Category: Rich Hoffman

Ann Becker’s Stand Against Ohio’s Central Committee: How John Kasich became an idiot–understanding Kantian philosophy

I remember doing a radio show several years ago with Matt Clark about how communists planned to take over both political parties in America and how they were going to infiltrate the media as far back as the late 1950s.  Obviously we have seen that happen in regard to the Democrats and the major media sources.  They call them progressives, but essentially they are communist leaning sympathizers by the nature of their philosophy.  But Matt and I also talked about the same thing happening to the Republican Party.  To many of us, the behavior of the GOP since as far back as 9-11 caused questioning minds to scratch their heads in bewilderment.  When John McCain lashed out at Bill Cunningham for being “divisive” during a campaign stop in Cincinnati during 2008 for which the WLW host was the emcee further preponderance of the evidence was presented.  These Republicans were not conservatives—but rather were something else and their strategic aims were much more centrist in their nature.  That by itself would not be alarming, but they seemed to be working with Democrats to pull that central position over time radically to the left.  Today’s “centrist” used to be yesterday’s socialist and yesterdays neutral supporter along the political spectrum is now openly communist—(progressive).  I dare one person to describe to me how progressivism differs from the communists of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1919.  (I’m waiting.)

Obviously I have known about this for a long time to even be able to talk about it in hindsight on Matt Clark’s show.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.  But the rest of the country really hasn’t noticed because of all the noise of modern society.  The evidence gets drowned out by the furious pace of our lives.  A lot of times the participants themselves don’t even realize the role they play—because they don’t know enough about history to understand.  One such example is the governor of my state John Kasich, who started off wonderfully six years ago, but is now an openly progressive loser who has evoked “god” as an excuse for expanding government reach and balancing the Ohio budget with more federal money through Obamacare exchanges.  If you want to know how deep this corruption has spread then look at the radicalism of the Ohio State Central Committee in supporting Kasich for the upcoming primaries when it is clearly evident that he doesn’t stand a chance at winning the popular vote.  Like trained drones the Ohio State Central Committee is sticking by the plan hashed out long ago—that Kasich the “moderate” would be elected president making it easy for the radical leftists to run over our nation without resistance.  Even though polling of prospective primary voters favor Trump and Cruz, the State Central Committee is doing what they planned all along.  They don’t listen to voters, they listen to the party bosses as to how and who to elect—and that plan was never in the favor of the American population.

This little trick is never talked about literally.  Every State Central Committee person is not part of some vast conspiracy—not knowingly.  It wasn’t that long ago that people like my friend Ann Becker from the Cincinnati Tea Party encouraged me to run for a Central Committee spot in my district.  Ann and her people are doing the good work of knocking moderate leftists out of the Central Committee to put more reasonable traditionalists on in their place.  To my eyes the functioning philosophy of the whole enterprise was noticeably Kantian and I knew that the basic philosophy for which they were functioning had to be changed before truly effective management of the Central Committee system could fully be implemented.  However, that doesn’t stop the good work of people inclined to suffer the daily abuse it takes to make micro changes along the way from doing so.  My role in all this has to be “different” so we all do what we are best at.  Ann is one of those people who likes to fight it out on the inside and she issued the following statement in regard to John Kasich.

I heard you! You do not support Governor Kasich for President – even if the Ohio GOP State Central Committee does. 


You reenergized my faith in the Constitutional people of Ohio! Yesterday I sent out an email about the Ohio Republican State Central Committee’s endorsement of Governor Kasich. An endorsement by a party means the members of that party are expected to support the candidate.


I received over 200 emails in two hours yesterday telling me ‘Hell No.’ The stories about Governor Kasich and the disdain for the Ohio Republican Party State Central Committee’s endorsement of Kasich was incredible. I could feel the anger coming out of my computer. 


Governor Kasich says he balanced Ohio’s budget – all Governors have to balance Ohio’s budget, it’s in the Ohio Constitution. He says he created jobs in Ohio – his term started after the crash in 2008. Yes, there were more jobs created in Ohio after 2008 but was it Kasich that created the jobs or the free market starting to improve? He takes credit for the jobs that our small business owners work hard and create – you didn’t build that Governor Kasich. 


Governor Kasich’s support of Common Core, his expanding Medicaid using Obamacare, his increase of spending in Ohio by 30%, his standing in the way of Right to Work, his raising taxes – all of these things and more are reasons that he is not the best choice for President.


I think we all agree that we want a President that will stand by the Constitution and give America a plan to move this country forward, not backward, toward freedom. Whoever that candidate is for you, vote for him or her. No one has the right to expect you to vote a certain way, party or not.


We want political parties that stand on principle, not on who they can get elected. Shame on the State Central Committee. They are up for reelection this March; we must watch those races. 


Your mission over the next eight weeks is to make sure everyone you know is ready to vote on March 15, or early vote at your county Board of Elections, starting February 17th. This is the most important primary in the history of the United States of America. Everyone who cares about the future of this country needs to get out and vote!


One of the biggest issues I heard about regarding Governor Kasich was his support of Common Core. I really thought he would flip-flop on this by now, but he is standing strong with Common Core. 


A horrible choice for our kids and Ohio Governor Kasich!


I had the privilege of hearing Heidi Huber give an update on Common Core last night. The video is below. We must stand together to make the change we want to see. 

Heidi Huber Common Core Update

 

Yours in Liberty,

Ann Becker

Kasich has been a disaster.  New York pundits like Bill O’Reilly on Fox News think that Kasich has done a fantastic job as governor.  But that’s because Kasich used to host his show and that Bill doesn’t live in Ohio.  Also, compared to New York, Ohio seems like a bastion of conservatism.  To Bill’s eyes, I’m sure Kasich looks like a conservative, but that’s only because the noise of modern politics drowns out the truth.    Kasich is broken at the level of his foundation philosophies.  He and the establishment types in the GOP have been taught to think incorrectly and now they are leading the party toward aims that were always intended to be noticeably communist.  Here is the evidence, first a definition of Kantian ethics followed by a nice little quote from the blogspot “Marxist Update.”

Kantian ethics refers to a deontological ethical theory ascribed to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. The theory, developed as a result of Enlightenment rationalism, is based on the view that the only intrinsically good thing is a good will; an action can only be good if its maxim – the principle behind it – is duty to the moral law. Central to Kant’s construction of the moral law is the categorical imperative, which acts on all people, regardless of their interests or desires. Kant formulated the categorical imperative in various ways. His principle of universalisability requires that, for an action to be permissible, it must be possible to apply it to all people without a contradiction occurring. His formulation of humanity as an end in itself requires that humans are never treated merely as a means to an end, but always also as ends in themselves. The formulation of autonomy concludes that rational agents are bound to the moral law by their own will, while Kant’s concept of the Kingdom of Ends requires that people act as if the principles of their actions establish a law for a hypothetical kingdom. Kant also distinguished between perfect and imperfect duties. A perfect duty, such as the duty not to lie, always holds true; an imperfect duty, such as the duty to give to charity, can be made flexible and applied in particular time and place.  (Sound like Kasich?)

In political philosophy, Kant has had wide and increasing influence with the major political philosopher of the late twentieth century, John Rawls, drawing heavily on his inspiration in setting out the basis for a liberal view of political institutions. The nature of Rawls’ use of Kant has engendered serious controversy but has demonstrated the vitality of Kantian considerations across a wider range of questions than was once thought plausible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantian_ethics

The poet Heine, who was a friend of Marx and upon whom the latter at one time had a great influence, depicted very vividly Kant’s motives for treading the two paths. Kant had an old and faithful servant, Lampe, who had lived with, and attended to, his master for forty years. For Kant this Lampe was the personification of the average man who could not live without religion. After a brilliant exposition of the revolutionary import of the Critique of Pure Reason in the struggle with theology and with the belief in a Divine Principle, Heine explained why Kant found it necessary to write the Critique of Practical Reason in which the philosopher re-established everything he had torn down before. Here is what Heine wrote:

“After the tragedy comes the farce. Immanuel Kant has hitherto appeared as the grim, inexorable philosopher; he has stormed heaven, put all the garrison to the sword; the ruler of the world swims senseless in his blood; there is no more any mercy, or fatherly goodness, or future reward for present privations; the immortality of the soul is in its last agonies — death rattles and groans. And old Lampe stands by with his umbrella under his arm as a sorrowing spectator, and the sweat of anguish and tears run down his cheeks. Then Immanuel Kant is moved to pity, and shows himself not only a great philosopher, but a good man. He reconsiders, and half good-naturedly and half ironically says, ‘Old Lampe must have a God, or else the poor man cannot be happy, and people really ought to be happy in this world. Practical common sense declares that. Well, meinet wegen, for all I care, let practical reason guarantee the existence of a God.'” [Heinrich Heine, Collected Works. W. Heineman, London, 1906. Vol. 5, pp. 150-151.]

http://marxistupdate.blogspot.com/2012/01/immanuel-kant-marxist-view.html

That’s how the political left has been able to implement and enact a communist strategy while at the same time convincing people who think they are hard-core conservative Central Committee members that they are doing the work established by Immanuel Kant.  What they don’t know is that Kant put down the foundations of Marxism which would evolve into open communism to essentially destroy the economy of Russia allowing Europe to rise to power after World War I.  It’s all German philosophy people.  But eventually Kant would influence John Rawls who nearly singlehandedly brought detrimental liberalism to most political institutions academic and social.  His magnum opus, A Theory of Justice (1971), was said at the time of its publication to be “the most important work in moral philosophy since the end of World War II“[4]and is now regarded as “one of the primary texts in political philosophy”.[5] His work in political philosophy, dubbed Rawlsianism,[6] takes as its starting point the argument that “the most reasonable principles of justice are those everyone would accept and agree to from a fair position”.[5] Rawls attempts to determine the principles of social justice by employing a number of thought experiments such as the famous original position in which everyone is impartially situated as equals behind a veil of ignorance.[5] He is one of the major thinkers in the tradition of liberal political philosophy. According to English philosopher Jonathan Wolff, while there could be a “dispute about the second most important political philosopher of the 20th century, there could be no dispute about the most important: John Rawls”.[4]

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rawls

It is because of Kant then Rawls that Governor Kasich and the Ohio State Central Committee is a bunch of idiots.  It is their foundation philosophy that Ann Becker and her purists are fighting against.  Of course Kasich and his gang don’t understand what Ann is talking about just as they can’t understand why Trump and Cruz are doing so well nationally in the 2016 presidential race—they continue to function based on the beliefs they have been taught by education institutions following the philosophy of John Rawls.  CLICK TO REVIEW.  They don’t understand because their thinking is wrong and out of touch with the rest of the world.  So I suggest dear reader that you do as Ann has asked, over the next eight weeks you need to register to vote in the primary and you need to defy the Ohio State Central Committee leadership and vote for anybody but John Kasich.  He is a failed person not because he’s bad—but because he was taught to be an idiot who follows Kant instead of some American philosopher with proper foundation thoughts, such as Thomas Jefferson or Ayn Rand.  Send the German philosophy back to Europe the way they sent it to Russia to destroy that nation.  Keep that stuff out of America and especially the state of Ohio.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Embarrassment of Detroit: Watch Steve Crowder demonstrate what could be next for America

It is a small radio station but it is doing some of the best work in talk radio that’s out there.  I used to do a lot with WLW radio in Cincinnati, but over time I’ve found WAAM radio in Ann Arbor, Michigan to be much more positioned to do the good work of conservative contemplation.  I’d say it is far superior to 55 KRC in Cincinnati largely because WLW and KRC are both Clear Channel stations run by a large corporate board and WAAM is still family owned and managed by good, solid people.  Of course I have been complimentary of The Blaze Radio but I have stopped listening to them because of their anti-Trump stance.  That has left me guest hosting and serving as a guest on WAAM nearly exclusively, because I like the owners.  It’s not so much the initial broadcast that matters these days, it’s the international reach that comes from the podcasts.  People are able to listen online months after the original airing, and more people listen that way these days than they do live. So given that as the factor in a changing marketplace, WAAM is a considerable heavy hitter nationally as they carry Glenn Beck in syndication and Alex Jones—but they have legitimate on air talent like Matt Clark and Steve Crowder who are young guns that show great promise for the future.  I’ve talked a lot about Matt, but if you’ve never listened to WAAM you should check out a contemporary of his, Steve Crowder.  He has a unique comedy conservativism that is very unique and specific to his generation empowering him to do work like he did below in Detroit.  Watch this.

Without people like Crowder, and talk radio in general, nobody would really know the truth about what’s really going on.  Regarding Detroit—which used to be one of the most successful cities on earth—television used to be a big exporter from that city in the Midwest.  Now it looks like the ruins of an ancient Mayan civilization.  It is literally a city of an ancient past.  Crowder exhibited this fact by driving into the center of the downtown area and driving out into the outer parts of the city to show how quickly things degraded.  It truly is a shocking video shown above to see the facts as Steve Crowder presented them.  By turning on the camera and just letting it run until they were in the slums and areas so depleted with population that there was already grass growing where there used to be buildings, Steve Crowder proved his point.   The modern city of Detroit is already looking like a lost city in need of archaeological discovery.   It is truly amazing to see the effects of a bankrupt city and its impact on the world around it.

As vibrant as Chicago looks today—it is headed in the same direction—as is the United States in general.  Two decades ago only the most conspiratorial science fiction writers predicted that Detroit would become a bankrupt city hemorrhaging population and selling homes at a price of $100 dollars.  Just one mile out of downtown the once great city of Detroit looks like the ruins of Troy or Giza—only a few religious monuments and fortunate homes have survived the vandalism and destruction of a declining population.  You can’t operate at a deficit for so many years and expect to hold value for property.  The United States at a nearly $19 trillion deficit as of this writing is where Detroit as a city was two decades ago.  It wouldn’t take much for the United States at this phase to resemble Detroit within a decade of now.  Nobody back in the heyday of Detroit ever believed it would look the way it does today.  They assumed that all the prosperity would go on forever—but it didn’t.

I have a fascination with old western towns.  At the time of their construction the residents could never imagine that those towns would ever become in decline.  Yet most of them did.  Residents of Rome and Egypt during the days of their powerful empires felt the same way; they never could imagine that there would ever be a society where their city or country was not the supreme in the world.  The same could be said of modern England which only one hundred years ago had an empire across the whole of the world.  Now they are a fraction of their former power and teeming with socialism as a changed society with only their roots into history as mere sympathy.  Nothing stays the same if bad management is applied to the maintenance of it.  In a car, if it is not maintained properly, it will decline in condition rapidly.  In a marriage, if care is not given, it will die.  Children require love and attention.  Companies require good management to maintain their status as job creators.  And for cities to survive, they must have good management.

Most of the failing cities around the world are run by liberals, because the demographic circumstances of mass populations make it so through democratic elections.   Needy, dependent people tend to migrate toward each other as rugged individualists like elbow room.  So cities tend to have people conglomerated into small areas who all share a level of human bonding and collective social services—and they elect people into office who think the way they do.  Now that liberalism is a proven intellectual failure regarding proper management of resources and people—there is a track record to identify—whereas a few decades ago, there wasn’t.  Detroit is the evidence of that failure—dramatically.  But it’s not alone.  As Steve Crowder drove the lonely crime ridden streets of Detroit in the above video, where a vast amount of the population was functionally illiterate—in spite of the free education provided to them—liberalism and its effects were on prolific display.  Years ago I wrote a screenplay that made several Wilshire Blvd agents very animated with anger called The Lost Cannibals of Cahokia.  That script featured a modern horror adventure story about discovering the mysterious reason that the ancient city just outside of St. Louis was suddenly abandoned of its culture and resources. The story was fiction but the premise of the characters was based on my observed opinions.  My reason of course was one that certainly went against the Hollywood mentality and just about every academic back then.  My proposal was that it was a form of liberalism that destroyed Cahokia and many other ancient cities from Chichen Itza to Ankor Wat.  Liberalism centered on self-sacrifice for the greater good in whatever variation of it was presented was my proposal for the destruction of most ancient cities.  Detroit is only the modern version of that destruction.  Washington D.C. is headed along that path as is all of the state of California.  They are on unsustainable paths that are closing in on them rapidly.

Many around the United States however don’t know much about places like Detroit.  If they visit, they only see the immediate downtown and not what’s one mile outside the city.  So radio guys like Steve Crowder are doing a great service to all of society and their political spectrums.  Detroit is a disgrace and people really need to see it, because those problems are coming to a neighborhood near you dear reader.  And if you really love something like I think Steve Crowder really loves Detroit—because he was born there—then the best way to save it is to tell the story in a truthful way—not just in tight television shots during a Detroit Lions football game.  People need to see what’s just beyond downtown—artificially propped up by federal money and corporate sponsorship to attempt to not make things appear as bad as they really are.  That’s the story in Chicago right now.  It’s a dead city with only the mask of a living entity on its face. If you want to prevent further casualties from the same fate, it’s time to identify the liberalism that has caused those deaths.  And if you want to hear Steve Crowder live on WAAM radio, check him out from 6 am to 9 am on Friday mornings.

I challenge anyone reading this article at any point in the future to give me one example of a liberal society that is successful.  And that includes Scandinavia.  Give me one example of success.  I bet you can’t.  They are all future Detroits in the making.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Frisky Nikki Haley: Not exactly the best strategy for the GOP

Apparently the GOP doesn’t get it. Why in the world they put Nikki Haley on as the response to Idiot Obama’s State of the Union speech from the standpoint of the Republicans is a mystery greater than the Bermuda Triangle.  As I watched her I couldn’t help but think that it was Haley who had caved into progressives regarding the Confederate Flag issue at the South Carolina State House.   Progressives applied pressure and she yielded giving them the victory.  Listen Republicans—compromise is a dirty word–when something is wrong and something is right.  The world is full of black and white—metaphorically—not literally, and compromising with wrong does not make it partially right. You’d think that the GOP would have looked at the current presidential frontrunners, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz and they’d put up someone to respond to the president that more accurately reflected the values of current GOP voters.  Instead they put forward a RINO at best who said this:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans should resist “the siren call of the angriest voices” in how the nation treats immigrants, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said Tuesday as the GOP used its response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address to try softening the tough stance embraced by some of its leading presidential candidates.

The U.S.-born daughter of Indian immigrants, Haley said the country is facing its most dangerous security threat since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. That was a reference to the Islamic State group, which has taken credit for attacks in Paris and elsewhere and may have inspired last month’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, California.

“During anxious times, it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices,” Haley, mentioned by some as a potential vice presidential candidate this year, said in her party’s formal response to Obama. “We must resist that temptation.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sc-governor-urges-tolerance-for-immigrants-in-gop-response/ar-CCsfBb?ocid=ansmsnnews11

No, the temptation against judgment where smart behavior must prevail over stupid behavior must not be compromised.  Having an open border in the United States is a foreign desire to destroy American capitalism with social diffusion, and anybody intelligent would understand that.  Instead, the GOP thought it was more important, and stylish to put a woman RINO who failed a contentious issue in South Carolina up as an answer to the GOP party platform going into the 2016 election season.  We are well beyond this kind of nonsense and trickery folks.

I’m sure Nikki Haley is a nice woman.  She’s somebody’s daughter, wife and mother.  She has a little bit of history with sleeping around with political bloggers and lobbyists which she denies, but I’m sure there’s some truth to it.  Funny things happen when people are in powerful positions and they share common values after hard-fought battles.  When you mix males and females together they tend to want to stick things into one another for pleasurable outcomes unless they can control their emotions—and politics is an emotional endeavor—extreme emotional highs and lows.  I actually knew a very driven political woman like Nikki Haley once and from 35 to 40 years of age, she was a bit of a sex addict—it went right along with the politics she was addicted to.  Her husband wasn’t a part of that world, so he didn’t understand why she was always so charged up all the time.   So there is likely some truth to the allegations against her—she fits the profile.   I personally don’t care.  She can do what she wants but with all things considered—she is what the Republican Party thought most represented their party?  Seriously?  Couldn’t they find anybody better—less controversial with a track record of success?  Is she the best that they have?

Apparently so, which says a lot.  I don’t think she’s done a bad job in South Carolina but I wouldn’t call her an example of excellence either.  I think with Republicans they picked her because she’s young, not horrible to look at, and she is “inclusive” to the open border policies foreign insurgents like George Soros are conducting against American sovereignty—which keeps campaign donations flowing into their political machine.  Maintaining borders in America is important to sustaining the value of American citizenship.  There is a reason that some of the highest per capita incomes in the world are within the United States.  It’s part of our “brand.”  If you let anybody into a movie how can its worth be measured but in ticket prices?  If everyone were just allowed to watch a movie how would anybody know if that movie is any good?  The price of a ticket and how many people buy one determine a movie’s value.  Even communist leaning liberals should be able to understand that.  The public has limited access to the celebrities in movies which drives up the desire for the market brand of those actors.  All that restriction causes increased value.  Limited access causes a desire to pay for a ticket price to see a movie with a particular actor involved so the viewer can at least be close to that person.

When a woman like Nikki Haley has rumors of one night stands with political lobbyists it lowers her brand.  The better thing to do is to be highly desired as a sex object without providing the sex—that way many people might yearn to be with her, they may even do what she wants them to do hoping to get access—but if people think she’s easy—sexually, her brand goes down because other people have already had her.  Whether or not it’s fair, it’s the rules of the game.  If a woman gives up sex too easily she is viewed as a slut.  If she is faithful to a husband or her family in general her brand goes up enormously because that person is inaccessible.  But if anybody can have sex with her any time they want, the value of sex with her is reduced to something much less spectacular.  The same holds true with an entire country, the more restrictive the access; the more people value it when they get access.  The less, the more they will want to abuse the situation to satisfy their personal whims.

http://www.politico.com/story/2010/06/haley-denies-second-rumored-affair-038077

Because of the rumors and the evidence by text messages and other aspects I have witnessed in real life, I think Nikki Haley probably has some trouble with maintaining her sexual poise in politically active climates.  That might impress members of the GOP who want to sleep with her sometime knowing that she’s easy game to tag, but it doesn’t do much to deliver the confidence that the GOP knows what they are doing. Then to compound the problem it was only this previous summer where progressives had beat her to a pulp over the Confederate Flag leaving her to compromise under the pressure. The racist insurgents didn’t give anything up to have the flag removed, it simply forced Nikki Haley to come off her position more to the center strategically—which was a loss for her.  Granted, it was a tough position for her to be in, and the GOP probably should have let a few years pass before they used her as the Republican answer to the President’s State of the Union address.  But they used her anyway because they thought it was a good idea.

But knowing politics the way I do I’d say somebody had other ideas given Haley’s reputation.  And that is just sad.  The GOP should be able to put up better, more reliable people other than Nikki Haley.  They didn’t—because they were unable to think of anybody—which shows why they are so far out of touch.  Some of those same idiots were seeking Obama’s autograph after the State of the Union speech even though it was a terrible speech speaking about a terrible presidency leaving the nation horribly in debt and a laughing-stock across the world.  It’s no wonder the GOP is failing just slightly less than the Democrats—they just don’t understand.  But in 2016, they’re going to learn just how much they don’t know and why they are going extinct.  And their extinction will make me very happy.  Right now, I’m just embarrassed for them.  They are so unimaginative and driven by primal urges—it’s just pathetic.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Quick Cal on WAAM Radio: The strongest argument in favor of guns

It had been a week of attacks against the Second Amendment, Obama had enacted executive orders against the right to maintain firearms within American society then he held a CNN town hall to justify his imposition.  It was clear to me that Obama was functioning from extreme ignorance—not all of it his fault.  Growing up in Indonesia as a boy, then in Hawaii by communist sympathizing grandparents he didn’t understand guns and how they applied to American Exceptionalism.  Obama doesn’t even believe in American Exceptionalism so he wasn’t close to understanding the role that guns played in maintaining that high measure of quality.  But, most people around the country—especially those who work with guns away from the largely democratically run cities in the United States—understand, and I felt it necessary to teach anti-gun people why they were wrong in their basic thinking—especially the president and his radical city dwelling progressive insurgents.  Since I was hosting for Matt Clark on 1600 WAAM in Ann Arbor, Michigan over an early weekend in January 2016 I thought it would be a good time to do a show about how guns benefit society and specifically American Exceptionalism.  So I invited on Quick Cal, who is the director of the Cowboy Fast Draw Association and champion shooter of four professional shooting categories and a multiple world record holder to talk about the benefits of firearms training and how it helps nurture an obscure philosophy that is the key to American Exceptionalism called the Cowboy Way.  Listen to that epic broadcast here:

Cal and I told several stories from both of our perspectives regarding our value of the Cowboy Way, which as Cal said is a philosophical definition that is minimalist in nature but  exemplifies the type of decency typically associated with Christian values—civility toward others, honor, hard work—essentially “do onto others as you’d have others do onto you.”  Cal stated that as a young man in the 1960s it was the Cowboy Way that kept him straight and off drugs and alcohol during that turbulent decade and I told a similar story.  I have worn a cowboy hat since I was in the fifth grade or some variation of it. When I was very young I recognized a need to distinguish myself from the rest of the world with some kind of hat that said my values were different from the mainstream of society—which appeared to my juvenile eyes to be headed in the wrong direction.  People always made fun of it and I learned to have a very thick skin about my hats.  Often I would wear a cowboy hat in public knowing and hoping that it would anger the mainstreamers—and I took inward joy at their anger.  Twenty years ago wearing such a hat during the post Reagan years took a lot of confidence especially for a young guy like me.  I wore it around the U.C. campus when I used to live there and would walk right down Vine Street with it on even though it went against the urban culture so prevalent there.  I knew the anger came because unconsciously people knew it symbolized the Cowboy Way which was viewed by progressive society as a backward “unenlightened” approach to living.  By wearing my cowboy hats, it was my public affirmation of values and traditional belief—and it distinguished me from my peers in a way which certainly preserved me to my current age.

Once I was invited to a campus rave party in an abandoned house at 2 AM in the morning.  I knew nothing good could come of the experience but a friend of mine wanted me to go with him in case he got into some physical confrontation—so I went along to protect him.   I showed up dressed in my poncho and a cowboy hat looking like I just stepped out of a spaghetti western—which I have always  enjoyed, and I certainly looked strange next to all the “emo” types dressed in black with all the piercings they had before such things were as common as they are today.  I figured if they could dress in public with purple Mohawks and studded black clothing that looked more appropriate for the movie set of The Road Warrior, then I could show up looking like I belonged in For A Few Dollars More.  To say it was difficult to walk into a party atmosphere with blaring Marilyn Manson music arousing the passions of naked women and drug induced idiots as a perfectly straight cowboy hat wearing traditionalist would be an understatement.  But I did it proudly.  Being a partier was never a priority for me and I thought at the time that during the most tempting years of my life if I held to my values that it would be very valuable to me later, when I was older.  That turned out to be the case and I can understand how following the Cowboy Way kept Quick Cal clean and free of imposition in his life during a similar turbulent period where everyone was wearing tie dye shirts and preaching peace through marijuana smoke and socialism.

Our experience is compelling enough to make a more than reasonable argument against the current tide of fashion.  If the trends of our age lead to such destructive living—bad personal conduct, addictive behavior, unreliability as a spouse or parent, and a general menace to society—then why would we accept such a thing as a fact to our reality.  There is nothing negative about the Cowboy Way—even if a person isn’t particularly religious.  The Cowboy Way is all about having values toward individualized accomplishment which is why the hat always symbolized to me that sentiment.  It was hard to go against such tides, but it felt good to survive.  Being popular isn’t the most valuable trait in the world if the people who like you are poor quality people.  If people made fun of my hat, they were not very high quality people and it made it easy for me to see who was who and why they did what they did.  Did they not like the hat because it reminded them of a parental figure they were trying to push out of their head, or had they bought into the commercial advancement of fashion to the extent where their collective ambitions denied individualized thought?  I learned a lot during those early years because of the public reactions to my cowboy hats.

Another aspect to the Cowboy Way that Cal and I discussed was the difference between shooting sports which are individualized in nature and the collective based team sports of football, baseball, and soccer.  Of course public schools are all about collective based identification.  They don’t want people thinking as individuals because their job as designated by the government is to herd people into a particular direction as determined by Beltway desires.  So team sports are emphasized to advance children into a more socially appropriate stature.  However, individualized sports, like Cowboy Fast Draw, and golf, are all about individual achievement, which is why the current trends are against them.  It’s why golf is largely viewed as a sport for the affluent—those who have achieved individualized success.  It’s also why progressives—who are collectivists by their nature, hate shooting sports.  Shooting a gun is a very individualized endeavor.  Golf and the culture of country clubs already have the stigma of being affluent based endeavors that are individualized in their foundations.  There is a social component but the associations are largely groups of affluent people talking to other affluent people without the noise of the outside world.  I will admit that I enjoy that country club culture.  My wife and I enjoy eating at the Elk’s Club Silver Tee restaurant near our home.  It’s always nice and they treat the guests in an exclusive way.  It’s about being with people who have similar values as you do.  You know when you eat there that the booth next to you is a family that are not knuckle draggers.  They are typically well employed and somewhat successful as individuals—and that makes the food taste just a bit better.  I consider shooting sports to be even more individualized because they serve the dual purpose of being useful in the defense of private property—which is another aspect that collectivists seek to demonize—because it goes against their foundation philosophies.

I made a decision about the Cowboy Way when I was very little, well before I knew why.  I knew I liked The Cowboys with John Wayne over the rock group Kiss when I was in the fourth grade.  I knew I liked The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly more than Pink Floyd’s The Wall.  In general, westerns reflected my values innately, and I was fortunate enough to be stubborn in pursuing those values even though it was against the social grain.  I’m glad that I did—now more than ever.  Obviously my rejection was against liberalism which I determined as a four-year old, didn’t work.  My parents didn’t necessarily preach it to me, and nobody else felt as strongly about conservativism as I did—it’s just something that I’ve always had.  It was just something I observed and decided to pursue—not always with clarity, but as a hunch that it was the right thing to do according to my moral compass.  It was only over a great many years that I learned why.  Most children are afraid of falling and of loud noises because their brains are wired to protect themselves from the unknown.  For whatever reason, I knew from a young age that liberalism didn’t work under any circumstance.  To this very day nobody can present a strong case in favor of liberalism rationally.  When I first started wearing my cowboy hat while still in grade school I knew that the only hope for the human race was to step back to a philosophic period before the progressive era—right around 1890—to those values in American culture. Not the racism, or the limitations against women, but the basic foundations of human decency.  The Cowboy Way was the greatest casualty of the progressive era and it is the thing we most need in our modern society.  And it was important for the nation to hear from someone who embodies that Cowboy Way in very emphatic ways. That is why I had Quick Cal on WAAM during an important Saturday afternoon in the long history of the human race.  People needed to hear an alternative to the madness of liberalism that is destroying America.  And they need it fast!

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

 

The Cinebistro at Liberty Center: Better than a Broadway play, and more comfortable

I have to say something very positive about Cinebistro at Liberty Center, which is a luxury movie theater near my home.  I was at the soft opening for the James Bond film described below in the Channel 12 clip talking about the food selections available, and I have written about my experience with a positive review.  I have been to movie theaters all over the country over many years and I certainly know good from bad.  I also have been in several home theaters and know the benefits to them as well.  So it should carry some weight to know how much I think of the Cinebistro experience at Liberty Center which is the best way I think there is to see a movie.  I have been to that theater several times now and can report that after several months of operating, the theater is actually better now than when it first opened.  It is a grand palace of mythmaking endeavor and it is worthy of the best praise.

My wife and I went to see The Revenant there.  I had just jumped off the air at WAAM radio as I was guest hosting for my friend Matt Clark while he was on vacation.  We hadn’t had anything to eat yet and we had reservations to see the long-awaited movie at 3 PM.  I fully expected that in the middle of the afternoon between lunch and dinner that the Cinebistro wouldn’t be crowded, but was surprised that the theater was nearly sold out when I made my reservations online at 10 AM, before going on the air at 1600 WAAM.  The moment I signed off at the station we literally got into the car and went to Liberty Center because at Cinebistro if you have a movie start time of 3 PM you need to arrive at 2:30 to get seated and have your food order in.

Entry into the theater is just epic; I never get tired of it.  I was in the mood to be pampered; I had worked very hard all week.  I had done a lot of reading and writing that morning before doing an hour of live radio on a Saturday, so I was tired and ready to see a movie I hoped would be great—which it was.  That is what they do best at Cinebistro as opposed to a home theater or anywhere else, they understand people like me—hard working people who come to the movies for an intellectual experience as opposed to just entertainment.  Nothing for me is ever just fun.  Some people argue that’s not a good way to live, I’d argue the opposite.  Everything I do in my life I do well and I put a lot of effort into it.  I never just waste time.  No time in a 24 hour period is spent wasting time.  If I can’t squeeze multiple meanings out of every instance it’s just not worth doing.  So when I go to the movie theater, Cinebistro gets what I expect out of my investment.

Cinebistro does not skimp on their employees, they do not understaff.  There were a small army of people running the theater.  If you counted all the kitchen staff, which makes everything by scratch, and include the runners, servers and ushers, there are at least five times the amount of people who are typically employed by a theater system like Showcase, Rave, or Regal.  As I looked at all the employees through the lobby, at the bars, concessions, etc, it was quite an impressive operation and not every movie is promised to pack the theater house like The Revenant.  Most movies are typically 30% full, so it baffles me how Cinebistro does it.

The proximity to parking in the back lot and entering the Liberty Center complex through the access tunnel by The Funny Bone Comedy Club essentially meant that we parked, our car on a packed Saturday afternoon and were at the ticket counter within about five minutes where I picked up my reserved tickets and we were upstairs and in our seats at precisely 2:31 PM. My wife and I ordered a couple of hamburgers and some popcorn which lasted the entire two and a half hour movie, along with drink refills just like in a good restaurant.  There were a lot of “yes sirs” from the staff and everyone was very respectful—which is something I expect from other people.  I was able to step into the movie world on a pedestal and view the mythic essence of a good movie without distractions.  For the first time I was able to see what a full house at the Cinebistro looked like.  Even on the soft opening for Spectre it was my group and a few other key groups present, so I didn’t get to see how Cinebistro handled a crowd.  The answer was a very pleasant one.  Every seat was full yet I didn’t notice that anybody was around me. The seats are so big that the people nearest to me were a good distance, more than enough for me to stretch out and relax.

It’s not that I’m claustrophobic or can’t handle crowds; it’s just that I don’t enjoy myself in a crowd.  I don’t like the idea of breathing air that people around me immediately exhumed.  The carbon dioxide that comes out of the bodies of other people need time to mix with fresh oxygen molecules and nitrogen along with other elements to produce good quality air to breathe and that just can’t happen if during an entire two-hour movie someone is right next to you.  So space is important to me.  I typically go to movies when other people don’t for that reason.  At Cinebistro I don’t have to worry about them.  Their air circulation system in the ceiling is very good giving the air quality a feeling of constant replenishing.  With the food, service, spacing and air quality all in tip-top shape, I was able to enjoy my movie without any distractions, which I greatly appreciated-especially with something as mind-boggling epic as The Revenant.

Typically at the end of any film I watch if it was any good, I always stay until the end of the credits.  I read who did what, and where the filming locations were—and any other information that strikes my interest—like how many stuntmen did the film take, who were the visual effect companies, essentially how many jobs were created by the production of the film—because those types of things are also important to me.  I also just like to listen to the music and let the movie slowly roll through my mind.  So it really irritates me when other people sitting next to me want to get up as soon as the picture is done and head for their cars.  You always have to stand up a bit and let them pass in front of you and once they do you can just imagine that they are passing gas and that they likely have full bladders from sitting for so long and that they need to use the restroom.  I don’t enjoy knowing that those kinds of things are so close in proximity to my face, so until the theater empties, it stresses me out and is hard to enjoy the credits.  It’s even worse in regular theaters because teenagers are often present and they almost always stink—they smell like adolescents and cigarette smoke.  They just feel slimy when they bump into your leg.  Typically, you expect it when you go into a public place and I just endure it.  But at Cinebristo I never have to worry about it.  When the movie let out my wife and I could remain in our seats with our chairs reclined and our entire aisle was able to empty without a single person bumping into my feet. I didn’t have to move a muscle to let anybody get up and leave.

When the last of the credits finally ended I was a little surprised to see that the place looked like an entire restaurant had just got up at the same time and left.  It didn’t look bad, but it would take a lot of table clearing to remove all the plates and glasses that were on every table in the theater.  That’s another thing specific to Cinebisto.  Everything they do is restaurant quality including the utensils.  All the soft drinks are actual glasses and there are lots of wine glasses.  There are no paper cups and popcorn bags.  Everything is something that has to be washed in the kitchen.  They do not go cheap on anything, which they could easily justify at only $12 dollars per seat on films before 4 PM.  Night seats are only $14 dollars, not much more than a typical local theater chain.  I couldn’t help but think that nobody was doing any cleaning yet and that it was going to take a while to get the place ready for another showing.  Most of the people had long left and the last people had left several minutes before we did.  We were clearly the last ones out of our seats.  As we walked back out of the theater a manager was there with a little tray of mints which he offered to us with a smile and some polite banter.  I thought that was a nice touch and I told him I appreciated it.  Then we stepped out into the hall and saw about 15 employees ready to enter the theater to clean it.   The manager had made them stand in the hall and wait for us to leave.  I knew they had to be angry at us for staying so long, but the manager refused to let the employees enter to disrupt our movie experience.  That is the kind of place the Cinebistro is.  It’s not going out of its way to be snobby.  They just make a point to elevate the human experience of going to the movies.

So thank you Cinebistro for doing such a great job for one entire business quarter—I hope that everything continues as it has.  It was wonderful to leave that theater and have so many people tell me to have a good day as I passed them back into the large vaulted lobby of the Cobb Theater system. It was also nice to see that the sun had went down and the streets of Liberty Center were lit up nicely completing a nice day for my wife and me.  I was able to see a movie I really wanted to without having to compromise my comfort and standards, and for that I really appreciated it.  The whole experience was what you expect from a luxury theater system and it has lived up to those standards now over several visits which is a great compliment to the hard work obviously on display and in full commitment of the management of Cinebistro.  Going to the movies at Cinebistro has the feel of attending a play at the Aronoff Center or on Broadway—only without the tight seating and the crowded streets of a big city.  It is a unique experience and I’m proud to have one at Liberty Center.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Film Review of ‘The Revenant’: An experience into the majestic scope of wilderness, history and human endeavor

 I had to put out of my mind all the lunacy of leftist Hollywood propaganda, the subtle messages within the film about the awe and majestic dominance of nature and Native Americans and Sean Penn’s associations with both the director and lead actors.  But it wasn’t that hard to overlook those minor issues because the essential story contained within The Revenant was just jaw-dropping and a game changer for American cinema. The Revenant is the Ben Hur of our 21st century.  It is our Citizen Kane.  It is our Gone with the Wind.  It is something that I didn’t think was possible in the modern studio system and it emphatically granted Leonardo DiCaprio the unequaled designation as one of the world’s greatest actors.  Politics aside—DiCaprio did great work—his portrayal of Hugh Glass was monstrously bold and awe inspiring—brimming with sheer masculinity.  It was a movie done with the greatest love imaginable for such a hard topic and controversial time period.  The Revenant was a film where everything works, and actually matched the marketing previews.  The opening scene was a battle containing several one shot tracks that I can’t see being duplicated by even the most skilled filmmakers any time soon.  It was ambitious, bold, sincere, and technically superior in every way that a movie can be.  It was and will always be cinematic genius stepping beyond contemporary philosophies to a thread of common human experience rarely ever touched by all but the most tenacious human beings.

The Revenant is a 2015 American biographical western film directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu set in 1823 Montana and South Dakota, which was inspired by the experiences of frontiersman and fur trapper Hugh Glass. The screenplay was written by Mark L. Smith and Iñárritu, based in part on Michael Punke‘s The Revenant: A Novel of Revenge. The film stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, Will Poulter, and Domhnall Gleeson.[4]

Development of the film began in August 2001 when Akiva Goldsman purchased Punke’s manuscript with the intent to produce the film. The film was originally set to be directed by Park Chan-wook with Samuel L. Jackson in mind to star, and later by John Hillcoat with Christian Bale in negotiations to star. Both directors left the project, and Iñárritu signed on to direct in August 2011. In April 2014, after several delays in production due to other projects, Iñárritu confirmed that he was beginning work onThe Revenant and that DiCaprio would play the lead role. It is the second on-screen collaboration of Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy (the first being Inception). Principal photography began in October 2014; delays associated with location and crew challenges resulted in its end date moving from May to August 2015.

The Revenant premiered at the TCL Chinese Theatre in Los Angeles on December 16, 2015 and had a limited release on December 25, 2015, followed by a wide release on January 8, 2016. The film received highly positive reviews from critics, who praised DiCaprio’s acting and Lubezki’s cinematography.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Revenant_(2015_film)

With all that said, I had previously stated that I hoped The Revenant would be good enough to resurrect many stories from that particular time period in the American West, from 1750 to around 1830—which was a very key time for American philosophic development.  Understanding this time period helps define America’s place within the world as most of the nations around the globe were fighting it out on the plains of the American West.  The trouble is, doing such a thing is incredibly difficult.  Capturing the ruggedness of mountainous terrain in the hard months of winter under terrible shooting conditions, snow storms, avalanches, animal attacks, freezing water and many other hardships is something actors and film crews aren’t keen to endure—so my hopes of taking the Allen Ekert novels and getting them put up on the silver screen are faint because of the reality of such difficult shoots.   This novel relative to the mentioned Ekert work is simple.  The story of Hugh Glass is more focused and isolated as opposed to the grand scale of The Frontiersman, which featured Simon Kenton, Daniel Boone, George Washington, Tecumseh and Blue Jacket all with roles similar to the hardships of Glass.  Given the amount of money it took to put The Revenant on screen—approximately $135 million dollars it would take nearly ten times more than that to turn The Frontiersman into a novel with the same ambition—which is why nobody does it.  So give Alejandro G. Iñárritu credit, he was grossly over budget and he pissed off most of Hollywood including old friends to make the picture, but he stuck to it and delivered a film that should be profitable in the long run and earn the studios that supported him with some reluctance a share in the Academy Awards that will be granted to The Revenant.  The first weekend the film did well, nearly outselling The Force Awakens which is no small feat in January during the first round of NFL playoff games.  The theater I saw it in was sold out on a Saturday afternoon and that experience was so good that I’ll write a separate review just for that.  But there was no question, there was interest in this film and people wanted to see it—and when they did, they left the theater with more than they anticipated.  Even saying all that, there is no way to spoil the film because it’s not so much about the plot as much as it’s the experience of viewing the world through the character of Hugh Glass.

The Revenant is the type of film that will still be talked about thirty years from now—even 100 years—it is a must see movie.  It is gory in a way only hunters really understand, but the information is relevant to everyone.  It was gory without being disgusting.  The way that the hard nature of the world beyond civilization was captured is worth the price of admission alone.  There is no downside to The Revenant, it is history shown relatively non-politically with honesty and love and it deserves the support of everyone who loves to watch movies.  It was about love and romance without ever showing it and it was about honor even when all the tapestries of society had been stripped away.  It is one of those rare movies that really put the audience into the character’s very souls.  Give Alejandro González Iñárritu and Leonardo DiCaprio their Academy Awards now.  Heck, give Tom Hardy his best supporting actor award as well.  There is nothing wrong with The Revenant and everything right, sound editing, music, cinematography, set design, script, visual effects–everything.  I’d suggest buying a movie ticket today and going to see it as a two and a half hour vacation to a vast wilderness adventure.  It will likely leave you a different person upon your return—just as a hard backpacking trip into rugged country often does.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

El Chapo Exposes Communist Ties to Hollywood: Sean Penn’s interview for left-leaning Rolling Stone and the failure of all governments

It is absolutely disgusting that Joaquín Guzmán felt so comfortable with producers and actors of American cinema that the communist Sean Penn was invited to meet with the most wanted fugitive in the world for a Rolling Stone interview in September 2015. I seem to be calling a lot of people communists these days but it’s only because they are coming out of their shells and calling themselves that—in this case Penn who seems to represent the Hollywood leftist politics as one of their most vocal advocates says it about himself.  Penn is a talented actor and sometimes director but he might as well be a filmmaker from Venezuela, China or Russia—because there isn’t much about him that is American—and that holds true of his friends, George Clooney, Leonardo DiCaprio, and James Cameron over the last 15 years. Hollywood is a cesspool of socialism and communism hidden behind Democratic fundraisers and environmental concerns.  The motion picture industry has been taken over by extreme leftist view points to such an extent that most of what they produce is ridiculously detrimental to our society.  While I was quite impressed with The Revenant, upcoming films like Dirty Grandpa with Robert De Niro show how far American cinema has embedded itself with drug avocation and liberal view points toward most social circumstances.  The situation is so bad that the most wanted fugitive in the world was able to contact members of Hollywood to give him a private interview at his home in the jungles of Sinaloa.

Of course Mexico and most of the media are trying to paint the communist Penn as a hero for leading authorities to El Chapo after a Friday night shootout led to his recapture.  But everyone is missing the point.  The CIA, FBI, Homeland Security, and all of Mexico was looking for the drug dealer yet Penn and Rolling Stone magazine were able to have an interview with him over four months ago and nothing was done.  Guzmán supposedly had a $100 million dollar hit on an American presidential candidate in Donald Trump—who is the Republican frontrunner—yet Hollywood was able to find and correspond with the drug dealer as literally every government on planet earth failed.  Give me a break!  This is a disgusting story that shows just how corrupt everything is from the President of the United States to all our government officials supposedly supplying security.  It’s not like El Chapo was hiding in some other country.  He was in his home state of Mexico all this time surrounded by thousands of people every day-and he was talking to Hollywood producers about making a movie about his life.  Sean Penn should be thrown in jail for conspiring with an enemy of the United States.  He’s no hero for getting Guzmán captured.  He’s a communist insurgent who associates with the worst the world has to offer in an attempt to overthrow American sovereignty.  Drugs in American culture are a Trojan horse weapon meant to topple our capitalists society with an overload of excess, and Hollywood is helping losers like El Chapo do it—and they should be prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law—everyone involved.  Here’s how our pathetic media outlets reported the story with links provided—article edited for priority briefing.

Joaquín Guzmán Loera, the Mexican drug lord known as El Chapo, started out in business not long after turning 6, selling oranges and soft drinks. By 15, he said in an interview conducted in a jungle clearing by the actor and director Sean Penn for Rolling Stone magazine, he had begun to grow marijuana and poppies because there was no other way for his impoverished family to survive.

Now, unapologetically, he said: “I supply more heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine and marijuana than anybody else in the world. I have a fleet of submarines, airplanes, trucks and boats.”

Though his fortune, estimated at $1 billion, has come with a trail of blood, he does not consider himself a violent man. “Look, all I do is defend myself, nothing more,” he told Mr. Penn. “But do I start trouble? Never.”

The seven hours Mr. Guzmán spent with Mr. Penn, and the follow-up interviews by phone and video, which began in October while he was on the run from the Mexican and American authorities, marked another surreal turn in his long-running battle to evade Mexican and American authorities. Mr. Guzmán, one of the world’s most wanted fugitives, who had twice escaped jail, was captured in his home state of Sinaloa in northwest Mexico on Friday after a gun battle with the authorities.

The interview with Rolling Stone, believed to be the first Mr. Guzmán has given in decades, was conducted over several sessions. It was scheduled to be published online Saturday night.

The interviews were held in a jungle clearing atop a mountain at an undisclosed location in Mexico. Surrounded by more than 100 cartel troops, and wearing a silk shirt and pressed black jeans, Mr. Guzmán sat down to dinner with Mr. Penn and Kate del Castillo, an actress who once played a drug kingpin in a soap opera.

Even though Mexican troops attacked his hide-out in the days after the meeting, necessitating a narrow escape, Mr. Guzmán continued the interview by BlackBerry Messenger and in a video delivered by courier to the pair later.

Mr. Penn’s account is likely to deepen the concern among the Mexican authorities already embarrassed by Mr. Guzmán’s multiple escapes, the months required to find him again and his status for some as something of a folk hero. Mr. Penn describes being waved through a military road checkpoint on his way to meet Mr. Guzmán, which Mr. Penn suggested was because the soldiers recognized Mr. Guzmán’s son. Mr. Penn said he was also told, during a leg of the journey taken in a small plane equipped with a scrambling device for ground radar only, that the cartel was informed by an insider when the military deployed a high-altitude surveillance plane that might have spotted their movements.

Mr. Penn and Mr. Guzmán spoke for seven hours, the story reports, at a compound amid dense jungle. The topics of conversation turned in unexpected directions. At one stage, Mr. Penn brought up Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential candidate; there were some reports that Mr. Guzmán had put a $100 million bounty on Mr. Trump after he made comments offensive to Mexicans. “Ah! Mi amigo!” Mr. Guzmán responded.

He asked Mr. Penn whether people in America were interested in him and laughed when Mr. Penn told him that the Fusion channel was repeating a documentary on him, “Chasing El Chapo.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/world/americas/el-chapo-mexican-drug-lord-interview-with-sean-penn.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

It is widely considered to be against the basic principles of journalism to grant a subject such authority over a piece.

Rolling  Stone’s journalistic practices have been criticized since its publication of a now discredited gang-rape story at the University of Virginia.

A representative for Rolling Stone did not immediately reply to The Blaze’s request for comment Saturday night.

Guzman was captured by Mexican marines early Friday in a coastal city, and the attorney general says the drug boss was tracked down partly because he was making a biographical movie.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/01/09/rolling-stone-granted-el-chapo-approval-power-over-entire-exclusive-profile-on-him/

I don’t know who the hell Kate Del Castillos is, nor do I care. I want to see Mexico get Sean Penn and throw him in one of those crappy Mexican prisons. Give him a taste of what Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, Sean Penn is scum, and is the face of the progressive liberal Democrat party. Throw the book at him Mexico! Force the US to extradite him. Use the Affluenza kid as bait.

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2016/01/09/sean-penn-under-investigation-for-meeting-el-chapo/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FireAndreaMitchell+%28Fire+Andrea+Mitchell%21+Exposing+Liberal+bias+cause+the+MSM+doesn%27t+have+to.%29

Conchita Alonso — known for her role in “The Running Man” and “Predator 2,” and who once acted in a 1988 film with Penn — had previously written an open letter criticizing him for his support for the Venezuelan dictator. Spotting the actor, who was also waiting for lost luggage, she approached him. When the “Milk” star recognized her, his smile disappeared: He told her he didn’t want to talk to her and accused her brother of trying to assassinate Chavez.

In an interview with WMAL, the actress said she told Penn, “You are in favor of Hugo Chavez and [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad.”

When Penn denied he supports Ahmadinejad and called Conchita Alonso “a pig,” she replied, “And you are a communist, Sean Penn! … You’re a communist asshole!”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/20/finally-actress-tells-sean-penn-hes-a-communist-asshole-video/#ixzz3woNTTedL

This whole story is just so terribly disgusting, it shows how embedded criminal elements are within Hollywood.   It also shows the network of priority that some of the worst that exist around the world gravitate to and why.  Then of course there is the sheer incompetence of all the governments involved in not picking up the loser Guzmán who was operating a multibillion dollar business right out in the open.  The whole thing is just pathetic.  And during the drama, Donald Trump turned out to be right about everything, including how cozy Guzmán’s relationship was with the United States.  Trump also deserves credit for staying tough even with the $100 million dollar bounty on his head.  Apparently nobody else has any toughness anymore, so it’s good to see somebody out there still does.  This whole case just exhibits why we need a wholesale change in American culture from the very top to the deepest bottom and scumbags like El Chapo and his criminal children deeply connected to Hollywood and Vegas need to be rooted out and punished for their work against American strategic objectives.

Personally for me, I don’t like drugs—in ANY form.  I don’t like drinking.  I don’t like collectivist based governments—such as communism and socialism—and I don’t like the worst scum bags of our planet using an American industry as a means of social destabilization right under the watch of all our tax payer funded governments.  Want to know why socialism and communism will never work and why in America we need guns—lots of guns?  This El Chapo story contains the very reasons with great illustration into the worst that human beings bring to the table of thought and action and exemplifies why the only sane people left in America are supporting Donald Trump for president.

This is the guy who was contacted and captured El Chapo.  What a bunch of dumb asses.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Why the NRA Didn’t Attend the CNN Town Hall: The tricks progressives play to advance their strategic objectives

When President Barack Obama agreed to the CNN Town Hall debate on Gun Control in America on January 7th 2016 immediately after he signed executive orders against them, I couldn’t help but think of the typical consensus building exercises that public schools use when they want to bend communities over their knees for tax increases.  When my home district of Lakota conducted those types of meetings even though I was against the tax increases, I didn’t attend because I didn’t want to break bread with the enemy.  So I can understand why the NRA refused the CNN Town Hall.   There was little for them to accomplish having a public meeting with Barack Obama in a consensus building exercise unless you are willing to go to battle in front of everyone and embarrass the President.  That is the reason I didn’t attend the Lakota meetings—because I didn’t want to make friends and find common ground due to the foundation philosophies being too far off between us.  CLICK THE MANY LINKS TO REVIEW.  With that said, I think the NRA should have attended and engaged the president the way Taya Kyle did and several others—but I understand why they didn’t.

The problem with progressives, which the president certainly embodies that definition–is that they use compromise to advance their plans.  When you negotiate with them and give a little they always come back later to take a little more.  Compromising with them only opens the door for more impositions.  For instance, back on the public school debate, they always suggest that a little bit of tax today will save a generation of children tomorrow, so why not give a few dollars of your property value to the children who need it.  However, because of the progressive management of public school systems and the escalating costs associated with their style of management, every five years those schools continuously return to voters with the same argument because they never change their essential behavior.  The progressive oriented aggressors in this case always favor consensus building exercises because they know that no matter what concessions are achieved during a public meeting, that they will always come back to take a little more—and they continue forever until there is nothing left because the basic philosophy of a typical progressive is rooted in communism.  So in the case of a school system, every five years school board management typically changes a bit as well as the top-level teachers who take up the most payroll in a budget so the same people aren’t always asking for the new tax increase.  But, because the foundation philosophy of progressives is communism each new generation of progressives coming to consensus building meetings can trust that new concessions will be demanded and that the slow advancement toward a centrally controlled society will eventually be achieved once property taxes are too high to mandate private property ownership.

For instance, in my community, Liberty Township, Ohio, it is nearly impossible for a private owner to hold more than 10 acres of land because the taxes are so incredibly high.  Those taxes are high because of community mismanagement—local government making too many concessions over the years to the school system of Lakota and other public employees.  The only real decisions that large land holders have is to sell their old farms to developers who will turn plots of land to neighborhoods that put more kids in schools requiring more public employees to deal with the increase in children.  Essentially two decades of tax increases created the problem so now there is suburban overcrowding and the golf courses near my home are struggling to justify holding so much land at such a high rate of tax to benefit so few people.  This forces the land use to migrate from exclusivity among say country club affluence into more of a “community” centered use, which progressives have always been in support of.  For the people who loved the open farm land and large plots of land under private ownership progressives within the school system and local government have managed to convert the land use to large plots of that same land being managed by socialist oriented neighborhood homeowner associations that collectively decide whether or not you can have up a garage door or park an RV in your driveway.  As that same land used to be managed by a private family that might have had a target range in their backyard and a few cars being always worked on next to a barn, the land was converted into something entirely different and much more conducive toward the aims of progressives—which are aligned with the original communist goals of eradicating private property.

Nobody ever says it directly but if you get them to dinner away from a crowd’s ear people like Jeffery Stec who ran the Lakota “community conversations” have every intention of advancing progressive agenda concerns against all individual rights.  Even though Anderson Cooper at CNN did a great job with the debate at the Town Hall featuring Barack Obama just days after the president’s executive orders angered gun owners immensely, both Cooper and Obama as progressives were working to whittle away the resistance to their eventual aims of collective assimilation.  If you watch the debate carefully dear reader, you will see the tactics.  For instance, when Obama had to deal with the widow of Chris Kyle followed up by the rape victim—both who were strong supporters of the Second Amendment, Obama took the edge off their resistance with compliments to ease into his eventual position.  For either of the two women to attack Obama after he had provided such compliments would make them appear as the villains.  So Obama took away their aggression with compliments in a public setting.  The president yielded no ground, yet Taya and others had to, so to appear civil in the discourse.  CNN gave president Obama the high ground strategically, and once he had that, there was no way to create leverage against him in debate.  The public watching all this then assumed that Obama seemed reasonable.  CNN appeared to side at times with Taya Kyle and other Second Amendment supporters.  But in the long run, resistance to the gun control measures loosened allowing them to stand against scrutiny.  Then when the next tragedy occurs, more laws will be proposed.  Just like the land grabs of local public schools converting over time the use and philosophic position of the community toward such use progressives will gain and everyone else loses.

There is a way to attack such town hall effectiveness against the other side.  It is difficult, but possible.  In such a conflict, the NRA doesn’t stand to gain much—only to hold their ground.  The real test of Obama’s consensus building exercise would be to speak at an NRA event, on ground controlled by gun rights supporters.  CNN is certainly sympathetic toward Obama and all past and future progressives—so it was a safe zone for the president.  But a NASCAR event or a gun show would be a different story.  Obama wouldn’t give the same town hall in front of such an audience if he were invited because he would not be able to maintain the high ground in the debate.  Under such conditions, Obama would be equal at best, and that would not give him the strategic platform to execute the progressive objectives.  So it goes both ways.  The NRA did not attend the CNN Town Hall because by the nature of it, the president controlled the high ground in the debate, just as Jeffery Stec in my community controlled the community conversations.  All this is a variation of the Delphi Technique that I talked so much about over five years ago.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.  The intent of such games is not to find mutual understanding—it is to advance the cause of progressives—which always lead to further impositions against freedom—so the only way not to lose such an engagement is to not participate.  However, that only works so long.  Eventually, a conflict is mandated and for that reason, the NRA needs to think of ways to go on the offensive.  My suggestion would be to invite the president to the next NRA event and strip him of the security of dealing with the friendly studios of CNN.  In the battle over public opinion a new strategy is needed.  Yielding to progressives will not get the job done—as many homeowners who used to hold large plots of land now clearly understand.  You have to know what kind of game we are all playing before you can win it.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Hillary the Communist: Admitting the truth, even when it hurts

I’ve been saying it for a long time; socialism is the basic philosophy of the Democratic Party.  People used to think I was being an extremist when I stated that teacher unions expected socialism from voters and school boards essentially teaching it to students in public education.  Most labor unions are functioning socialist enterprises which of course leads directly to small “c” communism.  Worse than socialists are “progressives” who have a strong belief in communism as a foundation principle to their style of governing.  Most progressives will deny it, but if you placed their belief system on a social scale next to the Bolsheviks of 1919 they would be indistinguishable from each other.  There is a reason that progressives and other liberals don’t want people to read Ayn Rand, who as an American novelist wrote quite passionately about communism in her very good book, We the Living.  I have known this for a very long time because I am an avid reader, and I understand history so I have been able to function from a position of knowledge and not just the marketing of ideas proposed in what people think is modern times.  That’s why it was so ridiculously stupid of Hillary Clinton when pressed by Chris Mathews—who is a fan of the Democratic candidate for president, to declare that she was a progressive Democrat.   That is equivalent to saying about herself under a proper definition that she’s a communist socialist.

This isn’t the first time this year that Chris Mathews on the very “progressive” MSNBC cable channel has asked someone of great importance within the Democratic Party what the difference between a socialist and a Democrat is.  But this one had more bite because Hillary had no idea how to answer the question even though she knew the question was coming at some point, because he had asked it before.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.  She couldn’t answer the question because there isn’t any difference.  Democrats today in 2016 are essentially the communists and socialists of the last century—the only real difference is that they changed the name.  Their essential philosophy is the same.

I don’t have much patience for stupid people—I’ll have to be honest.  When I had this education debate years ago within the media, at school boards, in education reform groups—and with other politicians I thought people close to the situation already knew what I was saying, that the essential product of public schools was socialism.  I had known it for years, so I assumed that we could have a conversation from a reasonable vantage point.  But the mad mothers and fathers angry at me for proposing to take away their tax money for essentially a day time socialist training center—which is what every public school is—provoked a lot of anger which I had no tolerance for.   Those idiots thought they would harass me online, come to my house, and attack me through social networks with all the socialist flair utilized in that novel, We the Living and that for some reason I’d just take it.  No, that’s not how things work.

I have always known that socialists and Democrats were essentially the same because I have always worked hard to have the answers to things—even if those answers were inconvenient.  For instance, everyone knows I have written a lot about Star Wars.  It could be said that I’ve been a mega fan.  I know Star Wars better than most people know their own families.  However, I do not like the new films by Disney and I will not read the books or buy into their product any longer in a post George Lucas era.  I see clearly in Star Wars now massive progressive influences and I will reject it—because I know better.  When something lets me down, I drop it like a rock in less than a second.  I went though a similar thought process with public education, our legal system, environmentalism, even family members who have not behaved properly.  It really didn’t matter what or who they were, I have dropped them at the first sign that they do not comply with my ethics and values.  And when the question comes as to who am I to judge—the reply is simple—an individual who works hard to be that way.  When I said that socialism was embedded deep in our culture I was able to do that because I was able to emotionally divorce myself from attachments that might skew my vision from the reality of knowledge.  So even when many were writing newspapers and television stations protesting my coverage by them because of my “extremist” language I never recanted or backed off because to do so would be to lie.  To lie would be wrong because it would force a new definition for the things I knew to be true—and that wasn’t going to happen.

This charade has went on for a long time largely because members of the media, like Chris Mathews accepted the revisionist definitions of a party he obviously supports—the Democrats whom he probably believes is still the party of JFK or LBJ.  The truth however is that Republicans like Jeb Bush and John Kasich are the new Democrats by proper definitions because the political lens of perception has been moved so far to the political left.  So it appears that Chris Mathews and others like him are having a real debate within themselves about the differences between socialists and Democrats or even communists and progressives.  The answer has always been there no matter how painful it might have been, or inconvenient.

I said it during many public education debates that if people wanted socialism and voted for it, then so be it—but they better know what it was they were voting for.  It’s really not a firm indication of public sentiment if Democrats avoid the proper definition for what they are doing just to win support of the public hoping slowly to cook the American public from capitalism to communism with changed terminology.  Democrats and progressives have arrived at this political climate by deceit, not by actually selling who and what they are.  What provokes the debate even now is that Bernie Sanders as a president is openly calling himself a socialist which then forces Hillary Clinton to name the difference.  Which of course she can, so she did the worst thing she could have done—she called herself worse—essentially a communist.  But she hoped that nobody understood the definitions and would bother to look.  Of course that doesn’t fly with me.

Hundreds of thousands of people read this blog site every year from countries all over the globe.  Most of those people disagree with me about one thing or another.  Sometimes they get so angry they call me names which always starts a small war of words.  Over the course of the last six years that I have been writing at this site—every single day in voluminous amounts—nobody has been able to dispute my claims factually.  Even the worst of the teacher’s union radicals within the state of Ohio could dispute it when I called them all socialists—sometimes quite publicly.  I have talked about it on the radio and written about socialism in public schools and most government offices extensively, and nobody at any academic level has been able to dispute it under any circumstance.  And believe me, the radical loser professors who call me an anti-education radical gun-nut would love to beat me intellectually if they could—but they can’t.  The reason they can’t is for the same reason that Hillary Clinton couldn’t provide a different definition of socialism in comparison to a typical member of the Democratic Party.  When the Party’s top voices cannot give a single instance of how Democrats are different from socialists, the truth is staring you right in the face dear reader.  And I have been telling you that for a very long time.  Once again, people should have listened.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Crying Bastard Obama: Why the political left is technically mentally ill

First of all, the crying bastard President Obama does not represent my views—he is not “my” president.  I say bastard of him for two reasons, he is obnoxiously disagreeable toward traditional American views, and he was born to unmarried parents as there is a lot of questions regarding his father.  So he fulfills the appropriate definition of a bastard by most accepted definitions—so it’s not a derogatory term.  Regarding the crying, I said the same thing about John Boehner.  In spite of what modern feminists and other progressives say, it’s not alright for a man to cry over stupid things.  Gun violence and mass shootings are nearly exclusively the result of mismanagement by the government.  Government in most cases has created the violent communities that shootings occur in, like Chicago.  Or they have let terrorists fester within our borders without acting before terror activities have occurred.  Americans have given up a lot of freedoms supposedly for the sake of security and that has turned out to be a stupid thing to do. Government has failed to do its job and now they want more power to do an even worse job—and to get it, the president resorted to crying like a child and that is pathetic.

The video above is a warning from Canada where their gun laws are pacing themselves to the rest of the so-called developed world—the kind of world the crying Obama referred to.  It is the direction America is heading so pay attention to it.  In it a gun rights supporter was condemned by the government every way they legally could for defending his property from some assailants launching firebombs at him.  The Canadian government did not want him to defend his property especially with a firearm, so they did worse to him personally than the fire bombers.  It is a very sad case and is the direction that gun laws in America by cry baby politicians want to take our society.  It’s the wrong direction and should be reversed immediately.

The attack on that individual gun owner has the very subtle inclination that property rights are not the value of any individual possession, so there should never be an instance where an individual should have to defend themselves or their possessions.  To the progressive descendant of communism individuals should surrender themselves to criminal intent for the benefit of the greater good.  If a criminal wants something you have, they should have the right to it under the umbrella of wealth redistribution and no individual should feel compelled to take a life for the protection of a possession.  The same mentality resides within the realm of a spouse—this is why progressives seek to demean family value with gay rights and welfare programs—to weaken individual input.  Therefore, guns should not be allowed to protect an individual from criminal intent because to their view as a mass society of collectivism, collateral damage is perfectly acceptable—if the greater good is placed as a value over individuals and their possessions.

But that is clearly not the type of society that we have in the United States.   Our politicians do not currently represent the type of people who currently make up most of the American population between city areas.  Most of those politicians manipulated their way by default into positions of power only to turn their eyes toward Europe for guidance and that’s not acceptable—especially when people like Obama standing in our White House cry to the world about how he wants to stop gun violence on a mass scale but fails to shed a tear when a white woman is gunned down by an illegal alien in San Francisco for no reason at all—but mass government mismanagement.  The tears are only shed for the collective entity of our global population, not the rights of one woman, or her father when a cold-blooded killer took away from them the love they shared as a possession of emotion.

That is just how sick progressives are in their views of the world.  They will support the mass extinction of babies through abortion, and support the terrorism in the Middle East but will take a hard stand against the rancher who wants to protect their grazing rights or an individual gunman who protects their wife or home from an assailant.  Their broken philosophy is always an emphasis on mass collectivism as opposed to individual integrity.  That is why so many progressives have mental illnesses—where their values are not reflected in their daily actions—because they associate behavior by the values of the collective as opposed to their own private behavior.  So if everyone is acting poorly, whether they are drunken losers or a mob rioting in the streets they can justify the morality of bad behavior by the measurement of the group association.  If everyone is doing wrong, then it’s OK to also do so—so long as a majority is in agreement.

That in essence is the largest problem that there is in regard to Obama’s executive orders against personal firearms issued on January 5th 2016—because it gives those same masses the ability to define sanity.  On the surface the proposals sound reasonable, background checks strengthening, gun show restrictions, and attempting to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally deficient.  The trouble is that the door is now open for the government to determine that every person on some sort of pain medication or depression illness is subject to the interpretation of being mentally unstable to purchase or own a firearm.  Additionally, the slippery slope of judgment for sanity will be interpreted by government with the same rationalization that we see among the current masses—the depraved lunatics of urban riots, public schools, and open socialists—the Bernie Sanders type of supporters.  Mental acuity will then be determined by the victor of whatever political party holds the White House at any particular time which would be bad for both sides.  With that additional interpretation the same government that decided that it was alright for the IRS to use a tax status to badger Tea Party groups will determine what constitutes mental health.

For the family that believes that a housewife should watch over the children at home in a very traditional way, and has a personal history of protesting Smart Meters—a progressive run federal government would likely view that behavior as insane and would prohibit those citizens from owning firearms.  A similar family that has a Twitter history showing strong conservative views would likely put those citizens on a watch list banning further purchases of guns.  It would be as simple as that.  The pattern around the world from Canada to Australia is already in place, we have the fortune in America to see what our current politicians are up to, because they are copying those fools from Europe and other places on removing firearms from their society to make way for some strategy that certainly works against individual liberty.  If allowed to feaster, Obama’s path would certainly lead to a similar letter as those proposed in Canada—be prepared to surrender firearms of a certain make and model until they are all gone from society and confiscated by the government.  They never do things in swift strokes, but over a long period of time gradually wearing down resistance to their diabolical utterances.

I’ve had a Federal Firearms License before, so I know what it’s like for them to demand to see your paperwork in the middle of dinner, or on a Friday afternoon while you’re sitting naked in your hot tub with your wife just enjoying the day in your own backyard.  When given the right for some pin headed bureaucrat to harass an individual, they nearly always do.  Because their value system is not based on individual integrity, but mass approval—so if their peers approve of their behavior of harassment, then they feel validated to do so—they use government coercion to exert force on individuals so to preserve the collective masses and their whims of necessity.

Guns were always meant to protect the individual against mass tyranny and to guarantee that private property would remain valuable in the course of American history.  Confiscation is the path to losing all freedoms and giving the drooling mouths of bureaucrats all the power they need to exact tyranny upon individuals and their possessions.  Hidden behind the government and their global backers is the long diabolical yearnings of communism which fuels their effort, the Karl Marx war against individuality and personal property.  So it is behind that premise that governments are at war with firearms and what drives Obama to cry in front of the world because deep down inside his essential being, he has a lot more in common with Karl Marx than he does Thomas Jefferson.  It is because of menaces like Barack Obama and all his progressive friends that Jefferson uttered……………“I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”  You can’t very well do that if they are armed, and you’re not.  Hence, the reason for gun control around the world.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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