Tag: Atlas Shrugged

The Morality of the Wall: Sex trafficking and the desire to destroy western civilization through illegal immigration, drug use, and sexual perversion

Of course, the Democrats won’t take the deal President Trump offered to reopen the government and secure funding for his border wall, but he had to do it anyway. As I we have been talking about the battle is about politics or even ideology at this point, it’s about above the line and below the line thinking. Above the line thinkers are responsible and self-determined while below the line are victims and always looking for reasons not to do things. Nancy Pelosi’s goal in winning the House Speaker job back was purely for the title. She has been and is currently action like many incompetent people who get into a seat of power, as a below the line thinker the position hasn’t helped her. She magically hasn’t become competent suddenly. Her ability to swing a gavel hasn’t put great wisdom and leadership into her abilities like so many in this world believe. But Trump knows all that and he acted accordingly while she was out-of-town yet again. When a leader who thinks above the line is in direct conflict with an incompetent below the line person, the loser below the line never has a chance. Even though she will avoid this proposal the way Democrats always do, Trump’s strategic movements will reflect favorably on the Republican party and the shutdown can continue well into the future at the expense of the Democrats, because people can see the startling difference and how the two sides act under pressure. Trump has done a very good job during this crisis.

I think in the wake of Trump’s Saturday broadcast we should go a little deeper onto the morality of building a wall. As below the line thinkers of course misery loves company so the whole open border strategy that has been globally implemented held considerable attractiveness to the likes of Nancy and her radical Democrats who at this point might as well be call socialists. The cover is off that Trojan horse, so why dance around the subject. Because many supporters of the Democrat party are below the line thinkers they don’t want the responsibility that comes with being an American citizen and what goes on around the world quite openly these days. Forget about the political rhetoric for a bit, one of the most evil things going on in this world right now is human trafficking, and President Trump brought that up during his speech. There is a huge market for smugglers and other criminal minded to smuggle people across the Mexican/American border for the opportunity for freedom, which sounds like a well-intended enterprise until you understand the reality.

Many years ago, some very bad people decided that they would use their power and influence to shape the world toward communism. Just because people have money and power doesn’t mean they are above the line thinkers. Bad, below the line people can acquire power, and often do. And they decided that the world needed open borders, that women needed to step out of the home and into the work place leaving their children vulnerable to state-run educations. The concept of a family was going to be redefined by the state and in the ashes of all that ambition many sexual fantasies would be fulfilled which of course was the fuel behind the ambition to start with. If you step into the mind of a typical globalists you will find extreme sexual perversions to be the norm, pedophilia, under age sex with both girls and boys, bondage, homosexuality and group-oriented sex orgies. Under all the activity was two basic intentions, the desire to redefine the human race by robbing their intrinsic motivations and instead seeking their place within the state, and to pull them there with the typical stick and carrot temptations of puberty. This catapulted many below the line thinkers into their late adulthoods with a deep desire to justify their sexual illnesses with massive sexual perversions that were driving all state activity. It is safe to say that much of our political world has been filled with these below the line types and they rule the way Nancy Pelosi does, so to her the behavior is normal. Only to people who are above the line thinkers is the behavior reprehensible and even considered vile.

South of the American borders as Marxism has destroyed those economies it has been the fantasy of the corrupt globalists because the only thing there really is to do is to have babies and flood the American border hopefully to overwhelm the system and destroy the American Constitution. And in the process mothers are willing to sell their children into the slavery of human traffickers just for the hope of their kids ending up in America with a shot at a better life. In that process 1 out of 4 girls are routinely raped, so much so that their mothers give birth control pills to their daughters knowing what will happen along the way. But believe it or not, young boys are the most lucrative targets, as dirty old men thinking well below the line are seeking most what’s missing in themselves by robbing children of their intrinsic motivations and scarring the children for life. It’s all part of the plan.

In the great book by Daniel Pink called Drive, he explores some surprising aspects of human development and what really drives people to do what they do. One thing that is quite clear is that most human beings are born with intrinsic motivations to be self-directed and autonomous, and if left to their own devices, to grow up and become wonderful above the line thinkers. But self-directed people motivated intrinsically are hard to control if you are a below the line thinker from the old world so the scheme is to actually ruin people as they get older, enter puberty and are more prone to the stick and carrot motivation lifestyle that leads to below the line thinking. You see, goal-oriented motivations make people less productive than intrinsically motivated attributes. Look at a typical six-year-old kid and they are usually self-directed and soaking up all the learning they can get. Take that same child at age 14 and suddenly sex is on their minds all the time as biology has taken over making them prone to stick and carrot goals, do this and do that and you get to have sex. Then once they have lost respect for that process, they have become sexual addicts for life since there is no way to stop it once it starts. The governments of our world understand this on a conceptual level and it is the heart of the open border concept—the intention is to hold mankind to this basic animal level behavior so that they will remain all their lives easily controlled below the line thinkers. And in this relationship, pedophilia to them is a moral endeavor because it feeds this unity across the world. Destroy a person’s mind and intrinsic motivations getting them to think disfunctionally about sex and they will be controlled all their lives as below the line thinkers.

The Democrat strategy as it has been shaped by their donors, wealthy contributors like George Soros and many, many others is to accelerate this conduct of destroying people’s intrinsic motivations and making them into stick and carrot below the line thinkers all their lives, so the sex, the rapes, the child trafficking is all part of the plan. The illegal drugs are intended to poison American society and to rob thought from entire generations which is happening currently, so Trump is correct, the whole thing is a humanitarian crisis. But to Nancy Pelosi, she doesn’t want to think about her responsibility to that crises because her party is committed to perpetuating it. As below the line thinkers, they are committed to making more people that way. It is their party platform if you really get down to it. So this fight isn’t just about political ideology, it is a fight between good and evil, evil being below the line, good being above. It’s about preserving intrinsic motivations as opposed to growing up as addicts of stick and carrot rewards where no matter how much you reach for goals the stick is placed just beyond your reach all your life by unseen controllers who operate within the political spectrum. And the carrot is usually sexual in nature and can never be filled through an entire life. And when a 55-year-old man buys a sexual slave from one of these smugglers coming across the American border from Mexico the robbing of intrinsic value from the child is encouraged, not thwarted because the goal from the beginning is to take away hope so that only the world’s governments can provide safe haven and thus provide those thus employed to have all the power in the world and to gain the ability to hold the sticks that are meant to control us all—all our lives. That is what is at stake and what this fight is really about.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Nature of Intrinsic Value: Why Nancy Pelosi comes out looking like a phony while Trump does genuine

Its one thing to identify below the line thinkers and to associate them with losers, but what’s needed is to understand what makes them the way they are. Why are they losers just for thinking in a negative way aspects of their existence which brings everyone else down? A few great examples are the current teacher’s strike in California, the government shut down and the Nancy Pelosi desire to keep Donald Trump from giving his State of the Union Speech in Congress. Can anybody imagine what would have happened if Republicans controlling congress had not invited Barack Obama to give the State of the Union speech? And that’s kind of the heart of the matter, losers are people who are functioning all the time below the line, and usually the reason they are in that position is because they have lost their intrinsic value for the things they do in life. People who only do things for money for instance are creepy because we recognize that they are not driven toward accomplishments that are aligned with their intrinsic values for their part in economic activity.

I have been going through old notes of late to solve current problems that were conquered long ago, but in the wake of current circumstances, have great meaning. In that regard I have been thinking of Daniel Pink’s work in the great book Drive, which explores the relationship that people have with intrinsic value versus carrot type motivations. For instance, since many people wonder about it, this blog site is an intrinsic state for me. I love writing, but I do it for free to the public because the value of it personally exceeds what anybody would pay for it. This leaves my motivations a mystery to people who are still functioning from the point of view that financial rewards are the only reasons that people do what they do. In that book Pink uses the example of Microsoft building a fantastic encyclopedia with many of the great minds of our day as paid contributors. I remember that project, I loved it. But along comes Wikipedia which has unpaid contributors building the whole thing and that business model beat over time the Microsoft encyclopedia concept. As the Internet has matured it has unlocked much more of mankind’s intrinsic desires than the predictable modes of thinking that preceded this current revolution. These days YouTube videos done by amateurs are outperforming large feature films and television broadcasts because the intrinsic value is undeniable. When people do things because they love them, it shows and people quickly gravitate toward the passions that come from those products.

To put it in a more proper context, currently there was some controversial comments by Donald Trump about the nature of Nancy Pelosi continuing to get a check from the government during the shutdown. The reason it scored points with people was that people understand President Trump is intrinsically invested in the job as president. He is currently not taking a salary and when the Clemson football champions came to visit the White House Trump bought them all hamburgers out of his own pocket which set off a firestorm of anxiety. Trump in the eyes of below the line losers had committed the worst kind of crime, he had blown their cover story all these years. Nancy Pelosi would never dream of giving up her salary as Speaker of the House because she is not functioning in her job from the perspective of intrinsic power. For her the financial compensation and the power that comes with it is very important to her, because she is personally lacking intrinsic value, so the monetary compensation is a motivating tool for her. But as we know from the book Drive, typical carrot type motivations are not the driver of human behavior in a positive way, in fact, it usually gets you worse results because intrinsic value is pushed out of consideration making the overall product produced inferior, and too expensive. On the other hand, Trump loves his job and it shows, his intrinsic value as President is something people can relate to, especially in this modern age where intrinsic value is being unlocked in the increased freedoms that technology is bringing us. You don’t have to go through the New York publishers if you want to be a writer in 2020. All you have to do is have the intrinsic value to do so and a site like this one will outperform a typical news and opinion site by a factor of 1000s because the paid writers aren’t doing what they are doing out of intrinsic value for the subject.

That’s why teacher strikes these days have lost their power. We are living in a time where education can easily be done online and by less than human resources. A striking overpaid teacher only demonstrates to the public that they don’t have intrinsic value for the children in their care which is a major turnoff to any voter. Many people these days may be photographers, artist or independent researchers due to the freedoms that online activity and smart phones have given them. While they may have jobs that pay them money and thus their bills, their real intrinsic value is often in their recreational activities. National Geographic may not be paying them to be elite photographers, but modern photo taking is made much easier allowing people with an intrinsic desire to photograph the world to do so without all the special skills that used to be required and the path to a paycheck that used to be associated with that endeavor. Intrinsic value has always been there, but it has only been recently where technology made personal preferences much more of an option that humans started expecting those choices to be part of their everyday lives.

When it is wondered why people are more interested in their smart phones than in the real world with real people in them it’s because the customization that is afforded to modern smart phone users gives people more intrinsic options than the real world typically does so its more interesting to them. People more than ever are driven by intrinsic needs more than financial ones and that is an aspect of these government shutdowns that just isn’t being covered. People don’t have much sympathy for workers striking or marching in protest because they aren’t getting a paycheck because it shows a victim status of below the line thinking which in the new age of intrinsic motivations is increasingly a negative impression. If someone is off work or not getting paid, then they are free to do what they really enjoy, and that is what the public sees more and more. That’s why Trump was popular in spite of the government shutdown while Nancy Pelosi comes out looking more and more phony, because she is functioning from motivations that are not aligned with intrinsic value. It’s good to get paid for the things you do, but if you are only doing them to make money, people are quick to think of such people as a phony because they have options in life to exhibit intrinsic value, but instead of functioning from that vantage point, they are complaining about what they don’t have and why they don’t have it. And nobody likes that type of person which is a newly identified condition of our present circumstances.

Rich Hoffman

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

A Quiet Place: Hollywood’s disfunctional relationship with guns

I thought the 2018 movie; A Quiet Place was a really good horror film that was compelling. However, it was hard for me to sit through because if I had been in that story, I would have only have lasted about 30 seconds. In the movie the main characters revolve around a family that has survived some kind of alien invasion and the antagonists are some really terrifying creatures who are completely reliant on sound to move around. This leaves the survivors of earth to move about in complete silence to avoid being eaten by the creatures. I thought it was an interesting concept that made for an entertaining narrative experience, but I couldn’t help but ask the question, why didn’t the dad just shoot the creatures and kill them on day one? The movie would have been over in the opening scenes and many more people would have lived.

This movie reminded me why I’m not in the movie business. I had the same conversation after The Blair Witch Project came out many years ago where I asked similar questions. I never get lost so becoming lost in the woods and being hunted down by some strange monster is just something that I can’t relate to. In A Quiet Place if I had to deal with a situation like that defending my family against some strange creatures that suddenly appeared and ate people maliciously for every sound they made, I would have simply shot them with one of my big caliber guns. There was a scene at the end of The Quiet Place where I was literally jumping around my living room screaming at the television for Emily Blunt to shoot the alien creature as it had her family trapped in her basement. It was a compelling scene for anybody who isn’t used to firearms and for Emily who is a citizen of the United Kingdom she acted as if she were more terrified of the gun than the monster. All she had to do was pull the trigger and the thing would have been killed and her family would be safe.

I’ve been to some of those Santa Monica dinner parties and spent the evening with actors and actresses like Emily Blunt and listened to their diatribes about how guns are so bad and honestly, I couldn’t handle it. Associating with people like that wore me out. And I could see John Krasinski who directed the film working with the screenwriters Bryan Woods and Scott Beck to string out the narrative of the movie into a compelling two-hour event based on their experiences with the soft tissue Hollywood types that frequent those Santa Monica bars at midnight on any given day. It was just over halfway through the movie that we learned that the dad actually had a pump 12 gauge shot-gun hidden away in the house. But in reality, the dad should have had that gun with him for the entire film and been using it to kill the monsters.

Emily Blunt looked way too comfortable holding that gun on the monster at the end of the film and not pulling the trigger that it revealed so much about what is wrong with Hollywood today. The movies are made by scared, timid people who are lacking real experience with firearms, and it was pretty sad. Guns are not part of their culture so when one is put in their hands, they appeared to be more scared of the guns than the terrible monsters. But in reality, if guns were more a part of the story then the dramatic tension of the horror film itself would have been different. If a story like A Quite Place were real, people all across America would have just shot the things. There is no way those blind bastards would have taken over our country the way they did in the movie. Normal people just aren’t as terrified of guns as the Hollywood filmmakers were.

Prior to watching A Quiet Place I watched the Bruce Willis version of Death Wish, and that was a fun movie that was lacerated by the entertainment media because it was a very honest homage to the old Charles Bronson Death Wish movies. Now in those days I could have worked in Hollywood where the story tellers were not so terrified of guns, but understood them as a narrative advancement. For instance, Indiana Jones would have never have been the great character he was if not for that one scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones shoots the swordsman in cold blood just because he didn’t have time to run all over Cairo looking for his girlfriend if he was wasting it fighting him. Back then, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg were still on the outside looking in within the film industry so they could do things like that in movies. But once they were invited into the Hollywood social activist club they stopped doing those kinds of things in their movies and people gradually stopped watching. A Quiet Place walked that fine line between ultimately using the gun to solve the problem of the story but they took the entire movie to arrive there. Because the human sacrifice count was high enough the Hollywood community gave A Quiet Place a pass, but to me it was pretty disgusting. It was a movie made by Hollywood types about a world they are afraid of, but for the rest of America where guns are as common as a glass of water, the movie was a useless exercise in stupidity.

The dad played by the director was a pretty good character, but of course when he needed a weapon at the end of the movie, he didn’t have one and he was killed. If he had been carrying his shotgun around, that stupid monster would have been dead quickly, and efficiently and they all would have lived happily ever after. Guns are a huge part of American culture and when Hollywood shows their ignorance, movie goers let them know it. Even though A Quiet Place was considered a successful film critically and at the box office the real numbers show it only made $188 million domestically and $152 million internationally. $340 million is not very much money for a movie at the box office these days, the movie would have done better business if it had embraced the gun culture more instead of trying to appease the anti-gun Hollywood types.

The last scene of the movie A Quiet Place was a hoard of the alien monsters converging on the house as Emily Blunt smiled at her children with her cocked shotgun ready to shoot them all. OK, so where was that attitude at the beginning of the film? The point of the entire movie seems to be to get the parents to overcome their aversion to guns so that they can defend themselves. Because the sonic device that the deaf daughter only appeared to agitate the monsters, it didn’t kill them. Only the gun did. So that is my problem with this whole Hollywood vantage point. They literally want their cake and to eat it too. They want an anti-gun message when the gun is the only thing that people want to pay money to see. But to appease the Hollywood gods who drink too much in Santa Monica bars, the filmmakers have to avoid using the gun as much as possible, until the very end of course.

That’s the way you do it.  Death Wish was a great movie!

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

Of Course Sheriff Israel Should Have Been Suspended: Democrats fly to Puerto Rico during the government shutdown

Not to be overly simplistic but politics these days could be said to be of two representative groups, Republicans represent above the line thinking as defined in the great business book, The Oz Principle and Democrats representing below the line thinking. Of course, there are plenty of Republicans who are below the line thinkers but their social aims point in that direction, so let’s use this example to have a discussion. The issue of the new Governor DeSantis suspending the bumbling fool Scott Israel over the response during the Parkland massacre is a perfect example of what we are talking about.

In the world of a typical Democrat accountability for one’s actions are never part of the consideration, below the line thinkers are always victims who are never responsible for anything. Everything to below the line thinkers is someone else’s fault, so when Sheriff Israel was given a very expensive budget in one of Florida’s wealthiest counties to protect the people there, he blew it. The shooter who would eventually attack the school had a long-troubled past which the police knew about and when the guy finally instigated his intended violence toward the kids of Parkland High School Israel’s police force wasn’t ready and behaved less than gracious under fire. Many more people died as a result of Sheriff Israel’s incompetence than otherwise would and it was a truly sad situation.

But in the aftermath, it was Sheriff Israel who was leading the charge to have guns removed from society by attacking the NRA hoping to deflect responsibility away from him and his law enforcement department. His radicalism in advocating below the line positions was excessive and even political moderates were getting tired of the excuses from Sheriff Israel. After eight months of excuses once Governor DeSantis took the official office as Florida’s next governor, he did what most Republicans seek to do, and that is provide accountability to a situation—above the line thinking.

And that is where the real difficulty is in deciding what kind of country we want to be, because we can’t be both. Below the line thinking is easy and destructive, it is far easier to destroy than to make, so that is why Democrats with their below the line thinking and overall victimhood mentality attract so many losers and can activate them to advance on a cause so quickly, because their fear is always accountability so as long as there is chaos and blame, they are quick to hide their incompetence behind violence and mass driven protests.

Accountability is hard so its much more difficult to stand up and accept that responsibility when there is always a parade of below the line thinkers to throw more animosity in your direction deflecting that pressure away from them as much as possible. This is why it was hard for even staunch NRA defenders to advocate for sanity after the Parkland shooting because the mob of below the line thinking had taken over. There was power in the masses for below the line thinkers who shared together a fear of responsibility. There was power in victimhood, in using the death of the innocent to advance a below the line political idea, such as the confiscation of guns. Guns themselves didn’t kill people, they are tools for above the line people to take responsibility for their own safety and property. But for below the line people who would never dare use a gun to defend themselves because they don’t want the responsibility, its easy to call for the elimination of personal firearms and the expansion of the state with more laws. But in the case of Parkland there were police on the scene as the gunman was killing and they did not engage. Sheriff Israel had allowed their daily routine to become too soft they were not ready for the danger when it came. But rather than take responsibility for their ill prepared training, Scott Israel deflected all responsibly to gun possession and he helped launch a national campaign against them.

If we want an accountable, and successful nation, below the line thinking just can’t be allowed—which essentially eliminates one political party from the discussion. We can see the same example of how Democrats behaved in Mid-January after they had just returned to Capitol Hill to the House and Senate only to charter a plane to fly to Puerto Rico to watch the play Hamilton. President Trump as a businessman understands leadership and accountability so he purposely stayed at the White House as the government shutdown dragged on and debate over the border wall persisted. Democrats being below the line people devoid of personal accountability don’t want to see how their actions can have an impact on the world around them so they tried to coax Republicans into playing along, but under Trump’s leadership they stayed put. While the news stories went out that government workers weren’t getting paid due to the shutdown Trump was in the White House ready to make a deal but the Democrats just off a Christmas vacation took another luxury trip to Puerto Rico to attend a high brow play. Typically, Republicans get caught in these kinds of things trying to defend themselves from a negative position, but Trump kept the discussion on above the line topics with true leadership—leading by example.

That is truly the battle of our day, the difference between personal accountability, and below the line victimhood. Losers are known as losers because they are never responsible for anything in their life, they make themselves perpetual victims because they lack the courage of personal accountability. The reason that Democrats want to expand government so much is to cover up their notion of accountability deflection. The more people involved, the more chaotic the bureaucratic chain of decision gates, the less people know that the real game is in protecting below the line thinking so that political leaders can sneak off to a luxury play in the tropics during a government shutdown and nobody would notice. And that is exactly what Democrats did in trying to protect the incompetency of Scott Israel after the Parkland shooting. The NRA which is an organization all about above the line thinking, personal accountability and the defense of American ideas became the scape-goat by default. Above the line thinking was attacked because the masses were afraid of what role they played in the mess and would rather expand government and pay more people to stand in front of them and help redistribute the blame game to everything else.

Governor DeSantis like President Trump was making a point in suspending Sheriff Israel, the intent was to demonstrate above the line thinking, just as Trump stayed at the White House to show leadership under fire. Accountability is the key to all successful enterprises, and Democrats just don’t have it in them. By their nature they always seek below the line solutions to above the line needs, so there will never be peace and joy in politics so long as this is the case. Everyone in our nation needs to at least be working toward the same objectives. One part of the country can’t take responsibility for everything while all the below the line thinkers fly off to Puerto Rico to attend a play while bitching that the President won’t budge on his needs for border wall funding. And what Sheriff Israel did, which is typical of all below the line thinkers was reprehensible, he tried to blame the very good NRA for his own incompetence. And if he had been successful, it would have had a terrible effect. Its bad enough that many people died because of him, but what’s worse is that he refused to take responsibility. That is his crime and why he had to be suspended. He’s lucky that was all.

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

Tear Down the Statue of Liberty: Understanding what immigration should be and knowing real history

As a very strong advocate of President Trump and his policies I am in a good position to defend the reasons that we want to build a wall. Only stupid people thinking in a negative below the line way would think that the reason is racism. The actual cause is to inspire more above the line thinking which stupid people are terrified of, so their only defense is to accuse above the line thinkers of racism. But in all honesty the need for the wall at the American southern border is to defend the values of the nation from those who don’t share those values and it has nothing to do with racism. Even deeper than that however is the need to defend America from its domestic enemies, any below the line thinkers who seek to destroy the concept of America who are now gathered under the clear tent of Democrat politics. I’ve had the benefit of watching my son-in-law go through a naturalization ceremony where he had to swear as a new American citizen to defend our Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic, and it was quite serious when placed in that context. Well, the Democrats have positioned themselves as clear domestic enemies and they are on full assault, so its time that we make it clear what this fight is really about. Don’t negotiate with them, destroy them!

The Statue of Liberty is a part of recent American history, there is a lot more to the concept of freedom and liberty that were in place well before the French gave us that statue which resides in the harbor of New York. It was commissioned in 1886 by President Cleveland at the start of the progressive movement in New York City so any references to the Statue of Liberty and the role it plays in immigration are tainted at best. Elis Island where the Statue of Liberty resides then became the first immigration station in the United States from 1892 to 1954 where roughly 12 million immigrants passed through on their path to citizenship. This is why progressives are particularly fond of the Statue of Liberty and keep using it as a reference to illegal immigration at the southern border, because the whole concept of a processing station with the Statue of Liberty looming over the process is one born in the heart of progressive politics in America to begin with in the very recent past.

It was Emma Lazarus who wrote the famous words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty,

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

She was part of the movement that was trying to raising money for a permanent home for the Statue of Liberty as it had been touring around since the French gave it to us. She was close personal friends with the progressive economist Henry George who wrote the terrible book Progress and Poverty, which ultimately inspired Emma to write what she did. That is why progressives in our modern era are so quick to point at the Statue of Liberty and attempt to unite the entire country behind their cause. Personally, I think we should tear down the damn thing. If you want to put up a symbol of American values in the harbor in New York for the world to see, it should be someone like John Wayne who much more embodies the values of America rather than the statue of a French designer who was part of the progressive era as it was born in New York society to grow like a massive disease to attempt to destroy American civilization.

There is a reason under capitalism that people are poor, it’s because they are lazy. In a capitalist society, which is something Henry George was debating, effort is the key to earning a good living. If you have that basic approach, you can do well in America. If you don’t, then you won’t, or wouldn’t until the progressive era corrupted politics with all their social reforms that made it so that people were less inspired to work hard and more inspired to think below the line such as is common in the labor movement which is another progressive era invention. Henry George and Emma Lazarus were some of the first people in America to propose a land tax which came directly out of this quote from his 1879 book Progress and Poverty:

Take now… some hard-headed business man, who has no theories, but knows how to make money. Say to him: “Here is a little village; in ten years it will be a great city—in ten years the railroad will have taken the place of the stage-coach, the electric light of the candle; it will abound with all the machinery and improvements that so enormously multiply the effective power of labor. Will in ten years, interest be any higher?” He will tell you, “No!” “Will the wages of the common labor be any higher…?” He will tell you, “No the wages of common labor will not be any higher…” “What, then, will be higher?” “Rent, the value of land. Go, get yourself a piece of ground, and hold possession.” And if, under such circumstances, you take his advice, you need do nothing more. You may sit down and smoke your pipe; you may lie around like the lazzaroni of Naples or the leperos of Mexico; you may go up in a balloon or down a hole in the ground; and without doing one stroke of work, without adding one iota of wealth to the community, in ten years you will be rich! In the new city you may have a luxurious mansion, but among its public buildings will be an almshouse.

–Translation, Henry George is proposing that the hard-headed businessman must be compelled to donate their riches to the “community.” That the wealth they create isn’t a value of its own which makes a town into a city or electricity to replace the candle. What the Statue of Liberty represents isn’t freedom, but compulsion as proposed by early progressives who are below the line thinkers trying to hide their negative vantage point behind do-gooding.

The below the line progressives and their modern Democrats are what early Americans fled from in Europe yet they followed with immigration the efforts of those frontiersman and adventurers who came before and built New York City with ambition and capitalist yearning. Below the line thinkers like Henry George saw this wealth and wanted to tax it, and his little girl friend Emma Lazarus adopted his ideas and stuck them on the side of a statue the French gave us as if they understood American capitalism and that is how the first immigration station started in America, which was a disaster from the beginning. Immigration is a fact of life when something has value and people are leaving areas of low value to seek a better life. But Emma missed the point, her entire quote was inspired by an economic below the line thinker who wanted to tax land owners as his great contribution to thought.

Resistance to illegal immigration isn’t to protect America from a “browning” of it from people south of the border, but in ensuring that the people who do come into America want to protect its Constitution and not to overthrow it. Hidden behind their proposals are the below the line efforts of the Statue of Liberty founders who were not rugged American capitalists. The debate isn’t about preventing all people into America through immigration but in letting in the best and brightest, not the perpetual poor, lazy, and drug addicted. Some people you don’t want in your country. People lacking value are some of them, and its time to have that debate instead of retreating back to some stupid words that Emma said on the Statue of Liberty. In fact, its time that we just take that damn thing down and use some other symbol of American value that is more properly representative of our present circumstances, like a gun that is there to protect the land owner from bleeding heart progressives like Henry George from using public resources to steal money from those making it, because he thinks he’s morally inclined to do so and to distribute that wealth to below the line thinkers who didn’t earn it to begin with. The debate is really about values and who has them and who doesn’t.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Losers Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer: More reason to keep the government shut down

More and more the only way to really describe the current political condition in the world is by above the line thinking and below the line. The Democrat response to President Trump’s border wall case made on national television on January 8th, 2019 was as below the line of anything I have seen in many years openly. Usually these types of negative, loser types conceal their intentions much more carefully, but not anymore. The Democrats empowered by what they think is a big victory in winning the House in 2018 are moving toward open socialism, which I have been warning about for many years. I remember when many below the line people in the Republican party thought I was being dramatic and even embarrassing in pointing the matter out with my bullwhips and YouTube videos, and my novels and media interviews. Back then many conservatives were reading from conservative publications that were caught in the grand socialism story themselves, and they thought they were too high brow to consider such a thing. But I saw it because to my perspective all the thinking was below the line, victimization and consolation of one another through group affiliation, both in Democrats and Republicans. Party politics for such below the line people wasn’t for some tactical implementation of political philosophy, it was for their own sanity maintenance. And like any below the line thinker, they seek to remain there and do not want to be challenged into any other concepts, even if reality dictates the necessity.

Watching the arrogance of such below the line people to keep the country hostage to such a mindset really angered me, because if you really listen to what Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi were saying in response to President Trump it was as bad as it gets in politics. It is they who are using the government worker shutdown as a bargaining chip. It is they who think that people will blame Trump for the loss in jobs and for the shut down in general. Don’t essentially stated that they weren’t going to budge at all, that they were clearly using this issue to try and knock the President out of office in 2020. And they are willing to go all the way with it. That’s why no matter what comes from Republicans, they are going to have to break the back of the Democrats on this shut down issue once and for all. Above the line thinking is going to have to destroy below the line thinking, there simply can’t be any other ending. Failure to do that will only get more of the behavior. There can be only a glorious defeat of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer in 2019 over the border wall and the government shut down.

Any above the line thinker sees the situation clearly. The American people really don’t care about the government shutdown. It doesn’t affect them and they are too busy to care. It’s the middle of winter and people don’t care if the national parks are closed. People like me would argue that government workers shouldn’t even be tied to any of this. Airlines should cover their own security costs; the government shouldn’t be in a position to shut down anything in American commerce. Government job growth is and has been for years part of the problem. Government has inserted itself where it doesn’t belong and that is part of the issue. Government has created this below the line monster so that it could send out some of its sales people, like Schumer and Pelosi and beg to be fed like some homeless person sitting at the side of a highway intersection pulling on the heartstrings of those passing by. The leverage they seek is to not only grow government and its below the line influence, but to destroy the political order from any above the line thinking.

If you really were to peel back the onion and look at the open border suggestion that is at the heart of most of our modern media and political system, you would find that the real war is between above the line and below the line thinking. The goal is not peace and to help people from impoverished countries live better lives in America, but to overrun people in America who think above the line with depressing reminders of humanities loser mentality, drugs, cheap sex, graffiti, tattooed gang members—essentially an age of anarchy intent to send mankind back to the mentality of social order over 4000 years ago. Below the line thinkers do not like advancements in thought and they love to hide their misery behind collectivist endeavors so that is why they use politics to advance their loser state. For them they would oppose Donald Trump if he gave a speech on saving the world from hunger because they simply don’t want to give merit to any above the line thinker, because they don’t want to live up to the standard.

I learned a long time ago that most politicians don’t want to solve problems. I have the honor to know a few locally who do like to solve problems, and to live above the line, but they are a pretty recent phenomenon. I think there will be many more like them emerging in the years to come because there is a natural human desire to have their political order functioning above the line as opposed to below the line. Trump’s election in that context shouldn’t come as a surprise to anybody, but to Democrats not willing to accept that the movement is one of above the line thinking chose to see what they want. Democrats trying to run for office in 2020, especially for president think that the charm of Trump is that he can associate with anybody, which is why Elizabeth Warren thought drinking a beer on a social media video would gain her points with a base of political supporters. But what she and many of them are missing is that Trump’s selling point was always above the line thinking as opposed to loser victimhood and that’s what Americans wanted from the beginning. All Democrats are offering at any level is victimhood, and that is not appealing to voters.

It Republicans can hold together with that understanding of what this issue is really about, they can destroy the loser mentality that is driving the entire Democrat party, and they’ll win this government shutdown battle. Trump will have to get his border wall money from declaring a national emergency which will be risky, but he’ll have to do it because Democrats would rather die than give him anything close to a campaign promise, because they are losers and can only think in that fashion. Democrats are not for American growth and border security, they are about global assimilation so that the worst of us can bring down the best and the level of expectation for everyone be lowered to more below the line thinking, where they are most comfortable. To them they have nothing to lose because what they are fighting for is the right to be a loser and to do that, they just have to keep saying no. And that is what everyone needs to understand about this particular breed of Democrat.

Rich Hoffman

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

It’s Good to be Hated: Consider it an honor

It is actually quite a compliment to be hated. Being hated is a very healthy thing. Its one thing to point to a big national figure like Donald Trump and say that people hate him, and for good reason. It’s quite another to look at a new executive in any business who brings in their wake great change and to say that they are hated. But in essence, the hatred is a needed element and is something that should be sought out, not avoided. If everyone loves you, you are doing something wrong, and not pushing the world around you as much as you should be to above the line thinking.

It never made any sense to me why we have taught people in our culture that the most important thing in the world was to seek being liked by our peers. I suppose for me it has taken roughly ten years of writing articles over 1000 words each coupled with many interesting life experiences to hone the issue down to simply Above the Line Thinking and Below the Line Thinking. I had to re-read The Oz Principle for a business need, which is a brilliant book. But after all the personal work that I have done, it really made a lot more sense to me now than it had previously. Its one thing to read a book like that and agree with it. It’s quite another to understand it at a deep philosophical level and be able to use it. Many of our problems in the world do simply come down to below the line thinking and above the line thinking as proposed in The Oz Principle.

But that wasn’t the first time that humans figured out the problem, The Oz Principle is a business take on The Wizard of Oz which was a very empowering story about not being a victim in life, and getting what you need at the end of a hero’s journey. Dorothy and her little dog didn’t do anything to be hated by the Wicked Witch but exist, much like the rest of us. All Dorothy did was get caught in a whirlwind and land on the sister of the Witch with her house. It was an accident, yet Dorothy was made to feel she owed something to the evil spinster. All Dorothy wanted to do was return to Kansas and help people along the way. Nobody in the world should have hated her for it, yet they did. It was unavoidable. It always is for people who are good to be hated by those who are bad.

So what is good and bad, well, simply bad people are below the line thinkers who scheme and plot to get others to join them there. Below the line thinking is victimhood mentality, thinking negatively about things, trying to keep the world suppressed to your weaknesses so that you as a below the line thinker are not outmatched by others. Below the line thinkers love the idea of equality for all because it gets them off the hook to perform. This is why politics is such a below the line activity, and why we instinctively think of it as an evil enterprise. Above the line however is where the good are, they are positive people always looking to improve the world around them. They take personal responsibility for actions and are always advancing intellectually because of it. Judging the good from the bad is simply that easy.

In the corporate world it happens all the time, a consultant is hired or a charismatic new CEO who comes in as an above the line thinker and changes the world of the below the liners, and it is safe to say that those employees hate that new element. They hate above the line thinkers because it demands on them performance, they are too lazy, or too corrupt to compete with. So the dominate emotion is sheer hatred. I grew up with a pretty good understanding of these things before I ever read The Oz Principle, but as I got older I understood the futility of making other people happy really early in my life. Instinctively I understood that if people disliked you, that you were doing something very right. Now in my life I understand that the more people do dislike me or hate me, the better I am doing in the world. If everybody loves you, then you are socializing with too many below the line thinkers and are becoming one of them yourself. Above the line thinkers, good people, are much fewer in number among populations because of the difficulty in being an above the line person. It is much easier to be scarecrows in life using The Wizard of Oz metaphor a bit, just doing our jobs and staying put where people tell us to be, then in going down the yellow brick road to a moment of self-discovery to find out all along we had everything we needed within ourselves. Its much easier to blame others for our problems than to take responsibility for them and to solve them. Most people spend their entire lives like the tin man or the scare crow blaming others for their withering condition when all they really need to do is to follow Dorothy to their own personal freedom. But guess what, they want to keep it that way, because it’s easy to just stand in a field and rot away. It takes a great effort to walk around and change your circumstances and when some above the line leaders crosses your path and evokes you to move along, great resentment and hatred do become the dominating emotions. But so what.

Once you understand that everything essentially comes down to above the line and below the line thinking, everything in the world makes much more sense, especially in politics. If the world believes that Donald Trump is a good president because lots of people love him then merit would be given to his faults due to so many below the line thinkers hating him. But as my way of thinking persists, since lots of people hate him, he is doing a great job as president because he is encouraging them to think above the line and they clearly don’t want to. That isn’t his problem, its theirs.

Everyone should aspire to be an above the line thinker, there is nothing good that comes out of below the line thinking. Forget about political affiliations, gender roles, skin color, nothing matters more than people who are above the line thinkers. Everyone should aspire to be one. Everyone, without exception. But so long as there are below the line people functioning in the world, there will be conflict and hatred. And that conflict is good, it’s needed, and its very healthy. Without above the line thinkers there would never be advancements in human society. And without them there would never be a challenge to evil. The true definition of the battles of good and evil come down to above and below the line thinking. The two are not compatible, they cannot negotiate together, and one must destroy the other. So the hatred that is directed at good, above the line thinkers is one of the greatest compliments that can be given. It means that you are doing it right, and good things do come about as a result—so long as you can teach yourself not to care about their opinions.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Loser Rashida Tiaib Attempts at Impeachment: Obviuosly, she hasn’t thought things through

News flash, what does Rashida Tiaib think is going to happen if her brand of socialist radicals impeach President Trump and take over all three branches of government with their insurgents? They are going to be destroyed. It’s not going to be allowed to happen, violence will erupt and many people will die. This idea that liberals have about taking over government by force, intimidation and ANTIFA radicalism hasn’t been thought through very well. There is a reason Donald Trump was elected president. It’s not his fault, it’s the people who put him there who Rashida Tiaib should be concerned about, and calling them a bunch of white racists isn’t going to help make a case for civility either. When push comes to shove, bodies will be lying around in the streets and any fantasy of a socialist takeover will end rather fast. It’s one thing to have an ANTIFA protest on a college campus or a very liberal town full of welfare recipients who have no passions in the matter. But it’s quite another to stroll into Deadwood South Dakota and demand socialism. Uhhhh, before the mob moved one city block I’d predict about 90,000 bullet holes and some of them coming unofficially from the sheriff’s office. Any attempt to impeach President Trump, let me just say—will start a war that Rashida Tiaib isn’t prepared for—or any Democrat for that matter.

I’m at a place in my life where I want to address this problem more deeply that it just being a liberal against conservative problem. As Mitt Romney proved, and even some local people in my own town have clearly demonstrated, they are just as much losers as Democrats are. So I am thinking more these days about a more appropriate and universal understanding of the problem, designating winners and losers instead of Republicans and Democrats and here is the reason, and again I’ll refer back to The Oz Principle, everything really comes down to above the line and below the line thinking. Winners think above the line, losers think below the line. Pretty simple, right? So let’s look at this Rashida Tiaib phenomena through the lens of being a loser or a winner. Obviously, her intentions for wanting to impeach Trump is to bring victory to her party’s ambitions to take control of government. But because she is a severe case of below the line thinking she hasn’t even conceived what it might look like if that reality were to manifest—how the American people in the real world would react to it. And that is the classic problem with all below the line thinkers.

Below the line thinking essentially consists of victim hood, in explaining why someone can’t advance themselves in life. Racism under any definition is classic below the line thinking and any government that supports it, is contributing severely to a loser mindset. In any business that is trying to improve its cultural footprint organizationally, the challenge is to get more people thinking above the line than below, and that is how you essentially start getting a winning mindset across the entire organization. To put it in crayon so that everyone can understand it, this is precisely the purpose of sports within our capitalist country. We watch teams bring in certain players who are supposed to excel in whatever position they play in a particular sport and we cheer on their efforts to win more games than other cities. It’s a fun game for all of us, but the real essence of it is to find that magic combination of winners and leaders who can inspire victory. Nobody has much tolerance for a sports player who is hurt all the time or underperforms. It doesn’t matter if the fans are liberals or conservatives, most people have an open disdain for a sport figure that is not living up to the expectations that the fan base has for wins and losses.

For a lot of reasons, we have allowed as a culture way too many people who are below the line thinkers to get government jobs and to shape that employment culture in a very negative way. The government labor unions are another victimhood-based organization, full of below the line thinkers and they actually incentivize that type of culture making most government workers the type of people who are extremely inefficient. Unlike most business environments which are performance based and are always trying to look for ways to keep below the line thinking from hindering a winning culture, government looks for more below the line thinking to justify their loser attitude about everything, and to satisfy that trend they want to always grow, because that’s what losers do, they love to hide their faults in the masses so their errors aren’t so obvious.

If I were working in government as a TSA agent, or a National Park Ranger, I would make sure human resources had my number correct and would tell them to call me when funding had been restored, if ever. I would never sit around waiting for somebody else to do something so that I could pay more rent or a mortgage. I would get a second job, or even a third job and I would take care of my financial obligations. That is an example of above the line thinking, and it’s the way more people need to start thinking if we really want America to remain such a great country. Lucky for us, in the rural parts of the nation that type of thinking is quite common—particularly among farmers. When they hit a drought, or the get a flat tire on a tractor they don’t sit around crying about racism or how unfair God is to them that day, they fix the tire. And they do their best with the drought. They survive. I can say that I am an above the line thinker with the employment status example because I’ve done that before several times, went to get second and third jobs to cover my expenses. Sometimes I didn’t even have a second car, I had to ride a bicycle to work just to get there and I never bitched about it. To me that was the kind of thinking that was needed. I don’t feel sorry for a single government worker not getting a paycheck during the government shutdown. I say to them, get another job, pay your bills, and stop complaining. The airlines themselves covered their own security costs before there was ever a unionized TSA organization and it wouldn’t be hard to get back to that mode of thinking.

The fight that Rashida Tiaib is really advocating is essentially for the right to use victimhood as a calling card to the masses who are also functioning below the line to rise up and take over government. But the attitude is a loser one, you could hear it in her voice when she spoke at the bar and in the people cheering. Those weren’t people trying to win at life, those were people cheering for an excuse to remain a loser. Their hatred of Trump isn’t that he’s a bad president, but a good one that is all about setting standards and building value. But losers don’t ever think of the next steps, they only view the world below the line where they seek to join other like-minded losers to justify their lack of ambition by pointing at numbers of similar losers and declaring they are the majority and thus the pace setters for civilization. However, that is not how people think, they want to be winners even if they don’t have the personal courage and below the line thinking only destroys society, it doesn’t build it, and should Rashida ever get what she really desires in an impeachment of President Trump, she will learn rather violently how badly people love winners and hate losers.

Rich Hoffman

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

We Should Terminate all 800,000 Government Workers from the Shutdown: All federal labor unions should be illegal

One of the things I’m not going to do anymore is provide an equal argument to the inefficiencies of government, to ponder why they are so slow, inefficient and corrupt when we all know why. So why waste the time? The important elements are in identifying the problem, teaching people why its unacceptable, and correcting the situation for real in the future. And the government shutdown is one of those things that happen from time to time when reality meets the fantasy of government, and no legitimate business person in the world could look at the proposals of government and even suggest sanity. The assumptions made that people care about a government shutdown are preposterous. The rate of pay is also preposterous, many of the 800,000 jobs who are not receiving a pay check over the government shutdown would be eliminated in the private sector due to business needs anyway. Much of the demand is artificial. When I hear Democrats trying to pull on our heart-strings that those 800,000 workers are not able to pay their mortgage or their car payments and that we should be willing to toss away billions of dollars and re-open the government just so they can do so, I hear the efforts at lunacy only. It’s an insane proposal that they are making. The government shouldn’t be opening to accommodate those 800,000 jobs, those jobs should be eliminated. They should seek new jobs in the growing economy and in the private sector. That is the real issue, yet nobody has come close to addressing it.

For so many years on this site I have provided instances where government workers make a lot more than private sector workers, on average. Where CEOs do make millions on occasion, average government workers functioning under a socialist labor union are artificially inflated by their wage rate. True market conditions do not have a say in the matter because the money is stolen from the tax payers and distributed insanely to their work force, who often are extremely inefficient. In private business there is a kind of subculture of what we call “fix it men and women” who go into an organization and straighten them out in all matters of production, and the companies thrive as a result. The current replacement for General Mattis as Defense Secretary is Patrick Shanahan who was a “fix it man” at Boeing. The assumption was that General Mattis, or “Mad Dog” as they were calling him was a far superior candidate because of his military service while Shanahan wouldn’t know what he was doing. In reality the situation is quite the opposite. Private industry experiences where lean manufacturing techniques are applied to increase the efficiency of an enterprise are far better than a military general who learns authority driven process controls and constant yielding to authority, for which politics often is the typical holder of power.

The problem with Mattis turned out that he was a “mad dog” as in he turned out to be a Democrat. You don’t always know this about people until you get to know them but that left leaning political philosophy comes with it inefficiency and apathy by the nature of their existence. It’s easy to talk a good game about how to remove troops from the Middle East or the perpetual war in Afghanistan, but after a few years of no results and asking why, that is when the Democrat side of people come out, such as with terms like “compassion,” “troop strength,” and “we’ll solve the problem next year.” Only government can get away with such below the line thinking, in fact government was entirely constructed to give below the line people a means to make livings and compete in the world. In all my years of doing lots of things with government I seldom find above the line people working among their below the line ranks. OF course, by using such terms I’m referring to The Oz Principle, which is a fairly famous book on business management and the types of people who contribute to productive enterprise, and those who must be overcome.

For days now regarding the government shutdown and the replacement of Mattis as the Secretary of Defense and putting the private industry guru Shanahan in charge, Democrats have continued to insist that we all had an obligation to the inefficiencies of the past, that we shouldn’t even ask if the 800,000 workers missing out on a paycheck during the shutdown were even needed. Of course, they aren’t, we could discharge them tomorrow and nobody would even notice. So why do we have them, just to pay them a pay check? And why are there any government unions attached to these workers saying anything about anything? All government labor unions should be made illegal, immediately. They only drive up the costs to tax payers without any added benefit. A lot of times “fix it” people in private practice have to go into a union shop and break up the command that “the people” have over management and to reinvigorate management to engage with employees in ways that offset the benefits they get from a labor union. It can be tricky business, but the job gets done and organizations most often live happily ever after. But in government no such thing ever occurs. The unions run everything and there is no real management of anything. If there was one thing that people in Washington D.C. really hated about Trump it’s that he is a manager functioning from the White House. Government workers don’t want management or any expectation of success, they just want their overly high paycheck and to use it to live a life of unrewarded excess, meaning they live large, but they didn’t earn that right. Which is how they end up corrupt.

In a book store you can find countless books on how to make business work better, but not a single book on how to make a government job more efficient. That’s because we have allowed the government worker to become insulated from reality. And since they have no competition, they actually think they can stand in front of us and declare how important they are when 800,000 workers are suddenly out of a paycheck and demanding to reopen the government. I would say to them, consider those jobs gone. Those 800,000 should be getting private sector jobs and moving on in life instead of waiting around for the government to reopen. If we really wanted to solve the problem of government inefficiency, we would start behaving in such a way and get rid of these ridiculous labor unions which only exist because the tax payers are forced to fund them due to no other options available. Its like being forced to buy a car from General Motors while the quality is terrible because the employees are smoking pot on every break and don’t care about the product. We have government workers who are just as bad and they are in that 800,000 number, and technically they shouldn’t have a job. Their labor unions have made management of their positions impossible and made them too expensive for what we get in services. And this government shutdown finally reveals the truth of how little we really need them. Which is why Trump needs to hold out for his border wall money. People need to know that all these government positions weren’t really needed to begin with. And instead of reopening the government just so they can get a paycheck, we should eliminate their positions all together. And this is one way to do it.

Rich Hoffman

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

No, the Government can Stay Closed: Trump needs to build the wall

It is astonishing how stupid people can be. That they actually thought the Democrat led House would magically wave a wand and all of a sudden, the government would reopen, and the wall debate would be wiped away. That people are that dumb, because some did believe it, should concern us all. Also, one of the big government labor unions is suing President Trump for not getting paid during the shutdown as illegal. So according to the union the only legal option is to always pay government workers even if there is no money? Seriously? Where do these people come from? Where did they go to school? Because they act like they landed here from some other place not understanding how civilization works, the assumptions they make are based on a childlike understanding of the world. In reality the government can shut down forever, and the border wall is a must. Trump can’t and won’t budge on it because it is something that has to be done. And the Democrats don’t have nor will they ever have leverage on the matter. Nobody cares about government workers. They make too much money anyway.

Commentator after commentator on all networks pondered what President Trump was up to in regard to border wall negotiations. It was unfathomable to them that he would actually hold out on reopening the government to get the money from congress. Likely the issue is that they are millennials largely who are used to quick fixes to everything. The idea of a month or six-month budget fight just isn’t in their vocabulary. Then of course many of them also are part of the new borderless world concept which is a trend started by globalists to inspire a one world government of no countries only people in regions. Of course that is a not so clever fantasy of communism where values between different people are ignored and they all serve a central authority, such as the United Nations. In other places in the world it’s not so obvious the difference between one country and another, but on the Mexican/American border the contradictions are bold and obvious. You can’t have a society in need desperately the way Mexico is and put them next to a society of plenty, like America and not expect major problems. It’s not that America wants to deny the people of Mexico the advantages of capitalism. But what matters is that Mexico needs to adopt that philosophy for themselves, not expect a spillover from America for even their most basic needs.

The border wall is basically about showing that difference so that the values are separated. Open looting is not a permissible strategy, yet it is the only strategy of the Mexican government. They can only hope to openly assimilate with the United States because their Marxist revolution has been a dismal failure, so they want open borders to prevent that obvious fact to remain concealed. It’s also about fueling the illegal drug trade to bring American money south and to poison the minds of the American people so that they can be easily conquered. Make no mistake about it, Nancy Pelosi and her open border supporters want the poisoning of American youth to continue through drugs from Mexico. She and they want to fuel that market to growth, not contraction. A border wall would make that effort much harder. Drugs would still get into the country, but not at the level it is presently. Drugs are a major problem in American society, everything from alcohol to cocaine, and the Mexican government delights in seeing so many Americans hooked on a product they produce so that avenues to hide their failed Marxism can remain. To understand the situation, you have to understand the game.

There is absolutely no reason for Trump to compromise with Nancy Pelosi on the border wall funding. The minute this issue is off the table, and the government reopens, the Democrats in the House will launch a barrage of investigations into Trump intended to hammer him out of office by 2020. They don’t care about the government, the border, or the national debt. They only care about trying to get a president in the White House in 2020, so everything they do is to that end. Trump could hold out reopening the government for the next two years hanging it on the Democrats and he’d be just fine. But Nancy and the gang won’t be. Their base of support are all mushy short-term thinkers who expect easy victories. When they see that those victories don’t come, and that people really don’t care about their issues, they will find themselves in a bad position. It is they who have the obligation to negotiate, not President Trump.

It’s one thing to know that people aren’t very smart, or to have watched over time the decline of western civilization as more people have accepted Marxism and communism over time, especially in our university system. Without question we are a fragmented nation in North America. But that’s not a bad thing. We are a republic, not a democracy for this very reason. In America logical thought is given the ability to prevail over the ambitions of the mob and at the essence of it, that is what the border fight is all about. Nancy Pelosi is functioning form a mob mentality hoping to apply peer pressure on President Trump to score an early victory for her House members and to launch their ambitions for 2020 elections. But Trump has all the power in the world to stop that desire. So why wouldn’t he? That is obviously a consideration that none of the pundits on television had been thinking about. Their assumption as it always is was that Trump had the obligation to yield as good Republicans usually do, and to feed the power of mob rule as proposed by Democrats.

There is actually a lot to be revealed by Mitt Romney’s quick challenge to President Trump, trying immediately to put pressure on him to negotiate with the House and to drop the border wall funding issue. That is because Romney wants another crack at running for president and if Trump wins again, he won’t get another chance. But more than that, he is philosophically more aligned with Nancy Pelosi than with President Trump’s GOP. The idea of a borderless world is appealing to them for many reasons. But more than anything, continuing to allow Mexico to loot value off of America gives them power in allowing it. The only people seeking to go from America to Mexico are criminals and tourists looking for some excitement they can’t get in America. You don’t see them crossing the border under machine gun fire. But in Mexico you do, they will go to great measures to get into America. Why? Because what is in America is valuable to them. So why can’t they have those opportunities in Mexico? Because Marxism has ruined their economy and the borderless world advocates want to hide that reality from everyone, and the best way to do that is to mix everyone together before anybody really notices. And that is exactly why there is a border wall fight, and Trump has all the time in the world to hold to it. Because he has the high ground and he’d be crazy to relinquish it. Yet Nancy Pelosi has no time to make her case, the pressure to reopen the government is complete on her, and as the heat cranks up, she won’t be able to handle it. Watch and see!

Rich Hoffman

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