Tag: Democrats

A Message to Republicans: Democrats and Whores are basically the same thing, they both are willing to fake anything

I would have been comfortable saying it previously, but especially now, with the Brett Kavanaugh controversy in Washington D.C. by radical leftists’ groups, but Democrats are evil, vile, despicable human beings. Their foundation beliefs are the root of the problem, they are collective based idealists who do not acknowledge individual rights—so therefor lying has no relevancy to them because their individual word has no personal value. They only see value in collective hive support, so they will do whatever must be done to preserve group associations. This makes them evil because they do not function from any individual responsibility, which therefore makes them a menace to society because all actions are individually based, even if actions are decided to be group affiliated. The decision comes from an individual decision. So do I believe that Dr. Ford would lie about an alleged rape attempt against her from Brett Kavanaugh—absolutely. Just because she’s a woman doesn’t make her a truth teller. Think of all the women who fake orgasms just to make the men in their lives feel useful, and you could build a case for women as a part of the human species with a tendency to bend the truth for the “greater good.”

And this leads us to the midterms. I do not believe that there are Democrats out there ready to take power from Republicans. I think Democrats are an extreme minority and the press is attempting to make everything look like a close race leading up to the election. I don’t believe the polls. I don’t believe the news reports. People just aren’t that liberal in the United States, and Democrats do not represent American ideas—so I don’t see a massive blue wave in the upcoming elections. But I do see a full-on military style assault that Democrats are using to take power from Republicans and in general, Americans of all political persuasions—as a collective, hive-like entity. As individuals Democrats are not very dangerous, no more so than an irritating mosquito. But in the swarms that they attack with, they can suck enough blood from an individual to kill them, which is what they are trying to do to Brett Kavanaugh. We are supposed to forget that not a single Democrat could live up to the standard they are creating for Kavanaugh, going back to a single high school party 36 years ago to disqualify a Supreme Court Justice from nomination. Just think if Republicans held Democrats to the same standard. It wasn’t that long ago when Republican senators like Lindsey Graham voted Obama nominees like Elana Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court even though they were radical leftists. Republicans did the right thing and voted for their character and serving the president whom they disagreed with. But they stuck to the rule of law and did the right thing by the people’s will. That is not what Democrats ever intended to do when the shoe was on the other foot.

I remember when my son-in-law became a U.S. Citizen and had to recite an oath to protect the Constitution when the words, “against enemies both foreign and domestic.” I couldn’t help but at that time to attribute that the Democrats were domestic enemies, they stood against the basic ideas of what America is and ever was and they wanted to overthrow it. To understand what they are against, I would suggest watching just about any American western from 1940 to 1990 and over that fifty-year period, the idea of what the dreams of America was are explored intellectually. Democrats openly stand against those ideas to put it simply and I’m personally not OK with that. Its one thing to live and let live, to be accommodating to other people’s ideas which are different from your own. I would hardly say that I’m an intolerant conservative—it was only a year ago that I had lunch with Stephen Samaniego from CNN and we had a nice talk about regional politics and various bubbles of thought that exists around the nation. Even with all that CNN has done to advance destruction of Trump’s presidency I can talk to just about anybody without being angry. I don’t look for ways to not get along with people. In fact, I would say I am extremely accommodating—I’m far from a radical ideologue. But to speak honestly of my opinions on these matters, I would also say that it is impossible to be friends with a Democrat, because their ideology is not individually based. It’s like marrying a whore, they may tell you they love you, but they make their living sleeping around with anybody with money in their pocket. For the whore, sex is not a value judgment, its collective based—anybody is alright so long as they pay. With a Democrat anything goes so long as the ends justify the means. It is impossible to have a real friendship with such a person, so when Republicans say that “our friends from the other side” they are creating for themselves a weak position. Democrats don’t want to be your friend. They want to destroy you. It really is that simple. If you are a conservative, no liberal wants to be friends. They simply want to use that leverage to undermine your belief system so they can bend it to their will.

With all that said voter turnout for Republicans will have to be massive in these midterms because Democrats do plan to cheat. I think there will be massive voter manipulation and we’ve seen that our own F.B.I. will play their part in making it happen. I remember well how there was not a single Republican voter in Philadelphia in 2012. How does that happen? The same statistics will erupt all across the country during the midterm election of 2018 especially in urban areas. The only way to really defeat those attempts is the way Trump did it in 2016, where the voter turnout was so high that even the attempts at cheating will leave the Democrats short. So take nothing for granted because Democrats have no problem with cheating and then lying about it. Because they do not value themselves as individuals, so they don’t care about lying, about eternal damnation in Hell, or any of the normal characteristics for holding people to the truth. They certainly have no problem lying under oath because many of them don’t believe in God, so to what value does swearing on a Bible hold them to? Nothing.

I’ve said it before and its worth saying now, we are at war with these Democrats. We are in a Civil War. They do not want to assimilate intellectually in the affairs of our nation, they simply want to destroy it. They don’t care what they have to do, they only care to do it. Nothing is too low for them, which is quite evident in the Kavanaugh hearings. If there was ever a cleaner nominee than Brett Kavanaugh, who would it be? My comment to Republicans is what it has been for many years now, you better know what kind of fight you are fighting. Do not think that by playing nice with Democrats that you will appease them and voters. The only thing that we can do with them is to destroy them. Destroy them as a party. They intend the destruction of everything we think of as America, so if Republicans don’t defend it, everything we know will be destroyed. And playing nice with the enemy will not provide a victory, not in the midterms, or in anything—ever.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Politics of Sex: Using primitive emotions to control Republican intellegence from exposing reality

It was good to see Donald Trump fly into Las Vegas to campaign against Wacky Jackie ahead of the midterm elections. Any rational mind would look at the typical Democrat and understand that there is a lot “wacky” about them. The mind of a liberal just isn’t normal and they are prone to massive corruption. Of course they justify that corruption with the belief that majority opinion rules, so if what they think is a democratic sampling of insanity votes to make it a mainstream position, then by sheer numbers something can be made so. It is a really baffling concept that freezes most conservative minds, because they can’t even imagine such things as a reality which paralyzes them from taking action. It is insane that so much has been made of Christine Ford’s rape allegation against Brett Kavanaugh just a few hours before the senate was set to vote for confirmation of him onto the Supreme Court. The information had been out there for a while yet Democrats had waited until just the last-minute to make their move and everyone was just supposed to play along. Everyone knows what’s going on yet the Democrats did it anyway. How are we supposed to take any of this serious? If the incident happened at all between Christine Ford and Brett Kavanaugh it was 36 years ago when they were little high school kids. Nobody called such things rape back then, it was just a party and virtually everyone behaved in such ways. Most of the female population and many males could have considered themselves raped if the criteria is what Christine Ford indicated. She is either ridiculously timid if she suffered trauma from an incident like what she described, or she’s just a liar trying to make a political move against a guy who is poised to be a conservative judge on the Supreme Court and as a liberal, she just can’t have that. Would she make up stories to make it so, well, yes.

I was reminded about these insane women who call themselves Democrats when I started to notice Kathy Wyenandt signs around the neighborhoods surrounding my home. She is running for the 52nd Ohio House District as a former Lakota school levy supporter—another tax and spend liberal. Only with her I have some history. My wife recently drug me out shopping and we were at the Kroger Marketplace over by Lakota East and I was reminded of the time that I had a full-blown explosion toward the levy supporters when they stood outside that shopping complex with a survey about me attacking my character in much the way liberals are now attacking Brett Kavanaugh. And it really pissed me off. It has been a few years but I never lost my anger over it and it was all the radical women who ran in Kathy Wyenandt’s group which I would eventually call latté sipping prostitutes because of the way they whored themselves out to the government union interests. It never seemed right to me that they could stand outside of a popular shopping center and call me every name in the book because I have been the face of tax increase resistance in my local community, but the minute I called them names in return you would think I beat them over the head with a bat the way they cried and protested in response. And their justification was that they were women and that somehow, I was a man and I owed them something by way of unearned respect. All I saw was a bunch of fat-assed losers who wanted to raise taxes on our property values and give that extra money to ridiculously paid union workers.

Just looking at Kathy Wyenandt’s endorsements for this Ohio House run that she is conducting and the evidence is clear, they are mostly all unions and progressive groups who are trying to use her femininity to win a House seat for the dirty Democrats. And the politics is the same as in the Lakota school levy situation where a bunch of crazy women were supposed to be allowed to call me every name in the book because I was a man who stood against higher taxes, and they expected to be unchallenged—because they were women. Their ideas about things were supposed to be beyond scrutiny just because they were women. We were supposed to have no value judgement against them, because they were women. Even Kathy Wyenandt’s campaign pitch is that we are supposed to vote for her because she was a “mom.” The entire proposal has always been insane, but it hasn’t stopped Democrats from using that insanity to advance their position.

Well, I have never accepted such a ridiculous notion and I never will. Back at that Kroger incident when I was on WLW radio I really didn’t understand the drama. The men at the station, the producers and talk talent thought I was crazy for even challenging the position that the levy moms were proposing, that as a man there was an unspoken rule that we were all supposed to just yield to whatever some crazy woman thought and said. Even high-ranking Republicans who were working with me on that anti-tax campaign were terrified of pissing off those levy moms and it never made a bit of sense. Women were obviously exploiting in men a primal weakness, the capitol of sex in relationships to control voting blocs. If women didn’t get what they wanted the men didn’t get sex. If you peeled away all the pretense of politeness away, that was essentially what was happening, and men were supposed to support sheer insanity just because women might take away the chance to have sex.

Even right now when this discussion about Brett Kavanaugh comes up and whether or not Christine Ford was raped at a high school party, men are expected to play along or not get sex from their radical feminist wives. Of course, not all women are radical feminists, but those who call themselves Democrats are nearly all crazy. It comes with the territory of being a Democrat. If a man was to go to BW3s to watch Monday Night Football with a group of six or seven women and the man was to say something like, “Christine Ford probably wanted Kavanaugh and she threw herself all over him at that party for which he likely wasn’t even there, but he knocked away her advances leading up to the incident. She probably found some loser who was drunk and tried to molest him to get revenge then under the new definitions of the #METOO movement and used her sexuality to advance her modern political agenda,” the women would laugh and declare that he was right. But they would then chastise him for even saying it and if he stuck with the story they’d push him out of their circle. So guys being guys not wanting to be away from the opportunities that can come with knowing women keeps his thoughts to himself. He may talk about it with other guys, but he certainly won’t let it out around women because it might get him removed from their inner circle. And that often means for the man, less sex.

It is in that way that so many men, specifically Republicans, have been tricked into buying into all this liberal garbage advanced by crazy Democrats. To accept that Christine Ford was so traumatized over events that occurred 36 years ago but that it all climaxed just days before Brett Kavanaugh was to be confirmed to the Supreme Court, you have to be a little insane to even entertain the notion. But because she’s a woman we are supposed to not even ask any questions about integrity because the Democratic proposal is that all women are to be believed no matter what they say. Or as Kathy Wyenandt wants us to believe, because she’s a mom. But of course, that’s not enough, and at least Donald Trump is not playing along, just as I can say that I never have. When he called the Democratic challenger in Nevada to a seat in congress “Wacky Jackie,” Trump was showing more than just some comic association, he was attacking the primary strategy of the Democratic party, using women to avoid criticism to take back seats of government liberalism. And hope that the tricks against men work yet again. But this time I don’t think they will. Because this time people are finally starting to understand how the game is played against them—for both men and women.

Rich Hoffman

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

Jesus Christ was Wrong: Turning the other cheek is a dumb idea

Jesus Christ was a socialist—they were of course called something else back in the day as religion and politics were less distinctive from each other. But a quick study through history will show that while Jesus was traveling in the wilderness he obviously came across Buddhism and adapted it for his own homeland in a way that conflicted with the powerful orthodox of the Jews who worked closely with the Roman Empire to be regional governors. Jesus used passivity to inspire the poor to rebel against their overlords and the Jews killed him for the threat to their society. Several centuries later the Roman Empire had a desire to turn to the political left so they imposed Christianity onto the regions they controlled and shortly thereafter the their entire society collapsed. The Dark Ages followed which had a Medieval Church that used the blunt hammer of Jesus Christ’s “sacrifice” as a mechanism to keep the living from trying to overtake their church leaders who ruled the lands with a Bible only they could read, as ignorance was the most powerful weapon in those days. People were too stupid and superstitious to think of individual rights until the Age of Reason rescued Europe from its long dark past. It was during the Renaissance that the ideas for America were born culminating in a mad dash for a country overrun with oriental savages from China with the same kind of leftist occult driven superstition as Jesus ran into during his days in the wilderness. The American frontiersman confronted those left leaning heathens on the western frontier and won. But along the way the Christian values they brought with them from Europe became the basic tenants of conservatism which worked well among their own kind. But the many oriental ideas in the teachings of Jesus paralyzed conservatives as they tried to deal with enemies to their value system—after all their leader had been crucified due to his threat to the Roman/Jewish relationship in Jerusalem.

That brief history flashed through my mind as I watched an exasperated Brit Hume on Fox News attempt to put his conservative finger on the problems of our day, as leftists were openly calling for violence against any Trump supporter in the streets of America. Brit’s comments showed us why we had turned away from Jeb Bush, John Kasich, John McCain and Mitch McConnell and started flying our flags behind Trump. It was a mystery to Brit how we could regain a civilized society under the value systems he embodied as a conservative. The Christian conservative is perfectly fine as a value system in the open spaces between the big cities of America. Just visit a Bob Evens at around 8:30 AM anywhere, and you’ll see America at its best. People are good to each other as old men sit at the counter and read the newspaper. Families eat in peace and treat each other respectfully, it’s an idea that has a lot of appeal—until a political leftist tries to steal that value through some kind of protest. At that point the same elements that ended the Roman Empire, destroyed the Churches of Europe and essentially led to every war that mankind had fought with each other throughout history is exposed and the conservatives have no recourse to deal with the intrusion because of their paralysis in the teachings of Jesus Christ. They turn the other cheek to their enemies only to find that cheek slapped too, and not just once, but twice, three times, and more, until the skin is literally falling off their face. The typical leftist is a heathen not that much unlike the Indians that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s mother described in the famous novels written by that author constituting the Little House on the Prairie series.

The big story of the day when Brit Hume was musing about the lack of civility in our modern political world was that Laura Ingalls Wilder was having her name removed from a prestigious literary award due to her comments on Indians, which in her day were always a threat to kill families on the frontier. Modern leftists have attempted to reinvent the past by defining the Indians as the original inhabitants of North America and that the white European settlers that brought with them new philosophies of self-management from the Age of Reason were confronting Chinese settlers who had radically different ideas on the nature of existence, and the two sides fought it out. The new Americans won over the oriental colonists from China. Many of these Chinese colonists came to North America during the Ming Dynasty when their giant ships were trading with countries all over the world, well before the Europeans were even thinking of a journey to North America. The New World at that time was already well-known in the East because they had been traveling there for centuries. And before the Chinese it was the Vikings and Phoenicians. Ancient descendents from all those nationalities were already in North America and had many empires rise and fall well before Laura Ingalls Wilder’s mother said that “the only good Indian was a dead Indian.” Many of the Indian nations were warring factions that used violence as a test of manhood—they were not docile nature lovers. They were the original leftists in the New World and the modern left has tied themselves to their ancient ancestors and have been trying for quite a long time to use that guilt as leverage over the newly founded country of America.

That is where conservatives find themselves paralyzed because the leader of most right-thinking people is ultimately Jesus Christ who was very ideologically aligned with the typical socialist and Indian warrior on the frontier of America. Maxine Watters isn’t the first radical to call for action through collective assimilation. So when the political left plays Jesus against conservatives by taking advantage of a turned cheek or a desire for peace, the political leftists attack and has been pushing conservatives further and further back for as long as humans have interacted with each other and we’re at a point where the running has to stop.

I would say to Brit Hume and to the estate of Laura Ingalls Wilder, and to Trump supporters in general that peace is not possible with the leftists. Just as treaties were not possible with the Indians because they were of a different mindset that was not conducive to the American idea. Or the Renaissance artist who was drawing naked bodies on buildings after hundreds of years of stagnant thinking coming out of the Dark Ages—the two sides of thinking are not compatible. Values cannot stand up to constant attack if the person with values always surrenders to the aggressions of the heathens. The Chinese were heathens during the Ming Dynasty because they were a collective based society seeking to impose themselves on the entire world. The Indians were heathens because they were another mixed batch of collective based cultures seeking to put superstition over the minds of reason, no different from the cults of churches in the Dark Ages were inclined to follow some priest who could magically read words on a page and decipher meaning from them. Or the Romans and Jews who were collectively based cultures who wanted to execute an individual preaching a collective eastern based religion that didn’t even need a church to guide them—a hippie from the wilderness known as Jesus who taught us all to turn the other cheek even as he was crucified on a cross with his blood dripping out upon the ground. The Roman Empire in its last days turned left and told us all that we should follow the teachings of the oriental Christ and sacrifice ourselves to the living so that we could live eternally in the afterlife. But in so doing they implied that we sanction evil in the here and now putting peace on earth above the morality of the good—and that is something that we as conservatives need to stop doing. We cannot surrender the world to evil with an eye to the everlasting. Because as many wise people have said over many centuries, what we do in life, does reflect us in death, and yielding to evil in life or death is not permissible. Jesus was wrong.

It’s one thing to be good to your fellow neighbors and to preach peace to people who have shared values at church, in our neighborhoods, and even at Bob Evens on a morning breakfast at 8:30 AM. But when the leftist as they are known to do, whether it’s the barbarian hordes that sacked Rome to officially end the Empire, or the Indians who were Chinese conquerors from the Ming Dynasty, and probably earlier, the Vikings or the latest clan of Maxine Waters supporters, they intend always to attack those of us who have individual values so war is always their first option. And when faced with such an option it is not enough to sacrifice ourselves to the crosses they wish to nail us to, which has been the path of most mainstream conservatives for many years—the world of Brit Hume. When faced with such a menace we must fight, and that goes beyond what our religions instruct us to do—unless you seek the deeper meaning of the plight of the Christian Soldiers, marching as to war. Not all of Christianity is a turn the other cheek religion. But for the parts that are, do not listen to those instructions, because they were created from the very beginning by liberals of countless names throughout history, and their intention was always to leave conservatives with no other option but to be conquered. And its time to change that history for a change toward the rights and freedoms of the individual.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Elephant in the Room: Democrats kill people with guns, not Republicans or NRA members

According to Ayn Rand’s definition in her books, which is as good as anyplace to sink roots into a definition, politics is the study of the principles governing the proper organization of society, it is based on ethics, the study of the proper values to guide man’s choices and actions. Politics and ethics have been fundamental branches of philosophy from the beginning. Philosophy is the science that studies the fundamental aspects of the nature of existence. The task of philosophy is to provide man with a comprehensive view of life. With that being said liberals and conservatives really can’t get along, because their fundamental approaches to even the most basic attributes of life are different. In such a case, one philosophy will have to dominate the other—they cannot coexist.

This is a new thought for me, I have tried for many years to be open-minded to other people’s thoughts, but when it comes down to the rubber hitting the road, liberals have no desire to coexist with conservatives. They only want to convert them into aspects of the liberal. They are very militant even for supposedly representing the more pacifist nature of the human species. They only desire peace so long as you think the way they do, which is to essentially not think at all. They require you to not think in order to get along with them, to not have opinions, to not judge, to assume that history is one month old and that interpretations of anything are subject to being redefined based on the sentiment of the day.

Considering things that way it should come as no surprise that liberals in the form of Democrats are the gun grabbers of society—while they have always been the perpetrators of violence. If we consider history, such as in the case of mass shooters and murderers it will become very obvious that they are largely always Democrats—more specifically liberals. Below is a list of major shootings over a long period of time that was sent to me by a reader of these pages. It doesn’t take much to see the pattern that has emerged and persists to this day. After reading it consider how absurd it is to even allow such people to lecture our society on the nature of how the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted. And even more so, how these idiots expect us to live in a gun-less society and share resources with them.

In 1865, a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States .

In 1881, a left-wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States, who later died from the wound.

In 1963, a radical left-wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

In 1975, a left-wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

In 1984, James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonald’s restaurant.

In 1986, Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in a Oklahoma post office.

In 1990, James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.

In 1991, George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, TX.

In 1995, James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.

In 1999, Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.

In 2001, a left-wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.

In 2003, Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.

In 2007, a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.

In 2010, a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.

In 2011, a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.

In 2012, Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.

In 2013, a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school in Newtown, CT.

As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.

Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats with guns.

Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or conservative Republican was involved in any of these shootings and murders. Guns don’t kill people; Democrats do. The same basic logic could be applied to the mass shootings since 2013, especially the Vegas shooter who was a millionaire gambler—and a Democrat. Many of the ISIS inspired killers are also politically speaking, associated with left leaning philosophy. Radical Islam for instance has very little in common with conservative philosophy. It is not enough to suggest that people of all kinds can get into a room and get along, because their essential political philosophies are not conducive to one another. And it is not even appropriate to assume that such people should not talk about their foundational beliefs out of respect for those who don’t feel the way they do about things. People who have radically different political beliefs cannot function in the world together.

Democrats are not shy about their desire to use force to impose their will on others. They are, historically speaking, very intolerant of other people’s beliefs. You don’t see people from the NRA running around killing people. It just isn’t in their political makeup to behave in such a way. They certainly aren’t on the list shown above. Yet Democrats are the ones who have resorted to violence when things have not gone the way they’ve desired. In extreme cases they’ve grabbed guns and tried to kill people, such as the Democrat that attacked Republican baseball players in 2017 by trying to kill them while in the field of play. But you don’t see Republicans doing such a thing because their fundamental philosophy about life keeps them from even thinking about it. Most people I know, myself included, who happen to be very conservative don’t even talk about shooting people, because that goes against the nature of life. The gun is to protect life in the mind of a Republican. To a Democrat the gun is there to take life. The Republican tends to be for the life of a fetus, to the Democrat they are for abortion—the killing of a human if it inconveniences the life of a woman. The differences are epistemological in nature. Politics isn’t a dirty word, it’s an essential element to understanding what kind of person we are dealing with, and to that effect how they view the basics of life.

Literally the elephant in the room is that conservatives stand for life and act in accordance with life in most everything they do. It is not in their nature to become mass shooters, or to even impose themselves on another life because they respect life—all life. Liberals in the form of Democrats however are all about imposing themselves in a group think way on anybody and everyone. If Republicans do not have guns and a way to protect their lives, it will be Democrats who will raid homes in the middle of the night trying to steal what is valued there. It will be Democrats who will say to everyone who they can, “join us or die.” To those who assume that Nazi types and racists like the KKK members of the American south are some brand of conservative, that would be wrong as well. It was always Democrats who formed the KKK and all racist organizations because like all liberals—Nazis included, they don’t value individual life. Only the collective efforts of the mob that rules by force against the defenseless. And it is those people who are screaming for a gun free society. That is pretty funny when you consider the absurdity of it. Because it will be Democrats who will steal a gun breaking the law many times over and use it as a sacrifice of themselves for some liberal cause. And that kind of thing will continue to happen as long as liberals are allowed to coexist with the life loving conservatives of American sentiment. There will never be peace between the two political philosophies because the two just aren’t conducive to one another. Only one side will survive, because that is the nature of philosophy. A truth and a lie cannot live in harmony. Death and life are not after the same goals. And that is the cold hard truth of this matter that is before us presently.

Rich Hoffman

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

Hillary For Prison: Communists outside of the RNC and the media who support them

For the recorded the communists in the following video calling Alex Jones and his entourage “nazi scum” need a history lesson.  Hitler and his Nazis were socialist offshoots of a secret society called Vril based on the book The Coming Race.  Nothing about the Nazi has any relevance to American life other than the fact that many of those Vril inspired Nazis were recruited into NASA’s space program because of what they were working on under the SS during World War II.  Yet, Jones was correct in what he was asserting and a clash erupted between his group and the communist supporters protesting outside of the Republican National Convention.  What you are about to see is what’s happening outside the mainstream news outlet coverage and defines quite well the massive void that currently takes place along political lines.  The obvious determination that is so evident in this exchange is that communist insurgents really can’t assimilate into American culture.  We can’t all live together in one country under the umbrella of two parties.  It’s just not possible.

It is unlikely that the main press outlets will show all the chants inside and outside the convention for Hillary Clinton to go to prison.  This is certainly a first for any presidential candidate to evoke so much passion before they have ever taken an oath of official office.  It is truly astonishing how determined the mainstream press is at avoiding the coverage of such legal demands for someone who is obviously a known criminal running for the highest office in the world.  Currently there are just enough communist sympathizers to give someone like Hillary Clinton a platform that is fundamentally anti-American—but it is truly bothersome to see that many of those sympathizers are in our national media.  Those media personalities are just as ignorant, and activist minded toward communist sympathies as the losers in the video attacking Alex Jones.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Black Flag of Assassin’s Creed: Why modern politics can be seen in naval ship battles

As I mentioned yesterday, Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed video game franchise is releasing a pirate version of their popular series to be launched prior to Halloween 2013 and it looks fantastic.  So I’m going to take a break from the usual serious matters dealt with at this site and expand a bit more about what I started to discuss regarding Assassin’s Creed as an instructive platform from which all people can learn history, by allowing players get to walk in the shoes of characters as history was made.  Shortly after I wrote the article previously mentioned, I managed to obtain my own ship while playing Assassin’s Creed III which takes place during the American Revolution and engage in the fantastic naval battles which is the new feature developed by Ubisoft.  The ship battle feature in the game is hands down one of the coolest uses of video game technology I have ever seen and it appears to be expanded upon dramatically in their upcoming pirate release, so it deserves mention and a metaphorical analysis in relation to real life.  The ship to ship battles in Assassin’s Creed III are simply breathtaking and deserve comment for the bench mark in history that they represent.  Justifiably so, I am very much looking forward to the release of Assassin’s Creed 4, The Black Flag coming this fall.  I will be one of the first to get it!  There are few places that you can live history from your living rooms and engage in the exhilaration that model ship builders have for years tried to capture when imagining grand galleons perched in combat with cannons firing on the choppy waters of a stormy sea.  But that is exactly what these recent Assassin Creed releases are offering for the first time anywhere and the results are simply stunning.   I’ve never seen anything like what I was able to play in Assassin’s Creed III with the ship to ship combat that alone makes the worth of the game more than justified for gamers who enjoy history.

Hanging in my home I have a painting of two ships firing canons at each other on Lake Erie during the War of 1812.  I have found that the old sea battles from the romantic era of naval combat reflects modern politics in many ways.  Like politics, wind speed is important as well as the direction from which it comes.  Politicians often allow themselves to blow where the winds of public opinion take them, so the metaphor is a proper one.  The old mast driven battleships were very much victims of circumstance, so maneuvering in position at a speed of 8 to 12 knots in order to fire upon an enemy was difficult.  Even then gaining a tactical advantage over an opponent meant that one ship would have to outlast another in broadside combat at close range, because that is often what it came to.  One ship would have to absorb the damage of another and hope that their ship wouldn’t sink to the oceans depths before their enemy.  I see in modern politics that Republicans have constantly been outmaneuvered by the pirate tactics of the Democrats who attack not just with one spectacular galleon, but many small ones.  Republicans often utilize such magnificent ships by displaying lots of guns and massive sails in a fashion that was typical of the British during their imperial rule.  The Democrats use smaller, faster vessels that can overtake larger ships with mass and dirty tricks to take down their superior foes—and such a metaphor describes modern politics clearly.

Many of the tactics seen in modern politics were long ago used on the high sea battles of early naval combat, before engines and modern firepower allowed technology to trump bravery.  In the picture I referred to of the 1812 conflict, I often think of the do or die nature of the ship crews who knew if they lost the fight, there would be no quarter given, no rescue from the enemy–there would be only death as their ship sank becoming their collective tombs.  So it is in this spirit that I love naval conflict from the period of world history where such things occurred, which is so wonderfully rendered in the Assassin games.

Personally I love the violent combat that is required in Assassin’s Creed III to even get to the naval battles.  Many game players over 35 years old might find themselves turned off at having to assassinate so many Redcoats to play through the story mode.  Some of my Tea Party friends who are history buffs and are inclined to spend their spare time building model trains and ships in bottles would love the naval combat graphics engine in the game, but they would find the brutality required to play the main character difficult to get their minds around.  That is the only weakness of the Assassin games.  The cost of the game is worth buying just for the ship battles, but that option should be available right out of the box to the advantage of the history buff—not the seasoned video gamer who loves the violent game play—like I do.

But that aside, it was bewildering to engage in combat with several schooner style ships in the choppy seas off the coast of North Carolina where the waves were 10 to 15 feet high and pitching my ship to and fro in a very violent manner.  I found that I had to time the cannon fire to these rough waters so that the cannons would reach their targets and not nose dive into the water short of their mark.  I have never seen such realism in a combat simulation of any kind, and it is just incredible to look at, let alone play.

The Assassin games are bringing history to life in a way I never thought was possible.  Needless to say, I am incredibly impressed.  As I write this the Horseshoe Casino has just opened in downtown Cincinnati and many adults my age converged upon its opening to spend $10 dollars per game on bets they are likely to never see a positive result.  The gaming that goes on in places like Vegas and casinos like The Horseshoe are consuming exercises that do little to give the players any kind of rewarding experience except for the occasional jackpot.  For my money, I would rather spend my gaming time on a $60 investment into a game like Assassin’s Creed III so at least the time spent playing can put the player into the seat of history and see and feel what it was like to stand on the docks of Boston in 1773 climbing aboard a ship to sail into the open sea blasting canons into the hull of an enemy in a rip-roaring wind attempting to turn ships over as sea water washes over the decks in a bubbling froth.  The ship battles are a heck of a lot more exciting than a casino slot machine that simply is designed to eat money from hopeful treasure hunters dressed to kill, but often losing the shirt right off their backs.  Games like Assassin’s Creed give back where a casino gaming experience can’t.

In such war simulations I tend to be a rammer when it comes to naval combat.  With all things being equal, the way to gain an advantage over an enemy is to be bolder in combat efforts so ramming into an opposing ship to cause them to hesitate before firing yields great results.  I do the same type of thing in actual politics.  Rather than dance around in never-ending stalemates, I tend to think like a pirate in being overly aggressive in achieving a victory.  (SEE THE LAKOTA LEVY FOR A SAMPLE)  I don’t have a lot of patience when it comes to politicians who insist on dancing with the enemy as less aggressive ship captains discover happens often in confrontations if they over-think their scenarios.  Playing games like Assassin’s Creed III can reveal these tendencies in a simulation before millions of wasted dollars go into political campaigns that only end up dancing around the enemy on the seas of life, (LIKE THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN).  The people reading this who will insist that their strategy was formed from years of experience and that such a simplified answer to age-long questions cannot be found in a video game—they are the same people who have lost many campaigns and are not qualified to provide an opinion.  Players of such a game not only learn a lot about history, but they also learn a lot about themselves.

Regardless of the level of enjoyment, the Assassin Creed video games are unsurpassed in their naval war simulations.  I could play them endlessly, and I scratch my head at those who are my age and older who scamper off to a casino to throw their money away when there are games like Assassin’s Creed III that are much more beneficial to the human mind, and an understanding of the history of our species.  But just for the sheer enjoyment of blowing up a gigantic galleon after a long fought battle, Ubisoft has achieved a level of detail that has never before been achieved in a game or war simulation of any kind any where.  I simply shudder to consider how cool the new game Black Flag will be.  I think I will be taking another vacation come fall of 2013, similar to the one I took to play The Old Republic.  Because if Assassin’s Creed 4 has better ship combat than Assassin’s Creed III, then I may never leave my house again………….because they are a lot of fun, and filled with rich history that will make a modern novel envious.

How much does my family like pirates?  Well, here is my oldest daughter’s birthday where her husband turned their townhome into a pirate haven.  You be the judge.  Needless to say, when Black Flag comes out, there will be a party at my house!

Rich Hoffman

“If they attack first………..blast em’!”

www.tailofthedragonbook.com