Tag: 700 WLW

Quality on a Golf Course: Why being “rich” is valuable

I hope it doesn’t happen, but I support it if it does–if Donald Trump goes third-party, I will support him. I am likely much more conservative than Donald Trump. I’m probably more conservative than every Republican in the party. I’m probably more conservative than even the most Bible thumping conservative–anywhere. Yet I would in less than a heartbeat support Donald Trump for president if he leaves the Republicans for a third-party. I would do so because I support a business man over a politician almost every time, particularly one who is as independently wealthy as Trump is. I think economic understanding is the paramount issue of the 2016 election because without money, there is no value—no morality, no understanding of quality, no measurement of worth. Wealthy people are typically a measure of productivity. If they have money, their hands touch the creations of wealth in positive ways. Money has been so ridiculed by the political culture that they forget that it is the only way to really measure value in our society. That is the premier reason I support Donald Trump even if he leaves the Republican Party. Here is how he put it during an interview with The Hill:

“The RNC has not been supportive. They were always supportive when I was a contributor. I was their fair-haired boy,” the business mogul told The Hill in a 40-minute interview from his Manhattan office at Trump Tower on Wednesday. “The RNC has been, I think, very foolish. I’ll have to see how I’m being treated by the Republicans. Absolutely, if they’re not fair, that would be a factor.”

“I’m not in the gang. I’m not in the group where the group does whatever it’s supposed to do,” he said. “I want to do what’s right for the country — not what’s good for special interest groups that contribute, not what’s good for the lobbyists and the donors.”

http://www.msn.com/?cobrand=lenovo13-comm.msn.com&ocid=LENDHP&pc=MALCJS

Much of what Trump said in that little interview was exactly how I feel about machine politics. I don’t like it. For something I don’t like, I spend a lot of time thinking about it, but my thoughts are always on how to break it up, not in how to play along to get something. I despise that system, because it gets in the way of pure capitalism and find it repulsive. If Trump will take a stand against it, I’ll fight with him against that system.

I was at a golf course the other day with my favorite pair of jeans on. I’m not one who cares much for orthodox behavior, or the rules of society, but at golf courses there is an understanding of how one dresses and acts. Just like business meetings typically involve suits and ties. You don’t show up covered in tattoos and torn cloths and expect people to take you serious, because the dress is an expectation of quality. Once all parties meeting with that basic agreement of quality in place, then discussions about important topics can begin. Golf courses are all about quality. They are about nice greens, golf clubs, amenities, and nice casual cloths along with quality time with yourself, or friends. Golf is about the swing, shooting under par, and getting the most out of the various tools among the assortment of golf clubs. The distinct ping of a driver hitting a golf ball squarely and with greatly controlled force is a sound of extreme beauty. That is because there is quality in the action. So I was aware that I would get some sideways looks when I showed up in my favorite jeans that have the knees torn out completely with holes. They look really bad. But I love them; they are comfortable and represent my lifestyle. And after spending several straight days in business suits, I wanted to be in my favorite cloths as I stopped by this particular course on business. Not to play, but to do some other activity.

As I walked around the clubhouse many golfers looked at me with disdain, which I understood. I was clearly not dressed for a golf course, so I didn’t take any offense. The value system of the golf course dictated that people conduct themselves with proper attire. It doesn’t matter the sex or race—only that fellow golfers conduct themselves with a sense of “quality.” In addition to the holy pants, I had on a loose-fitting button-up shirt that wasn’t tucked in, which is normal for me around the house. At a golf course, it was frowned upon. And I understood and accepted that. Life on a golf course is supposed to be slightly luxurious and otherworldly. People go there to get away not just from the world for a bit, but to be around quality. If people show up expecting that culture of quality to change just because they want to wear holy pants, they are the one in the wrong. Now, I was in the mood to not care what people thought, so I dressed the way I wanted. But never did I expect them to change for my benefit.

Similarly, money is a measurement of quality. Those who have lots of money have usually done something in their life that reflects excessively productive output. The money is a measure of that productivity. People can be jealous of that productive output and hope that they might acquire a lot of money without the work of being productive, but usually they would be wasting wishes—unless they happen to win a lottery ticket or inherit a lot of money for someone else’s effort. But they do not have a right to demand that productive people refuse to put a cap on their efforts just to make others feel better about themselves.

The Republican Party as an organization doesn’t do much but consume resources. They solicit money from people like Trump to keep them funded and continuing to win elections which then provokes the question as to why they are even needed if they serve no other purpose but to appeal to people who have money so they can stick themselves between the productive and the needy to barter the relationship with their con-artist appeal. If they aren’t going to manage resources, then the politicians are useless, which is what Trump’s campaign is shaping up to illustrate. He doesn’t need them and neither do voters, which begs the question as to why we have such a ridiculous system to begin with.

The political class is attempting to demonize Trump because he has money. Because he has money, he doesn’t have to appeal to any donors, so there is nobody to pull out the rug from under his campaign. The political class knows they can’t compete with that, so they have no other move but to castigate him from their circles of associations. They want him as a donor; they don’t want him as a contributor to the philosophy of Republicanism. That makes them leeches in need of sustenance. It also makes him the body they need to suck off of, and with all this name calling they have embarked on, they are trying to put him in his place with force—whether it’s John McCain calling Trump’s supports “crazies,” or Lindsey Graham calling Trump himself a “jackass.” They actually expected him to take the ridicule which is why politics is so screwed up in the first place. The emphasis among the political class is that the individual must subject themselves to the greater good of the group—those who are most served have the value over the least. But that assumes that everyone involved is of the same quality. And people are not all of the same quality. That is the lesson one learns at a golf course, or based on the size of one’s bank account. Some people do more and are worth more than others. In the world of politics, Trump has done a lot more than all the politicians on Capital Hill put together. Yet they expect Trump to fall in line to maintain their illusion of value behind a group consensus. They do the same to us all, which makes them completely worthless to the task at hand.

If Trump leaves the party behind, I will as well to help him accomplish his task. I’ve pulled for Republicans before; I still do with a hope that some of them aren’t a bunch of screwballs. After I was burnt by John Kasich personally as I was one of the Right to Work leaders in Ohio during a time when the governor wanted to attack those types of people using the party to try to eliminate them, I will never give anybody a chance to do that to me again. So I have no love for the party, they are too liberal for me. They can point to Trump and declare that he was a Democrat, and that he was friends with the Clintons, and that he isn’t a strong conservative. But he’s rich, and he has made a lot of money, and to me that means something. I’d put my bets on him over any politician, so if the party paints him out of the party, it will be their loss—yet again.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

John Kasich Running For President: All the good things I have to say about him

As many know I have a lot to say.  Every day I write multi thousand word articles about topics that are on my mind.  So of course I have to comment on John Kasich, whom I once awarded as Warrior of the Week right here on this site.   He just announced he’s running for president of the United States.  I’ve met the guy personally, and he’s from my state.  So let me articulate all the reasons he should be president with my voluminous command of the English language and prodigious writing ability.

………………………………………I can’t think of a single good thing to say in support.  He lost Issue 2.  Gave Obama everything he wanted.  And he was one of the first to tag Ohio to Obamacare.  He shouldn’t be running for president…………………he should be running from angry voters.

Only in Washington!

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Military Objective of Mexican Illegal Immigration: Understanding the Constitution of 1917

Did you ever wonder dear reader why so many liberals want an open border policy with Mexico, and why they want to pull Republicans into amnesty debates with illegal aliens? Did you ever wonder why they are seeking to overwhelm the American welfare system with illegal immigrants and why they want to change the name to something more “respectful?” It is good to ask questions. It is even better to know history. It is extremely important to understand Mexico itself and the extreme liberal investment that progressivism has made into the region for the last hundred years so to properly understand the politics of the present. Specifically it is important to understand that the Constitution of Mexico written in 1917 was essentially a Marxist revolution that was as radical as the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union. They were spreading communist banter among the working poor years before Cuba fell to communism leading the entire Central American region to teeter politically with communism and socialism. That disease would then spread down into South America where it has impoverished every country south of the United States border for a century now. And presently, the communists are banking on flooding America with the descendents of this revolution through a weakness for illegal narcotics and praying for a revolution in the United States of an even greater socialist uprising. Mexico as it is today is a socialist region with roots in radical communism and they are not friends to our capitalist country. They are drowning on their choice of socialism and the political left is using them to topple American capitalism by flooding our political system with people trained to think like socialists spreading their roots into Marxist expectations. Here is some of the history of the Mexican Revolution for reference.

The Mexican Revolution (Spanish: Revolución mexicana) was a major armed struggle that started in 1910, with an uprising led by Francisco I. Madero against longtime autocrat Porfirio Díaz, and lasted for the better part of a decade until around 1920.[5] Over time the revolution changed from a revolt against the established order to a multi-sided civil war with frequently shifting power struggles amongst factions in the Mexican Revolution.

This armed conflict is often categorized as the most important sociopolitical event in Mexico and one of the greatest upheavals of the 20th century;[6] it resulted in an important program of experimentation and reform in social organization.[7]

A number of Mexicans began to organize against Díaz’s policies that had welcomed foreign capital and capitalists, suppressed nascent labor unions, and consistently moved against peasants as agriculture flourished. In 1905, a group of Mexican intellectuals and agitators who had created the Mexican Liberal Party (Partido Liberal de México), drew up a radical program of reform, specifically addressing what they considered the worse aspects of the Díaz regime. Most prominent in the PLM were Ricardo Flores Magón and his two brothers, Enrique Flores Magón and Jesús Flores Magón. They along, with Luis Cabrera Lobato and Antonio Díaz Soto y Gama, were connected to the anti-Díaz publication, El Hijo de Ahuizote. Political cartoons of José Guadalupe Posada lampooned politicians and cultural elites with mordant humor, portraying them as skeletons. The Liberal Party of Mexico founded the anti-Díaz, anarchist newspaper, Regeneración, which appeared in both Spanish and English. In exile in the United State was Práxedis Guerrero, who started an anti-Díaz newspaper in San Francisco, Alba Roja. Although leftist groups were small in number, through their publications they became highly influential and helped articulate the reasons to oppose the Díaz regime. Francisco Bulnes (politician) described these men as the “true authors” of the Mexican Revolution for agitating the masses.[20] As the 1910 election approached, Francisco I. Madero, an idealistic, political novice and member of one of Mexico’s richest families, funded a newspaper Anti-Reelectionista, in opposition to the continuous re-election of Díaz.

Labor began organizing, then striking against their employers for better wages and more just treatment. Demands for better conditions for labor were part of the Liberal Party Program, drawn up in 1905. Mexican copper miners in the northern state of Sonora taking action in the 1906 Cananea strike, where, among other grievances, they were paid less than U.S. nationals working in the mines.[21] In the state of Veracruz, textile workers struck in January 1907 at the huge Río Blanco, Veracruz factory, the world’s largest, against unfair labor practices, especially the payment of wages in credit that could only be used at the company store.[22]

One of the major issues that faced Obregón’s early post-revolution government was stabilizing Mexico. Regional caciques (chiefs) were still fighting each other in small skirmishes. The populace was demanding reforms, promised by the 1917 constitution. Many issues faced the working poor, such as debt peonage and company stores that kept the populace poor. The military had generals who wanted to overthrow the regime and take power for themselves. There were also foreign governments, primarily the United States, who feared Mexico would take a communist turn such as Russia was to do in 1918. Obregón was in a difficult position; he had to appeal to both the left and the right to ensure Mexico would not fall back into civil war.

With regard to the masses, Obregón, who was conservative but still a reformer, started listening to demands to appease the populace. Obregón’s first focus, in 1920, was land reform. He had governors in various states push forward the reforms promised in the 1917 constitution. These were, however, quite limited. Former Zapatistas still had strong influence in the post-revolutionary government, so most of the reforms began in Morelos, the birthplace of the Zapatista movement.

Despite pressures from the U.S., Obregón flirted with the newly formed USSR. To appeal to intellectuals and left-leaning peasants, official Mexican propaganda began having a very Marxist spin. Murals with Lenin and Trotsky began to appear in government buildings. Despite the sympathy towards socialism, the government began to ferment nationalism amongst the peasantry. This was accomplished by memorializing revolutionary figures and creating anti-western murals. Among the artists employed was Diego Rivera, who had a Mexican nationalist and Marxist tinge to his government murals. Despite these moves towards an anti-western and pro-socialist regime, Obregón did not separate the Mexican economy from foreign capitalists, allowing free trade with some restrictions.

Meanwhile, in 1927 another military coup was attempted, this time receiving support from land owners. Calles quickly crushed the rebellion with help from the newly mobilized peasant battalions, who later on were used to fight against the Church. In the midst of the mobilized worker’s militias, land reform, and anti-church actions, the American government began to openly declare Mexico a Bolshevik regime. To recover from the backlash, Calles began to tone down the radical rhetoric and slowed land reform policies in 1928. A year later, Calles defeated the church ending the rebellion.

After the war ended in 1929, supporters of Calles and Obregón began to form a united political party called the National Revolutionary Party or PNR. This was to unite the various revolutionary factions of the civil war to prevent further Cristero revolts and build stability.

After a series of interim presidents controlled by the party, Lázaro Cárdenas took power in 1934. Cárdenas was a socialist and began to base government policy on class struggle and empowering the masses. However, not all of his reforms were completely socialist, making him somewhat more centrist than purely socialist. Regardless, his rule was the most radical phase of the post revolution, social revolution.

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

 

Now, if you look at the violence that took place in Iran during the 70s, it is important to understand that it was a Marxist philosophy that was being implemented against an aristocratic regime friendly to the United States. China of course in the late 40s was taken over by communism, Cuba was hit with communism in the late 50s and of course the Soviet Union fell to communism during the early part of the Twentieth Century. And at that exact same time as communists were taking over the U.S.S.R, Marxism was attempting to rise in Mexico under the guiding help of progressive intellectuals. They of course didn’t call it communism in Mexico, until the socialist regimes were firmly in control with a social justice oriented constitution. It took about thirty years to fully reveal what they had really been trying to achieve with their revolution. The same slow flood of communism is still moving across the earth, Europe is now drowning with it, all of South America is submitting to it and in all of Asia, only Japan and South Korea are reminiscent of capitalist countries. Then there is the United States where progressives within American culture are trying to overtake the political system of the freest country on earth with a socialist revolution by flooding the borders, then giving amnesty to the illegal aliens to vote socialist in upcoming elections and topple the country away from capitalism into socialism, then communism.

This move has already been underway within black communities. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. Communists have been working within the black communities for years to exploit them away from capitalism and to embrace socialism. The proof of what that strategy has created can be seen in Detroit, which presently looks much the way Tijuana does in Mexico. Everywhere that socialism takes root, the lights of hope go out in people and their roads begin to litter with crime and dilapidated evidence of finer times. The most disgusting place I’ve ever visited was the suburbs of Cancun, Mexico. It was unbelievable to me that such a slum could exist so close to so much wealth and investment as the resort city is known for. But the socialism has killed the town and left them completely at the mercy of tourism and foreign investment. I have felt incredibly sorry for the people of Mexico suffering under the socialism of their nation, and the corruption of their government. Hope is gone from their eyes, and it is truly sad—and that same look is in all eyes of every human being in every socialist country—from the slums of Rio to the shanty towns of the African continent, to the once great streets of Greece. All those places have parents who would sell their daughters to sex slavery to buy a loaf of bread—and that is so incredibly sad. And it is those people that progressives in America want to send to voting booths to keep Democrats in power by redistributing wealth directly to the poor in exchange for a vote. And Republicans are foolishly playing along with the game to their own demise, because they don’t know history and underestimate the radical intentions of the communists within.

And the assault continues. Left leaning revolutionaries are now in the American White House and their military objective is to overwhelm our capitalist system for a socialist regime change and they are using Marxist trained illegal immigrants to topple our economy. It’s not a matter of humanity for those insurgents, they are but pawns in a century long military struggle sharing with the world a philosophy rooted in Karl Marx. The great evil has destroyed many lives, which is obvious the moment one travels south of the American border-anywhere.   And that evil is coming to America—not in the innocent lives used as political pawns, but in what they bring with them. Communism and a love for it.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Trap Behind the Deal: Danielle Richardson standing against a tide of corruption

Danielle Richardson has been leading the way to save the Old Union School within the Lakota school district. She led a group of protestors to the school board meeting on Monday June 8, 2015 to stop the giveaway the district is attempting to create with a Boys and Girls Club offering free babysitting service to area tax payers. The deal is essentially a levy building consensus exercise designed to pull together the business community with the progressive aims of the government school. What is being destroyed in the process is a bit of history within West Chester, Ohio and the efforts of the tax payers at maintaining sanity from the runaway costs of the Lakota school system—for which they are paving the way for yet another tax increase.

Karen Mantia the superintendent of Lakota is up for a contract renewal, which should be allowed to expire and part ways because of her ineffectiveness from a community perspective. Under her watch taxes have gone up and so have her labor costs not resulting in an increase in services offered to the community. She is everything that people like me said she would be at the very beginning. Lakota during the levy fights have since yielded to the labor union strategy of pay for play programs and reduced programs putting as a priority their employees over the kids who attend resulting in a failure that is only hidden by the benefits of an affluent district. She has ridden the coat tails of that success and sought wherever possible to utilize progressive consensus building mechanisms like the Community Conversation program which costs $40K per year to do nothing but change people’s minds about increased property taxes. The other strategy utilized by her has been to make alliances with former opponents from No Lakota Levy to quiet them during upcoming levies, which is what the Old Union School giveaway is all about.image

Danielle’s protestors had a hardy presence even though it will fall on deaf ears, because Lakota has no other management option but to ask for more money and make deals to gain public support for tax increases. By giving away the Old Union School to development, the cost of the tax increases for the property owners involved are marginalized and everyone gets to walk away from the deal thinking they did something nice for kids—and everyone sleeps well at night with that belief. But that’s not the end of the story for everyone else not associated with the deal—and that’s the issue of concern.

Through an alliance with the Community Foundation Lakota has one of its largest levy cheerleaders which penetrate the heart of the GOP community within Butler County. In this way Mantia and her consensus builders within the Lakota organization gets the Republican Party to support unionized labor which indirectly works against them politically with the amount of PAC money that is generated through union dues. The Old Union School deal is something more reminiscent of Hillary Clinton’s backroom deals with Uranium One. It pulls local Republicans in on a trap set by her, using children as bait, to attack their financial base indirectly with union fees. It marginalizes their protests in public because they are all in on the deal, and moves them politically to the left neutralizing their future opposition when tax increases are proposed.

Lakota is too far committed to this Old Union School deal to listen to protestors now. Their goal is not to work with the local GOP as Mantia is a former school teacher herself—they are a progressive advocate intent to water down the GOP into a more centralist organization which has shown itself to be the case over the last four years. Mantia’s not alone of course; the woman who hired her was Lynda O’Connor who openly befriended many of the No Lakota Levy people in 2012 to the point where we supported her for re-election. She’s now the president of the school board and has helped pull all these elements together with consensus building of her own.   People who would normally disagree politically play ball because they want a piece of the pie that this Lakota team helped build. In this case the Lakota alliance with the Community Foundation and area developers whom I worked with in the past are the primary players.  I along with a few others exposed this ill begotten alliance when we started our own foundation to compete with the Community Foundation which resulted in a violent backlash toward myself—which has been well documented—much of it led by the same person who is advocating on behalf of this Boys and Girls Club project. The evidence had been emerging for quite some time, so we flushed it out, and not everyone had the courage to stand up to it. In the end, there were a lot of people who quietly showed me their support, but really in the end just like Danielle Richardson is experiencing now—it’s a lonely road that only one or two people at any given time have the guts to expose. Danielle’s protest is more of an exposure of this vile behavior than a hope for change. The silence and slander from Lakota is the confirmation of her validity because it’s the only play they have in the matter. The slander doesn’t always come from direct sources, but in the roundabout ways within party politics.image

But it should never be taken for granted that the overall goal of the Old Union School deal is to weaken the grip of the GOP, gain support for a future tax increase, and offer free babysitting services to already addicted parents who cannot afford to put their children in daycare so both parents can work and pay for the large mortgages it takes to live within Liberty/West Chester Townships. It is far cheaper to pay the taxes for those levy addicts than the yearly daycare costs—and that is at the heart of the entire strategy which pulls all these parties into supporting indirectly radical labor union intentions dedicated to progressive politics—anti GOP strategies. So while the Old Union School demolition and rebuilding of a new Boys and Girls Club might give local developers some much-needed work, the gains are short-term exclusively but the impact to the GOP down the road is gradual erosion of its small government platform.

As much as area Republicans might want to chastise Richardson for being a radical activist and a say-no-to-anything and everything related to progress type, she is more Republican than a whole room full of GOP leaders—and she’s not even a hard-core Republican. She’s a libertarian in almost every way yet her intentions and goals benefit the GOP far more than Todd Hall’s grand unification of the GOP strategy of pushing out all the radicals and pulling in all the business types under the same tent. Because when it comes to levy time, those who took the deal won’t be able to stand against the tax increase, and Lakota knows that. That’s the main objective of the Old Union School demolition and property giveaway. It’s a flytrap for insurgents who have too high a profile to stand honestly against the corruption as Danielle Richardson is. And for her, it’s going to be a lonely road.

If you want to join her you can at the following link:

http://www.saveoldunionschool.com/

As for fans of Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom who are distraught that No Lakota Levy members are involved in the Old Union School deal, do not fret. The resistance to the future tax increases is alive and well, and more vibrant than it was even four years ago when No Lakota Levy was in its prime. Things evolve and new faces emerge as other faces fade off under the pressure and make deals. People like Danielle Richardson will be a part of those future fights which of course begins with events like this one centering on the Old Union School. I wonder what Lakota will do when they can’t answer the questions that Danielle brings up……………..they certainly can’t call her a sexist. Ummmmmm, that might be a difficult problem for them to overcome. What’s the old term……………………….”what comes around……………goes……………..”

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Helping Chief Blackwell: Cincinnati needs more guns–not less

Gun grabbers and pacifists are licking their lips with all the recent violence in Cincinnati involving guns. As Channel 9 released the report below and the Cincinnati Enquirer pandered to the same class of the panic driven drivel, the root cause of the gun violence was ignored in favor of a progressive objective seeking to demonize personal firearms. Here is how Channel 9 presented the case for which the burden fell on Chief Blackwell.

Cincinnatians have been barraged with the reports of 168 shootings so far this year. They include the recent gun battle on I-75, gunfire ringing out on our streets in broad daylight, teen-agers getting shot and teen-agers doing the shooting. There’s one thing all these incidents have in common: a gun.

 

That’s what I wanted to talk about with Chief Jeffrey Blackwell when I sat down with him Friday. Guns have been on his mind too.

 

He produced a daily report showing shootings are up 23 percent this year compared to the same period last year. Homicides are down, but he agreed that the recent violence has created an atmosphere of unease. 

 

His short-term response to the outbreak of gun violence is to create a new “gun-reduction program,” a group of 13 officers who will focus on the people police know of who are responsible for much of it.

 

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/06/03/sentinels-support-chief/28408041/

 

http://www.wcpo.com/web/wcpo/news/crime/cincinnati-police-department-90-day-plan-includes-moving-more-officers-to-the-streets

So I’m going to do Chief Blackwell a favor, and explain to him the cause and how to remedy the problem that the city manager of Cincinnati has placed upon his shoulders. First of all the reason for the increase in gun violence is that the news reports from Baltimore and Ferguson have shown the criminal minded how to avoid prosecution and harassment by the police. Now that they’ve seen how mobs of people can protest the police and how the police have been neutered, particularly in places like New York City, and Chicago—respect for the law is at an all time low. Poor quality politicians and the media have fanned the flames of violence provoking it in many cases in inner cities where government dependents reside in a high concentration. The net result is an increase in the statistical violence involving guns in Cincinnati, and just about everywhere else where large concentrations of public housing, and welfare dominate the per capita population.

Yet in areas where there is a high concentration of gun ownership, like Mason and West Chester, Ohio—there is almost no gun violence per capita or by volume of gun ownership. That is because the quality of people in those areas are different—there are less thugs per capita in those areas. So a simple gun reduction program won’t work, because guns have been invented and bad guys will find them just as they do illegal drugs.   Reducing gun ownership within the city of Cincinnati will only guarantee more violence, not less—because when those who behave with an animalistic desire to suppress others drives criminal behavior against the innocent—the lack of guns allows for an unbalanced defense against thugs. Thugs are those who wish to impart violence against others to fulfill their own personal objectives. The victims may not desire to take part in that desire but if they don’t have a gun to equalize the ill intent, the thug will have the advantage 100% of the time without any resistance.

Progressives and other community advocates who lazily wish that guns had never been invented and fantasize that more government workers could manage all the elements of society into peace if only there were no more guns are the cause of the violence and the delay of the solution. They are the cause of the increased violence coming and going then point at the guns as the villains. Well, they have lost their seat at the table. There is enough history and facts now to dispute their fear based diatribes. Fewer guns increase violence, more guns reduce it. It’s a very simple equation.

If the violence within Cincinnati were to truly be reduced, then more homes with more guns should have them. There may be a slight spike at the beginning of such a proposal where the guns are used to dispel the efforts of a bad guy but once word hit the streets, the cockroaches would return to their hiding and keep their crimes from the eyes of humanity—for the most part. Give some shotguns to the old men who sit on their porches in Avondale talking about the old days—and let them eliminate the violence on their streets, the car break-ins, the drug deals, the gang gatherings—and it will quickly be shown how effect a pro gun program in the hands of private citizens truly is.

Take those same old men in Avondale sitting on their porches with shotguns painted against the reality of our day and they would be arrested for poor handling of a firearm and disturbing the peace while the members of a gang stand on a street corner down the road and laugh. The old men are an easy arrest for the police and keeps their captains off their backs for lack of arrests—but the kids down the road are difficult. There are legal entanglements and revenge killings—and they are just too much trouble. No cop with a family wants a cartel killer to show up on their doorstep, so they leave the kids alone. The gang is just too much trouble to deal with. Cops will show up to take a report after violence has occurred, but they just can’t do anything until a crime is committed making them virtually powerless to stop anything before a thug committees a violent act.

So what is Chief Blackwell supposed to say to a bunch of panicky politicians wanting a quick fix to a problem they created with progressive policies?   Tell them the truth, or tell them what they want to hear—that he’ll focus on getting rid of guns off the streets. To liberal progressives, that is music to their ears, so they might be appeased—for a while, but it won’t solve the problem. Violence will continue because those in charge have been deemed weak by the thugs, and that will only breed more thugs—not less. Before crime can really be solved management must admit that some of their citizens are thugs, and that they seek to correct that behavior with a basic respect for humanity. Those failing to adhere to that basic respect must be dealt with in the only way they understand—with force. Then and only then will violent trends decrease, and assumptions toward civility be cultivated successfully.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Why the Department of Education Should be Shut Down: Broadband for everyone!

This is why the Department of Education should be completely eliminated. It is grotesquely ineffective and agenda based politically. The aim of equality so boisterously proposed by government school advocates is only a thinly veiled attempt at state-run parenting. It’s an insult to have them in charge of education. For instance, I first saw the following article from Yahoo News, and found the source article after some checking. Essentially it’s a marketing ploy advocating in favor of two progressive agenda items—one Common Core, the other Net Neutrality and using children to advance both causes. I personally find it insulting that they actually think human beings are stupid enough to believe what they are saying. While many people may be, not everyone is, and while they strive for equality of stupidity for all people, I’m not going to comply, nor will the typical reader of this site. Here is how the article read:

Overall, 63 percent of public schools don’t have access to broadband speeds needed for digital learning. The problem is particularly acute in rural and low-income districts: Only 14 percent in those areas meet high-speed internet targets.

“It’s just very uneven all over the country,” Lan Neugent, executive director of the non-profit State Educational Technology Directors Association.

The Federal Communications Commission approved a $1.5 billion spending cap increase for school broadband and Wi-Fi last year that is expected to significantly boost connectivity. State grants linked to Common Core implementation and collaborations with tech and business leaders are also bridging the gap. But those initiatives could take a year or more to connect thousands of schools and testing started in 29 states and the District of Columbia for 12 million students this year.

In the meantime, they’re resorting to alternatives: Testing students in small groups, busing them to other schools and limiting all other internet access while exams are taken.

Ideally, technology can help eliminate achievement gaps between poor and rural students and their more affluent peers. The shift to online testing, however, reveals how wide the digital divide remains. Districts like Chicago Public Schools with large numbers of low-income students have raised questions about whether their students — who often don’t have access to a computer or the Internet at home — are at a disadvantage.

“The implementation of Common Core is bringing these issues more to the forefront,” said Brian Smith, executive director of the nonprofit Education Trust-West. “But this has been an issue that has plagued communities of color and low-income communities for years.”

 

http://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2015/05/11/online-common-core-testing-lays-bare-tech-divide-in-schools

Problem number one, if technology is being used in public schools to the extent that they need WI-FI internet connections, then the institution itself is not needed. I already argue that modern technology as far as teaching is far superior to an actual union member public school teacher. Teachers may have some success in helping children who have bad parents, or limited financial opportunities, but for the masses of children, public school is ineffective as an institution—other than providing day care for children while parents work. Here is the Department of Education attempting to articulate that the internet is needed to provide education in a brick and mortar school—even to the extent that they are willing to spend money to bus students to locations with better WI-FI connections. People are supposed to actually sympathize with that nonsense. It’s an insult to assume that normal people are stupid enough to not see what is going on with that ridiculous assumption.

Secondly, the Department of Education ignores completely the Vico cycle of human devolution—which is historically as reliable as sunrises and sunsets. The reason that there are different portions of the country rural and urban as well as wealthy and poor is because different factions of people depending on their values progress along the Vico cycle at rates specific to them. For instance, those in poor neighborhoods are entering the anarchy phase while those in the suburbs may be at the aristocratic. Those phases are not compatible with one another—so there will be different types of people produced by them. CLICK HERE for a contemporary understanding of the Vico cycle. It would be thought that all the supposedly smart people at the Department of Education would understand the Vico cycle—but apparently not. Loses in internet connectivity has little to do with any other factor than whether or not an area is profitable. Internet providers are willing to incur the cost of service if there is money in it for them. They are not going to do it for the fun of it.   Ironically, Richard Branson with his Virgin Galactic company is planning to put satellites up that will bring internet coverage to even the most remote portions of Africa, so a day when such connectivity problems will still be an issue are on their way out—so long as government stays out-of-the-way. If Virgin Galactic is left alone, the problems of this entire article will evaporate like a puddle of water on a hot summer day. It won’t take long for there to be no trace of anything left behind.

Then of course is the not so subtle marketing of public education services by stating that technology can help erase the gaps between poor and affluent—as if government schools were the great equalizers of society. They aren’t. You could give a poor kid in South Chicago a brand new laptop and it would likely be destroyed within a few weeks, sold for drug money, or riddled with pornography because the parents of the poor child were terrible and instilled limited values on the unfortunate sapling. I’ve known lots of people from poor neighborhoods and tried to help them all. You can’t make bad people into good just by being nice to them, or giving them a fair shake. They have to change their values. A drunk has to value soberness to want to quit. The illiterate has to value reading to break their curse. A poor person has to want to be productive; otherwise they will continue to be poor. Until you work on the core values of a society, nothing can stop their progress on the Vico cycle. Nothing—no amount of money, no feel good public education experiment—no billions of dollars spent on the internet. The internet is useless without the desire to learn something from it. The internet doesn’t just magically make everyone equal with opportunity. Stupid people will use it for porn. Smart people will use it for knowledge. In order for everyone to be equal, everyone has to either want to be stupid or smart. Public education as indicated by the Department of Education has decided that the best way to make everyone equal is to make the smart into the stupid and then hope that government can manage the chaos of the Vico cycle that follows. But they can’t, and they will never learn to. Because the phase after anarchy is always theocracy, and when that happens the Department of Education will be eliminated anyway in favor of a new god to worship and the whole mess starts over again.

Well everyone isn’t stupid, or have plans on joining the ranks. For them, the Department of Education insulted their intelligence with such a stupid release of information flowed down to the orthodox media. It shows just how astonishingly ignorant those in charge at the Department of Education really are. I mean I don’t think much of them anyway, but to not understand the basic concepts of the Vico cycle—it’s just preposterous. Sad and ignorant that such people are employed by tax payer dollars. That—is the real insult.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Vote No on the Midpointe Library System: Philosophy and the changing way of expanding knowledge

I am against the MidPointe Library System in Butler County, Ohio for all the same reasons I am against school levies. Even though I tend to love people who strive for knowledge and desire to feed minds with information, the quality of those efforts can cast people adrift all of their lives ruining them, and a library in many subtle ways contribute to that personal destruction. Before detailing why and how, here is the case that the MidPointe Library System makes for itself looking for more money from voters during the upcoming May 5th 2015 election.   Essentially to make a long story short, they make the same arguments that public schools make, helping the children, offerings to the community, and all that kind of nonsense.

The MidPointe Library System will have a renewal levy on the ballot on Tuesday, May 5.  Please find information regarding this levy, as well as why the Library is asking for continued community support below:

Something for Everyone in the Community

With current funding levels, the MidPointe Library System is able to provide many resources, materials, services, and programming to the residents of eastern Butler County. 

MidPointe offers a collection of over a half million items, and partnership in the SearchOhio lending consortium gives patrons access to over 16 million items from across the state. In 2014 over 2 million items were checked out. Additionally, MidPointe provides internet access and public computers to assist people in finding jobs, accessing data and doing school work.

In 2014, MidPointe offered over 2000 programs.  These are as diverse as yoga class and technology instruction for adults, to storytime and early literacy book clubs for children.  The Library’s Summer Reading Program, which promotes literacy for all ages, reached record involvement last year, with nearly 10,000 patrons participating. 

MidPointe’s influence expands well beyond the buildings. Librarians visit schools and community centers to engage young people in the joy of reading. Educators are able to stock their classrooms with books as a result of MidPointe’s “Teacher Collections.” The MidPointe Outreach Services Department delivers materials to over 200 patrons who are unable to physically visit the Library.

Library Budgeting

For the past two decades, Libraries in the state of Ohio have faced reduced funding.  In 2008, the most drastic of these cuts occurred and as a result, the Library had to dramatically reduce hours, services and staffing.   For the first time, the Library approached the public with the possibility of a .75 mill levy to supplement operations.  The voters of our Library district passed the levy, which represents almost 40% of the MidPointe budget. Overdue fines and fees only represent 3.25% of the Library’s overall budget.

The overwhelming majority of the Library’s expenses are devoted to collection development and public service and programs. Administrative costs represent only 12.5% of overall expenses and the MidPointe Library System has continually been recognized as one of the most cost-effective in the state. 

Levy Details

  • The levy on the May 5 ballot is a renewal. This is not a new tax.
  • Levy funds make up 40% of MidPointe’s budget.
  • Levy Millage:  .75 mill
  • Length of Levy:  5 years
  • Cost: The cost of this levy to the owner of a $100,000 home is approximately $22.97 a year(less than the cost of one hardback book).

Levy funds will:

  • Maintain services and materials at all MidPointe locations.
  • Continue to provide current technological resources to the public.
  • Allow for sensible expansion in our growing community.
  • Sustain programs for children, teens and adults.

 

 

http://www.midpointelibrary.org/news/renewal-levy-information/

Essentially they simply want more money to continue a practice that is rooted in socialism. I have never liked libraries because I have never liked sharing my books. I like buying them, and owning them—collecting them like treasures to be guarded by me as part of a life’s journey. It has always seemed wrong to “borrow” a library book from the library where they maintain “collective” ownership. The concept of a shared resource is disgusting. Library books are routinely abused because nobody owns them and are reflective of the type of society that is not centered on personal responsibility and individual ownership.image

I have not been to a library for years. In my community within my little network of a neighborhood I have one of the best libraries in the entire country, the West Chester Library, yet I never, ever use it. I would not borrow a book or movie from them, because I don’t want to use someone else’s stuff. However, I go to one of two Barnes and Nobles book stores about two times a week. The children sections in both of those book stores are tremendous services to children and show how much better private investment is in constructing the mind of young people. The book store in Newport, Kentucky is just fabulous and is still one of my favorites anywhere—which is pictured within this article. It is a temple of knowledge and I love it—yet it is struggling to stay afloat in the changing climate of online offerings. Unlike the MidPointe Library System, Barnes and Noble cannot ask for a tax increase to stay afloat in a changing economy. So they have to adapt—where libraries are doing the same things they always have—and they lose a lot of money because of it. They are essentially money pits and their offerings to the community are not beneficial as they pretend.

The job of teaching children to read falls on the parents or less directly, the extended family members of a child—aunts, uncles, grandparents and so on. Not a socialist librarian or volunteer who has a subtle agenda of encouraging sharing as opposed to ownership. The world of a capitalist society like the United States is rooted in ownership—not sharing. When something of value maintains its worth because someone owned it and cared for it, it is then valuable to someone who might want to purchase it for their own. Libraries encourage sharing and while that might sound good on the surface—the mentality created from this exchange of ideas often leads to various acceptances of degrees of socialism—like public education, public housing, public assistance and so on.image

From the book shelves at Barnes and Noble in Newport, Kentucky in my favorite section—the philosophy section—the two primary competing ideas regarding philosophy are on full display—because that is what people are buying. Amazon.com can provide obscure books within a few days and at a great price. Barnes and Noble put on their shelves titles that sell. All the other sections in the book store, politics, fiction, and cooking, current events—etc, all stem from the philosophy section. People think the way they do and are attracted to some things rather than other things based on their personal philosophy, so I see it as the most important section. In the various schools of thought in Western philosophy everything is basically built off two individuals, Plato and Aristotle. In the east it is Confucius, which leans toward Western Platonic thought. What that translates to through a long line of philosophic thought is essentially Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. imageI certainly lean toward Ayn Rand—yet I think her Objectivism is limited to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and that there will be new schools of thought stemming from her Objectivism that will have to encapsulate the bizarre behavior of quantum mechanics now being discovered. But Karl Marx has been a failure and is a dying philosophy that will either be extinct within the next two hundred years, or it will destroy our civilization. I have no use for Karl Marx in any fashion. Libraries are part of a Karl Marx mentality.image

I love libraries for their historical significance—especially the library in Alexandria. At the time the cost of printing books was prohibitive and everyone couldn’t own a book. So the borrowing of books at a library was the best way to achieve an exchange of knowledge. But that time has passed. Now there are so many books printed that the market is saturated with knowledge. It is easier, and more efficient for people to upload books onto their devices, or just buy them at Amazon.com. Stores like Barnes and Nobel fill the traditional role of a library being a center of learning—especially for kids. But as for motivation into intellectual endeavors, libraries are not a substitute for a good parent or mentor. The reason I don’t go to the West Chester library is because it feels like a socialist utopia to me. But Barnes and Nobel feels like the intellectual center of a capitalist country and I could essentially move into every one of them and be very happy. It is for that reason that I will vote no for the MidPointe levy on May 5th. I feel sorry for them, but they are a dying enterprise that will evaporate under the changing times—and it would be better for them to see that happen now than prolonging the agony. Community isn’t very valuable unless the members of that community believe in an Aristotelian logic as opposed to a Platonic sentiment. A community of socialists is a destructive force, and that will be the unintended consequence of a continuation of the library system in America. It is time for a replacement and it begins with a withdrawal of funds from the black hole of tax increases for which libraries currently represent.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Ayn Rand and Social Security: Confiscated money that is owed eventually

As far as Ayn Rand and her modern footprint into politics and philosophy many on the left have attempted to discredit her based on the notion that she drew from Social Security late in her life. As a small government advocate deeply suspicious of America’s steps toward socialism—which she had fled from, and lost her family to, many progressives have identified her as a danger to their Kant driven philosophy doing whatever they could to discredit her writings using the Social Security issue to lead the charge against the logic she presented. Recently my friend Mark Etterling ran across just such a person on his email musings with the far left and radical nut cases hoping to shut off the world to wisdom, so to disguise their treacherous attempts against righteousness—specifically a strong economy driven by capitalism. Mark presented a strong case in favor of Ayn Rand which I thought was effective enough to repeat below. Many assume that Social Security is a government entitlement when in fact as Mark presents; it’s supposed to be an investment. The distinction is important as Etterling explains in greater detail:

From: Mark Etterling Date: April 5, 2015 at 1:31:22 PM EDT Subject: Moron, expose theyself Reply-To: Mark Etterling

 

Recently I read a Facebook post from a liberal that was meant to be a “gotcha” moment against conservatives and in this case the now deceased author Ayn Rand in particular. Upon reading the post I actually found myself laughing out loud. Not only was this a hilariously bad attempt at painting the right as hypocrites, but was so moronic that the poster had no idea who he was actually insulting.

The post was a story about how the vaunted die-hard capitalist Ayn Rand had actually dared to collect on Social Security in her old age in defiance of her own writings demonizing big government. This is the same tired assault that liberals have tried for years by claiming conservatives are hypocrites for railing against intrusive government up until such time as it’s their own turn to stand in line for some government goodies.

So for the umpteenth time allow me to explain what the half-wits on left just simply can’t seem to grasp. SOCIAL SECURITY ISN’T A GOVERNMENT HANDOUT! Let me put this in simple terms. If you loan someone $100 today and then later return to collect on your loan that doesn’t make you greedy, a thief, a handout recipient, a hypocrite, or any other such non-sense. It simply means that you are collecting a return of what was rightfully yours all along. The fact that the government forcibly confiscates that money from you (and the matching funds from your employer) throughout your working life on the promise of returning it to you later (if you’re fortunate enough to live that long) doesn’t constitute even the remotest concept to anyone above the IQ of a horsefly that it somehow magically becomes a handout.

To prove my point all you need to do is look at your pay stub. You have separate line item deductions for Social Security and Medicare because those moneys are SUPPOSED to be placed in a separate government trust fund so that people won’t foolishly waste all their money before they reach retirement age. The reason I capitalized the word supposedly above is because under this scenario the ugly truth is that it’s been the government all along who has foolishly wasted your money instead as they have basically borrowed and spent against all that money until the actual trust fund is pretty much an empty vault of IOU’s. Personally, as an intelligent adult I would have preferred it if big brother government would have simply butted out of my life so that I could have invested that total of 15% annual matching funds on my own instead of through a glorified government sanctioned Ponzi scheme. However, now that they have it, you can bet your @ss I want it back!

It blows my mind every time I hear some idiot from the left proclaiming that the elderly are better off because of Social Security. In saying that they are not only stating by proxy that all Americans are too stupid to be trusted with something like their own retirement (same thing for healthcare), but completely forget that had the government not interfered the money that was confiscated would have been the people’s money all along (plus interest) anyway. It’s like a thief robbing you and then expecting a big old “thank you” for returning the things they should have never stolen at government gun point in the first place. Here’s another way to think of it for when they ignorantly try to insult conservatives for trying to collect what is rightfully theirs. Is it right that someone should be forced to pay for a meal in advance and then demonized simply because they would now like a chance to eat it before it’s all gone? Honestly, I wish I could think of a stronger word than “moron” in situations like this.

Morons are morons and nothing will ever change that. However, in posting what he posted this particular moron doesn’t even realize that who he has basically insulted isn’t just conservatives, but every American who has worked all their life and is now old enough that they are simply trying to retrieve what was rightfully theirs all along. The checks they are now receiving aren’t government handouts. They’re long overdue reimbursements. Personally, I hope he reposts his article over and over. In doing so he’ll be accomplishing far more to expose his own true self-insulting ignorance than any rebuttal I could ever hope to write.

P.S. As a side note please remember that it was DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz who recently proposed the idiotic idea of having the government confiscate everyone’s IRA’s and 401K’s and using that money to shore up the missing funds from Social Security. As you can see, these people aren’t just simple morons. They’re morons that are hell-bent on ruining all our lives.

Social Security was a stupid idea, and it never should have been enacted. It is an insult to stick the government in between Americans and their so-called retirements. I resent every deduction taken from my paycheck as a theft stolen from me, because the government will never be in a position to pay me back all the money I have “invested” under coercion. I have personal friends who hate Social Security so badly they have essentially given up their citizenship over the issue. One of those friends had began plotting his deferral from the Social Security system in the 5th grade—no kidding. He was a very smart kid and while the other kids were talking about the rock band KISS and the new show on television called The Dukes of Hazzard, he was planning on how to legally refuse his obligations toward Social Security. As an adult, he gave up his citizenship after years of legal entanglement—but—he doesn’t pay into the system, because as he was always right, Social Security is stolen money not granted by an infant when they are issued a card after being registered by their parents. His argument was that his parents didn’t have a right to commit him to a life obligation into such a contract with the government.

The rest of the world isn’t willing to take such extremes, so we just pay into it knowing that its wrong—because we don’t want the hassle of fighting the government—and they know that. My friend had a lifelong crusade against Social Security which continues to this very day—but I have always found it easier to just outwork the money grabbing hands of the government. I have infinite energy which they don’t posses. With me it’s a delicate balance; government knows they need me to be productive to pay their salaries, so they generally leave me alone. But, I have to accept that they will steal a portion of my money every week because they made laws enabling them to do so. I have the same deal with insects in my house. I know they are there in the cracks, but if they come out in the open, they are disposed of. I don’t want to see them even though they are likely hidden in every crevice available. The government takes my money before I even get to see it each week. They get first dibs on my earnings—which is why more Americans aren’t angered by the stolen money because they figure they never had it in the first place. But when it comes time to get that money back—everyone expects it—just like we expect tax returns at the end of each year for the overpayments interest free we make to the government through the same withdrawal system. The idiots who came before us who voted in favor of this kind of thing made a major mistake, and it should be rectified. But until then, like Mark Etterling said in his article—I want my money back at the first opportunity I can get it. And I won’t apologize for wanting it either. It was stolen from me without my permission, and I want every dime back before it’s all said and done. When Ayn Rand needed the money she put into the system, I don’t fault her for getting it. She paid into it, so she deserved to get it back. But, she would have been the first to argue, if the government had stayed out of the exchange in the first place that same money may have made her rich, instead of needing Social Security in the first place. She was more qualified to handle her own money than the government was, and that is the tragedy we all face—at some point in time.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Blaze Radio: An evolution of thought and freedom

I have raved before about how much I enjoy The Blaze Radio Network when my friend Doc Thompson acquired a job with them. As a long time AM radio listener going back several decades now, I enjoy news stations and talk radio the way an air traffic controller might enjoy monitoring sky traffic through radio chatter. It is assuring to me to hear intellectual activity from minds talking over the radio about their thoughts and opinions on given matters. Formally it was the local Cincinnati station of 700 WLW, which is how I came to know Doc, that I most listened to sometimes 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. But not anymore.

The trouble with WLW and stations like it is that they have way too much sports broadcasting and in Cincinnati where the teams are often a disappointment, I get sick of hearing about things that are not important. But in the old days I had to put up with it to get to the good stuff, the news at the top and bottom of every hour and the talk radio programs that discussed the news of the day. But when Glenn Beck created The Blaze Radio Network he basically took the best of what made stations like WLW so appealing, and turned them into a full-time broadcast. Now after a few years under their belt, The Blaze Radio has become my new favorite friend providing information and content at all hours of the day all through the week. It is excellent broadcasting designed by a long time radio guy and my friend Doc starts the day off each day with hard news, humorous opinion and high quality research that comes from hours of tireless investigating.

The Blaze Radio Network is a conservative libertarian American radio network programmed by The Blaze and available via Internet streaming on SiriusXM channel 796, The Blaze’s website, its iOS app, or ClearChannel‘s iHeartRadio Website, app on iOS or Android devices, or Roku channel. It is one of the most listened to internet streams in the United States.[1]

The network also produces and operates The Blaze Radio News, the exclusive provider of news updates at the top of every programming hour on SiriusXM Patriot.

All episodes from shows on The Blaze Radio Network (with the exception of The Weekend With Joe Pags and all of the shows on Sunday) are available on-demand to listen or download at Stitcher Radio, SoundCloud, and iTunes.

On October 28, 2013, The Blaze Radio Network launched a localized radio station broadcasting The Blaze Radio Network content augmented by Philadelphia local updates like weather and traffic several times an hour. The Blaze Radio/Philly is available on the same apps mentioned above. Additionally, to promote the launch, The Blaze Radio Network was broadcast on WWIQ-FM 106.9 for the week of October 28-November 3, 2013, prior to its format change to WKVP.

The Glenn Beck Radio Program simulcasts on The Blaze Radio and many Premiere Networks affiliates. The Morning Blaze with Doc Thompson and Skip Lacombe is also syndicated to terrestrial radio on a few affiliates, mainly on the West Coast.

 

Current Lineup

Weekdays
ET End Program Host Notes Original Run
6 a.m. 9 a.m. The Morning Blaze with Doc Thompson Doc Thompson Skip LaCombe Live 2012–present
9 a.m. noon The Glenn Beck Radio Program Glenn Beck Pat Gray Stu Burguiere Live 2000–present
noon 2 p.m. The Buck Sexton Show Buck Sexton Live 2013–present
2 p.m. 5 p.m. The Jay Severin Show Jay Severin Live 2012–present
5 p.m. 7 p.m. Pat & Stu Pat Gray Stu Burguiere Pre-recorded (audio rebroadcast of Noon – 2 P.M. TV show) 2012–present

Saturdays
6 a.m. 8 a.m. The Jeff Fisher Show Jeff Fisher Live 2014–present
8 a.m. 9 a.m. Pure Opelka Mike Opelka Live 2014–present
9 a.m. noon The Glenn Beck Weekend Glenn Beck Pat Gray Stu Burguiere Pre-recorded 2014–present
noon 3 p.m. The Chris Salcedo Show Chris Salcedo Live 2013–present
3 p.m. 6 p.m. The Mike Slater Show Mike Slater Live 2014–present
6 p.m. 9 p.m. The Weekend with Joe Pags Joe “Pags” Pagliarulo Pre-recorded 2013–present

Sundays
10 a.m. 1 p.m. Wallbuilders David Barton Pre-recorded 2013–present
1 p.m. 2 p.m. Handel On The Law Bill Handel Pre-recorded 2014–present
2 p.m. 4 p.m. The Jacki Daily Show Jacki Daily Live 2015-present
4 p.m. 7 p.m. Gun Talk Radio Tom Gresham Pre-recorded 2014–present
7 p.m. 10 p.m. Hollywood 360 Carl Amari Pre-recorded 2014–present
10 p.m. 12 a.m. The Jeff Fisher Show Jeff Fisher Pre-recorded 2014–present

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheBlaze_Radio_Network

The magic for me of late has come from my T-Mobile account where they provide free data to my iPhone over iHeart Radio. That has turned out to be one of the greatest gifts of this modern age, because it allows me to essentially monitor The Blaze Radio all hours of the day without worrying about consuming my data. That’s important because on most days through the week I bike for about three hours a day—(bicycle). Often I am in complete dead zones in the middle of nowhere and just a few years ago there was no Internet coverage in these zones. But, T-Mobile now covers those areas so I can essentially leave my driveway and go to all the places I do for exercise listening to The Blaze Radio without a signal drop—really for the first time.

When I was a little kid I used to sit in my bunk bed and listen to the Voice of America radio all night for much the same reason—I liked hearing the thoughts of people across the world and my clunky 1970s AM radio allowed me that freedom—which has never become old to me. But now, I get the same impact off a simple miniature computer that fits in my pocket not much bigger than a credit card. So the miracle of the iPhone is not lost to me and I keep it always turned to The Blaze. I had one of those special moments the other day during sunrise. I was in the middle of a vast field of wetlands as the hint of spring was emerging from the 25 degree air with snow heavily coating the ground. A train was roaring across the plain as some ducks took to the sky in fear of the roar and I just stopped my bike to take it all in. On The Blaze Doc and his partner Skip were doing a new segment of weekly news updates and it was very funny, and informative. At that moment I took a minute to marvel at all those elements. When The Blaze Radio is playing, I feel the world is not lost off its rocker, because it connects those still having a mind with others who feel the same way and it bypasses all that ridiculous nonsense so common on other mainstream news outlets. It was a real pleasure to listen to Doc Thompson’s radio broadcast to the entire world from my bicycle in the middle of a wetland as a train roared through the early spring countryside from my iPhone. There are so many inventions that it took to make that moment possible and I thanked them all in that moment.

I am so happy to have The Blaze Radio as an option. It has become my best news friend because no matter how bad things get, they have a way of delivering the news in a way that makes nothing seem impossible. They are a beacon in the darkness where thought is still appreciated. Buck Sexton is a gift to have someone like that on the radio everyday at noon. Jay Severin comes on after Buck and he’s great too. Then of course there’s Pat and Stu who are really truly funny while at the same time being extremely informative from a critical thinking point of view. They are quite good at what they do and they can only be heard on The Blaze Radio. Everyone who loves conservative talk radio should have this station tuned in at all times. With the Internet and satellite radio options now available, there is no reason not to tune in to them. I think they are the best available now, and it is simply an amazing time that we live in where every individual no matter where they are can now have access to that station at all times.

In just 35 or so years radio technology has went from a young boy trying to angle his antenna to capture a strong signal complete with static on a battery operated AM radio to a mini computer that can pick up a broadcast from anywhere in the world in real-time without a drop in coverage and with a crisp clarity that seems even today, unfathomable. The Blaze Radio may be one of the most listened to Internet streams available, but it’s so new that its full impact has not yet been realized. It was only a few years ago that I was driving a delivery truck through the mountains of the South trying to get WLW radio in Cincinnati on the peeks—just for news updates. Now, I can just listen to The Blaze Radio and there is never a loss in broadcast quality no matter where I am on a mountain, or in the valley of a deep canyon. If you have a smart phone and access to iHeart Radio, you can get The Blaze anywhere, anytime you wish. And that is a gift unto itself that the new radio station is poised to uniquely deliver.   If I didn’t know better I would declare that the new Net Neutrality grabs from the FCC were specifically targeted at outlets like The Blaze Radio. After all, Voice of America brought down communism by broadcasting American goodness across the oceans into poor countries hampered by communism. Now, with a much smaller network The Blaze Radio is able to pipe in that same goodness over the current federal government hell-bent on liberalism and collectivist objectives. For the young minds out there still hungry to think, The Blaze Radio is food for their thoughts and is a miracle of modern science, and a necessary ingredient for the perpetuation of freedom—which starts with questions and answers contemplated over conservative talk radio the world over.

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

Labor Unions are a form of Terrorism: Scott Walker was right

The scum bag old hippies from the labor movement sent me one of their propaganda pieces over the weekend still upset at Scott Walker for successfully making Wisconsin a right-to-work state. Their argument was an implied insult made by Walker during a speech poising himself for a presidential run saying, “If I can take on 100,000 protestors, I can do the same with Islamic terrorists.”  The labor unions of Wisconsin and within the Democratic Party felt that the comparison of labor union workers protesting the reforms that Walker was implementing were inaccurately being compared to terrorists as if such a thing was a radical departure from reality. But the truth is, any labor union that uses force, coercion, or fear of any kind to make their point is an act of terror. They may not go to the extra level of killing people to make their point, but they certainly did try to damage Walker politically and personally on several occasions and their motives were to invoke terror upon the governor with the same tactical aims in mind as the terrorists of Islam are seeking to achieve through their actions.

Just because the terrorists in this case aren’t wearing towels on their heads and cutting the throat of so-called infidels on a beach in the Mediterranean, if the intention is to make a point against a rival position by using fear instead of logic—the action is one of terrorism. The labor unions have been conducting themselves in such a manner for years, and they don’t get a free pass just because they are American citizens, or members of the Democratic Party backed by laws created by the Department of Labor. Terrorism is anything that invokes fear to accelerate acceptance of the perpetrator’s point of view.

And while we’re at clarifying definitions, let’s also look at the type of language used by labor unions to describe themselves. In the propaganda piece the labor union described their position as such, “Scott Walker compared Wisconsin workers to terrorists. He wants to be president, STOP HIM.” From there they have a little link you can click that takes you to a petition page so you can sign your name to their plight as if some collective mass of ignorance could stop the reality of their foolishness. Workers in the way that labor unions and members of the Democratic Party machine use it, is a term utilized by the philosophy of Karl Marx in his various articulations on the merits of communism, such as in the Communist Manifesto where he ends the book “workers of the world unite.” In the manner that Marx indicated he was calling for an act of terrorism against the management of labor in capitalist enterprises. When “workers” strike and don’t perform tasks of labor, they are no longer “working” they are denying labor to an employer—so they require a different technical classification. A worker in a capitalist country is someone who conducts productive enterprise. A worker in communist and socialist endeavors is a protestor who uses terrorism to extort money they did not earn through collective bargaining agreements by threatening to destroy productivity or the profit margins of their employer through a strike.

Recently the labor unions of the west coast port workers managed to wrestle a contract negotiation settlement for themselves by slowing down work for a number of months costing many millions of dollars in profit. That was economic terrorism where the employers were forced to take the lesser of two evils, they could not operate their business due to the back log in work the labor union “workers” were imposing on them, or they could agree to the labor demands of their protestors and at least collect enough money to stay in business. With average wages of $147,000 per year the ILWU union deliberately brought the management of the west coast ports to their knees with drag-assing techniques designed to hurt their employer so to wrestle away more money from them. That was and is an act of terrorism.

In my home school district of Lakota in 2013 when they wanted to pass a tax increase which they had been unsuccessful three prior times due to arguments that I posed to the public which they could not overcome, they resorted to terrorism through labor union radicalism. The district wanted to give overpaid government employees more money so they needed a tax increase on property values to do it. They used the recent school shooting at Sandy Hook to swing voters about 5% into their direction as they promised to spend the money on “safety and security.” Lakota as a district was doing what public schools do all across the nation when they want more money for their teacher unions—they make parents afraid that something might happen to their children if something isn’t done in their favor. To help drive the point home just a few days before the election a death threat was found in the girls bathroom promising a shooting spree which of course made all the papers and news outlets. Enough parents were scared to vote in favor of the tax increase and Lakota received their money. They didn’t get the money in a straight up and down vote on logic. Lakota had to utilize some form of terror to provoke people into voting for their cause making it an act of terrorism. Of course they didn’t cross the line to become actual killers like the ISIS terrorists have, but they did use fear to achieve their objectives.

And in Wisconsin, against Scott Walker, there were death threats, political maneuvers designed to invoke fear in the population, threats that the economy of the state would be wrecked if Walker got his way—none of which actually happened. The labor unions were using fear to preserve their grip on the state’s economy and under Walker’s leadership, they failed. So out of all the presidential candidates seeking a run for the office in 2016, Walker is the most experienced in dealing with terrorism. He did successfully battle it among the various labor unions in his state. Those labor unions did sometimes threaten to kill him, but unlike ISIS, they didn’t actually try to carry it out. But the threats were made—and those threats are considered to be terrorism with the same intentions as the ISIS terrorist—to achieve a tactical objective through the means of inflicting some form of terror to move an opponent off their position.

The word “worker” is not sacred in American politics. To people who create work the term indicates the potential for some radicalized protest that will cost money and a huge amount of damage to the public relations of any endeavor. Labor unions don’t get to live under different rules by the shadows of reality just because they are Americans. If they desire to inflict fear because they can’t win an argument through logic, they are in fact a form of terrorist. Any time coercion is utilized to achieve a political objective; it is an act of terrorism.   Obama conducted himself as a terrorist when he sent a picture to congress with his pen promising executive orders if they did not do as he demanded. When they refused, such as in the amnesty issue, Obama signed an executive order that ended up as a rider to the Department of Homeland Security bill which is presently being voted upon in the House. Those against the DHS funding bill are upset at Obama’s executive order for amnesty which is really just another way for Democrats to buy votes for future elections. They make up lots of fancy terms for things, but at the heart of the reality, they are behaving as terrorists, because they use fear to drive policy implementation. And of the potential candidates in 2016, Scott Walker has the right kind of mind to deal with the type of domestic terrorism that has so crippled the American economy for years in the labor unions. It’s quite clear that he has the ability to deal with terrorists who don’t even try to hide their actions behind suits and ties—and Washington lobbyists. Walker’s track record and statement was correct. And the labor unions know it—that’s why they’re afraid of him.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT