Tag: corruption

A Career Change to Gunfighter: Hillary Clinton’s call for gun control is opposed to American lifestyles

It was expected yet ironic that Hillary Clinton in reaction to the latest mass shooting in Oregon announced that she would make gun control a central theme of her run for President of the United States. First of all, ironic not just because she is a criminal herself, but because I spent the first weekend of October 2015 on a life changing mission dedicated to the future promotion of the Second Amendment. When I announced a few weeks ago that my next career would be that of a gunfighter—I was quite serious. But between now and then I have many thousands of hours of practice and many tens of thousands of spent money to get where I want to be with that new career. It will be a long process of which I am just starting. I have shot guns a lot over the years and am good with them now. But what I’m talking about is a whole new level where timing is measured within a quarter of a second. Given that progressive politicians like Hillary are going in one way, I am decisively going in the opposite to not only even out the imposition that these gun grabbing politicians are attempting, but to resurrect a marketing of firearms that worked years ago that I have decided needed to be implemented again. I’m talking about the kind of America that we all know and love from the famous Christmas Story movie that plays every Holiday Season where the little boy dreamed fervently about owning his own Red Ryder BB gun. Hillary and her gang of loony progressives are and have always been at war with that traditional American culture and I’m personally sick of it. So I looked in the mirror and decided I’m going to do something about it. And I have taken those first hard steps over the last several days.

I am proud to announce that I am officially a member of the Cowboy Fast Draw Association and several other gun related groups, which is unusual for me. I typically stay away from memberships, but in this case I’ll make the exception. We are in an ideological Civil War in this country and you have to pick a side—and I have. And when I do engage myself in such an activity I don’t choose to lose. I have also made a commitment to Second Call Defense for the same reasons that I joined Cowboy Fast Draw. I am going to make these organizations a part of my daily life and help them in ways that I can. I consider them extremely important to preserving what I love about America. However the things I say, I say on behalf of myself as an individual, not on behalf of them—so let’s make that clear as we go forward.

As far as fast guns to me single action firearms are the fastest. They have less moving parts than semiautomatics and don’t jam up on the feed mechanisms. So in that respect a good portion of the technology invented at the turn of the 20th century was the fastest and most reliable in firearm manufacture. That is the reason that Cowboy Fast Draw is the fastest sport there is, and why there needs to be more promotion of it to the mass marketplace. The first step for my participation in this new endeavor was to purchase a new .45 Ruger Vaquero which I did over the weekend at Right 2 Arms gun shop which is essentially in my back yard. One thing about where I live, which I am very happy about, there are three gun shops within a few miles of my house, real legitimate shops that have a constantly good stock of ammunition and firearms. I am thankful for them. I am particularly sentimental of Mike Reed at Right 2 Arms because he’s a great guy who is making it happen the right way. Then within a few dozen miles of my home is of course a Bass Pro Shop, a Cabela’s and a Dick’s Sporting goods all of which have a decent selection of firearms. God bless America! It felt good to purchase such an important gun from a good, all American gun shop at Right 2 Arms. It felt good buying it.

Of course then my next investment which as a large one—actually bigger than the gun was the targeting equipment needed for Cowboy Fast Draw. The timing lights and targets themselves are pretty sophisticated for a shooting sport and need to be acquired since times less than a second are needed to measure. If a Fast Draw shooter has times over one second, they are too slow, so the targets are needed to work with in knowing how to practice. I will be setting up in the coming months a special range in my basement just for this equipment. To be honest, it was in understanding all this equipment that has been the biggest hindrance to jumping into this sport for me. It is the key to learning Fast Draw.

Equally important is the holster rig needed for shooting Fast Draw. I’ve wanted a good one for many years now, but couldn’t justify it for just range shooting. The holster rig must have a metal lining to allow the revolver cylinder to turn within the holster so not to slow down the shooter and a deflection plate is good to have to keep the gun from going off into your feet. Fast draw largely uses wax bullets and powder charges in competition, so a really good holster is needed for both speed and safety. For me it had to be an official Mernickle Holster that I’ve had my eye on for at least a decade. Those rigs are custom-made for each customer, so it will take a few months to get it. But I bought the one I wanted and it wasn’t cheap.

After buying all those items to celebrate my wife and I took our grandson to the Wild West Festival out in Eastern Cincinnati—beyond the Eastgate Mall by about 15 miles east. I had been meaning to go as some of the people I have known over the years within the Western Arts community perform there. Through Gery Deer I know the Pickle Brothers act and their sword swallowing displays complete with fire and freakish spectacle. There were some fun gun fights and a pretty good Wild West act in the main saloon. The environment was wonderful and really put a cherry on top of the weekend for me since I had just deeply committed myself to another few decades of fun with Western Arts with a whole new skill development. I was certainly in the right mindset to go to that particular festival.

As I watched my grandson take the new gun my wife bought for him around the town and shoot everyone he met, I thought about Hillary Clinton and what a fit she would have if she witnessed a three-year old child shooting everyone he met. Progressives like her would want me arrested for child endangerment. But in that Wild West environment, everyone played along. When he shot street vendors, they pretended to die. He actually shot the gunfighters who roamed the streets and gratefully died spectacular deaths to give my grandson that taste of being a Wild West hero on the hunt for bad guys. When I was a kid, I mostly played those types of games and I have never been at risk to shoot anybody for anything. When I have been in conflict with others, melee combat has been just fine. It’s perfectly healthy for young boys to play with guns so that they can adapt their emotional stability to a proper, healthy red-blooded American man who holds doors open for young ladies, and works hard into the night to care for his family. Not having those types of values gives you people like Bill Clinton—Hillary’s husband, the former president who has conducted his life as a sex crazed lunatic who craves power so he can have access to the girls who love it. During the Wild West period of westward expansion and all the romance that was born of that era, brave families risked everything to live on the frontier to essentially get away from people like Hillary Clinton, big government aristocrats who want to rule the lives of everyone to satisfy their own egos. But in our modern age, there isn’t anywhere left in the world to run to, so the ideologies of what made America great through guns, and the progressives who are so in love with Europe that they always want to remake the world into the image of that debacle of historic failure—are clashing and there’s only room for one side—as the two clearly can’t co-habituate. Progressives are unwilling to get along with people who are not like them—timid specimens of fear and loathing.

All this activity left me feeling very good about America. It was nice to be free for a little while of the parasitic decay so commonly associated with progressive types, like Hillary Clinton. It was a little shocking after all that reverie to hear from them their latest attempts to remove guns from American culture which left me thinking hard about why I enjoyed all these gun related events so much. My conclusion is that the American gunfighter is a unique concept in the world invented here in the United States during the frontier period. It was largely an invention of myth based on actual history surrounding heroes and villains that emerged in the Old West from around 1850 to 1900. The romance and freedom associated with gunslingers at Wild West festivals which excite boyish enthusiasm in young and old alike are unique inventions of American capitalism. The deep-rooted assumption is that guns guarantee freedom because it prevents a larger, faster, or more aggressive lunatic from imposing their will upon individuals. It doesn’t matter if the force of aggression is a country or another individual, the gun allows people the security of being self-reliant—and it’s a comforting concept. It is there that people like Hillary Clinton are so wrong and out-of-step with the correct way to socially carry our nation to the next philosophic step. The world in general has banned guns, and their economies and their people are suffering because of that decision. America has a different experience, it has been defined by revolution and expansion—where the American gunfighter is the pinnacle ingredient of its national mythology. For that reason I am very proud of my decision and I look forward immensely to being a part of the Cowboy Fast Draw Association. It is one of the few groups I find it a pleasure to be associated with because of its well-defined roots in Americana. This is going to be a lot of fun.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Trump Offers Himself as a Superman President: A curious query into meekness and the assumption that its good

One thing that really disgusts me is when I’m around other men who make the statement, “I’m not superman” as a way to let themselves off the hook for underachieving. The statement usually comes when there is great pressure to do everything and be everything to all the needs of all who require solutions. The chicken thing to do is to declare—I’m not superman, “I’m not perfect,” “I’m just a man.” I don’t think there has ever been a single day in my life from a young boy until the present where I’ve just wanted to be “just a man.” Considering the name of this site is “overmanwarrior” that should be a pretty good indication of where my sentiments reside in the context of personal expectation. So when presented with problems, no matter how many or how difficult, I always lean in to solve them all and carry whatever burdens there are—no matter what the odds. To my mind that is what is expected out of men—all men of all races and ages. It is their job and if they fall short of that attempt—I don’t think much of them. That is why I am so interested in the Donald Trump campaign. He says and expects of himself much of what I do—which is the type of person I want for president. That was never more obvious than in an early October weekend interview with Trump by CNBC’s John Harwood who declared to the presidential candidate, that America doesn’t have “superman” presidents. Trump’s response was that “You will if you have Trump for president.” Watch for yourself.

What John Harwood said was actually a mouthful—it had meanings at many levels. But most obvious is that American presidents should be expected to be supermen—otherwise no nation can expect to maintain such an exclusive status as a dominating superpower. Ordinary men with their petty weaknesses have caused enough trouble over the years, from John Kennedy’s affairs, to LBJ’s womanizing, Bill Clinton’s obsession with sexual relationships, and the Bush family meekness, if the problems in our country were to really be traced back to an origin, it comes from human beings—especially people who are supposed to be leaders, lowering the bar of their own expectations to be viewed as simple men with humble origins. Society might teach that meekness is a positive trait in Sunday school, but in reality that just gets your ass kicked intellectually and physically. Meekness invites some dominating personality—or county to step in and push you around and that mentality needs to change if America is going to survive.

Men should expect themselves to be supermen. Teddy Roosevelt with all his faults pushed himself toward greatness nearly with every breath he took, daily. One of his life goals was to kill a man which he did on San Jaun Hill with his Rough Riders. He overcame illnesses, great opposition, and even finished a speech he was giving while he was shot. He was campaigning when an assassin’s bullet penetrated his body—he knew it—yet he finished his campaign speech anyway just to show how tough he was. That was not a guy who allowed himself to be “meek.” Andrew Jackson was another such personality. Over his lifetime he survived many duels and carried with him all his life an expectation toward a rough and ready approach to just about everything. It was because of Jackson that the United States currently has Florida, Texas and had a paid off debt during his time in office. Thomas Jefferson was another personality who expected of himself not great physical strength, but incredible intellectual strength. It was because of him that we have the Marines when he put together a force to go and fight the Barbary Pirates. I would expect every American president to exhibit similar behavior. Even though those presidents were far from perfect, they at least made attempts during their lives to be more than ordinary. They certainly tried and had personal expectations of greatness.

During westward expansion many men challenged themselves against fate for the potential of fortune. Most failed, but a few rose to the top and became larger than life characters largely on the backs of their personal bravado. Doc Holiday was one of those gun fighting characters that took a debilitating illness and pushed himself beyond the limits of fear to something he otherwise would not otherwise become as a gentleman gambler. Many don’t know it but likely the real inspiration for the Lone Ranger western character was a man named Bass Reeves. He was a black lawman who was obsessed with living with honor and a sense of justice for the innocent. The westward expansion period was an exciting time because there did emerge strong personalities that pushed themselves toward superhuman expectations, Jessie James was one, Wild Bill Hickok was another. After World War II many westerns were made in the movie business and on television that embodied something of an overman mindset, where men tried to live under a system of honor to protect their families and friends with a superhuman courage. John Wayne and Clint Eastwood built their careers around embodying those traits to the movie going public. For a lot of years there was an expectation among other males that they were expected to act whenever possible as something beyond mortal when pressed.

Most males today make me sick at their lack of bravado, and now we live in a time where such superhuman expectations have been abandoned. Even among our celebrities there are no longer many who even attempt to portray a larger-than-life personality. Yet John Harwood says it so easily that we don’t elect superman presidents. When have we decided not to? What ridiculous imposition of assumption dictated that we vote for the meek, week, losers of low self-confidence emitting from the “everyman” like sweat running through the crack of a gorilla’s ass? When did weakness become such a noble quality—because at such a point the instigator should be wrung up and cast through the folds of time into a boundless existence where they can do no further harm toward the fate of humanity. No wonder so many people dislike Trump’s boastfulness. Donald Trump doesn’t sit around crying like some modern man that his goldfish died. Trump doesn’t politely pretend to be stupid so some losers can feel like they belong at the tables of greatness. Over the last few weeks there have been several examples given of past Mit Romney campaigns along with John McCain as if they were the types of presidential candidates the Republicans were looking for in 2016.   Are you kidding me? Both of those idiots lost—because they took the advice of marketers and allowed themselves to be seen as “everyman” instead of “overman.” There is nothing noble or good about the belching, farting, insecure everyman. There is nothing endearing about such a creature. The universe is laughing at them daily—we don’t want them in the White House.

Trump has no trouble sticking up his hand and declaring he’s not an “everyman.” He states emphatically without apology, that he is and would be, a superman. That’s who I want at the wheel of a “superpower” that America is supposed to be under the capitalist style of government that we have. We don’t need another meek statesman who believes himself to be just another guy in a field of team players unimportant on the cosmic stage. We’ve had plenty of presidents like that—and they haven’t done us a good job. As a result, there are not enough men in the world willing to be a superman within the sphere of their personal contacts. Ask a wife who she’d rather sleep with, a crying fool ready to throw himself at the feet of a community and sacrifice himself to their qualms, or an unapologetic superman who always has the answers and is ready in a fraction of a second at all hours of the day to take her where she wants to go? What about the child who looks up at a father and wants someone who knows best 100% of the time, or the wavering reed of indecision who declares that they are just men among men—and nothing particularly special. Then who would that kid listen to when they ask what would happen if it were discovered they smoked pot for the first time. Typically the meek dad would say, “well son, I’ve smoked it and it wasn’t very smart, but you’ll have to make up your own mind. Who am I to judge or tell you anything, I’m just a man?” Compare that to the dad who tells the kid, “if I catch you smoking pot I’ll kick your ass off this fu**ing planet you little bitch. I’ve never smoked it and only pussies smoke it because they can’t handle the pressure of this life and seek to numb their minds from the pain of reality. That makes them weak and you don’t want to be weak.” Which is the correct answer dear reader? That is why the world needs more supermen. The meek types have done enough damage to last many lifetimes—and its time to change our approach. The world needs more supermen. Wives want them in their beds, kids want them as fathers, and nations need something to encourage them to be better people. So especially in the White House, we had better learn to elect such people. Because we all need to face a high bar and stop using humanity as a crutch for laziness, and cowardly dispositions. We have tried that and it doesn’t work.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

An Oregon Tragedy: Why America needs more Second Call Defense and the NRA

Nearly on time with the shots fired from a gunman at Umpqua Community College in Oregon the White House was blaming Congress for not passing more gun control legislation. As usual, the progressive types—the muddy minded know nothings of academia uttered an emotional reaction to a crisis. As stated often at this site and elsewhere, more guns lead to less violence, not the other way around. Especially in liberal regions where there are large conglomerations of people—like schools where students are nearly 99.999999% unarmed 100% of the time—when some frustrated loser wants to take out their anxieties through actions of cowardly behavior from a gun that gives them a significant advantage over the masses—the call for solutions is in actuality the opposite of what the White House advocated. But before describing why, this is how the AP reported the story as it broke across the wire.

ROSEBURG, Ore. (AP) — A gunman opened fire at an Oregon community college Thursday, killing at least seven people and wounding 20, authorities said.

The shooting happened at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, about 180 miles south of Portland. The local fire district advised people via Twitter to stay away from the school. It later tweeted that there were “multiple casualties” but did not elaborate.

State police Lt. Bill Fugate told KATU-TV that seven to 10 people were dead and at least 20 others hurt. A photographer for the Roseburg News-Review newspaper said he saw people being loaded into multiple ambulances and taken to the local hospital.

Andrea Zielinski, a spokeswoman for Douglas County Sheriff’s office, told The Associated Press: “There’s no more threat.”

Zielinski would not say whether a suspect was apprehended or dead.

Sheriff’s Office did not immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking details.

The sheriff’s office reported on Twitter that it received a call about the shooting at 10:38 a.m.

Students and faculty members were being bused to the Douglas County Fairgrounds, the sheriff’s office said.

A spokeswoman for the Oregon department that oversees community colleges in the state said she had not received any detailed information about the shooting.

“It’s extremely concerning and sad,” said Endi Hartigan, spokeswoman for the Oregon Higher Education Coordinating Commission.

The rural town of Roseburg lies west of the Cascade Mountains in an area where the timber industry has struggled. In recent years, officials have tried to promote the region as a tourist destination for vineyards and outdoor activities.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gunman-opens-fire-at-oregon-community-college-killing-7/ar-AAf0Xnl?li=AAa0dzB&ocid=LENDHP

In each of those classes there should have been at least 10 or more armed students trained to use a gun and equipped enough to stop the carnage. There is a reason these acts of violence occur in places where liberals are generally in charge. You don’t see mass shootings in areas where lots of gun owners are carrying—especially gun and knife shows. Do you know why dear reader—because people shoot back. Scum bags like this crazed gunman want to inflict as much harm as necessary before they end up dead—which if such a person is at the end of their rope—are dangerous with or without guns. If there are people present who shoot back, their chance for carnage goes from many people to just a few just because other people are armed at the scene and can stop the intentions.

I normally don’t back products or services—especially during a tragedy, but these shootings and the way liberals attempt to capitalize on them forces the issue to the forefront, so in this case I will. I’m a member of Second Call Defense which you can also become a member of by clicking on the link to the right of this page. Just type in Overmanwarrior in the redemption code and you will get your first month of Second Call Defense coverage for free. Several people at that community college even though many are under the age of 18 should have been armed with a personal firearm, they should have been members of the NRA, and they absolutely should have been members of Second Call Defense. As members they could have shot that gunman on site as soon as a threat assessment was asserted and many lives would have been saved. There is nothing worse than sitting at a desk and being trapped unarmed by an aggressor who wants to take away everything you’ve ever worked to be in an instant. It is far better to reach under a jacket and pull out a firearm so you can shoot back and save people from further carnage. If the self-defense shooter was a member of Second Call Defense they could have taken down the attacker then called the hot line to let the dedicated attorneys handle the rest of the case legally. Second Call Defense makes those types of self-defense shootings much easier.

In the case of this Oregon shooter, again it’s another kid—26 years old—with a hyphenated name. There is something to be said about the reason so many of these young kids are feeling desperate enough to end their own lives and to kill as many people as possible. Causes for the failed behavior would be progressive educations, changing masculine roles socially, video game desensitization, even copy-cat crimes. There are many causes for the violence, but the gun is just a tool in the killings. So long as society imposes progressive beliefs upon young minds in conflict with their natural inclinations, there will be occasional clashes with elements of our society who crack mentally under pressure.   Progressives point to the gun and hope that the public won’t notice that the real cause of these modern shooting sprees are their policies, which ironically have increased dramatically since the recession of 2008 and the rise of Barack Obama. A simple investigation into a chart on the matter will show what I mean.

But violence is here to stay, and it’s likely to get worse. The only way to deal with violent people is with the promise of the type of violence they fear. That’s why more guns are needed, not less. Gun laws need to be loosened, not tightened. And more people need to protect themselves with programs like Second Call Defense so that when they do find themselves in a self-defense shooting, that a legal team will fight on their behalf against the laws created by liberals to punish gun ownership and make examples out of people who use the Second Amendment for the purpose it was designed for. Progressives don’t see value in individuals, unless they can exploit them after some tragedy. So they really don’t care about the cause of the behavior that inspires these young kids to shoot other people in schools. But they do want to get rid of guns, and the more people who lose their life in violent upheavals the better for progressives and their mission. That mission was nearly dripping from the mouths of the president’s people at the White House directly after the shooting—they saw another reason immediately to attack the American gun culture. What they failed to mention is that guns protect innocent people not only from over reaching government, but from distraught young punks with nothing else in their life to do but harm others—just because they can.

Remember if you get into a self-defense gunfight with a scumbag, a diabolical menace, or a withering spirit on its last leg of emphasis, be sure to first call 911 to report what happened. Then, call Second Call Defense to keep liberals from ruining your life with litigation, character assassination and personal hatred because you stand between them and the eradication of guns from a culture that desires to be free.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Communist Dreams: Shutting down the government over guns

When the anti-gun forces point to the far-right as their primary opposition to the national banning of weapons their perspective is relative to their current political positions which are essentially the type of communists that founded the U.S.S.R. They call themselves progressives now instead of communists but their message and strategy are extremely similar to the turn-of-the-century communists that seized Europe prior to World War II. In America to avoid the communist stigma they changed their name to progressive and are seeking to implement the type of centralized control that is common under communist regimes. So let’s get that little disclaimer out-of-the-way before proceeding.   When they speak with hatred at the “far right” they mean capitalists, traditionalists and religious conservatives—essentially the majority of the American nation. They speak the name with a bit of scorn hoping to push people down into shells of security from speaking publicly and affirming that the progressives are in fact the majority hoping to transform the nation into the semblance of a communist state. To accomplish that task the must remove guns from American culture.

In delivering the eulogy Saturday for an aide killed by a stray bullet on a New York City street, Gov. Andrew Cuomo stepped up his calls for national gun control toward the progressive aim of accomplishing that task by saying:

“If the far right is willing to shut down the government because they don’t get a tax cut for the rich, then our people should have the same resolve and threaten to shut down the government if they don’t get a real gun control law to stop killing of their innocents,” he said.

http://www.guns.com/2015/09/28/cuomo-calls-for-government-shut-down-over-gun-control/

You see how this works dear reader. If Republicans were not trying to do the responsible thing and shut down the government because of extremely irresponsible spending at the federal level, by both sides of the House and Senate, then progressives would be shutting it down for the same radicalism only from the political left’s position. Aside from the threat of shutting down the portions of the government because the bill for it is simply too high amok with inefficiencies, the services rendered are constantly and forever going to be used to extort action from one side or the other. So it would be best to get used to not wanting those services so that they can’t be used to force action upon the voting public. Government shut downs are a responsible action. It is irresponsible of the government to use National Parks as extortion pieces to hurt travelers from visiting national treasures and refusing local law enforcement help to keep those parks open, as they did during the last government shut down—of which the Republicans were supposedly blamed, but still managed to take control of the House and Senate. The American public supported Republican efforts in spite of what progressives said of the action in the media.

And now here is Andrew Cuomo attempting to use tragedy to advance a progressive agenda obsessed with gun control—and thereby control over the public at large as a centralized authority. The purpose of guns in America is to protect private property either from individual theft, or governments out of control if the terrible should ever take place and the courts fail completely—as they presently are near in status. There are occasionally tests by the government of their authority against people they consider radical gun-nuts, and gun fights do sometimes erupt—but the threat of violence currently keeps government at bay in all but the most extreme cases. To put things simply, guns are intended to keep activist progressives like Andrew Cuomo from spreading like a disease across the nation as an activist politician allowing government to seize private property for the purpose of extorting its use back to us—such as what happens when there is government shut downs. The National Parks are shut down to hurt the people who want to use them.   The federal government is essentially fighting for the right to purposely mismanage their assignments for the sole propose of maintaining control to advance progressive strategies which almost always involve over spending on federal budgets for causes that are anti-traditional in American value.

There are many of us on the “far right” who are looking around and wondering where our country went—and we don’t like it. Every day there is more legislation created by nut-cases like Andrew Cuomo for the purpose of advancing progressive strategies—and there is always money attached to them. For Cuomo and his kind, removing guns from society is the ultimate dream because they would no longer have to fear imposing their desires as a collective parasite upon the free people of America. They don’t think anything of using every tragedy from lives lost toward that objective because they don’t see value in individuals—but only if they can use them to build a collective sentiment toward mass disregard for a particular topic they are against—in this case guns.

These same tricksters will give a eulogy for a fallen victim on one afternoon then turn right around and defend the mass murder of millions of babies to abortion under the same breath. Their purpose is the spread of evil upon the earth as communists—their brethren from the past. And to continue that spread, they require the removal of guns from society so that there is no defense to protect that majority “far right” within America from the aggressive intentions of the typical progressive. The undercurrent of Andrew Cuomo is aggression through the disguise of peace. Progressives have no problem assaulting individuals so long as the can bring peace to the “greater good” as defined by them. Pacifists who surrender to the authority of the state, in the mind of the progressive, are the ways forward to a society’s desire for justice. But that definition is strictly one from the “far left.” The “far right” and the “far left” are a long way off. Andrew Cuomo is a long way away from someone like me in regard to political philosophy. One philosophy is built by the values of something like the Rocky Horror Picture Show, while mine might be built by years of John Wayne movies. The values are not compatible and it is not going to be possible to convince me to surrender my sanctity to the big government efforts of the Andrew Cuomo’s progressive mentality. Frustrations will abound. When the government shuts down due to political battles—I’m happy because I don’t want to pay for a lot of the offerings that the government provides. I don’t want them in charge of National Parks; I don’t want them in our schools, or in the typical government positions that are so common in the Beltway culture.   However, when those methods of politics fail and progressives still haven’t obtained their true objective, they must turn to force as the last resort. And when they do, they have to know and respect that the American guns of private ownership are there to meet their insurrection.   That is what the real issue behind Cuomo’s utterance. If Republicans didn’t threaten to shut down the government Democrats would try the same but for different reasons. That is a fact we all better get used to because government spending is too high and there is no way to slow it down now without pain. When politicians realize that they can’t live with that pain they will turn to force—and when they do, we better have plenty of guns in as many homes as possible. Because there is no other recourse when legislative justice breaks down due to political idealism—the only way to stay free is through gun ownership. It is the key to American civilization, and it needs to be less stringent instead of more so.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

Sticking to our Guns: Why you should join the NRA today

Over the weekend Dana Loesch stirred up controversy against the anti-gun progressive insurgents with a controversial new ad. It was quite effective prompting a Twitter war with radical anti-Second Amendment nut cases. And to her credit for every negative Tweet she received, she donated to the NRA in that person’s name and bought herself a box of ammunition. Her spunk should be greatly admired because besides the national debt, protecting the Second Amendment is the key strategic objective of all right thinking Americans in eroding away the terrible damage to our country that progressives have invoked presently.

If you are not a member of the NRA dear reader—what’s stopping you? In a town of lobbyists in Washington, the NRA is probably the only one that I support—and you have to. Without them, the Second Amendment would have been gone a long time ago by progressive, communist sympathizers who want to disarm society and put the government in charge of everything. What they don’t tell you about their gun grabbing tendencies is that their ultimate objective besides wealth redistribution is the eradication of private property. They do this through many progressive taxes—especially property taxes which are of course directly attached to public schools using our community’s children as hostages toward that objective. The gun in America through the Second Amendment is established to protect private property from enemies foreign and domestic and to uphold the Constitution with something besides a sling shot. Governments cannot be trusted, so the only way that progressives can implement their strategic objectives is by removing guns from society.

Guns are the key to a free society and the rest of the world would be a lot better off if they’d learn that very simple truth. Every single human being on planet earth, man, woman and child under parental supervision should possess a gun. There would be a lot less violence in the world if guns were more readily available than there are now. ISIS would have far less control over the Middle East, Islamic radicals in Africa would quickly loose their ability to terrorize innocent people—the communist governments in China, North Korea and elsewhere would lose their ability to abuse their own citizens and it would keep everyone honest. The only reason government doesn’t fly out of complete control in America is because of the ever-present knowledge that Americans are heavily armed and if government steps out of line, there will be trouble. So let’s get that straight before we discuss anything more. Any liberal who stands against the Second Amendment, any religious figure, and any body of government whatsoever is essentially attacking the American way of life and should be considered an insurgent against the Constitution. There is no debate with some “other side.” There is no touchy feely testimony about some terrible crime that occurs which should move America off defending the Second Amendment that justifies any such proposal. Bad things happen—nothing is perfect, but guns for the essence of individual freedom in the modern world are essential to our survival as a country. The rest of the world should copy the American way of life for their own betterment and the sooner they get that through their thick skulls, the better.

I have written many millions of words and conducted many speeches against public education. It is proven that government schools are liberal recruiting centers designed to undo private property through progressive taxation—and the whole system needs to be scrapped and redone. I have been very passionate about the issue. But there comes a time when you’ve made your point and the new strategy of the day needs to be addressed, because when it comes to liberalism they provide moving targets. I will always cover education issues, but I am going to shift my passion toward defending the Second Amendment with my considerable talents being put to full use. The reason is that it’s time now for those voices to add to what’s always been out there—which is the NRA. They have held down the fort for a long time, and its time they get some reinforcements because the progressive aspects of society are shifting their depleting resources into that direction for one last ridiculous push toward communism—their secret dreams which sing them to sleep at night often under the influence of drugs, and alcohol while listening to Miley Cyrus grind her crotch against a Teddy bear.   Liberals are parasitic animals and their attempts at attacking the Second Amendment need to be met for the intentions always established by the political left.

Of those new voices Dana Loesch is one of those great new talents who are helping the NRA change-up their marketing, which is essential to their continued success. I plan to add to those voices for the strategic implementation of that task with my own talents-which will of course be unique. I wouldn’t have it any other way. Because the time is now to expand the reach of the NRA’s base of support to the new markets of the Millennials and other middle-grounders that have been on the fence and only know about guns from television shows like CSI. Hollywood used to help spread the message of the NRA, but since that valley town of entertainment is nearly all liberalized these days, the marketing efforts that have been needed to keep the NRA expanding require more creative voices from unlikely sources—of which Dana is one.

Largely I have left many of the efforts toward defending the Second Amendment to the committed voices that have been out there. But over the last few years a few things have changed for me. First, I watched how much radicalism there was toward the two Discovery Channel shows, Son’s of Guns and American Gun, which I liked quite a lot. Both were pulled off the air and the main male leads in both were put under scrutiny legally. Some was justified; some was due to their cable reality shows featuring guns. Another change for me was that I had grand children. When I first did the YouTube video A Whip Trick to Save America some of the negative feedback toward me was to discredit my love of traditional western arts. They called me a “hillbilly” and “trailer trash” because I wore a cowboy hat in the video. Their assertion was that anything less than New York fashion would do—but to me that fashion was heavily progressive. I love old westerns and the values they exhibited. For myself I can live among progressives and not have my position challenged, but I worry about my grandchildren. They deserve to have the kind of America I grew up with and as I look around at the possible male role-models, I’m really the only one who has held firm to those traditions. So I’m not going to let that progressive America ruin my grandchildren. It’s not going to happen, let me put it that way. Because of the negative feedback I received about my whip work during the education reform debates, I took note and decided to make some adjustments for the present crusades.

Additionally, at the time a few years ago I had a publisher and some novels that I was planning to promote in the traditional way—through New York—which is heavily anti-gun. My thoughts were that since my character of Cliffhanger used bullwhips instead of guns that it might be more acceptable to them for mass market reasons. However, it wasn’t. Cliffhanger was far too traditional for publisher heads, so it didn’t really matter. My decision since has been to just do what I feel like doing and let the chips fall where they may. I have given up on the New York and Santa Monica creative class in working with them to produce content that America is looking for—they aren’t interested, even if they make a lot of money in the effort. They are far too radicalized politically for that collaboration so I’m at a point in my life where I no longer care. Those who support the Second Amendment in America need to be proud of their position. They shouldn’t feel like they have to hide their love of guns underground—which is what has been happening. Guns should be main stream, so anything I can do to help that I’m going to. It’s just that simple. I do not support the present direction of the country. So why avoid promoting gun ownership just to appease a few publishers? To hell with them.

I know that if I felt that pressure to not flamboyantly advance the gun culture in America, then it’s probably twenty times worse for the average person, so its time to change that—and to stop apologizing. It was only a few years ago when westerns were just about all that was on television which entertained the Greatest Generation after World War II with the first programming provided to the new television format. While I’m looking forward to Tarentino’s new western The Hateful Eight I don’t have a lot of faith that it will have a lot of the traditional values shown in westerns, but will just be a bloody gun fight typical of the new age director. The production company putting out the film is hopelessly progressive, so I can only look forward to it so much—but in the realm of westerns, that’s all there is. Star Wars is a modern western replacing spaceships for horses, but the values are very similar. Other than those influences however there’s not much for the modern gun lover to get their heels into. Progressives are waiting for the old timers who were raised on westerns to die off so the modern progressive kids brainwashed against guns in public school can become the dominate voting class—and when that happens even the NRA will be overwhelmed. So the good ol’ NRA needs a little help. I plan to help them and obviously Dana Loesch is doing her part. And if we all do, we can help shape the future in the proper way. A conservative future must have at the center of it a love for the gun, because everything else emerges from it—primarily economic freedom and personal liberty.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

 

 

 

The Real Reason John Boehner Left Congress: How evil hides behind institutionalism

I don’t plan to bash John Boehner into the ground forever. As much of a nice guy as I think he is, nice doesn’t mean a person is immune to criticism, especially when they hold very public government positions—yet John said something that was very insightful within his announcement speech of leaving congress ahead of some serious controversy. The cause of his effect—his desire to step down as Speaker of the House and to leave congress all together by his words is to protect the institution of his office intending to offer that the individual sacrifice themselves to the higher concept so to preserve it. In Boehner’s case, he is specifically indicating the minority of his political party who are rebel rousing constitutional purists, and are going to fight him at every step in future key issues, such as the funding of Planned Parenthood, the debt limit and the inevitable fiscal cliff that we are all facing as a nation. Boehner proposed that the institution was greater than the individual which explains immensely what is wrong with American government in 2015.

Even though Boehner and his wife just bought last year an $835,000 condo in Marco Island, Florida that in itself is not a case of alarm other than it’s a bit expensive for a guy who only makes $223,500 per year as speaker. For one, $835,000 doesn’t get you much of a condo in Florida, that’s nothing too crazy over-the-top even though socialist leaning despots have tried to make an issue of the purchase. That’s not a lot of money for the private sector—but it is for a government official who is supposed to be doing the business of the people who elected him. For Boehner to spend that kind of money on a second home in Florida indicates that he intends to become a lobbyist sooner than later where he will easily be able to make a seven-figure salary twisting the arms of his former friends for favors. Boehner is 65 years hold presently. The rules dictate that all members of congress take one year off to cool their former connections—but at precisely November 1st of 2016 at the age of 66 look for John Boehner to have an office on K-Street as a means to pay for that expensive condo in Florida and to rake in the money for about a 10 year career at that lofty sum. Boehner will become rich off the “institution” he holds in such high regard and he will have done it without really bringing any real value to the table of philosophy and republic preservation. He will have done it just to enrich himself behind a mask of “sacrifice” like every other loser who has left office and found employment as a lobbyist.

It seems like a long time ago but remember Trent Lott, the former Senate Majority Leader in 2008? Well, he and ex-Louisiana Senator John Breaux opened up a lobbying firm and took in $30.8 million dollars over a three-year period after they left office. They now work for Squire Patton Boggs who does lobbying work for Amazon. Their job was to twist the arms of people like John Boehner into doing what they needed for their clients. Boehner was often the monkey in the middle who had Trent Lott beating on his door over some issue or another—a guy who obviously helped pave the way for Boehner to emerge as an obscure Ohio congressman to the eventual leadership role of Speaker of the House by working things behind the scenes. Well when those favors are called in what’s John supposed to do, keep the door closed on Trent? Or is Boehner supposed to listen to the twenty raucous Constitutional purists who demanded that Boehner act out of integrity instead of lobbying dollars. Boehner decided that if he wanted to cash in on the “institutional” scheme of government employment then he’d better do it while he was relatively young. So he sang, zippity do da, and announced his resignation—while he still could cash in on his “sacrifice” within congress for 25 years. For him it makes sense, play golf at his new Florida condo for a year while the House drowns in squabbles that have no easy answer, and then return for Christmas of 2016 as a millionaire to close out his years and family fortune by providing access to corporate America the halls of congressional power. So much for the value of the “institution.”

But what was most sickening about Boehner’s announcement was his social proclamation about institutionalism—as if he truly believed that the House of Congress was so sacred that he needed to remove himself from the situation so to preserve it. That is just ridiculous—manically so. Boehner’s presentation of the assumption was meant to throw people off the trail of his true intentions with a long nurtured social illness that poses that institutions—collections of people brought together under the umbrella of common belief are more powerful than the individuals who formulate the beliefs that the masses collect under. The assumption is that sacrifice erases the need for individual logic so long as that individual is willing to surrender their mind to the collective whole of an institution. The media and virtually everyone watching instantly forgave Boehner for his vagina-like approach to exiting Congress at a critical time because he evoked to the public that his individual needs to avoid the coming conflict was not about himself, it was to preserve the “institution.”

When I am critical of the church and religion in general it is because it trains the masses to think in this fashion, which is one of the greatest evils offered to our modern modes of thinking. I would never propose that being an atheist was the correct approach either. I am of the thinking that the correct approach to these complicated problems has not yet been invented. There is no philosopher from the past who has provided a map to navigate by—that map still needs to be created. But putting the individual in a subservient position to institutional value is false. On the other hand, you cannot have mass anarchy either, where individuals live hedonistic lives indulging at every impulse—evil and otherwise. A code of behavior is needed to hold individuals together so that proper conduct at life can be achieved. Yet allowing an institution to define those guidelines surrenders the individual to the impulses of mass collectivism.   Not a smart idea because what it does is allow for an institution to wear a mask of holiness, whether that institution is Congress or something like the Catholic Church and allows the value of behavior to be applied to the collective efforts of the institution instead of the individual behavior of its members.

For instance, you might remember dear reader the situation of Jerry Sandusky of the Penn State football program.   Jerry was part of a group of well-known and powerful campus personalities who routinely raped children. The behavior was hidden behind the institution of Penn State—the institution was greater than the sum of the individual, so Penn State would live on while Jerry went to jail for his behavior. Yet Jerry was allowed to molest children under the cover of the institution—by using its mass and authority to give him leverage, and access to many young boys. The Catholic Church is known to have conducted themselves in the very same fashion—yet the church itself continues on as a symbol of piety even though it provides a shield to hide the individual behavior of the criminally insane. Congress does the same thing; it hides the individual behavior of its members under the greater good of institutionalism. So if Boehner decides to work the system to his benefit, then its forgiven because he has surrendered individual thought to the yearnings of institutional preservation. But in reality it has nothing to do with the institution so long as Boehner can pay for his Florida condo with the lobby power of K-Street.

Institutionalism is not superior to individual will. Society still has to figure out how to merge good behavior with a code of conduct that is rightly generated by the inner needs of every individual—but surrendering thought to institutional control is not the best option. And neither is the notion of sacrifice. You would think that after many thousands of years of sacrificial emphasis within our institutions—whether it’s sacrificing your life for a job, a family, or a god, that we would have learned to recognize the farce. When a public official like John Boehner says such a thing in a very public statement, you are listening to a ruse—likely in his case—one that he believes himself, especially as a devoted Catholic. Don’t pay attention to the individual misbehaviors of the people who make up the institution, so long as the value of the collective entity is preserved with immunity. Do you see what’s going on dear reader and why we have such a poor philosophy? It allows evil to work its desires behind collective enterprise without the worry of individual value—and this is how poor conduct spreads itself through institutions. With that known, Boehner isn’t just leaving to save himself the future embarrassments that have been headed his way as the leader of the Congressional “institution.” He’s leaving to get rich—while he still can. And that’s the real story.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Being a Big Fish in a Small Pond: Sheriff Richard K. Jones running for congress

It was spring of 2015 and I was at the Brazenhead in Mason, Ohio having a beer with some heavily connected conspirators fresh off the ear rings of Judy Shelton, the local Republican protector of John Boehner within the ranks of the Central Committee where I first learned that the Speaker of the House in Washington D.C. was planning to step down. It was also there that I learned that Sheriff Richard K. Jones was eyeing Boehner’s congressional seat which evoked some interesting thoughts which had been percolating for quite some time. At times I have liked Sheriff Jones. He once gave me a well done portrait sketch drawn in a way that made him look like a Wild West superstar—which I liked. But he lost me when he supported the union position against Governor Kasich’s Issue 2 in 2012, and the Lakota levy in 2013. As larger than life and John Wayne-like that Sheriff Jones wanted to be, he was a strictly local hometown celebrity who would be like a tropical goldfish cast into the frozen waters of the Artic Ocean if he were to go to Washington where much bigger fish than he experienced in Butler County, Ohio were there to eat him quickly—so I thought it odd that he’d even consider risking his reputation at his age to such a politically dangerous enterprise. After all, in Hamilton, he was a big fish in a small pond—but in Washington, where the GOP is changing rapidly under Tea Party influence—the game had changed in front of his face not in his favor.

I get the opportunity to work with lots of people from other parts of the country. In my work with bullwhips locally I was always well-known to be the best that anybody had ever seen. I grew up with that designation where literally everyone I met had never witnessed a person who could crack a cigarette out of the mouth of a willing participant with a bullwhip. For me it was not enough to be a big fish in a small pond, I had to know that I could be a big fish in a big ocean too—so I pushed myself to get better and compete against people from all over the world. Competition after all makes everyone better, even if you don’t like the results. I knew as a bullwhip artist that I could never truly consider myself one of the best in the world if I didn’t challenge myself against people who also considered themselves the best at the craft.

My journey took me to many competitive events; winning several trophies competing with the best that are out there. I even have had some stints in Hollywood dazzling celebrities with my whip work. I know what it feels like to stand in the middle of the road on Brand Blvd in Glendale California where television producers and movie stars were gathered around stopped traffic to watch me perform because they had never seen what I was doing before—and were fascinated. For me personally, it was then that I deserved to call myself a big fish in a big ocean. I had challenged myself and I had to. My life goal was to write stories about the pulp hero Cliffhanger and as the author; I had to know that I could have the swagger in real life of the character I had created. As a writer I had to know that I could do what I demanded my character to do. I never wanted to be one of those sickly writers who live through their art. Rather, my art had to reflect my reality—so I demanded of myself to be really good at the things I wrote about. Yet prior to the year 2000 few people knew about me outside of my hometown. I was a big fish then too, but the pond was small and easy to win in. Outside of my town the water was much larger and there is always the theory that there is somebody better than you. Until you test yourself against them, you don’t have a right to consider yourself the best—and if that’s your goal, you have to step out of the small pond and into the big one and compete.

Between 2005 and 2008 I had satisfied my goal. I had met and worked with some of the best bullwhip artists in the world. There were a few I didn’t get to meet, but at a high level, everyone is pretty even, so you get a good idea of where you stand among them. And it was very satisfying to realize that with all the hard work, that I could swim with the biggest fish in the biggest water possible and hold my own. I didn’t do such a thing to fulfill my personal ego, but to satisfy my literary needs for my own personal work of philosophy. After I achieved that goal I was ready to move on to the next thing and was quite secure in my place in the universe. Those who watched me and competed against me who worked hard to get better and better, I am happy for. I never felt a need to keep up with them or to outdo their efforts—because I know what they are trying to do—which was the same thing that I was—they need to know that they can swim with the biggest of fish. And I respect people who strive to do that. There is lots of room for big fish to swim in a big ocean. There are plenty of little fish to eat, so there is no reason not to cheer on other big fish to grow even larger—and impressive.

When Sheriff Jones first gave me the poster of himself I thought of him as a big fish. The day he gave it to me Fox News was going to have him on that night to talk about immigration issues on the border of Arizona. And during the Issue 2 union debates he and I were frequent guests on 700 WLW radio—so I thought of him initially as a big fish in a big ocean. But over time it was obvious that he was happy to be the big fish in the small pond, because the ocean out there was a bit too threatening. He’s a local boy who will always be the hometown hero, the public servant who marches in parades and made good by the area he grew up in. But going to Washington D.C.—that’s a big ocean that requires more than just tough talk—you have to actually be tough.

Jones showed what kind of person he was during the Issue 2 debates where he thought he was a conservative Republican who attended Tea Party events and was fighting to preserve American tradition. But his view of that tradition was much like John Boehner’s, a progressive touchy, feely, sentiment about conservatism that belonged more in a Sunday school class than in the halls of Congress. As the government in Washington started changing slowly under the Tea Party influences, Jones stood against that tide attempting to preserve the Republican standard nurtured by crony capitalists and pink middle-grounders just a few steps away from socialism on the scales of political philosophy. Issue 2 exposed him as a labor union supporter who refused to see the damage collective bargaining was doing to local budgets. He certainly lost my support, and many others like me who are looking for a purer version of a constitutional republic than we presently have.

When I heard that he wanted Boehner’s seat the first thought I had was that he’d be reluctant to test himself against the big fish of Washington. I remembered my first bullwhip competition against some really talented people—particularly Chris Camp who had won about everything there was to win in the bullwhip arts. He was a star in Vegas, had several world records and was the bench mark of a really good professional bullwhip artist. I worried for days before the competition about having a respectable showing against him. That was nearly 15 years ago, but I remember well how nervous I was about it. It was a bone chilling paralysis that sucked the life right out of you. The reason I was so nervous was that I thought I was pretty good with the bullwhip, but if I couldn’t hold a candle to Chris, I would know that I didn’t have what it took to be the best. Since the bullwhip was one of my signature attributes it was very important to me to be one of the best, so I pressed on. In 2005 after working very hard, I won every event there was against the best competition that the nation provided. I earned their respect and I earned the right to consider myself one of the big fish—and it was one of the proudest days of my life. In the scheme of things, it was a pretty minor deal—a competition at a regional festival. But, in the world of bullwhip work, it was a big deal to me because I had a lot to lose in the attempt.

In the world of politics becoming a congressman at the federal level is like winning that bullwhip contest against a really skilled group of guys. And Sheriff Jones I knew when I heard the story from the political insiders at Brazenhead that the local sheriff wouldn’t risk the disgrace. It’s not that he’d lose the race. I believe he would be elected if he ran for the seat. Butler County is the most populated area of Boehner’s district, which runs all the way up to Greenville, Ohio. Jones could run and win I think pretty easily. I share with him a passion for two big platform issues, his stance against drugs and illegal immigration. But on most other issues, he is as soft as Boehner was, and the now former Speaker of the House was just chewed up and spit out of Washington by a Tea Party wing of the Republican Party that is fast emerging to dominate the party. Those like the local apologist Judy Shelton who have fought so hard to keep Boehner in power all this time are well behind the political current of the times. Conservatives are demanding to move back to the right, they don’t like the left, or even centralist’s positions. And that is where the big fish swim these days. And in that pond, Sheriff Jones is a little fish who will have to scramble for his very life. That’s not a risk I think he is willing to make at this stage of his life. The time for him to test himself with such a feat would have been twenty years ago. The insurrection that is currently happening on Capital Hill for which Donald Trump and several other outsiders are a part are going to change politics from now on. Boehner saw that he was not equipped to handle the hard decisions that are ahead for a Speaker of the House, or even a congressman. So he jumped off the train singing songs. Sheriff Jones is of the same mind. If Sheriff Jones wants to be remembered as a big fish—he better stay in the small pond, because if he goes to Washington, he’ll be eaten rather quickly.

The talk went on that evening and I listened casually while looking at all the magnificent cannons decorating the Irish Pub. It was an appropriate setting for political intrigue and maniacal subterfuge among the socially manipulative. And that made the beer taste better. But I only half believed those sources when they said that Boehner was going to step down. So I have to also believe that Sheriff Jones is going to climb out on that limb and try to take Boehner’s seat. My advice to him would be to keep his image of a big fish alive for the sake of his grandchildren. An embarrassing experience in Washington would be hard to recover from unless he thinks he’s savvy enough to take on the candidates coming out of FreedomWorks. Because they are the future—the past is John Boehner and progressive radio hosts like Bill Cunningham. Sheriff Jones has more in common with them than the candidates nurtured along through FreedomWorks. Getting elected is only half the battle. Getting trampled as a RINO on the house floor is far more embarrassing.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Why You Should Vote for Donald Trump: The historic Oklahoma State Fair Speech of 2015

This speech at the Oklahoma State Fair on September 25, 2015 is why I’m supporting Donald Trump for president. If you were smart dear reader, you would too. This speech exemplifies why Donald Trump is the best candidate in the last century for president of the United States. When Trump is under the most fire, he gets better. He thrives under the heat of pressure. The worse a situation is, the better he is. With all the controversy he’s endured since the last debate most candidates in his position would have a tendency to run scared. After all, as of this writing Trump is in a feud with Fox News, Glenn Beck daily slams his candidacy and many other establishment Republicans are on a full court press to dump Trump from being a threat to the Republican ticket. But in spite of all that—Trump is at his best under adversity. Watch this speech.

People who function best under stress are extremely rare, and Donald Trump is one of those people. Punch his ticket and jump on for the ride. Because people like him are not about politics, it’s about quality. He is precisely what is needed in a 2016 White House. His Oklahoma speech with no notes, wonderful enthusiasm and rhetorical debate answering directly the criticism of the past week is a work of political art. You should watch it and make sure a friend sees it as well. This is history in the making and you’ll want to participate.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

A Muslim in the White House: The history and reason why not

If there was any doubt ever about the depth of the corruption of our federal government by forces not committed to traditional America, the Muslim issue smoking off of Donald Trump’s recent town hall meeting is all the evidence anybody needs. A person at that town hall asked a question about Obama’s Islamic faith, which was a conclusion that Obama himself has fostered with his actions—particularly with NASA and his position regarding the Middle East where he favors Palestinian and Iranian positions over those of Israel and even Egypt. Trump listened politely. He had questions about Obama’s birth certificate in the past, which still are unanswered, as the document Obama eventually provided under pressure from Trump turned out to be computer generated—as proven by Sheriff Arpaio of Arizona.

So the issue never was settled, but the national and international media was quick to accept it so that they could move on to another issue—mysteriously. They called Trump a birther and the Department of Justice sued Arpaio for his border enforcement techniques which was obvious harassment as a direct result of the birth certificate investigation. The rest of the world moved on leaving lots of questions unanswered, propelling conspiracy theories which a significant portion of the American public are now asking, the guy at Trump’s town hall being one of them.   Trump didn’t fan the flames, but he didn’t quell them either, because anybody with any reasonable mind knows something is wrong on the issue—but at this point it’s no longer relevant. The condemnation from the political right and left was truly baffling. It was the lead story for four consecutive days propelled mostly by Republicans. It was evidence of just how far off the rocker we have all fallen as a nation.

Then over the weekend, Ben Carson got into all kinds of trouble by saying that a Muslim should not be elected president, which started a firestorm of its own. Carson’s position is a logical one, the Islamic faith is producing much of the violence seen throughout the world, and America doesn’t need to accelerate that violence by putting a Muslim in the White House. Maybe someday when terrorists aren’t using the Koran to justify beheading infidels—but until there is a good century of violent free behavior, a Muslim in an American White House empowering the radicals fueling terrorism in the Middle East even more is not a good idea. This is something any rational, well-educated mind should understand—easily.

Then on every channel, more than usual was a real hatred of Donald Trump. The endearing nurturing of his candidacy was gone. No longer was he a thorn in the side of Jeb Bush and other establishment Republicans—Trump had suddenly become a threat to everything every progressive had built a public dialogue around. Without Trump’s town hall, nobody would have thought to press Ben Carson, about what he said about Muslims in the White House. Now the cat of distrust about the Islamic faith is out of the bag on a national forum, and establishment types from all walks of life in unison are flustered and acting well out of accordance of what should be American interests.

I’ve known a fair share of Muslims. They are generally peaceful. Their need to pray to Mecca each day gets irritating, but as long as it doesn’t interfere with what I want to do, I’m fine with it. It’s weird to me, but so are a lot of things. Religion should be a private thing and people are free to practice whatever they want.   But like all religions, including the Catholic one, they have elements of collectivism that is dangerous to our republic style of government. The current Pope is using global warming and other aspects of the church he heads to spread a socialist agenda he learned from his home country of Argentina. If the current Pope who is touring America right now is the representation of God on planet earth, then that God is an idiot—because the Pope is not a friend of capitalism or the American way of life. If an American president were excessively Catholic and wanted to turn over the White House to the Pope for guidance, I would have a big problem with that as well. So it’s not just the Muslim faith. It’s any radical religious type who thinks through the collectivism of the church instead of their own free—individual will. We don’t elect religious nut cases in the White House—at least we shouldn’t. We need in America self guided, philosophically sound, individuals who are capable of leadership. We don’t always get that, but we at least have attempted to strive for that objective.

Occasionally I deal with some of the mysteries of Pre-Columbian archaeology and the discrepancies that investigative science casts against a historical record as defined by religion. There has been a lot of violent history regarding religious faith from just about every denomination. While we want an American president who respects the premise of religious value which established the United States, we don’t want a leader of the free world who blindly accepts a dialogue that can be controlled by an unholy relationship between the church and politics. We need a president who asks questions and we need a media who distrusts what a president might say—to question everything even if religion offers an opinion and attempts to use the hand of God as a justification for some evil performed. When barbarians destroyed the Library of Alexandria a terrible crime was committed and there is no way to recover what was lost during that tragedy. The great novel Finnegans Wake may be all that’s left of that period of history before the Roman Empire, and Halloween all that’s left of the strange rituals of that pre-history period.   The world is covered with mysterious artifacts that don’t fit with current scientific or religious understanding. There is a lot of pre-history that existed, but there is no accounting for it. So it’s dangerous and illogical to accept anything blindly—especially Islamic faith. As I’ve pointed out before without Aristotle, there would be no Islamic faith and without Zoroastrian religion there wouldn’t be any Christian or Muslim belief as those are the foundations of both. The mystery is what came before Aristotilian philosophy and Zoroastrian faith. Given that many in the media are highly educated, they should know all this, but they don’t. Instead, they are too quick to accept blind faith and false documents. They are OK to accept whatever President Obama says—even though the evidence is quite mysterious, and the fervor over just a question speaks to the same reckless agenda type of diatribe which burned down the library I referred to in Alexandria. CLICK TO REVIEW. Now you know dear reader why I support Trump so much. As a free man he is unshackled to ask the right questions without fearing upsetting the orthodox thinking, which these days is far too concerned with putting a woman in the White House, or people of different faiths, people of different sexual orientation, and anybody but the right person for the job. That is a strange value for a collective species to have. I can understand that view-point from a fanatical group, but not the entire establishment. That should send alarms to every sane mind who hears it.

Trump said all the right things in the wake and is fully aware of the challenge he posses. But I don’t think even he understood the depths of the sinister persuasion of what he terms a “dishonest media.” The media is dishonest because they are too concerned with bending logic to fit the story of their establishment. In this case their story is that Muslims are a peaceful people not prone to radicalized behavior. Yet the truth is that it is from that specific group of religious lunatics that most terrorism stems. Even radical Christians and the worst Bible thumpers are docile compared to the terrorist groups spawned from Islamic faith and their assumption that their religion is the only one of value. For instance, on the Cartoon Network late at night on Fridays is a show called Black Jesus. Such a show would never be produced called “Black Muhammad.” There would be death threats and probably someone would lose their life in response. It is because of that reality that Ben Carson said he was uneasy with a Muslim in the White House. And that is also why a question about such radicalism was asked at a Trump event. Denouncing the question as all the pundits suggested Trump should have done does not solve the problem. Ignoring the question is not what good journalism should be doing. It should be the media asking those questions, not some dude at a Trump rally. The reason why the media isn’t is why Trump says the media is dishonest, and why Republicans are supporting outsiders for the White House. Because people know something is wrong, and often the truth is hidden behind religion and the media that doesn’t cover the real facts. Among those facts are that the religions of our day are softened versions of a long forgotten pagan past. What they share in common with those distant relatives is a desire to sacrifice life essence to undefined spiritual entities. In the Catholic Church, that sacrifice is most notable during Lent and the ritual of communion. In Islamic faith, it is too often interpreted these days with the actual taking of human life, much the way the Maya, Aztec and countless head hunter cultures have for centuries. An American president needs to be free of this desire to sacrifice our country to the wishes of the uncharted, and unseen. And that is the million dollar desire of our day and the type of provocation that only Donald Trump is free to bring forth. That’s also why his poll numbers are so high because too many people are asking questions these days that nobody else will dare answer.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

GMC and a Wife Hard to Please: A financial warning triggered by low interest rates

For a long time my wife and I have missed our old Jeep Grand Cherokee. She lost it in 2005 to an accident where the airbags went off during a wreck actually induced by the Lakota school system’s cut of busing during a levy fight. There were too many people on the road at Lakota East and my wife was driving our children to school. It was wet out and there was an accident. The Jeep held up wonderfully. Hardly any physical damage to the vehicle—but the airbags did deploy and that put the cost of repair well over the price of the Jeep’s worth. So it was totaled and wasn’t worth covering the extra cost to repair ourselves. We had the Jeep for a long time, and it was time to get a new car anyway. We picked up a Chrysler Town and Country which was perfect for us, and our large family. We drove it everywhere for the last ten years. We tend to buy vehicles and keep them for a long time. We don’t lease throwaway cars. We buy to keep, and we take care of them when we get them. So it’s a big deal in our family to make a car purchase. But its time again for my wife to have a new car and she is really, really, really picky. Let me emphasize, she is very hard to please. She has very specific tastes that are hard to satisfy. Her standards are extremely high. Picking out a car with her is very difficult.

I had been looking at buying a GMC Yukon Denali myself with the extended back and showed them to her, but she wasn’t going for it. They are just too big for her. She wanted a Jeep, but now that they are owned by Fiat she wants nothing to do with them. Additionally we loved our Town and Country but after Fiat acquired Chrysler that was the end of having any possibility of buying a Chrysler or Jeep. My wife may be an old country club girl, but she is probably more patriotic than I am when it comes down to it, and she doesn’t want to pay good money for foreign cars. Her very first car was a BMW. We had a Toyota Camry once, back when she was in college, but she resented having an Asian car, so since then it’s always been American cars—which I personally think are too expensive due to the labor unions and short-cuts that are often made to compete with foreign markets. I didn’t want to look at any General Motors cars because of the bailout in 2009, and Ford wasn’t making anything all that great in my opinion. They weren’t dynamic enough for us. So shopping for a car was hard for us. She didn’t want to look at any of the Mercedes products, which I tried to bring up—because she didn’t want to support German manufacturers over American even though I think they have the edge in engineering presently. But my attitude softened as I started looking into the new Yukons. On that car GMC was starting to build a good reputation again, and I was impressed.

My wife refused to drive a Yukon so we gave up on the discussion as we were at an impasse. What I didn’t know was that she started to consider the smaller versions of the Yukon on the GMC line and found that she loved the Terrain quite a lot. I was aghast because I thought the car was too small, but knowing she had done a lot of homework, and how hard she was to please, I gave it a shot—reluctantly. After all, we weren’t buying for me, it was for her. We went down to Fiehrer Motors at Bridgewater Falls to let her sell me on the merits of the GMC Terrain and I walked away rather impressed. The only drawback for me was that the Terrain wasn’t a Yukon, which wasn’t fair to the Terrain. After driving them around and looking at all the options it was clear why she liked the vehicle, it reminded us of our old Jeep, and it was made by an American company trying to give birth to itself once again—and the front end of it was smashing cool. Inside there was a lot of room and it’s technically quite a leap forward in engineering development. I was impressed with the 6 speed transmission that actually has the ability to go manual if needed, so she sold me on it and we bought one.

But this article is not about buying a new car or reviewing the GMC Terrain. It’s about a revelation I had while going through finance and signing all the paperwork. Buying a car is a very important part of the American economy, so I pay attention to aspects of it that measure the greater aspect of national GDP. I enjoyed greatly my experience at Fiehrer Motors as they have been in business for three generations now—which is very unusual. They used to be on Route 4 for a long time across from the Hamilton Plaza, by the old Richard’s Pizza place. But my wife and I would never shop for a car in that type of location because it’s too busy there to think right, plus the area is surrounded by impoverished has-been homes. Not a good way to usher in an expensive car buying experience. When we have bought cars in the past, it has been at Kings Automall. We like it over there for all the reasons that we prefer that Costco over the one in Tri-County. There are fewer slack-jawed losers over on Fields Ertle, and it does matter. People who have purchasing power don’t want to hang out with people whose life goals are to buy a pack of cigarettes and win $10 on a scratch-off lottery ticket so they can buy a case of beer. It matters even if it’s not politically correct. If the new Fiehrer dealership at Bridgewater wasn’t so nice, my wife would have never convinced me to go car shopping in the first place. So we were there buying the new Terrain, the sun was out on a nice 68 degree day after a bit of rain. There was some college football on the big screen behind me in the lounge area which I enjoyed watching as we went over all the contract details. It was clean, everyone seemed professional, and it was a good productive atmosphere that was conducive to the proper exchange of money and product. The finance guy was finalizing the details and I had positioned myself so I could see his computer screen just enough to read. That’s when I asked him if he was a drug addict.

I’m not going to give away a lot of personal details especially on a purchase that costs half of a small house. I’m grateful for good terms when I can get them. I’m not complaining on an individual basis. But what I saw was alarming to me. Keep in mind that I used to do what this finance guy was doing, so I had some experience on the matter. That was over twenty years ago, and back then I even helped paint on the front window of our dealership a giant sign designed to entice people to come in and buy a car—“4% on all cars and trucks.” I remembered back then that almost nobody had credit good enough to qualify for the 4% interest rate. They usually walked out of finance at somewhere around 6% to 7% if they had really good credit. Only people with “gold” credit were able to actually get what was on the window. So here I was watching the Sooners stomp all over the Golden Hurricanes, my wife had found a car she liked, and we were getting Chick-fil-A for my grandson’s birthday on a nice fall afternoon once we were finished with buying the car. It doesn’t get any better than that—except for the interest rate that I saw on the computer screen of my finance guy. It was less than what I painted on the window of the dealership I worked at decades ago. I thought he had made a serious mistake and was trying to hide a drug addiction.

But he wasn’t on drugs, and it was a legitimate interest rate. While my wife and everyone else was happy, I wasn’t. Something was dreadfully wrong about that. Things were not alright, that interest rate should have been much higher. As we signed the paperwork, I thought about the Fed’s decision to keep interest rates where they were, which are artificially low. Sure its good for the economy, it’s good for people to spend money, but it essentially means that any investments made in bonds or other long-term holdings are not increasing encouraging investors to continue dumping money into risky stocks further flaming a volatile market. This meant that the economy was in far worse shape than anybody was willing to acknowledge, including the most conspiratorial talk show hosts on AM radio. Banks were giving away money at a very low profit to them just to get people to buy products—and that artificial stimulus was a direct correlation to the true state of our economy that is dangerously perilous.

Look people, America is about to hit $19 trillion dollars in debt, wages are stagnant, inflation is unbelievably high, and there isn’t enough GDP to stave off complete economic collapse. There is really only this next presidential election to get it right where both the House, Senate, and the Executive Branch can increase GDP, pay down the debt so the United States doesn’t choke on foreign interest rates itself, and put the country back on course again where buying cars is a routine exercise, along with many other factors of a national economy. Failure to solve this problem means there is no future. Interest rates can’t be lowered any more than they are, and if that’s not getting people out to the stores to move products, then nothing will do it. That is not a good situation.

I’m proud of GMC for getting their act together and producing a nice series of cars, particularly the Terrain. I am impressed, and it deserves a look by anybody in the car market. I am proud of Fiehrer Motors for relocating into a really nice store in a really nice area—because I otherwise wouldn’t have went car shopping—so it’s a factor in national GDP—nearly as much as interest rate shopping—for me anyway. Without their decision to move off Dixie Highway, I wouldn’t have visited them and they wouldn’t have had the opportunity to sell me a new car. I’m proud of the Sooners for playing a fun college football game that sold lots of beer and fast food options to hundreds of thousands of viewers. And I was proud to spend $100 at Chick-fil-A on food that day. These are all wonderful things for our economy. But, the bank shouldn’t have to feel like they have to give away money. They need a chance to make a profit and while some people will say that banks make enough money, profit is what they need to stay in business. And they deserve to make money on their services. Based on that interest rate, it was clear to me that they weren’t making enough. For my situation, I won’t complain. But the fact that they felt compelled to offer it makes me worry about their future. Good things aren’t always good things.

Overall, it was a fun day, but many of the things I write about became quite evident to me. I don’t always like being right, even though I am most of the time. Unfortunately, not enough people listen in time to help themselves. That is frustrating to me. For that reason my wife and I did get the subscription to XM radio. No matter what happens, we’ll have a good life and we’ll enjoy it. However, I want many others to have a taste of the good life too-which is why I put so much time into trying to teach people—if only they’d listen.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.