Tag: corruption

Gun Smoke, Hoppe’s, and Leather: How Second Call Defense preserves a fundamental American right


image

With all the calls for gun control peculating from recent terrorist attacks it has been good for me to spend much more time with my guns than I usually do, just to balance out the obvious intrusion that political leftists intend on our rights as American citizens. I have been practicing a lot in my home gun range the new skill of Cowboy Fast Draw. While I have a long way to go before I get where I want to be, it has been a lot of fun getting there. In my home shop I can now reload my ammunition and shoot it within a few feet from my work bench and that is something that I cherish as a right.

The reason I became a recruiter for Second Call Defense is because it is the biggest fight presently in politics. I have spent a lot of time on other issues leading up to this latest crusade, such as education, and economic matters—political philosophy and related items, but guns are at the center of our capitalist culture and they require a defense—an articulate defense. So for me to provide some of the needed help—the words needed to frame the argument properly, I need to step into that realm with both feet. If you are going to promote conceal and open carry as a solution to many of the modern problems we are facing, you have to also provide people with the protections they need if they take your advice. I don’t want to get a bunch of people in trouble for using a firearm in their constitutionally protected right to defend their property. I’d like to keep them out of trouble for listening to me. Second Call Defense gives me that ability; I can promote firearms for self-defense while offering a legal protection in case something happens. Until the emergence of Second Call Defense, there wasn’t any such protection—so it was hard for me to promote something that might disrupt the lives of the people who listen to me.image

But I’ll have to say that I’m having a good time with it. It’s difficult to get into shooting for sport if you can’t use your firearms, but at least locally where I live there is a new shooting range going in near Port Union—a classy facility that looks fantastic. I’ve watched the building go together over the last few months and have been impressed with its construction. The facility is called Premier Shooting & Training Center and is located in West Chester focusing on a February opening. It will be the place in town to shoot the firearms of choice. I have already been told that my .500 Magnum will be welcome there. Then of course there is the ability to shoot at your own home, which is a treasure in itself.

There really is no better smell in the world than Hoppe’s bore cleaning solvent, leather, and gun smoke. Those are the smells of freedom—it’s the smell of America. It is what gives us our freedom, the right to bear arms. It is unique in the world in that guns are intended to protect the property of mankind which for the first time in history has decided that acquisitions obtained through capitalist enterprise needs private protection. That is the purpose of guns, to keep malicious people from cheating at life and stealing the fruits of labor—the things acquired in the game of life. There is no better smell than those three items because they are the smell of freedom. As I shot in my little private work area on Sunday watching football games and enjoying the company of my many tools, it was that scent that made me want to take a moment to appreciate what it’s all for.image

By becoming a member of Second Call Defense you can rest easily in using your firearm in concealed carry conditions. If you do use that firearm, the terrifying legal issues that follow are much less menacing. Just call the number on your membership card and let the attorneys at Second Call handle the case from there. There are five categories of protection, entry-level, or Basic, Advocate, Defender, Protector, and Ultimate. From Defender through Ultimate Second Call Defense even offers a gun replacement or retrieval of a beloved firearm during or after a court proceeding. One thing that happens after a gun related shooting is that guns are confiscated for evidence and if you happen to have a lot of history with that firearm, it will have sentimental value. Second Call Defense will do what it can to get your gun back once the case is put to rest. If it is impossible, then they offer to replace the gun. That would come in handy if the gun is a valuable one, something in excess of $1000. Or perhaps the gun is one that you intend to pass down to a son or daughter, with Second Call Defense; you have the best chance there is of getting that gun back. And that’s a very good thing. Of course the price per month increases for the higher coverage, but after spending countless hours cleaning your guns with Hoppe’s in your home shop, you tend to bond with those friends, and until Second Call Defense came along, there wasn’t anything that could be done with law enforcement when they did confiscate guns.

I don’t have a very high impression of the police—I know they are needed, and many of them do good work, but I have had lots of bad experiences with them. Most of those experiences are that I’ve never trusted them to do what I can do myself, and they seem to know that about me. They tend to be contentious in personal interactions because I’m not the submissive type and I with them because I personally despise authority figures—in every form. When I was first gunsmithing many years ago, I had a FFA license to practice and all the credentials it took to operate a shop at my personal residence. So I had to talk to government people, and I didn’t like it. There were too many rules and they all had very stuffy approaches to their jobs. They seemed too eager to throw barriers in front of you so that they would have less work to do. My respect for them was much lower after I had to work with them for a while. About that time my wife who was young and extremely beautiful—a top tier model type who was working as a receptionist at her parent’s business had to deal with a few cops investigating a break-in where her dad had lost some valuables. They knew she was married, she told them what I did because they asked and they seemed to get cockier in their questioning. The entire purpose of their visit was to get information on the break-in. Instead an older cop and his younger partner were more interested in hitting on my wife trying to exert authority upon her to get her to tolerate their sexual advances. “I won’t cheat on my husband,” she eventually said to them. But then the old fat one said, “but will you lay still while I do?” Her dad was in the other room and heard the whole thing. The cops had no fear of ramifications from their actions because they were the embodiments of the law. They knew her dad wanted them to resolve his case and they knew I needed to maintain my FFA license, because they bragged about how they knew ATF agents in town hinting that they could make life rough on me—if they wanted.

I stewed over that incident for at least two years—actually it still makes me very angry when I think about it. But needless to say, I gave up gunsmithing and decided to hold jobs that avoided that kind of manipulation—where someone could exert that kind of authority over my life. But I always loved gunsmithing and the idea of it. While that incident might have shaped my feelings about government authority for life—I didn’t let my love of gunsmithing and guns in general erode away. I was only 19 at that time, but now I’m much older, and times have changed—as well as the politics. I have much more powerful weapons now than guns to use against incursions—I have the gift of the written word, which I have been able to use much better than the best snipers on the planet in accomplishing my intended goals. Guns are just tools in the scheme of things.

But that doesn’t rival the smell of freshly discharged gun powder and Hoppe’s solvent with a newly made leather holster hanging from your hip. Those are the kinds of smells that brought my interest toward guns in the first place and many years later have reinvigorated my interest. However, it is Second Call Defense that has made it all possible for me. Knowing that such a defense exists puts my mind at ease in promoting firearms once again. In those early days of gunsmithing, it was obvious that there were cops, like those two that hit on my wife that would sell confiscated firearms in an auction or on the black market without a second thought and there was no defense against that type of harassment. Gun owners had to put up or shut up, or face arrest, or legal harassment through permit compliance—or some other government means of control. Without such a defense, I just couldn’t recommend such a lifestyle to people without the possibility of intrusion—because there is nothing like losing a gun you care about to legal red tape. It’s not as rough as losing a family member, but it’s close—because when you work with guns and clean them, maintain them, they become characters in your life that you treasure. And law enforcement can confiscate them at will with a trumped-up charge—which happens more than it should. Second Call Defense offers a protection against that kind of thing for the first time. If Second Call Defense had been around 25 years ago, I would have continued being a gunsmith to this day. It is better late than never though, and at least now it’s an option. And knowing that makes that gun smoke and Hoppe’s smell a whole lot better.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Why ISIS Terrorists Want to Kill Americans: What it means to eat from the Tree of Life

I have listened to countless hours of talk radio and watched many segments on television, read many articles from the mainstream press and all have missed the mark in identifying why San Bernardino assassins Syed Farok and his wife Tashfeen Malik dropped off their six month old child at a grandmother’s house telling the unsuspecting woman that they were going to the doctor, neglecting to give any hints that they would probably never return—no final goodbyes to their child or parents, no hint of what was to come. Then to get back in their car and go to the government office where Farok worked to kill 14 people and wound many others in what they knew would become an international incident of terror. But why–how could that possibly have been justified in their minds to give up so much and to bring so much hurt to others if they were such devoted Muslims who read from the Quran so intently—supposedly a book of peace?

The answer is a rather disturbing one, and it cannot be reasoned with by fancy appeasement speeches and psychological evaluations. But it does explain why Barack Obama sympathizes with terrorism and why the political left seems to take similar positions against America as the San Bernardino shooters did. Ironically the answer is within the 2014 movie Noah by Darren Aronofsky—in how progressive types interpret Biblical events and the type of maniacal behavior that can sometimes be associated with religion. I’m one who enjoyed Noah by Aronofsky. I like Aronofsky’s work, particularly Pi, Requiem for a Dream and The Wrestler, so I gave Noah a chance, and immediately recognized within it distinct elements not just from the book of Genesis, but the Book of Enoch—which is a kind of deleted scenes group of stories from the Bible. Aronofsky certainly intended to shake up the foundations of the viewing public by throwing The Book of Enoch into the traditional story of Genesis—and I thought it was a pretty good idea to combine action film elements with the classic story to form a unique mythology. The response from the religious community was brutal and Aronofsky was deeply criticized. The film did pretty well at the global box office and was an ambitious project which I enjoyed. But of course there is more to it—as there always is.

In Aronofsky’s Noah, the biblical character was a bit of a madman following the will of the Creator with a maniacal ambition that could have easily been interpreted as insane. There are many hints to a time before Noah through his grandfather who lives atop a mountain protected by the fallen angels known as The Watchers. This grandfather Methuselah was played by Anthony Hopkins quite brilliantly and obviously possessed a Merlin like quality directly inherited from Enoch. Methuselah lived the longest of the Noah family at 969 years which is interesting. I happen to believe quite emphatically that the Bible has many missing chapters and what has been presented to the public at large through the churches over time are only the pacifist passages, and not the whole work—only the parts that would placate the masses. So I enjoyed very much the back story elements of Genesis within the movie Noah. This is quite a study in itself, but lets not get off track, the purpose of this article is to understand the rationalization behind terrorism and how religion can provoke such extremism. It could be said that many of the characters in Noah were radicals in their own way, Noah for building an Ark based on a vision from the Creator leading his family to safety through the end times for a rebirth of civilization, and Noah’s Tubal-cain who had an almost Ayn Rand concept of mankind—which I actually agreed with. In Aronofsky’s version of Noah Russell Crow’s self sacrifice as the classic Biblical character was an environmental one that very neatly pressed in the modern Green Movement into the film’s message as Tubal-can played by Ray Winstone was a pro man type of capitalist. I enjoyed all the various perspectives even though I don’t agree with much of it. I noticed the obvious Hollywood politics quickly which of course spilled over into the Obama Climate Summit in Paris.

Leading up the San Bernardino shootings Obama and his friends were in Paris which is still recovering from acts of ISIS terrorism of their own and declared that global warming was the greatest menace facing our world. If you really get to the meat of what they believe, they are not unlike Noah in Aronofsky’s movie. They want to erase mankind from the earth and return the world back to nature—so from their perspective, global warming is the greatest threat—because they don’t like the achievements of mankind. To Obama and his progressive friends, they have radicalized their foundations of social communism and economic Marxism into a new religion centering on the environment, which ties directly to the movie Noah—who believed he was not being saved to keep mankind alive, but to save the animals of the earth from Tubal-cain’s vile superiority as a species of man. In typical Christian understanding the moral of Genesis was a combination of Tubal-cain and Noah, but in Aronofsky’s interpretation, it was directed at the environmentalists who have a great desire to start a new religion of earth worship making the whole planet a kind of eternal Garden of Eden. Keep that in mind.

As anyone who has read the Quran knows, it is essentially another version of the Biblical Old Testament–it shares many of the same characters as it’s Christian counterpart and I believe with that book as I do with the Bible that the chapters were put together by former emperors and religious leaders to control their populations with stories conducive with “service”—so there are missing elements that will likely never be recovered but through myth and legend. This is the book that many of these modern terrorists are gravitating to, and with a singular focus such as what Syed Farok obviously displayed—where peripheral concerns were ignored, much like the prophets from the Quran assumed that they were the hand of god doing the work of a higher purpose even if it meant an end to the human race. If taken literally, the characters from the Old Testament and the Quran were extremely self-sacrificial and functioning from their unique connection to their deities. To the outside world this appears quite insane, but to them, it is justified.

Now enter the communist spread from the Soviet Union that is behind the current environmental concerns and the Islamic caliphate which has adopted various degrees of Marxism as a means toward collectivism to assimilate more closely with Allah. The goal of such assimilation is to recognize that one’s spirit belongs to Allah and that whatever he wishes for us, we must perform. To them the villain of Islam is the kind of mentality that Tubal-cain exhibited. Of course Tubal-cain is the West, Israel, the United States, Europe and all places that have elements of capitalism within their cultures—because capitalism is the religion of “man,” not of the “Creator” whatever name is placed upon it.

Viewed in this context things make a lot more sense—politicians like Obama use global warming as a way to attack western ways and the Tubal-cain nature of mankind—the capitalism of the United States. Radical Islam uses the prophet heroes of the Quran to do the same, their motive is to show Allah that they are pure in spirit and not attached to the evils of capitalism—that their values of self-sacrifice are paramount and worthy of an eternal walk in the Garden of Eden—that they don’t identify with the paradox of knowledge of good and evil, but that they eat from the “Tree of Life.”

I’ve read all these books—many times actually, and am 100% sure that when Syed Farok and his wife Tashfeen Malik dropped off their six month old child at grandmother’s house forever that they weren’t emotional about the issue, and that they didn’t feel bad lying to family members about what they were about to do. I would go so far to suggest that they purposely kept their eye on the higher goal of appeasing Allah because they justified their lives as eating from the Tree of Life-not the Tubal-cain based capitalism that corrupts mankind from the perspective of the Marxist. And thus, you have the reason that Obama cannot condemn Islam, and why global warming is the greatest threat to civilization. It’s not mankind that they are protecting, but mother earth and they share with radical Islam the belief that the capitalist West is the shared villain of their religious doctrines and that all of them are willing to sacrifice their life in the here and now for the benefits of an eternal afterlife with the “father.” And if you are a president with daddy issues like Obama is, an everlasting father in the clouds of heaven is an appealing idea. What he shares with the terrorist Syed Farok is the desire to end capitalism and all the Tubal-cain’s of existence for the might of a savor only written about in books ultimately controlled by churches and politics reflecting a fragmented past not conducive with the ambitions of America.

The goal of the terrorist of course whether it is the literal attempts by radicals like Syed Farok or politicians like Obama who obviously sympathizes with terror acts as his friend Bill Ayers from Chicago shares much in ideology with Farok—they intend to strike fear into mankind to force them to give up individual freedoms in favor of collective enterprise. And to their rational, if people have to die to serve the greater good of their maniacal deities, then so be it. They do so with their eyes off this terrestrial existence toward a greater good defined by their religions, whether that religion is Islam, or the more modern Mother Earth worship. All those ideologies share a common past one that spans the centuries. More recently it is rooted in communism, but it spans back further toward the desire of ancient rulers to keep their subjects under submission through religion that all these beliefs were fostered. If taken correctly many of the lost books of the Bible and the Quran, there would likely be different values expressed, but we’ll never know. Aronofsky played with the idea a bit in Noah, but ultimately carried the message of his film toward the values of his dinner time friends around Hollywood—the religion of conservation—and the desire to reacquaint themselves with the Garden of Eden as agents of light. Syed Farok and his wife obviously felt so strongly in their actions against the villainous West that they were willing to sacrifice everything to terrorize that representation of Tubal-cain into submission to the collectivism of Allah—even if it meant never seeing their child again.

But they all have it wrong, Aronofsky, Farok, Obama, and all the church leaders who edited these religious texts for the purpose of social control. Man wasn’t meant to stay in a Garden of Eden built by a creator. Man is the creator, and it is the task of civilization to build a Garden of Eden for each and every one of us to live within. Because when we finally peel away all the mysteries of quantum mechanics we will find that the creator wasn’t out there somewhere, but always inside. As Jesus said, “the Kingdom of God is all around us but men do not see it.” That statement didn’t mean that men were to be graduated from only to reconcile through death with the creator of all things. It was intended to evolve mankind into a true understanding—and the reason that men do not see the Garden of Eden in their own lives is because they are listening to all the wrong sources. Go to Trump Tower in Manhattan and you will see the Garden of Eden, the Kingdom of God—the Tree of Life. You will see the gates of heaven built through capitalism and the morality of productivity for the first time in human history. And that is why Syed Farok is a villain of epic proportions rooted in a medieval religion that is outdated and manipulated through the ages toward collectivism by power-hungry rulers who wanted nothing else but to control the masses to their selfish desires for terrestrial concerns.

For those who want to know my source material for this article, consult the metaphorical Tree of Life. The rest of these idiots are still eating from the Tree of Knowledge and they weren’t supposed to.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

New York Times Shares Guilt in Promoting Terrorism Activity: Syed Farook was a very liberal government employee Muslim

Actually, The New York Times is correct when they said on their front page editorial against gun ownership—“no right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.” That is why I propose in the wake of the gross mismanagement of the events that led up to the San Bernardino shootings that we possibly reword the American Constitution to clarify the meaning of the Second Amendment for all. The New York Times showed why they are losing readership and nearing bankruptcy, because they don’t understand the world outside of their little building in New York City. They certainly don’t understand the necessity of guns in American culture. Read part of their much talked about and misguided editorial for further gun control below.   My terminology for the rewording would be to clarify that guns are needed in American culture because government often does fail, and that gun owners must possess at least equal armaments for their own protection in the event of such administrative failures as those on full display in the terrorist acts leading up to the San Bernardino massacre—which was clearly the fault of the Obama administration and the Homeland Security under his management from the executive office. Americans can’t be limited by clip counts and weapons types by legislation that puts more powerful weapons in the hands of government than what the citizen employers of those organizations possess themselves. What the New York Times proposes below is just stupid. They have the situation backwards. We need more guns with fewer restrictions, not fewer guns with more restrictions. Here is what they said:

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

 It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

 http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/05/us/new-york-times-gun-control-san-bernardino/index.html

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/end-the-gun-epidemic-in-america.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-top-region&region=opinion-c-col-top-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-top-region&_r=0

Let me clarify a “moral outrage” for The New York Times—a president who failed to acknowledge that ISIS (Not ISIL) is a major threat in spreading a global caliphate, which he had a hand in creating through his actions—then not communicating that failure properly to the American people. What is outrageous is the decision to allow the media to completely contaminate the crime scene of the San Bernardino terrorists just two days after they were shot and killed. Astonishingly the media was allowed to enter the apartment the two lived in and put their fingerprints all over the possessions contained therein. The apartment had not even been dusted for prints so this was an obvious move by the FBI and the Obama administration in coordination with local law enforcement to allow for the destruction of evidence so that connections to other terrorist suspects could be eliminated. The White House needed to maintain the story that the two acted alone, instead of being part of a more extensive group. This was highly corrupt, and if the highest law enforcement in America is prone to making these kinds of terrible judgment calls, they are not capable to make decisions on civilian’s behalf in regards to armament. Forget restrictions of full automatic weapons or ammunition types, like the .223. Those restrictions need to be removed because you never know when some government employee, like one of the terrorists in this California case was—might lose their mind, destroy evidence, abuse their authority, or allow themselves to be pawns from a corrupt executive branch in the future—and assault the innocent with the most aggressive weapons invented. American civilians need to be able to protect themselves from anything, enemies foreign and domestic.

But let me declare to The New York Times the greatest outrage—the cover-up—or the attempted cover-up of the nature of the terrorist couple themselves, the family lawyer who immediately tried to pacify the situation and media outlets like The New York Times from jumping all over guns instead of the actions of one of their own. In his online dating “Arab Lounge” profile where he met Tashfeen Malik, Syed Farook described himself as a devoted Muslim who was “very liberal,” politically. Farook was a creation of government. It took two full days before a picture of Tashfeen was produced essentially because she was always seen in a hijab marking her clearly as a Muslim and the government didn’t want the American people to start blaming all Muslims for being potential terrorists. When the FBI and White House realized they couldn’t contain the story they did the opposite, they allowed the media to contaminate the crime scene. They took away all references that they could find to other terrorist groups within the United States then let the media destroy all the rest of the evidence with over saturation of exposure instead of trying to limit access.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/12/04/online-dating-profile-provides-closer-look-at-calif-killer-and-lists-his-political-identification/

These are the types of people who want to demand that Americans give up their guns and trust government exclusively. Every level of this San Bernardino terrorist act was provoked by a government employee—from the shooter himself down to the investigators on the ground. The New York Times has the same radicalized liberal beliefs as Syed Farook and they are seeking to deflect the argument of potential terrorism away from liberal issues onto guns at the expense of freedom. There is nothing reasonable about gun control proposals when all the guilty in this case were the type of government employees we all need to protect ourselves from. The situation is just appalling. Our government cannot be trusted, and America needs guns to protect themselves from their employees as well as common thugs and miscreants in general. What would be best is just to lift all restrictions on ammo and explosive devices and let the free market take care of this encroaching problem. Liberals built this mess—these terrorist networks and the people who make them up. They don’t get to disarm us from the ramifications of their failure as well. That’s not how it works. The New York Times even for a very liberal publication should at least have known that much. They certainly shouldn’t have put that editorial on their front page because gun ownership was not the cause of the problem. It was the lack of a defense from the victims and the nurturing of domestic terrorism that all liberals helped create through their actions that is most to blame—and the clear attempt to cover up the evidence from the highest office of the White House to the cops on the scene. They knew the names, they saw their appearance once the terrorist couple had been gunned down in the street—appropriately—but they attempted to contain the story from the outset and when they realized how deep it went, they looked to isolate them from the connections to others which undoubtedly extended to more terrorist cells around the United States. And these same idiots think it appropriate to lecture America about gun rights? It is because of these types of people that we have a Second Amendment to begin with. So perhaps its time to take any vagueness out of the Constitution to clarify the real intention of civilian gun ownership—it is for protection from the employees of those civilians in attempting an insurrection—as they have been caught red-handed in hiding terrorism in America and their part in fostering it. The New York Times is as guilty as anybody on the liberal side of the political spectrum, and its time they apologize for their part in creating terrorism in America instead of camouflaging their error behind calls for more gun control.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Ruger’s Plan to Help the NRA: Using Second Call Defense to help stop Jihad at American borders

Fortunately, most Americans understand the situation, on Black Friday 2015 a record was shattered as there were 185,000 background checks from people buying firearms. That averages out to roughly 2 checks every second. And those Americans weren’t buying guns to hunt deer. Hopefully, many of those guns were from Ruger who is donating $2 for every Ruger sold between 2015 and 2016 intending to raise $4 million dollars for the NRA. I did my part and bought a new Ruger, and I’m very proud of it. In spite of the government insisting every couple of minutes that more gun control is needed to slow down the violent mass shootings erupting all over the country, the only real solution to the mismanagement of the social affairs that have contributed to the violence is more guns carried by responsible people, not less.

After the San Bernardino shooting on December 2nd 2015 Obama went straight to the airwaves to proclaim the need for more gun control and made a point to declare that other countries don’t have the problem of gun violence that America has. He failed to say why. Most of the rest of the world has terrible poverty and severe gun control restrictions and their people are mass migrating from those places trying to get into the United States. They aren’t immigrating to America because they like their homes. All is not well in the world, so Obama’s comparison is out-of-touch and extremely naive. He could only make such a global comparison by ignoring many facts, dangerously to his own detriment in judgment—which is obviously extremely flawed. America is a superior place to live, and guns help make it that way. Obama clearly doesn’t connect the dots. Because there are two things that are common to many of these mass shootings over the last couple of years—most of the shootings involve young people fresh out of their progressive educations. Second many of them are related to radical Islamic behavior. Fewer guns empowers these demographic groups toward terrorism—it doesn’t deter them.

The husband and wife shooter in San Bernardino recently were clearly Islamic radicals stoked into a froth of terrorism by fellow Jihadist activists. The situation was so embarrassing to the government that the wife had been permitted into the country on a work visa passing the Homeland Security check, then marrying a U.S. citizen whom she likely instigated into a Jihadist conversion. It was astonishing as of this writing that there was not yet a picture of the wife produced anywhere on the Internet. Surely there were some, but the authorities avoided putting her picture up because she represents a new level to the prospect of terror, the conversion of devout Muslims to Jihad through the power of sex. Without question, she is not alone working now with the United States. Obama cannot deny it— or anybody else. They propose gun control for one of two reasons; they have either promoted these extremists to come into the United States hoping to spread a Middle Eastern caliphate, or to cover the follies of their own terrible mismanagement as government officials. It is either deliberate promotion of these terrorist attacks or the result of gross incompetence. Given Obama’s social position against Israel, his reluctance to name Islamic terrorism by name, and his tendency as a foreign raised child to view America as an imperialist empire—that speculation as to his loyalty has reasonable traction to consider insurgency. His insistence on Syrian refugees entering the United States points to possibly thousands of additional terrorists raising more home-grown radicals just like this husband and wife team. These insurgents plan long and patiently. They fully intend the death of America like a long time family pet being taken to the vet to be euthanized. They say nice things to our ears, but their intentions are to woe us to sleep before the injection takes place.

Given all those raw facts it is clear that in either case, our government has been grossly incompetent. The terrorist husband in San Bernardino was a government worker, the investigators were government employees, the Homeland Security that allowed all this radical behavior to foster were government employees. All the freedoms we gave up, Constitutionally guaranteed, did not prevent the attack from occurring, so what was the point of it all? What’s the point of the HSA, the TSA, the FBI, the CIA or any of them if they couldn’t keep an online dating service from sending a girl from Saudi Arabia to an American born Muslim to ruin his mind with sex and radicalism until he was ready to shoot up an office building while maintaining a bomb factory at his home in full view of his neighbors—who were shushed into silence for fear of being labeled “prejudice.” Government incompetence is at the heart of every issue, so the obvious conclusion is that they cannot be trusted.

That is why gun sales are up, because normal Americans see the writing on the wall and they know they need to protect themselves. If an active civil war between factions of political ideology must break out, then the fault is on the government for failing to protect our private property from potential terrorists. We have the Second Amendment as a back-up–the way it was always designed, to take matters into our own hands if government proves itself to be so grossly inadequate. It is good and highly encouraged that all Americans obtain a concealed carry permit and began making themselves active resistance to this impending terrorism within our borders. Ruger is doing their part in offering to boost the power of the NRA with a donation for every firearm sold during this upcoming year, so if you’re planning to buy one, make it a Ruger.

One of the most exciting things about a possible Donald Trump presidency is that he is very pro Second Amendment and has a plan to make concealed carry permits viable in all 50 states. So if you get a concealed carry permit in Ohio, it would be good in California and Hawaii—which would be wonderful. If there had been armed people in that government building, those two terrorists could not have emptied so many rounds into innocent people. Some gun carrying protectors could have shot back ending the dispute right then and there. There may have still been some killed or injured, but the number would be far less. The response to these terrorist threats cannot be passivity, and gun restrictions. It has to be the opposite, more guns and expanded conditions for which private people carry them.

Of course this all points back to why I am now a recruiter for Second Call Defense. If you are going to carry a firearm and you find yourself in a self-defense shooting—say some Jihadist nut job came into your place of business or a fine restaurant you were taking your wife to for a nice dinner and these scum bags come in to spread their intentions of a global caliphate—and you shoot them—you will have to defend yourself from the same government that let those idiots roam free—that same government that refused to publish the picture of a young Saudi woman who used sex to convert the mind of a peaceful Muslim into a radical Jihadist. So you have to protect yourself from that government—because they will be looking for a straw man for their incompetence. Second Call Defense takes that ability away from them. First you shoot the terrorist saving as many people as you can, then you call Second Call Defense and let them handle the government investigation into the matter protecting you and your property from further incursions of blame. Just as Barack Obama took the side of Trayvon Martin in the George Zimmerman case in Florida putting the shooter at a severe legal disadvantage in the process, you don’t want the same thing to happen to you if you put down a terrorist Jihadist that the government let into the country to fulfill some political goal they have at our expense. If that happens, be sure to let Second Call Defense handle the case. Just use my name in the redemption code when you sign up and you will get the first month free. I wouldn’t put my name on something like this if I didn’t think it would help people and help spread the use of firearms in these types of cases.

Ruger specifically is one of my favorite firearms manufactures. I absolutely love my Vaquero; it is machined to perfection and is just an astonishingly wonderful product. I have shot it nearly a thousand times over the last couple of months and it gives me great pleasure to stand at my workbench in the garage and clean it back to its original finish after each shooting session. It is a wonderfully American thing to do as I listen to talk radio and listen to conservative discussions free of liberal sentimentality while cleaning a very nice firearm after a hard day of shooting, carefully, with great craftsmanship—to use an array of tools to care for something that is fun recreationally, but can also defend your property from the fools of the world—which are numerous. As I clean that gun I think of how special we are in the United States to have those privileges—we are probably the only place that has such an ability—free speech, free access to the finest firearms in the world, free from unreasonable searches and seizer—but it is all those rights that these terrorists are attacking. Their military objective is to erode our freedoms with terrorism, to force America to overreact into accepting gradually bigger government and much more restriction—like what terrorists achieved after 9/11. But we have to stop that game in its tracks right now. We have to give them the opposite. We need gun sales to spike; we need more people openly carrying them, and we need to make it easier for them to carry guns in more places. That is the only solution to the gross government mismanagement to the current Jihadist threats. And toward that aim, Ruger is a good place to begin fighting back. Second Call Defense is the next.

Now, CLICK HERE to learn about my plan to defeat ISIS and global terrorism, once and for all. 

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

The Movie ‘Selma’ Was Terrible: Mark Zuckerberg’s wasted $45 billion dollars

I read in USA Today that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife who just gave birth to their first child, planned to give away approximately 45 billion dollars during their lifetimes toward the next generation in achieving equality and other lofty goals. While that sounded very “stylish” I couldn’t help but think that the actuality of their intentions would only lead to more degradation and progressive political erosion of core traditional values—such as strong families, hard work, and personal ethics. It is a proven fact that you can’t throw good money at bad people, so a valueless society even propped up with billions or trillions of dollars cannot flourish. There are many examples of this but let me give a more contemporary comparison that everyone can relate to, like a review of the recent movie Selma about Martin Luther King’s march across the famous bridge toward Montgomery, Alabama for a civil rights demonstration that made history. I personally think a lot of Martin Luther King, or at least I did until I saw Selma because the movie wasn’t very good. It had the feel of a made for television movie, not an Academy Award type of film. It clearly received high praise because of its message about progressive concerns—not for the actual quality of the film itself. Under the direction of Ava DuVernay, I think she went a long way to destroying what was best about Martin Luther King. But the purpose of this article is to show how good money spent poorly can give terrible results, and that is what Selma most represents. With all the great talent involved, and money—they couldn’t buy a successful outcome.

Selma is a 2014 American historical drama film directed by Ava DuVernay and written by Paul Webb. It is based on the 1965 Selma to Montgomery voting rights marches led by James Bevel,[3][4] Hosea Williams, Martin Luther King, Jr., and John Lewis. The film stars actors David Oyelowo as King, Tom Wilkinson as President Lyndon B. Johnson, Tim Roth as George Wallace, Carmen Ejogo as Coretta Scott King, and rapper and actor Common as Bevel.

Selma premiered at the American Film Institute Festival on November 11, 2014, began a limited US release on December 25, and expanded into wide theatrical release on January 9, 2015, two months before the 50th anniversary of the march. The film got a re-release on March 20, 2015 in the honor of the 50th anniversary of the historical march.

Selma had four Golden Globe Award nominations, including Best Motion Picture – Drama, Best Director, and Best Actor, and won for Best Original Song.[5] It was also nominated for Best Picture and won Best Original Song at the 87th Academy Awards.

The story goes like this, in 1964, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) accepted his Nobel Peace Prize. Four African-American girls walking down stairs in the Birmingham, Alabama 16th Street Baptist Church were killed by a bomb set by the Ku Klux Klan. Annie Lee Cooper attempted to register to vote in Selma, Alabama but was prevented by the white registrar. King met with President Lyndon B. Johnson and asked for federal legislation to allow black citizens to register to vote unencumbered. Johnson said he had more important projects at the time, like his War on Poverty initiative.

King traveled to Selma with Ralph Abernathy, Andrew Young, James Orange, and Diane Nash. James Bevel greeted them, and other SCLC activists showed up to help. FBI director J. Edgar Hoover told Johnson that King was a problem, and suggested they disrupt his marriage. Coretta Scott King has concerns about her husband’s upcoming work in Selma. King calls singer Mahalia Jackson to inspire him with a song. King, other SCLC leaders, and black Selma residents march to the registration office to register. After a confrontation in front of the courthouse a shoving match occurs as the police go into the crowd. Cooper fights back, knocking Sheriff Jim Clark to the ground, leading to the arrest of Cooper, King, and others.

Alabama Governor George Wallace speaks out against the movement. Coretta meets with Malcolm X, who says he will drive whites to ally with King by advocating a more extreme position. Wallace and Al Lingo decide to use force at an upcoming night march in Marion, Alabama, using state troopers to assault the marchers. A group of protesters runs into a restaurant to hide, but troopers rush in, beat and shoot Jimmie Lee Jackson. King and Bevel meet with Cager Lee, Jackson’s grandfather, at the morgue. King speaks to ask people to continue to fight for their rights. King receives harassing phone calls with a recording of sexual activity implied to be him and another woman leading to an argument with Coretta. King is criticized by members of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC).

As the Selma to Montgomery march is about to begin, King talks to Young about cancelling it, but Young convinces King to persevere. The marchers, including John Lewis of SNCC, Hosea Williams of SCLC, and Selma activist Amelia Boynton, cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge and approach a line of state troopers who put on gas masks. The troopers order the marchers to turn back, and when they hold their ground the troopers attack with clubs, horses, tear gas, and other weapons. Lewis and Boynton are among those badly injured. The attack was shown on national television as the wounded are treated at Brown Chapel, the movement’s headquarter church.

Movement attorney Fred Gray asks federal Judge Frank Minis Johnson to let the march go forward. President Johnson demands that King and Wallace stop their actions, and sends John Doar to convince King to postpone the next march. White Americans, including Viola Liuzzo and James Reeb, arrived to join the second march. Marchers cross the bridge again and see the state troopers lined up, but the troopers turn aside to let them pass. King, after praying, turns around and leads the group away, and again comes under sharp criticism from SNCC activists. That evening, Reeb was beaten to death by white racists on a street in Selma.

Judge Johnson allows the march. President Johnson speaks before a Joint Session of Congress to ask for quick passage of a bill to eliminate restrictions on voting, praising the courage of the activists; he states “We shall overcome.” The march on the highway to Montgomery takes place, and when the marchers reach Montgomery King delivers a speech on the steps of the State Capitol. As King speaks of coming victory, footage of him and his supporters were displayed on screen, and that was the end of the movie. That should save you from having to watch it.

DuVernay directed Selma, with a $20 million budget produced by Plan B Entertainment. The movie was released on December 25, 2014.[27] There was significant controversy about Selma and its depiction of Lyndon Johnson‘s actions as portrayed in the film.[28][29] Former Johnson domestic policy aide Joseph A. Califano, Jr. criticized DuVernay for ignoring and falsifying history, and particularly for suggesting that Johnson reluctantly supported King’s efforts and that he set the FBI to investigate King.[30] For the film she did uncredited re-writes of most of the original screenwriter Paul Webb’s script with an increased emphasis on King and the people of Selma as central figures.[31][32] In response to the criticisms of historians and media sources that accused her of irresponsibly rewriting history to portray her own agenda, DuVernay pointed out that the film is “not a documentary. I’m not a historian. I’m a storyteller”.[33] However, most people watching the film without question will accept the film as historical record.

The film was nominated for Best Picture and Best Song, but not Best Director, by the Academy Awards. While the lack of diversity of the Oscar nominations for 2014 was the subject of much press,[34] especially on Twitter,[35] the film of the only person of color that was nominated for the 87th Academy Awards, Mexican director Alejandro González Iñárritu, ended up taking top honors in three categories at the February 2015 87th Academy Awards – Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay. The award for Best Original Song went to “Glory” from Selma.[36][37] DuVernay stated that she had not expected to be nominated so the omission didn’t really bother her; rather she was hurt by actor David Oyelowo not being nominated. As to the question of racial diversity of awards, she stated that the obstacles to people of color being represented in the Academy Awards were systemic.[35] She failed to mention that in order to be considered for such a nomination that she should have shown herself to be a director of the highest order. For instance, I disagree tremendously with the politics of the movie Argo and its director Ben Afleck. But, Ben did a great job with that picture and deserved his rewards as a fabulous director. It had nothing to do with him being white, or a male—he just made a great movie—even though I disagreed with most of the premise—favoring the communists of Iran with a haze of respect instead of a more conservative position.

Ava Marie DuVernay (born August 24, 1972) is an American director, screenwriter, film marketer, and film distributor. At the 2012 Sundance Film Festival, DuVernay won the Best Director Prize for her second feature film Middle of Nowhere,[1][2][3][4] becoming the first African-American woman to win the award.[5][6] For her work in Selma, DuVernay is the first black woman director to be nominated for a Golden Globe Award.[7][8] With Selma, she is also the first black woman director to have their film nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selma_(film)

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

Ava DuVernay obviously needed more time behind the camera directing because there were a lot of sloppy mistakes, most notably involving Malcolm X. It was obvious that the producers, specifically Oprah and Brad Pitt wanted an African-American woman to direct the film instead of the best possible candidate, so their hiring desires directed the foundation of the film which came across as a music video painted with a PBS documentary. I don’t think it was DuVernay’s fault the movie wasn’t good; it was that the lack of understanding and emphasis by the producers that made the film bad from the start. They made a movie about a popular black man and the civil rights movement then expected to show up at the Academy Awards to pick up their nomination for advancing a progressive cause. The movie suffered because of it. The story of Selma is actually a good one, but it deserved a much better effort instead of the politically charged tripe that was provided.

The film cost $20 million to make and brought in just over $68 million so financially it wasn’t a failure, but culturally it did little to advance the story of Martin Luther King. Instead, it took him down several pegs in the eyes of history I suppose to show that he was a more “human” man. Obviously the real hero of Selma to my eyes appeared to be King’s wife—the battered wife who stood by her man even after his death—which contradicted the UN flying flag that the protestors were carrying into Montgomery at the end of the film. What did the United Nations have to do with American civil rights? If the intention of the filmmakers was to tell a powerful story about Martin Luther King and how Malcolm X made peace with him before his own assassination, the film failed. Instead they gave us an insider’s gaze into the political activism that still goes on behind the scenes of a civil rights movement that isn’t so much rooted in fairness for all people, but a global government led by the United Nations—which had Brad Pitt’s fingerprints all over it, even the cowboy riding a horse running down innocent blacks with a bullwhip in slow motion. The progressive imagery was obvious. I certainly didn’t miss it, which made me wonder who they thought they were making the movie for. I don’t think the producers knew.

Given the history and success of people like Oprah and Brad Pitt, you’d think they’d know better. They are rich people, but all their wealth hasn’t done much to make them better people. You could give them all the money in the world and they would just waste it. They couldn’t even make a good movie when given a free hand at producing anything they wanted with money not even being an option. With all their resources, Selma is all they could come up with. It is for that reason that with all the intelligence Mark Zuckerberg showed in developing Facebook, it’s clear he was a one shot wonder who stumbled across something that people wanted to pay him a lot of money for. But he doesn’t understand the value of what he obtained and neither will the recipients of his 45 billion dollars. It’s a nice gesture but will share with the movie Selma—made by his good friends—a lackluster outcome that falls well short of its good intentions. The path to hell of course is paved with good intentions. But you’d think that smart people would have learned that by now and not funded the concrete trucks that helped pave the way. Without personal value, no amount of money can’t fix anything; money can only delay the inevitable just a while longer. Money doesn’t give value—it only represents it. If you throw $20 million dollars at a slam dunk movie set for the academy awards, but the people involved are not up to the task and aren’t making the movie with real value at the heart of it—but just eyeing a sure-fire Academy Award for exploiting blacks and the civil rights history—then the attempt will likely be a failure. And if $45 billion dollars are poured into a global society without putting value into the people receiving it, then all that money will just be wasted, because the value of money cannot stick to anything. The effort may be noble, but the result will be less than fulfilling, because the essence of value was ignored, and confused with fiscal measurements.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

A Review of ‘Crippled America’: The bargain of Donald Trump, my dream presidential candidate

I started on Donald Trump’s new book, Crippled America during Thanksgiving morning 2015 about two hours before the Macy’s parade and ended about an hour and a half after, just before our lunchtime feast. It wasn’t a very big book and was an easy read. It was written so people with very basic reading skills would have no trouble with it. For the first 25 pages I couldn’t help but think that Trump probably dictated the whole book to somebody because it sounded an awful lot like his campaign speeches, of which I’ve listened to quite a lot of. I didn’t anticipate that I’d learn very much new about Trump that I didn’t already know. However, by the time I closed the book just before the turkey was placed on our table, I felt refreshed and happy that such a guy was running for presidential office. I have been a Trump supporter since his campaign speech in June at Trump Tower so I was already in his camp. Leading up to his announcement it has been my strong feeling for years, going all the way back to Ross Perot, that successful business people needed to be in government, not the unproven lawyers that we have now—so Trump as president makes sense to me. After reading Crippled America it was clear to me that Trump should be handing these books out at campaign events, because it turned out to be a pretty good book, especially the second half after he warmed up a bit. The first half was pretty typical to his campaign platform, but the second half delved more into the man himself, the character behind the drama, the hype, and the brand—to the person who just wants to restore the American nation from the dilapidated mess that it currently is.

As I closed the book I understood Donald Trump. He was still that 28-year-old developer taking on impossible projects that nobody else could touch and turning them into marvels the world would gawk at. Trump isn’t nearly the egoist that his persona projects, he’s a very passionate developer who just likes to make things. His run for president is not about power or prestige, he already has those things. What he wants to do is restore America like he has so many failed properties around the world. It’s a massive restoration project that has his natural inclinations salivating to see if he can pull it off in his final years of life—the perfect period to an American story that he has been gloriously successful at writing. Trump is not the kind of man who is happy just dining his way into the sunset with a beautiful family and wealth beyond measure. He wants to be in the trenches fighting, and at the stage of life that he’s in currently only the restoration project of President of the United States suits his polished tastes. He has everything a man could want—literally, except one thing—completion of the greatest challenge perhaps the world has ever seen. America is a crippled superpower heavily in debt, defeated in spirit because of over 20 years of gross government mismanagement, and a country that has lost its global respect. Trump intends quite sincerely to turn all that around within a few terms as president. He even says in the book that he plans to actually accomplish more in the first 90 days than Obama has in 7 years. And I believe him, especially after reading his book, because he does get into details on how to do it—complete with examples.

Politically it was the usual stuff, discussions about the economy, taxes, the state of the nation, infrastructure, foreign policy and what he thinks he can do that’s better than everyone else. In that way Trump’s book sounds like Ben Carson’s, and Hillary Clinton’s. But there’s more to it—another layer that was not so obviously camouflaged. There is a swagger to Trump that indicates he could actually pull it off. With every other political candidate and commenter alike who have written such books—from Glenn Beck to Rand Paul—and I’ve read them all—nobody but Trump stands a chance of accomplishing even a small portion of the promises—because the political system itself is set up to prevent any action—and to feed the shadow government of lobbyists and political donations which essentially fuel all the politics of the Beltway.

Trump has a plan for just about everything and he has the confidence based on his reputation to pull off 100% of what’s in his book. I was actually impressed by his swagger, which is saying something. I have personally hired hundreds of people so I’ve interviewed perhaps thousands over the last decade and I’ve developed quite a bullshit detector. I know when someone presents an inflated résumé to me, and I know when raw passion is displayed for the hiring. Trump is raw passion with an understated résumé of which Crippled America is essentially. Getting to know Trump becomes much more evident toward the last third of the book where he talks about all his building projects over the years and when you realize just how much he’s accomplished in just three decades, its pretty earth shattering. Just considering what he did from 1974 with the Commodore Hotel in New York City to the opening of Trump Tower in 1983 is mind-blowing as an individual measurement, with just a loan from his father to take on the world of real estate in New York City which is arguably on of the most complicated and expensive in the world. He is an impressive figure radiating with confidence which is obvious in every word of his book. Based on his résumé and how he communicated it, I’d have to hire him just to see if he could do it. Our last president was a community organizer and he ran the country with that strength in his wheel house. Obama gets excited about Ferguson riots, but could care less about $19 trillion in debt. Bush the younger ran the country as a rich daddy’s boy—which he was. His dad wished he had completed the mission in Iraq, but didn’t so the boy finished the job—to his own detriment. Following the orders of his daddy was in Bush’s wheel house so he did so in that fashion. Clinton during the 90s was a free partying womanizer associated with criminals, drug smuggling and murder as governor of Arkansas. So he ran the country as if it were the mob. And that’s pretty much what we got. There hasn’t been anybody like Trump—ever. He’s successful, accomplished, and at the top of his game—and he’s even more confident than I think most people can even register. Out of all the candidates in this century or the last, Trump is the most poised candidate ever to put his name on a ticket. We have to give him a chance or we are just stupid as a nation, because he is certainly the most qualified presidential candidate.

And that’s where Crippled America gets interesting. Trump knows why the media is against him, and why the political parties are terrified of him. He’s more aware of it than even he’ll let on in his speeches—it comes out in his writing. When he is given time and a free stump without opposition he can really string together a number of complicated thoughts about matters. He’s much smarter than he lets on—that much is very clear. If Trump becomes president the entire political system falls apart. He has been a powerful political contributor and they loved him then. But now he’s crossing over into their world and he knows where the bodies are buried—and they don’t like it. The political class has been “apathetic” to say the least in the United States. They have made good livings for themselves doing nothing. They know if Trump is elected than there will be other business types who follow and a chain reaction will start that will end their way of life. Business people will begin to enter public office from the local school board president to the governors of states. The term “politician” will take on an entirely new meaning. Trump plans to run the White House like he does his businesses and that scares K-Street immensely. They will be exposed and Trump will use that leverage to get the arm twisting he needs done accomplished.

As I closed the book and thought about all the things I’m grateful for—which is a lot—I think for the first time ever I had hope for our political future. I’ve voted for people before who I thought might shake things up a bit and accomplish a nice thing or two. But Trump is offering to revamp America as a restoration project from Social Security, private sector driven health care, to making concealed carry a statewide option—like getting a driver’s license. I think I’d vote for Donald Trump just because he wants to make concealed carry good in all 50 states. I’m surprised he doesn’t talk more about that issue—because it’s a big one. He wants to simplify the tax code and demand respect from our trade imbalances. He planes to renew our infrastructure and dramatically increase our economic growth. His presidency would be a trend setting endeavor that would change all elections in the future. So for me the turkey tasted just a bitter knowing that Trump is running for president. And given his polling numbers in spite of everything that’s been thrown at him he has a great chance of winning. The political establishment however is fighting for its very life and will do anything it can to keep Trump out of the White House. The difference between my hopes for change in the past and this one is that I think Trump is just getting started and he knows how to work through that minefield and still come out of the other side dancing through the fire. Any apprehension I had about Trump was erased with Crippled America. Using his book as a résumé there really is no other option. He is the most accomplished candidate in the field to do what he says, and he’s most poised to put a stop to the current political process of fundraising and K-Street shadow governments.   If he did just 1% of what he promised in Crippled America he’d go down as the greatest president in the history of the world. But as I cut the turkey on my plate I realized that he had the potential to accomplish all 100%. And that is really something to smile about.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

How to Peacefully Destroy ISIS: Why America created the terrorist group and what to do about it

Just for clarification, the United States created ISIS. While Russia and Iran supported Bashar al-Assad’s regime of terror in Syria, the West, Turkey, and the Gulf States supported removing him. So America essentially supplied the weapons of war to the rebels against Assad to defeat him. What occurred in the aftermath was ISIS. That is why to this very day America cannot join Russia in teaming up with Assad to fight ISIS, because that would be far too embarrassing. The Obama Administration made a serious blunder and there is no going back now. For proof that the U.S. Government wanted ISIS to emerge in Syria watch this Reality Check from Ben Swann, who has a new job at CBS 46.

Good job Ben Swann, now watch a video he did two years ago predicting the creation of ISIS. Pay very close attention to the little boy singing approximately 6 minutes in. There are thousands of kids like him and there will be absolutely no way to reason with that child poisoned with extremism. That is the fight that is before us, created by Barack Obama’s horrible mismanagement of the stand-off with Syria—remember when he drew a line in the sand, Assad crossed it, then Obama walked back and drew a new line—which Assad crossed again. So Obama along with Republican Senator John McCain sought to supply weapons to the Free Syrian Army to overthrow Assad. But what that army did instead was attack outlying villages and begin to purge Syria and Iraq of Christians, Jews, and invalidate a peaceful exchange by Muslims toward the rest of the world.   Watch closely—this is what the “media” is supposed to be doing—reporting the facts.

Now, there is no way the United States could possibly work with Russia to help Syria against ISIS, because America created ISIS to destroy the current Syrian regime backed by Russia. Do you see the problem dear reader? That is the very definition of the path to hell is paved with good intentions, and hell is quite hot these days. Obama drove us here because he couldn’t read his GPS system, even though it was beeping with alarms the entire time. We now have a severe mess that there is no easy way out of. There is no solution which takes everyone back to peace. The Middle East will never again return to a glory day of Arabs practicing peacefully in the arts and sciences of Aristotle’s brand of Islamic faith. Communism and radicalism are now centerpieces of the Middle East and factions of more severe terrorists are breeding at an extraordinary rate. Little children like the kid in the Ben Swann video are going to grow up and bomb Europe and the United States with increased frequency. War has been declared whether or not we open the mail to read it. They are coming, and we empowered them to do so. If you were smart dear reader you would fire every government official connected to this failure at the very next election. The situation is catastrophically epic.

So here’s what has to happen to rectify the situation. America needs to unleash its oil potential. Currently we are sitting on 285 years of oil and Bill Gates has agreed to pour tens of millions, perhaps billions of R&D dollars into renewable energy yet to be discovered. We should be able to achieve that within 285 years. We could probably do it in 20. So the plan should be to completely cut off the Middle East of oil sales to the U.S.. Saudi Arabia sponsors too much terrorism, and there is really no good way to defeat radicalism in the Middle East so long as good and bad Arabs are plotting against the United States using our dependency on their oil as the leverage mechanism to deal with us. That means we have to cut them off, starve them out, and force them to peaceful negotiations on our terms. They have to want our money otherwise they are unmotivated to deal. Instead, they will continue to use our money and our weapons to fight us. So they need to be choked off—all of them, the entire Middle East. If they are mad at us for our participation in Sykes-Picto, then let them have their land and all the worthless oil on it.

But opening up the oil reserves in America to the point where oil prices would be under $1 a gallon would jump-start our economy again and bring down the global price per barrel everywhere. This would take the wind out of the sails of the only thing the Middle East has by way of economic sustenance. Because of their flirtations with communism, they would not be able to develop any other economical means, and would be forced to face their failed ideology. Their fights would turn on themselves instead of outwardly being united against America and Europe. By completely withdrawing from the region, the United States could take itself out of the debate and leave the red meat to the wolves to fight over. In just a few short decades kids like the one singing in the Ben Swann video would snuff themselves out fighting for the same piece of bread. Oil funds the Dark Ages mentality of ISIS with the belief that they are equal to the developed world outside of their attempted caliphate. But they’re not. Without the United States, they would become like an island of head hunters in New Guinea, isolated and primitive—like they truly are.

I don’t propose letting Israel plunge into possession by the barbarians. We should still support them—they have other economic engines to keep them going, and should be a lesson to Jordan, Syria, and Iran on how to conduct a proper economy. Eventually when the money runs out—which it will, the oil barons in Saudi Arabia and at the UAE would be forced to eat out of the hand of America for basic income. Within a few decades those dust pits in the Middle East could be like modern-day Puerto Rico, one category under statehood, and be forced to adopt American policy and capitalism just to survive. That would be good for everyone.

We are at war, forget about the environment. Global warming is a false prophecy advocated by the political left with a religious like fervor. It has no grounding, or basis in reality—it’s just another communist inspired scheme by old hippies to cripple all forms of capitalism in worship to a deity called Mother Earth. Screw mother earth, drill for oil, choke off our enemies from the easy money, and advance civilization off this planet for destinations yet unknown traveling among the stars. It’s stupid to stay on earth. The rest of the planet needs to learn from the United States. China needs to give up on communism. Russia needs to expand its economy and come out of the Soviet era economic beliefs also centered on state controlled economies. Europe needs to give up on socialism including Sweden and Norway. It doesn’t work as well as they prop it up to appear. In a few years their youth will show signs of complete complacency and those are not the type of people who will voyage to Mars resettle that red planet from what will prove to be a history that we share. We are already in World War III. So we need to pull together and do what it takes to win that war, and unlike the weapons of the past, this current one is financial. The best way to defeat the Islamic caliphate is not with troops on the ground, but with opening up American oil reserves to choke off the world with our isolation so they can’t mooch off our wealth any longer—then get mad at us for giving them that help.   Cut them off and live happily ever after.

The kid shown in the video above won’t be reasoned with. He won’t be won over with flowers, or even a show of power. Those Arabs are filled with hate and stupidity and there is no way to deal with them rationally now. Forget the deals with OPEC, forget the meetings with the World Bank to keep oil prices at a certain place to secure the economy of the Middle East. End all those deals and cut off those terrorists so they can’t buy a bag of beans from Russia and Iran let alone nuclear weapons. Take away their oil not through theft or possession. Do it through currency devaluation of the price of oil. If you love mother earth so much, then leave her to her home while we as a human race move out into our own homes. We can come back and visit on Holidays, but as a species, we need to think bigger. We need to advance to space; we need to use up our 285 years worth of dirty oil to destroy those who hate America forcing them to unite with our freedom and style of republic democracy so that when we do move into space, we can all get along for a change. But before we do any of that, we have to understand that we created much of this mess, so now we have to commit to fixing it for everyone’s sake. And we should not listen to the idiots who caused all this in the first place—people like John McCain and Barack Obama. Open up the Keystone Pipeline and drill for oil in New York. If Andrew Cuomo doesn’t like it, send him to Iraq to trade in beads—while the rest of the world moves on under American leadership and a dollar valued by capitalist countries.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Chicago Police Corruption: The Rubber Gun Squad, race baiters, and FOP unions

Here are two very good articles about the police shooting of a black teenage kid in Chicago and the subsequent protests by the Black Lives Matter crowd, who as we have covered before is a black insurgency group driven by a communist ideology seeking to implant itself in black communities. Both the Chicago police and the Black Lives Matter people are born of the same liberal womb—they are the creations of progressive police and government expansion seeking to use each other to advance the spread of less individual rights with each news story demanding more public safety through increased support of both. Before I provide a more proper commentary read the below I-Team report from ABC 7 below, followed by a Reuters article. Both tell a story that should be very disconcerting to all. I put them up in their completions with the links included because months from now when this story is lost to time—people will still need to remember the dynamics of this particular case and the context I’m presenting will still need to be preserved for ease of reflection.

By Chuck Goudie and Rob Elgas

Wednesday, November 25, 2015 10:55PM

CHICAGO (WLS) —

The ABC7 I-Team has obtained new police dash-cam video of the moments leading up to Laquan McDonald’s deadly encounter with police. The new videos from five police vehicles show Officer Jason Van Dyke, who faces first-degree murder charges in McDonald’s death, in pursuit of the teenager before the shooting. One of the blurry videos is from inside Van Dyke’s police vehicle. On Oct. 20, 2014, Officer Van Dyke and his partner were in a convenience store parking lot when the call came in and they responded. Video from another police car shows Van Dyke on the move, weaving through traffic, rushing to a report of a man wielding a knife. GRAPHIC VIDEO: Click here to watch new, unedited dash-cam video from five police vehicles the night of Laquan McDonald’s death During the incident, you can see McDonald, 17, crossing right in front of his vehicle, carrying what appears to be a knife. Thirty seconds later, he collapses to the street, shot 16 times.

The video shows the view Officer Van Dyke had of McDonald while sitting in the passenger seat during the pursuit. It puts Van Dyke on the trail of the teenager and involved in the chase about 30 seconds earlier than first thought. At this point in the video, the vehicle emergency lights had been turned off. That should also have switched off the dash-cam, but for some reason, Van Dyke’s dash-cam continued recording despite an “off” icon on the screen. Regardless, the video continued recording as his police car pulled up to the scene where McDonald is walking down the street. It is at this point – about 30 seconds after he apparently first spotted McDonald – that Van Dyke got out of his vehicle and opened fire, emptying his police pistol. Video from a different dash-cam shows McDonald’s body on the street after the shooting, still alive before paramedics arrived. The dash-cams are supposed to record audio, but during the McDonald incident, none did. Only the muffled sound of sirens can be heard, but no voices. On Tuesday, Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy addressed the absence of audio on dash-cam videos. “There were apparently technical difficulties, but in no way shape or form is there any evidence that anything was tampered with,” McCarthy said. Wednesday night, a Chicago police official said there was no audio because the batteries in the dash-cams had been put in improperly and facing the wrong direction, which disables the audio part of the recorder. CPD says officers responsible for maintaining their dash-cams are being retrained to avoid this. “Sometimes officers need to be disciplined if they don’t turn it on at the right circumstance which is why we’re working out all the details of our body cam project,” McCarthy said. The fatal shooting occurred in front of a Burger King, which may have captured some of the moments leading up to the slaying. The restaurant manager said that four or five police officers asked him for the password to his surveillance system the night of the shooting. A camera allegedly caught one of the officers touching the DVR. The manager told ABC7 that the Independent Police Review Authority showed up later, it had been determined that up to 15 files had been deleted. However, police officials had said the FBI had determined there was no tampering.

http://abc7chicago.com/news/new-video-shows-officers-pursuit-of-laquan-mcdonald/1099885/

Newly released police dashboard camera videos from the scene of the shooting of a black teenager by a white Chicago patrolman could raise fresh questions over documentation of the killing, as the city braced for an organized protest march on Friday.

Like the first video released on Tuesday, the new footage lacks discernible audio of the Oct. 20, 2014 shooting of 17-year-old Laquan McDonald by Officer Jason Van Dyke. Audio and video should be automatically activated on the cameras, according to police department policy.

Van Dyke on Tuesday became the first Chicago police officer in decades to be charged with murder for on-duty use of lethal force and is in jail pending a second bond hearing on Monday.

Protests over police killings of black men have rocked a number of U.S. cities in the past 18 months. Chicago has seen muted reaction thus far to such incidents, even though police shootings there have been more frequent on average than in the bigger cities of New York and Los Angeles.

The new footage from dashboard cameras on squad cars, sent to Reuters and other media in response to public record requests, does not show the actual shooting.

McDonald’s killing and the 13-month delay in charging Van Dyke and releasing the video led to demonstrations on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The powerful Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) is supporting a Black Friday march along Michigan Avenue, an upscale shopping street, organized by civil rights leader Reverend Jesse Jackson.

“We have watched in anger and disappointment as the city has covered up police violence,” CTU Vice President Jesse Sharkey said in a statement. He accused Mayor Rahm Emanuel of delaying release of the videos while he was running for re-election, which he won in April. Emanuel and other officials said they delayed releasing the video to avoid tainting the investigation of Van Dyke.

There were no signs of protests on Thursday despite some calls on social media for demonstrations at the annual Thanksgiving Day parade.

Police guarded the parade through Chicago’s downtown business district, which was packed with families and tourists watching high school bands playing instruments and dancing as inflatables hovered above their heads.

A HISTORY OF COMPLAINTS

Van Dyke had 20 misconduct complaints against him but he was never disciplined, according to the Citizens Police Data Project, a database of 56,000 misconduct complaints against Chicago police officers compiled by the Invisible Institute, a transparency organization.

However, a federal jury in a civil trial against Van Dyke and Thomas McKenna found in 2010 that the two officers had used excessive force during a 2007 traffic stop. The city was ordered to pay the plaintiff, Edward Nance, $350,000 in damages as well as $180,000 in legal fees, according to documents in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

TECHNICAL PROBLEM

The first tape of the shooting was released under court order hours after Van Dyke was charged. It showed McDonald as he was gunned down in the middle of a street.

Police said the sound was missing from the first tape due to an unspecified technical problem. A spokesman for the department did not immediately respond on Thursday to an e-mailed question about why the footage released on Wednesday also does not have audio.

One of those new videos is from the patrol car that Van Dyke was in and shows McDonald running away from the vehicle. The shooting occurs off camera.

Prosecutors and police said McDonald was carrying a folding knife and had the hallucinogenic drug PCP in his system.

The Chicago Police Department directive on dashboard cameras says they “automatically engage audio and video recording when the vehicle’s emergency-roof lights are activated.”

Officers are supposed to verify cameras are working properly and immediately notify a supervisor if they are inoperable, according to the directive. Police can also manually activate the system.

Chicago police have shot an average of 50 people a year over the last seven years. That average exceeds that of the larger cities of New York and Los Angeles.

Of those shot by Chicago police, 74 percent have been black. On average there have been 17 fatal police shootings in Chicago each year since 2007.

(Additional reporting by Steve Gorman in Los Angeles and Mary Wisniewski in Chicago; Writing by Frank McGurty; Editing by Paul Simao and David Gregorio)

Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/26/us-usa-race-chicago-idUSKBN0TF22R20151126#RvOEV7AP5mQBCb7m.99

Without question, the Chicago police covered up the incriminating evidence of a fellow police officer in this particular shooting. I view police as necessary, but because of my long history with them I can testify that they cannot be trusted without private oversight, particularly when it comes to the police union. Police should not be allowed to unionize, so long as they can, this kind of corruption will go unpunished, because their FOP unions prevent proper discipline.   If you’ve ever seen the film The Wolf of Wall Street, our police forces are every bit as corrupt, only not on the financial side of things. What goes on and why it does would make your skin crawl. I hate that police corruption so much that I even wrote a book about it—The Tail of the Dragon. In short, there is no way our society can ever just trust the police in a gun free society. They are prone to be power-hungry and love to abuse that power. Police cannot be allowed to go unchecked and mismanaged, and so long as they are members of a police union, they will be potential menaces to individual citizens.

However, they are necessary in a society. Cops are often exposed to so much human degradation, particularly in poor communities where human values are quite vacant that they begin to lose their minds. If not for the labor unions, those cops would be otherwise placed on the “rubber gun squad” which is essentially desk work and removed from public interaction until they get their minds right. When a police officer sees too much and their personal value system finds it can’t cope, those cops need to be pulled off the street. Officer Van Dyke behaved as if he should have been on the “rubber gun squad” a long time ago. Likely he wasn’t because the labor unions do most of the personnel management in police forces keeping police chiefs from taking action when they know they should otherwise be placed on desk jobs until their psychological evaluations clear them for their regular police tasks.

So there is a lot going on with this case. Liberals and their war on poverty have used blacks and their conditions of discontent to be the next Martin Luther Kings with race baiters like Jesse Jackson to make good money through the exploitation—and they never seek to actually solve the problem of helping black kids with actual intelligence based educations. Profiteering race baiters purposely keep black children in a victimized state so that they will harass the police and be street thugs to advance the marketing of political money pouring into those communities so they can skim some off the top for their own decadent lifestyles. The police led not by their chain of command, but their labor unions abuse their authority all the time and frequently step over the line of proper conduct abusing people’s Constitutional rights on a constant basis. The two sides are played against each other by liberal politics for the primary purpose of marketing both with publicity, even if it’s negative, for the expansion of more confiscated tax burdens.

The real solution to all of this is less police, eliminated union membership and more individualized based property protection—in other words, a strong national commitment to the Second Amendment. This does two things, it decentralizes the security of a region and it takes the money out of union membership dues making police forces a much less lucrative safe-haven for corruption and manipulation. Cops are needed; brave cops are better—valiant souls who truly want to do the right things. But these idiots who just want to break down doors, and get blow jobs from innocent girls trying to get out of traffic tickets are abusing their authority to extraordinary degrees, and it needs to stop.

To prove I know something about this issue let me provide come clarification, and evidence based on personal history. I had a good friend who worked for me for a time who left my employment to become a cop in Hamilton. Ohio—a fairly nice Midwest town in the southern portion of the state. He left my employment for more money as a cop, his wife was already a cop in Franklin, Ohio and most of their social networks were cops. They had parties together often and associated frequently with cops all over the region. They were also swingers, as a couple. I had them at gatherings at my house a few times and learned a lot more than I cared to learn about off-duty cops and their lifestyle habits. That guy was later busted for pulling over attractive girls and letting them off with a warning in exchange for oral sex. The police force tried to help cover it up, but the evidence was just too overwhelming, so he moved to another city and became a cop there. These cops have a massive network and they help each other. Not all of them, but more than a few sleep with each other’s wives and conduct their personal life in a pretty disgraceful fashion. I have many more examples—in fact, I could write several books on what I know about them, but to me the worst example is that old friend of mine. I took him for a brave young guy who was an adrenaline junkie that could be used for good. Instead he was a sex maniac who wanted to use his power and authority to commit vile evil on innocent people. We stopped being friends after I learned about what he was doing with the girls in the cars. It’s not just blacks in poor neighborhoods—it’s everyone. You just don’t have communist groups uniting the young girls of a local high school to protest against the police because nobody is going to feel sorry for a bunch of pretty white high school girls. But blacks have a history with civil rights and Martin Luther King marches that can be exploited by thieves and other treacherous characters to advance sympathy and garner donations.

Of course I got to know that friend’s wife. She had slept with half of the male members of her police force and they all had wives they were cheating on with her—and those women knew what was going on, and everyone was very open about it. But I didn’t respond and she lost interest quickly probably considering me too “uppity” for them. I was her husband’s boss at the time, so she held her tongue around me, but I can only imagine what she said after they were together away from my ears, because his behavior toward me changed after that. That’s when I realized that these cops and their personal ethics were dreadfully vacant. As government employees, I would never trust them with my life. I like the job they do most of the time, but I would never trust them exclusively. You never know if they are up for the “rubber gun squad” or when they will be. For many of them, the sex and other forms of recklessness is a form of balance to bring them back from the brink of what they see on patrol, the battered bodies in car wrecks, the domestic violence, and the bad social conduct of the people they are forced to see during routine calls. It takes a steady mind to hold up to the rigor, even in nice neighborhoods. And only a few out of hundreds are up to that level of conduct. The police unions cover up the other cases and there’s nothing a mayor or police chief can do about it.

Police are trained incorrectly how to deal with stress. Too many police are shooting not just blacks, but everyone. Blacks are the only group protesting under organized assault. Per capita it might look like blacks are disproportionately being targeted, but that is largely because they are often confined to a poor neighborhood connected directly to government housing and other benefits. Black youth appear to be so badly out of control because they are largely fatherless, which is the primary cause of their behavior. Government has a lot to do with the reason those black families are fatherless, and government is also behind the bad behavior of cops. So government has been the cause of most of the problem, their mismanagement in both situations.   Given that, there is no way that government can even consider making a case for dismantling the Second Amendment. Government can and does abuse its obligations and when they get caught, just like in the Hillary Clinton case and with Lois Lerner at the IRS, they lie, delete emails, and hide behind their labor unions to cover up their crimes. Government is a big problem; they purposely make people poor so they can use them to advance an agenda. Their employees are out-of-control, and they destroy evidence which only they can use to prosecute. The Chicago case of November 2015 is just one small example of a long history of abuse. And the only conclusion we can make is that they can’t be trusted, any of them. We can’t trust the civil rights activists because of the inclination to communist influence, and we can’t trust the cops because they are prone to corruption by the very nature of their jobs. When they are mentally unfit for service, their labor unions protect them from the “rubber gun squad.” So what are we to do? Protect the Second Amendment, because you’re going to need it—if only to keep all this government mismanagement away from your dinner table.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Rodizio at Liberty Center: Review after the first full month of opening — a vacation in our own back yards

To be completely honest, when I travel it is usually the restaurants that I remember most and what I look forward to experiencing before hand. Maybe it’s just the primal need for food and its connection to our daily life that does it, but restaurants reflect most about whatever culture I’m visiting. For instance, when traveling to my favorite amusement park, the Epcot Center in Florida it isn’t the rides that I think of most afterwards, it’s the chance to eat at all the various restaurants representing the different countries. It’s like traveling the world without the pain of all the border crossings and language barriers. Usually when I’m planning a trip, whether it’s to another country or another city within the United States, I scout ahead to the dinning options available and look forward to concluding whatever business I have in those places, so that I can enjoy a unique restaurant experience.

Given that little prequel it should be obvious then why I have taken such a liking to the Rodizio Grill at Liberty Center. It’s an exotic joy that is just as authentic, if not more so, than if I visited a steakhouse in Brazil, but it’s just down the road from me saving the plane fees to get there. After a hard day, or week I can visit the Rodizio at Liberty Center and feel like I took a vacation—which I consider invaluable to stress management—so I feel grateful to have one of these Rodizio restaurants so close now in southern Ohio. There are only two in all of Ohio, one in Columbus and now the one at Liberty Center. There are a few in Colorado, a few in Florida, one in Louisiana, one in Minnesota, Nebraska and New Jersey. So there are a respectable number of them in the United States—but for most of the country it is a journey to get to one of the locations. The Rodizio at Liberty Center is literally down the road for me so given that convenience and my love of a vacation experience even if it’s just for a few hours, it shouldn’t be a surprise that I have been there several times in just the first month of its opening. My wife and I were fortunate enough to be invited to a VIP opening on October 27 2015 and we enjoyed it so much that we took our daughter there for her 25th birthday exactly one month later.

I had been there other times in between, most of them professionally based, but this last time was different—it was my family, so out of all the nice places around the city of Cincinnati, I wanted my little girl to have the best opportunity. I have eaten at most places around the city of Cincinnati. I am very familiar with the various restaurants along the Fields Ertle exit just outside of nearby Mason. But there is nothing like this Brazilian steakhouse outside of downtown Cincinnati. However I prefer the suburbs to downtown mainly because of parking, so it was a no brainer on the decision. I wanted to take her to the Rodizio for a unique, “worldly” experience that I think she deserves—because she’s a good kid who deserves to be pampered on her birthday.

My measure of steakhouses is of course Jags in West Chester which I consider to be the best in the area. Jeff Ruby’s Steak House on Fountain Square is a close second. But these are very expensive establishments. The food is very good, of course, but it’s more a place to be seen, or to raise an impression with a client then the actual functionality of those places. I put the Rodizio at Liberty Center above those steakhouses for one simple reason. The food is on par with those upper crest establishments—but the atmosphere is much more ambitious at Rodizio, and the food supply is limitless. The full Rodizio experience is essentially an all you can eat buffet—an endless supply of fresh vegetables, fruits and salads with some of the best cuts of meat that you can find anywhere—such as the Maminha which is a tri-tip sirloin steak with a moderate marbled-to-lean cut presented medium to medium rare right at your table. The Gauchos bring the meats to your table and present a slice to your plate directly. They will keep coming until you turn your table indicator to red letting them know to either give you a break, or to bring your check. The Picanha is a slice of top sirloin that rivals the best of what any steakhouse anywhere can provide and it’s presented in whatever quantities you can hold as the customer. At the birthday lunch for my daughter they were circulating roughly 7 different types of meat and a standout was the Miolo Da Paleta and the Garlic Beef. Lunch is $19.95 for the full Rodizio experience which I think is an absolute bargain. At dinner the selections increase to well over 10 items including lamb. Dinner is just shy of $33 dollars per person. I’ve now been to Rodizio enough to begin knowing the various cuts of meat on sight which seemed very exotic upon my first visit. They still are, but now they are like familiar friends.

My concern after the VIP dinner was that the management at Rodizio was putting their best foot forward to win over community leaders, but that the food quality would subside after a few weeks of a hard open to the general public. As of this writing Rodizio at Liberty Center has been open for only a month, but their food quality is as good as it was on that first special night. Each time I have been to Rodizio since, which has been at least once a week, Captain Hook, the head chef has personally come to my table to make sure the food quality is up to par. He welcomes criticism because he is aiming at perfection—which impresses me in any endeavor. I continue to be impressed with Captain Hook and the management at Rodizio purely from a business standpoint. It is a real challenge to offer so much fresh food to an unpredictable public. Dinners at Rodizio are busy, so make sure to make reservations. Lunches are something that local residents haven’t yet discovered so the rushes have been sporadic. Yet Captain Hook prepares large quantities of food to accommodate without putting the restaurant in an obvious strain. The kitchen might feel the pressure, but it doesn’t show on the floor where the customers are. Pricing wise, and by function Rodizio is like a hot rod healthy version of the Golden Corral, or a Frisch’s breakfast bar. In those places the food is prepared in mass quantities and sits under hot plates for hours. The food can be good, but you know you’re at a smorgasbord so you don’t expect high quality food. Rodizio has the same challenges, but they’re competing with the best of the steakhouses in the city so the food quality challenge by Captain Hook and the management is to balance out need with supply. I’ve been to Rodizio on really busy nights and during sporadic lunches and the food quality under all those conditions has been very high. They maintain items ranging from Ovo de Codorna (marinated quail eggs) to Salada de Cogumelo (mushroom salad)—fairly complex arrangements all presented very fresh—and I have yet to see the food quality drop.

The 27th of November happened to be Black Friday at Liberty Center and it was good to see the place  bulging with business. People have discovered the place and at just after 6 PM, there wasn’t a parking space to be found except in the very back of the complex. After the first thirty days of opening my family has been there at least 20 times—so Liberty Center has become very important to our social life. We’ve now eaten in most of the establishments—both the premier restaurants of which Rodizio is but one, and the offerings around the food court, and we have had pretty much positive experiences at all of them. I prefer the Rodizio because it is the most unusual of the dining options—it is the one that most feels like something you’d have while on vacation as opposed to just a night out on the town. Rodizio reminds me of something I’d have at the Epcot Center instead of at a local eatery—so I love it. But it’s not just that place, but all of Liberty Center which contributes to that vacation destination feel. If I were from out-of-town, I’d look forward most to visiting Liberty Center and restaurants like the Rodizio as the takeaway of my traveling experience. It’s that kind of place. I can’t help but think of how lucky some of the people who are leasing apartments and office space in the yet to be opened buildings where work, living, and pleasure will be offered in a one stop experience. When those places do open restaurants like Rodizio will be wonderful options for them. You can eat healthy and affordably at the Rodizio, and load up your food for the day instead of leaving hungry. A group of eight like we had at Rodizio would have cost about $700 to feed at Jags. That same group at Rodizio was just shy of $200 and we didn’t hold back on anything—we spent very loosely, deserts, drinks, and tips. And we were stuffed. I didn’t need to eat the next day. The food was so good that you just don’t want to stop eating it. But at some point you are on the verge of busting so you put your table indicator on its side and they bring your check. If I were a young millennial living at one of the Liberty Center apartments, I’d eat at Rodizio every day for lunch at only $19.95 and get all the fruits and veggies a body needs. For business travelers staying at the Marriott at the other end of the complex, Rodizio will solve jet lag and replenish you after a long day of boring business meetings. It’s a bargain, and a luxury. As good as the other restaurants are—and so far they all are, it’s the all you can eat option at Rodizio mixed with the exotic style of the food that put it on top for me.

After our lunch we walked around Liberty Center and enjoyed the Holiday lights. It was a warm evening, so it was a pleasure to stroll around and people watch. Liberty Center is a special place and in just a very short time my family has used it for what it was intended. It’s a vacation destination that we have in our own backyards. As I write this we are making plans for a complex trip overseas to very exotic locations, but I can’t say that I am looking forward to any of them the way I do when going to Liberty Center and dinning at the Rodizio Grill. I appreciate what all the ambition that made Liberty Center possible was committed to so that places like Rodizio could be an entertainment option. But it’s still nice to see people enjoying it. If there was anything that really jumped out at me about the Thanksgiving Holiday for which we just experienced, it was that I’m thankful for the wonders of capitalism—because it’s on full display at Liberty Center. It shows what unlocked human potential can generate if provided with the opportunity. Among the best of these examples is the Rodizio Grill. It’s a real treasure in southern Ohio and a perfect getaway for a spirit needing to recover from the stresses of living—without the worry of spending yourself into oblivion to get there. It’s a vacation experience every time you go—and for me, that’s a cache worth more than money.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Robert Lewis Dear Apparently Identified as a Woman: What the news won’t tell you about Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting

 

Guess what, Obama, MSNBC, CNN, Hillary Clinton and all the rest of the knuckle dragging losers of progressive politics? They thought they finally had a white middle-aged Republican man who committed a terrorist act—so that they could propose more gun control. Sadly for them, the shooter—Robert Lewis Dear—the lunatic who shot up a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic on November 27th 2015 appears to be a cross-gender loving pervert who shared much more with Obama’s LBGT community than the NRA loving American traditionalists. According to early reports from The Gateway Pundit shown below indicate Robert Lewis Dear identified as a woman, not as the man that he is. Bet you won’t hear that on the news networks. Sounds like he had some issues…………………………….have a look for yourself. Dear sounds like a cast member of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. That would explain his appearance.

Dear also lists his party as UAF.

Colorado Voters Info has Dear listed as a woman.

The Heavy reported has more on Robert Lewis Dear from Hartsel, Colorado:

Robert Lewis Dear, the suspected gunman, is from Hartsel, Colorado. According to KDVR-TV, he was previously a resident of North Carolina and is originally from South Carolina.

Dear’s age has been reported to as both 57 and 59, but public records indicate that he is 57. His family is from South Carolina, according to public records and his father’s obituary.

According to court records, Dear has an arrest record in both North and South Carolina. He has been convicted of several traffic offenses, but has been arrested several times on more serious charges.

His convictions include seat belt violations, driver’s license violations, operating a vehicle in an unsafe mechanical condition and driving a non-registered vehicle.

Dear was charged in Colleton, South Carolina, with two counts of cruelty to animals in 2002, but was found not guilty in a bench trial.

He was also charged in 2002 in Colleton with charges of “peeping Tom” and eavesdropping. Those charges were dismissed.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/11/court-records-colorado-planned-parenthood-shooter-not-republican-identifies-as-woman

This is just further proof that liberals make most of the problems in our society. They feed anger toward Planned Parenthood with immoral justifications then they create a loose society full of perverts, peeping Toms, and losers who are men who think they are women and women who want to be men. USA Today almost had an orgasm when they saw the pictures of the suspect, but quickly put on the brakes once the stories of this idiot became clear. They reported that the motive was unclear so the hard reporting will probably die now that Robert Lewis Dear has turned out to be a Bruce Jenner clone—a woman in a man’s body. Perhaps Dear was jealous that real woman were able to get abortions for casual sex while he was not able to commit such a vile crime—so he went on a shooting spree. That conclusion is just as valid as Obama’s early comments regarding the push to use gun control as a way to keep more idiots like this loser free to peek in our windows all in the name of a more “progressive” society of morally loose punks and general depraved nut cases. Gun control laws obviously didn’t work with this confused person. Robert Lewis Dear was a Obama kind of guy—a bewildered mess who didn’t know what he was. And when it got to be too much of a mess in his head, he went on a shooting spree, just like the radical Muslims, and dumb kids taught in public schools who take out their frustrations through violence in public places. All the mass shootings over these last few years embody one of those character traits and all of them are creations of liberalized educations and progressive society. Add Robert Lewis Dear to the list.

Sorry liberals, you won’t find many people in the NRA who fit the mental description of Robert Lewis Dear.   They at least typically know what sex they are and aren’t the type of people who peek through windows at unsuspecting victims. NRA members have guns to protect themselves from people like Robert Lewis Dear. Again, if there were more armed people within the Planned Parent Hood clinic, they could have ended the standoff a lot sooner than they did, and more people might be alive. After all, what are they protecting—they are already agents of death? At least if they were armed they may have been able to save a few lives instead of exclusively being a place that takes them.

Oh, and what is the UAF?  I’m glad you asked, it’s a front group to the Socialist Workers Party.  Defiantly not a Republican group.  It is possible that this voter registration was doctored but at this early stage, probably not.  Take a picture.  It will last longer.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT