And it’s not just physical—it’s in the conversations. You hear who’s struggling with debt, who’s on their third marriage, who’s battling health problems.

But here’s the thing: Thanksgiving also gives us hope. It’s a chance to reset, to remind ourselves what matters. For a few hours, the bills and the stress fade away, and we just enjoy being together. And if we use that time wisely—not just to eat, but to inspire—we can plant seeds that change the next generation.

Family is a gift, but it’s also a responsibility. It’s not just about biology—it’s about choices. Every choice we make ripples through generations, shaping the lives of people who haven’t even been born yet. That’s heavy, but it’s also empowering. Because if bad choices can create misery, good choices can create joy.

So this Thanksgiving, as you sit around the table, look at the faces you care about and ask yourself: What legacy are we building? Are we passing down wisdom, or just repeating the same mistakes? Because the truth is, the cycle doesn’t have to continue. We can break it. We can teach our kids to run the marathon wisely, to pace themselves, to make decisions that lead to health, happiness, and freedom.

And if we do that—if we choose better and inspire better—then maybe, just maybe, the next Thanksgiving will feel different. The laughter will be louder, the smiles will be brighter, and the weight of bad choices will be replaced by the joy of good ones. That’s something worth being thankful for.

Rich Hoffman

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

I Love War: The greatest joy in life is destroying your enemies

Erika Kirk’s statements at the memorial service for her husband were nice, but it has been something that has come up in my direction many more times than a few this past week.  I am more aligned with what President Trump said about his enemies: I hate them.  I don’t want to get along with them.  And I would be bored to death in life if I didn’t have someone to fight.  The idea of going to Heaven and sitting around playing a harp on a cloud all day for eternity is not appealing.  Forgiving enemies is not something I will ever do.  I love war, and I love being in fights with other people.  I love to destroy my enemies.  That destruction either happens fast or it happens over a great many years, depending on the circumstance.  But one way or another, the destruction of my enemies is something that is going to happen, and I spend a lot of my life thinking about it.  The idea of waking up every morning, sipping coffee, and watching the dew gather on blades of grass without having to fight is incredibly dull to me, and I would not be happy.  So even though the concept of Christianity is to forgive your enemies and all kinds of platitudes that I think were incorrectly interpreted over time into organized religion, that is where my thoughts end on these kinds of things.  I may share a lot of values with very religious people, but if there is no conflict involved in communicating those ideas, then I lose interest really fast.  Because to me, the fight is the only thing that matters, and if people aren’t fighting, they aren’t trying to get to the truth of a matter. 

Human beings are so deceitful; they have numerous value systems that protect their motivations behind the creative lies that surround their lives intensely.  That is the first problem with a society of peace: a lot of truth gets buried behind deceit.  When people ask me why I can sniff out so much truth about things, and have over a long period of time, it’s because I like to fight for that truth about people.  The pressure of conflict brings about the truth in people and exposes them from their hiding places.  In my experience, that is the only way to understand what people are all about truly.  Otherwise, they will conceal their true thoughts behind the façade of polite society.  If you love the truth, you have to love the means of extracting it from society in general, and the only real way to do that is through conflict.  People often reveal a great deal about themselves through conflict that they would otherwise conceal.  Along with war, I love uncovering the truth about things.  Whatever that truth may be.  I love war because I love the truth, and you can only learn it through conflict.  Because people, all people, will lie to protect their version of the truth until their dying day, if they are allowed to.  The reason for conflict is to settle differing ideas about things.  And to avoid war is to suppress the truth about what those things might be in favor of some common understanding that is usually a watered-down version of reality.  So the assumption of peace is the surrender of the truth, as people are willing to fight for it.  And that lowers the value of a society in general as a result. 

I suppose this has arisen recently, before Erika Kirk made her statements, because many truly reprehensible individuals believed they had some leverage over me.  And they have been very frustrated by my reaction to their aggressions.  Most people conduct strategies assuming that peace is the motivating factor in a human being.  To wake up in the morning and be left alone so that everything is just perfect.  I don’t see the world like that.  If there isn’t something to fight, then I’m bored.  So when I have a lot of enemies trying to plot my demise, I am far happier than if everyone just left me alone.  Many people are frustrated by my approach because they assumed, like most people, that I would do anything for peace.  They should have done their homework.  Ever since I was a little kid, most of my thoughts have been about war and fighting someone over something.  That’s why I love politics.  That’s why I love the business world.  That’s why I like most things, because they involve people, and those people are often at cross-purposes with each other. I love uncovering the truth behind concealed smiles and handshakes.  I never sit down with people and look for common ground or ways to enjoy another person.  I want to challenge them, with everyone, and to discover what it is they don’t want to be known for to the world.  I never assume that my interactions with anyone will be peaceful, and if they are, I lose interest in those people quickly.  In my youth, I wore army fatigues everywhere, under every circumstance, because they reminded me of my love for constant fighting.  I never wanted to join the military to “serve.”  Serving others was always a misguided idea because what if, in doing so, those people were found to be unworthy of my dedication, which is a common discovery in all institutionalism.  However, the fighting aspect has always been appealing. 

The teachings of Jesus are appealing ideas on the surface.  But if you like the truth of a matter, you will either be killed for it, as Jesus was, and John the Baptist was, and as was Charlie Kirk, and many others.  Or you will have to fight everyone, and like it.  And that means everyone, because most people are very deceitful even within their families.  There are plenty of fights, and if you want to know the truth about things, you’d better be willing to fight for it.  Fighting is more than just the physical aspect, because humans are very emotional creatures; they create many layers of deceit in their lives to protect themselves from the harm of judgment.  And the more people you deal with, the more deceit you can expect to be exposed to.  The only way to get to the truth of anything is through conflict, in stripping away the things people use to protect themselves so you can get to the foundation of their intellects.  Such a thing is never given up voluntarily; you have to pound away at their defenses to know who they really are, which only happens under duress.  So, if many people have found that they now have a handful with me, they should have thought about things a bit more carefully.  I am only thrilled when the world around me is on fire, and that is how it will always be with me, even in Heaven.  Heaven to me would be at the gates of Hell putting evil’s heads on a pike and spitting on their tortured bodies.  Everyone else can play a harp at the golden gates of Heaven and sing songs to each other in a quest for peace.  Which, for me, is the same as serving an obligation toward dishonesty.  Only in war do people really tell the truth, even in Heaven.

Rich Hoffman

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

I Endorse Ben Nguyen for Lakota School Board: What a smart young man with a great future

Ben Nguyen is in good company.  When Nancy Nix invites me to her house to meet people she thinks will be the future of politics, she has a pretty good track record.  And I felt bad; I was running late when she invited me over to listen to a speech from a bright young man by her pool, as I had in the past.  I was stuck on an overseas call, and the time zones didn’t match up to the schedule Nancy had given me.  But when I did arrive, it was just in time to hear a speech by Ben Nguyen, a former student at Lakota schools who had just graduated and was now running for the school board.  And as I watched him speak, he had picked a spot by her pool to talk to the crowd that was just like another young overachiever, J.D. Vance.  A few years ago I had listened to the future Vice President give a very similar speech as Ben did from that very spot, which was before he was even running for the senate seat, and of course Nancy was right about him.  Ben also reminded me of another bright young mind who she promised me had a great future in politics, which was Vivek Ramaswamy.  I think of these guys as young, even though they were in their late 30s when I first met them, because, to me, they are.  I’m not a young person, so everyone seems young to me.  But Nancy Nix has a knack for finding good people in the crowd and getting behind them with a bit of help.  I was not surprised to learn that Ben Nguyen was an intelligent young man, and I enjoyed listening to him speak about why he was running for the Lakota school board in the November 2025 elections. 

Essentially, Ben is against the upcoming Lakota levy, which is the most expensive school levy in the state of Ohio.  He is also against indoctrination in public schools, and he has fresh experience, having just left school to learn what is really going on.  And he wants to do good things in life with his obvious talents.  He has siblings still attending Lakota schools, so he is concerned about public education in general.  He plans to do many things in the future, as his life is currently an open book.  However, to run and win the school board seat would be historic; he would undoubtedly be one of the youngest ever to do so.  But as I listened to him speak, he possessed the wisdom of a much older person, and he was only going to improve with time.  I had just recently watched Bernie Moreno give a similar speech from almost the same spot in Nancy Nix’s backyard, and he’s close to my age.  And Ben sounded just as well-versed politically, and he was very articulate and well-spoken.  He’s already a better political figure than most people who have been doing this kind of thing for three or four decades.  As I thought about Ben, I was skeptical due to his age as I drove to Nancy’s home.  I am one of those people who think it’s better to be old and broken, looking like a wet towel discarded in the sun, than a beautiful young person with everything working, because of the essential ingredient of wisdom.  Wisdom is hard to get, and it’s worth the age it often takes to get there, and what you lose along the way.  So I’m not automatically impressed with young people.  However, it was clear that Ben Nguyen was something special because he possessed a remarkable amount of wisdom at a very young age, which was evident in his family background, as he discussed.

And he was right in his speech about why someone like him needed to be on the Lakota school board.  I have been intensely critical of the public education system.  My thought on it was to erase everything John Dewey ever did and to start the concept of education anew in American culture.  I don’t think people are nearly as educated as they should be, and I deal with a lot of people every day who hold advanced Master’s and PhDs.  People aren’t that smart in our culture, and it disgusts me.  I’m not excited to support more of the kind of education that leaves people so ill-prepared for the world.  However, to Ben’s point, the current school board does not represent the kind of people who live in Butler County, Ohio. If we are going to have a public school funded by taxpayer money, we should have representatives on the school board who represent us.  After speaking with Ben, I think he would be great, and I will certainly be voting for him.  Needless to say, I fully endorse him and would love to see him win a seat in this upcoming election.  It would be a step in the right direction.  I’ve been a part of a lot of campaigns to put members of the school board in place to represent conservatives, but the efforts have been discouraging, leaving me wanting to blow up the whole system with charter schools and the elimination of the Department of Education as a whole.  But Ben Nguyen reminds me of why I have worked for good school boards in the past, and his personality appears to be well-suited to withstand the intense scrutiny that comes with the job.

Isaac Adi was also there to show support.  Isaac is a current school board member for Lakota, and he consistently votes in favor of Republican positions.  But he’s currently the only one.  He and I have seen each other at a few events since the highly publicized fallout he had with Darby Boddy, a school board member I had supported a lot and still do.  The pressure of those positions, by the whispers that come into them, is hard to deal with, and I wanted those two to work better together instead of against each other.  And Isaac was one of the reasons I no longer thought school board races were worth dealing with.  But seeing him there to support Ben, I thought the beginnings of something good were forming.  Of course, to get a good school board, it would take a lot more than just Ben Nguyen.  However, this was a good start, because until there is a good school board, Lakota schools will continue to mismanage money and ask for tax increases, as they have more in mind than just this bond levy on the November ballot.  They are also considering an operations levy in the very near future, and we don’t want a liberal school board rubber-stamping more spending, as they have been doing.  We need smart people who are willing to engage in lively debate and continually ask essential questions. With Ben Nguyen in that school board role, I see a lot of opportunity for good things to happen.  However, people will have to show up and vote for him because the Democrats are counting on a low turnout to maintain the status quo on the school board.  So people are going to have to rally behind Ben.  And after hearing him speak and explaining what he wants to do and why, the Lakota school district would be in a much better position.  And Ben Nguyen is certainly somebody voters can get excited about.

Rich Hoffman

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

What a Miracle to see RFK Jr. Confirmed: The hidden war against Americans through poisoned food

It was different this time, whenever I go to political fundraisers, there’s always hope lurking in the background that if only we could get this person elected, or that, that maybe, just maybe, we might save the world.  But a kind of dismal smoke always makes everything political seem out of reach, even diabolical.  Things never quite work out how you want them to, and the political efforts always come out feeling short on the results.  However, the atmosphere was dramatically different this year at the Nancy Nix fundraiser for February of 2025.  Trump had been back in the White House for a month, but things were already feeling dramatically different.  Kash Patel had just been confirmed as the new Director of the FBI, which I never thought possible, and it is a topic of its own.  Most of Trump’s presidential picks had received confirmation votes in the Senate.  But the one I think is astonishing, and that I thought was even less of a possibility than Kash Patel, is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  The Senate confirmed RFK Jr. into his new role as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and I am very excited to see what he can do with our food supply.  After reading his books on Anthony Fauci, I never thought he’d be in any government role.  It just seemed like a fantasy that could never come true.  But he did get confirmed, and that will be his new job, and I think great things will happen from that position.  Not that I am suddenly about government regulations or supportive of Democrats.  But in a tough time, when I was reading Bobby’s books about the origin and villains of COVID-19, I thought it took a lot of guts to say what he did and that all those things have stood up to time legally. 

Let’s not play patty cake with this issue; COVID was the most diabolical menace created as a bioweapon that has so far been unleashed on the human race within the context of mass scale. It was created in a lab in Wuhan and released to the world during an election year when China was very upset about Trump’s trade tariffs, and there is only one way to view that kind of thing: as a terrorist weapon meant to drive a World Economic Forum Great Reset of the global economy into a communist-controlled menace.  And that’s saying it all nicely.  For those who think we can turn the page and forget what Covid was, who made it, and why, forget about it.  Those involved in creating and distributing COVID-19 must be punished for what they did. The pharma companies that perpetuated the destruction must also be dealt with.  We can’t let it go.  Time and distance can’t make the guilty less guilty.  They have to pay, and RFK Jr. laid out the case in his two books on the subject, The Real Anthoney Fauci and The Wuhan Cover-up.  As the new HHS secretary, the author of those books gets to drive health policy in America, knowing what we do now about all the diabolical forces in the background who used health care as a global power grab to install a one-world government driven ultimately by the United Nations, through their sub-tier, The World Health Organization.  These are all bad people from socialist and communist countries, and they have been trying to destroy our nation through policy regulation for years, and with COVID-19, they went too far.  Trump knows it, and his new HHS secretary wrote the book on the matter.

Regarding poison, I have become very skeptical of our food supply and how our water is treated across America.  Watching what many evil characters without refute did during COVID-19 has opened the door to everything, such as fluoride and corn syrup, as known catastrophic mechanisms of doom.   Even if the government pinheads did everything on accident, just trying to meet the market needs of a capitalist public, allowing known killers to poison our food just can’t occur.  As an example, a good friend of mine just traveled to England, where a week there lowered his blood sugar dramatically as he has diabetes, just through diet.  I have had a similar experience and complained about it a lot.  The food in Europe has all kinds of regulations and doesn’t taste nearly as good as it does in America.  Usually, after I take a trip to Europe or Asia, I look forward to my layover flights in either Chicago, Detroit, or Charlette upon re-entering the United States because I pig out on double combo meals from the nearest Burger King just to get my usual food intake levels back to what they are used to in America.  But maybe that shouldn’t be the case.  Our food is making us unhealthy, and not that Europe or Asia is doing something better than us with tight market controls over the food supply, but perhaps in this case, their admission to the health crises is far more than just being a nanny state over their citizens.  We’re at a point where you can’t have any discussions about healthcare policy without dealing with the poison that is in most foods, hidden behind our free market system with the same intentions as drug dealers seek to poison our citizens slowly.  Who needs war to kill off your enemy when you can just encourage them to poison themselves with drugs and poorly constructed food? 

I was with a large group of affiliates at the P.F. Chang’s in West Chester where we were talking about this very issue, and we were all sharing some lettuce wraps and talking about all the harmful ingredients that were in American Chinese food that you wouldn’t find in the country of origin.  And my attitude was, “Who cares?” because this food had to be good for you because I wouldn’t be eating a leaf if not for all the good stuff that you poor over it to make it taste good.  So, indeed, the leaf had health value.  But, when you think of the vast amounts of food we eat where those kinds of concessions are constantly being made, our bodies can’t keep up with all the lousy processing, destroying our population.  So we needed to have a serious discussion on food, and we need to set some standards that are going to be rough on companies taking advantage of the freedom they have had because we can’t poison our population and hide laziness and a lack of innovation behind a mask of capitalism, and to call it good.  Because so many companies have gotten away with literal murder, the pharma companies thought they were going to get away with COVID-19 and the vaccines that caused so much trouble with ridiculous immunity deals from any prosecution.  The solution to all in RFK was to be in some position to help.  And to have a Trump administration that would have the guts to turn him loose.  And now he is, Robert F. Kenndy Jr. is getting the chance of a lifetime, and he won’t waste it.  Which, of course, we will all benefit from.   Our food might taste different, but we’ll get used to it.  Because ultimately, we all want to be healthier and not let our enemies laugh at us while we poison ourselves recklessly and without regard for a prosperous future.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Illusion of Joe Biden: Who really runs the world

Sorry to break it to everyone. People continue to be surprised that Joe Biden is not in charge of our government, and he never was.  I told you guys that he was a puppet president put in place.  He was not elected.  The Administrative State selected him to serve the Deep State of globalists hiding in the World Economic Forum in the mountains of Davos.  And the Joe Biden presidency is them flexing the muscle of their power and control over the rest of us.  Now that time has passed, and the election fraud of 2020 is so apparent, with objective evidence beyond a doubt, the realization is becoming more mainstream.  People have assumed that when they elect a president, they bring in an executive to run the country.  But that is not what the hostile agents of doom worldwide want.  They want an idiot like Joe, who is so compromised as a person that he is easy to control.  They are still so mad that we elected Trump back in 2016 that they no longer care if we see how they control our lives.  The illusion of freedom has now been ripped away, and during that debate with Trump at the end of June 2024, people had that moment where they realized that all the comments about Biden were not some conspiracy theory created by some Alex Jones personality.  This was real.  To many people, that realization was terrifying and something that people were beginning to observe.  If Joe Biden wasn’t running the country, then who was?  The answer is the Administrative State.  The Biden presidency is a creation of bureaucrats to preserve Washington D.C.’s culture of easy money and sinful mayhem.  And they didn’t want a real executive like President Trump traditionally running things.  Instead, they gave us President Biden to flex their muscle and preserve their globalist plans.  And now they aren’t even trying to hide it with that mess of a debate they gave us with tongues deeply in their cheeks.

But how could they do such a thing?  Well, it’s simple, and we see this audaciousness in almost every industry.  Yes, it is raw communism, but it is disguised to us as procedural fulfillment.  Those who write the rules and create the procedures are the absolute rulers of the world.  And that is how they have been running Joe Biden.  He is not concerned about deciding on the health of the nuclear football because these same administrator types control the whole world and know whether there will be a war or not between two parties.  They have complete control over everything, including when wars happen and where, such as in the Russia/Ukraine war presently.  Or the fight between the Palestinians and Israel.  Or whether China will invade Taiwan.  It’s all carefully scripted, with procedural mandates flowing down through the United Nations.  How it works in this Biden White House and since the first George Bush was in office was that administrators following the handbook of global politics set the agenda and policy for the American president, and he is supposed to follow that without deviation.  The president’s job, such as Obama’s job exclusively, was to sell the illusion to the public.  Not to make executive decisions.  We don’t have a system that allows for a president to act as a traditional executive.  They aren’t making decisions decisively in the situation room anymore.  They are given PR memos and told what to say and where to do it.  It’s all written down for them, but who does all the writing?  Well, it’s the same pinheaded young college kids who learn in school how to be friendly, little compliant members of the administrative state.  They also learn to get their information from the United Nations, where all procedures and rules for global conduct are put in place. 

It works that way in business, too.  Many of the world’s best companies are not run by strong personalities as we expect them to be. Instead, most CEOs are focused on compliance with the standards created by the Administrative State.  The values have shifted dramatically in recent years, not to a company’s performance but more to its compliance with rules and standardization, which is meant to bring sameness to the world’s industries and usher in global communism using China as the model.  That is what the United Nations has been doing in the background.  And for proof, look at your local zoning and township maintenance.  Most of what they have to deal with comes straight out of the pages of Agenda 21 and 2030, including the smart meters on all our houses.  I live in an area heavily targeted by Agenda 21’s “sustainable development” and warned everyone 20 years ago what it was and how it would be done.  As a result, we have roundabouts and bicycle trails everywhere for these beta males who like to ride bicycles looking like girls in their tight spandex pants and gay little helmets.  But the shell game works like this: Deep Staters flow down the rules and regulations through the Administrative State, who pick it up and flow it into every company in the world through standardization.  And it ends up in local government school boards and with the trustees as enforceable mandates.  And if the local leadership doesn’t follow the rules, they get sued.  When people are upset over some new zoning change, all trustees can do is follow the zoning recommendations, which are entirely shaped by those same kids right out of college who were trained to be compliant members of the Administrative State bureaucracy.  And if the trustees don’t follow the rules and prove themselves non-compliant, they are harassed legally. 

This has been the phantom impact of global communism as advocated by the United Nations.  This is how they plan to rule the world, as they have been doing. Essentially, all rules and regulations that we endure today, no matter what industry it is, go to the doorstep of the mindless bureaucrats banging wine glasses together in the mountains of Davos hiding behind the World Economic Forum on behalf of the United Nations.  And Joe Biden, for them, was revenge against the rest of us because Trump threatened to dismantle that entire mess.  So Joe Biden, the complete idiot, was to stick it in our eye that they are in control and have been for years.  But we are fighting back, with Trump running for another term.  The Supreme Court just ruled on the Chevron case, which dramatically takes away the power of the Administrative State to grab power for itself and then continue to change rules, solidifying that power to an even greater extent.  As bad as it has been, people are catching on, and if that debate was meant to discourage people from challenging the power of the Administrative State, it turned people in the other direction.  I would say that the power and arrogance of the Deep State and their frustrations at a public that insists on more than an illusion of freedom forced them into a rather large error.  They should not have put Biden on that stage to show the world he was never in charge.  Because it only confirmed the suspicions that the public had been having.  They may have wanted a replacement on the Democrat ticket while there is still time to build up someone else.  But this is the kind of mess you always get when dealing with the Administrative State.  They make a lot of mistakes because competent rulers don’t rule them.  But pinheaded bureaucrats who have been trying to replace real executive leadership for years.  And it’s all been a trick that most people have fallen for, at least until now. 

Rich Hoffman

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