Tag: Doc Thompson

Disney’s Crusade Against Toy Guns: Hiding behind terrorism to appease their progressive base

Terrorism and the problems coming from it are the fault of a federal government that has failed to do its job.  Most of the terrorist incidents in America over the last twenty years are the direct result of a failed government to do what they were supposed to.  Yet their reaction is always that we should give them more government as a result of their incompetency, which most of us realize was a stupid thing to do.   Then of course comes the next debate as to private companies having to protect themselves due to the ineffectual policies by the government to hedge against terrorism.   People like me think an expansion of the Second Amendment is the needed result, whereas progressive organizations—like Disney believe in gun confiscation and more intrusions of personal liberty.

I am a long time fan of the Disney Company.  So it pained me greatly not only to see that they made such a terribly progressive Star Wars film but that they have announced that they are getting rid of toy guns within their parks.  For as long as I can remember Frontierland was a place where a child could buy a toy rifle and a coon skin cap as a memory of their Disney World visit.  But not anymore.  Regretfully, Disney as a company has let the liberal persuasion of capitalizing off government mismanagement marginalize their impact on the minds of our youth by pandering to gun grabbing politicians covering their own fallacies—purposely perpetrated, or by default—with gun censorship.  I would go so far as to call the following announcement entirely un-American:

Disney announced that metal detectors will be installed at the entrance to Disneyland and its Florida theme parks starting Thursday. The enhanced security measures will also ban adults from wearing masks or costumes, and discontinue toy gun sales inside all parks.

The entertainment giant announced the changes quietly Thursday, saying they were not based on “any single event,” but were intended to help security personnel and to make guests feel secure.

The portable metal detectors will be positioned beyond the “bag check” area at Disneyland and Walt Disney World parks in Florida. Security personnel will randomly select some visitors to pass through the magnetometers as part of a secondary screening.

The company also announced that it will beef up the deployment of police officers contracted to help with security around the parks. At Disneyland, that means beefing up patrols by the Anaheim Police Department. Disney did not give details about the scope of the expansion.

Disneyland will also increase patrols by explosive-sniffing dogs around the parks and related properties, such as Downtown Disney and its resort hotels, the company said.

The ban on masks and costumes will apply to all guests over 14 years old. And the company will no longer sell toy guns inside its parks, or allow guests to carry toy guns with them, regardless of age. Spokeswoman Suzy Brown said the company banned the toy guns “to avoid confusion or distraction for our cast members and security personnel.”

The rules are an apparent response to recent terrorist attacks in San Bernardino and Paris. Disney’s overseas parks will also enhance security, in accordance with recommendations from its experts at those locations, the company said.

The new rules are included on the company’s Disneyland Resort Park Rules page. “We continually review our comprehensive approach to security and are implementing additional security measures, as appropriate,” Brown said in a statement.

A Universal Studios Hollywood spokesperson said the park is testing metal detection as well, but doesn’t sell toy guns.

“We have begun testing metal detection at our theme park,” the spokesperson said. “We want our guests to feel safe when they come here. We’ve long used metal detection for special events, such as Halloween Horror Nights. This test is a natural progression for us as we study best practices for security in today’s world.”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/disneyland-other-parks-install-metal-detectors-ban-toy-183956756.html

Here is the hypocrisy of Disney, take away the guns and cannons from the Pirates of the Caribbean ride and see how many people line up to ride, or see the movies.  Take the guns out of Star Wars and see how much money the films make.  Even though the gun was taken away from Woody in Toy Story, at least he had the holster.  Guns and their application are a huge part of what has made Disney as a company successful in the past, and is at the heart of their continued success.  Taking a stand against toy guns falls right in line with the rest of progressive leaning insurgents from teachers to politicians who are suspending children in public schools for wearing Star Wars characters holding guns on their clothing—in an attempt to change Americas love for firearms—culturally.  One of the largest entertainment companies in the history of the world is taking a position against guns not for fear of terrorism, but to solidify the progressive plans of their friends and allies on the liberal side of politics.  And it’s disgusting.

Walt Disney would be rolling over in his grave!  Frontierland was intended to keep people from forgetting about their heritage in America—which revolved around the gun.  The Disney Company has shown at many levels within a day of each other how radicalized against American tradition they have become.  The Force Awakens was clearly a liberalized version of Star Wars—the most obvious one yet.  In the film again regarding the space cowboy Han Solo there were occasions where he borrowed Chewbacca’s bow caster and was impressed by the power it exhibited.  All Han Solo fans know that he prefers a powerful pistol which he’s often seen holding in promotional pictures.  It is impossible to believe that as long as he’s known Chewbacca, for over 60 years–that he’s never had a chance to fire that weapon before.  Likely there was a decision by the filmmakers to show that Solo appreciated “native” weapons to advance the progressive platform sympathetic to “native” cultures instead of imposing a particular viewpoint on others—it is a small world after all.  It could also be that J.J. Abrams or somebody else just wanted to see Han Solo shoot Chewbacca’s gun in the film.  But because of Disney’s behavior about guns and progressive acceptance of cultural values conspiracy theories are bound to flash across our minds.

Instead of slowly weaning America off firearms in their entertainment productions, why not go all the way and take guns out of their films and television shows completely?  If you want to know the truth, Disney, the reason that The Lone Ranger flopped at the box office was largely because Tonto was the featured character and The Lone Ranger gunfighter aspect was greatly reduced so to appease the progressive activists.  Americans wanted to see the gunfighter shooting guns, not flopping around in the film until the very end.   So instead of taking guns out of the parks and hiding behind reasons of terrorism prevention to sell it to the public, why not just declare to the American public that as an organization you are against guns?  Disney won’t do such a thing because it would have an impact on their bottom line.

The policy is pathetic and further evidence of how far the company has fallen from its roots of preserving traditional American values.  The rest of the world is welcome to share in those values, but it should go without saying that American culture is the best, and it’s up to companies like Disney to communicate those values in a way that helps other cultures adapt aspects that might help them be more fruitful.  It’s not Disney’s job to try to alter the advancement of American culture back to the ways of the lowly European history—the gun grabbing losers of progressive tendency.  Further imposing restrictions on their park visitors with bans on “toy guns” when much of their revenue is generated from “guns” is disrespectful, and intolerable.  And let me tell you this dear reader.  It is well-known that I love Disney World and the surrounding parks affiliated with their company.  But this will change my plans for many years.  If Disney as a company will take a stand against guns like they have over this latest issue—I won’t plan a trip in the near future.  I many abandon it all together as a future vacation destination.   I will not spend my money on such a company.  And there are many people like me who won’t either.  It’s a pretty bad move on their part.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

 

France is a Socialist Country: Understanding the intent of Four Horsmen and climate change arguments

I recommend that you watch this documentary called the Four Horsemen by Ross Aschcroft, who is an English director whose provocative film shown below evokes how the modern-day Four Horsemen continue to ride roughshod over the people who least can afford it.  It provokes a new kind of socialism that is supported by young Millennials like the group Anonymous and the Occupy Walls Street protestors.  It essentially is a repackaged hatred of capitalism that represents European socialism attempting to spread to every corner of the world, particularly in America.  It’s important to understand how the attacks on American enterprise come, how it’s being sold, and what the history of it is.  When Obama and French president François Hollande celebrated their climate change agreements in Paris recently the communist strategy behind their emphasis was not reported by the press and to those who don’t know any better.  Films like the Four Horsmen sound like reasonable suggestions—just like climate change might seem reasonable on the surface.  But it’s not reasonable, and many Americans don’t understand how deep the roots of socialism run in Europe—and how politicians in the United States have sought to mimic much of what they’ve seen there in American policy.

France is not a capitalist country that represents the values of the “west.”  It has a very long history with socialism and they are quite open about it.  Here is a bit of the history of France and its political system which was quite evident in the Four Horsmen film.  Of course the point in exhibiting this information is to show how France has influenced all of Europe, particularly Great Britain and liberal filmmakers like Ross Ashcroff.   The Socialist Party (French: Parti socialiste [paʁti sɔsjaˈlist], PS) is a social-democratic,[4] centrist political party in France, and the largest party of the French centre-left or center-right. The PS is one of the two major contemporary political parties in France, along with the Republicans. The Socialist Party replaced the earlier French Section of the Workers’ International (SFIO) in 1969, and is currently led by First Secretary Jean-Christophe Cambadélis. The PS is a member of the Party of European Socialists (PES), the Socialist International (SI) and the Progressive Alliance.

The PS first won power in 1981, when its candidate François Mitterrand was elected President of France in the 1981 presidential election. Under Mitterrand, the party achieved a governing majority in the National Assembly from 1981 to 1986 and again from 1988 to 1993. PS leader Lionel Jospin lost his bid to succeed Mitterrand as president in the 1995 presidential election against Rally for the Republic leader Jacques Chirac, but became prime minister in a cohabitation government after the 1997 parliamentary elections, a position Jospin held until 2002, when he was again defeated in the presidential election.

In 2007, the party’s candidate for the presidential election, Ségolène Royal, was defeated by conservative UMP candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. Then, the Socialist party won most of regional and local elections and it won control of the Senate in 2011 for the first time in more than fifty years.[5] On 6 May 2012, François Hollande, the First Secretary of the Socialist Party from 1997 to 2008, was elected President of France, and the next month, the party won the majority in the National Assembly.

The PS also formed several figures who acted at the international level: Jacques Delors, who was the eighth President of the European Commission from 1985 to 1994 and the first person to serve three terms in that office, was from the Socialist Party,[6] as well as Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who was the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund from 2007 to 2011,[7] and Pascal Lamy, who was Director-General of the World Trade Organization from 2005 to 2013.[8]

In 2014, the party had 60,000 members.[1] In 2012 the party had claimed 173,486 members.[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Party_(France)

 

François Maurice Adrien Marie Mitterrand (French: [fʁɑ̃swa mɔʁis mitɛʁɑ̃] ( listen); 26 October 1916 – 8 January 1996) was a French statesman, who served as the President of France from 1981 until 1995. He is the longest-serving President of France and, as leader of the Socialist Party, the first figure from the left elected President under the Fifth Republic.

Reflecting family influences, Mitterrand started political life on the Catholic nationalist right. He served under the Vichy Regime in its earlier years. Subsequently, however, he joined the Resistance, moved to the left, and held ministerial office repeatedly under the Fourth Republic. He opposed de Gaulle‘s establishment of the Fifth Republic. Although at times a politically isolated figure, Mitterrand outmaneuvered rivals to become the left’s standard-bearer in every presidential election from 1965 to 1988, except 1969. Elected President in the May 1981 presidential election, he was re-elected in 1988 and held office until 1995.

Mitterrand invited the Communist Party into his first government, a controversial move at the time. In the event, the Communists were boxed in as junior partners and, rather than taking advantage, saw their support erode. They left the cabinet in 1984. Early in his first term, Mitterrand followed a radical economic program, including nationalization of key firms, but after two years, with the economy in crisis, he reversed course. His foreign and defense policies built on those of his Gaullist predecessors. His partnership with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl advanced European integration via the Maastricht Treaty, but he accepted German reunification only reluctantly. During his time in office he was a strong promoter of culture and implemented a range of costly “Grands Projets“. He was twice forced by the loss of a parliamentary majority into “cohabitation governments” with conservative cabinets led, respectively, by Jacques Chirac (1986–88), and Édouard Balladur (1993–95). Less than eight months after leaving office, Mitterrand died from the prostate cancer he had successfully concealed for most of his presidency.

Beyond making the French left electable, Mitterrand presided over the rise of the Socialist Party to dominance of the left, and the decline of the once-mighty Communist Party (as a share of the popular vote in the first presidential round, the Communists shrank from a peak of 21.27% in 1969 to 8.66% in 1995, at the end of Mitterrand’s second term, and to 1.93% in the 2007 election).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Mitterrand

To many left leaning political people capitalism is what America is, where corporations are the targets of crony deals between politics and free enterprise.   The bar of understanding has been set so low that capitalism has been defined as the mess that currently makes up the Washington beltway.   This is largely because we have allowed Europe—specifically the socialism of places like France to define capitalism as a definition allowing film and television producers in love with Paris and London to create the standard understanding of money’s measurement in our culture with films like Four Horsmen.  But socialism and communism did not go away during the McCarthy Hearings, or the fall of the Berlin Wall.  It is quite alive and well, and being taught in our local schools, in our media, and in our admiration for the Europeans by a class of people in America who really don’t understand capitalism—particularly pure capitalism without the crony aspect.

It is important to understand history and to know that as far back as most people alive today can remember, France has been a socialist county.  It must be understood that when there are climate change discussions in Paris that it’s not protecting the environment that they are after, it’s more of building sympathy for proposals like the ones expressed in Ross Ashcroff’s film Four Horsmen.  These are not people who want a free market economy, they quote Plato in the film, but ignore that it was Aristotle who built the philosophy of American politics and economy. And that for America to work correctly, Plato’s prehistoric socialism must be eradicated and replaced with competitive environments full of inventiveness and productive enterprise rooted in profit.  It is to understand that before a true indulgence of the market forces at work can be comprehended proper definitions for things must be clear.  And clearly the kid Ross Ashcroft missed the mark as do many.  That is because they were bred to believe that Europe is still relevant and that their long history with socialism is the standard of the day.  But for us in America, we need to sever that relationship until places like France get the clear message—that they are entirely on the wrong path and are destined for continued failure.  The only way they can hide that failure is by sabotaging through any means possible the economic power of the west, and the productivity of free enterprise.

Rich “Cliffhanger” 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 Elusive Nature of Leadership: Understanding the need for an entirely different approach

I know I write a lot about the failure of our education system, and need for Donald Trump as president.  While those subjects may become laborious to the everyday reader, there are so many angles to discuss that only voluminous examination from every trajectory of consideration is appropriate to the difficulties of our day.  Sometimes I run across a video clip that really exhibits the reason, and such an example came to me while I was watching a Donald Trump interview with Chris Cuomo on CNN.  I was so astonished by some of the things Chris said that it took me several days to get my thoughts right about it.  Watch the video below.  The specific part of the interview that I found so astonishing was the part that Cuomo uttered in question form, “how do you know you’re right if so many people disagree with you. “  Boy did he say a mouthful right there.

Leadership is the most elusive element of modern culture.  Even with all our science and physiological understanding of thought processes—academics do not understand it.  Very few people understand real leadership.  I actually deal with this kind of stupidity all the time.  I understand leadership extremely well; it’s always been a very natural thing for me.  When I read books like Trump’s Art of the Deal, and Sun Tzu’s Art of War, I understand the author’s point of view instinctively as opposed to the novice student hearing some of the elements of those books for the first time.  A lot of that comes from my education background and life experiences which looked to people on the outside to be extremely reckless.  I have always known the right thing to do even when nobody else could see it, in every aspect of my life—so it’s easy for me to look at Chris Cuomo and wonder if he’s from some other planet.  I’ve heard that baffling contemplation so many times that it doesn’t surprise me.  But for the sake of dramatic writing, I’ll fester along the line of thought to make the point more interesting.  Leadership does not come from focus groups or consensus of any kind.  It comes from raw individualized leadership only—meaning other voices are pointless.  It is good to utilize other people’s opinions for the sake of “team building.”  But a “team” approach is not the same as “leadership.”  It’s just a means of getting large numbers of people to do what you want them to do.  A team approach is fine so long as that team listens to their head coach.  Without a strong leader, a “team” will be ineffective.

When I talk about things like that to people who think they are the smartest people in the room, I get hokey references to all my mysterious books as if somewhere in them was a famous recipe for leadership that they can figure out if they just put together the right mix of a “team” working toward consensus.   As I write this the new Star Wars films are getting ready to release and there is a lot of excitement about them.  There really may never be such an event on planet earth again, where the entire world is so ripe with anticipation.  While I think the movies might be pretty good, I have serious doubts that they will be as good as the movies George Lucas made when he ran Lucasfilm from a leadership position as a sole proprietor.   The new films are certainly made by “committee” and I think that will show up in what comes across in the movie theater.  The message of the old movies was individualism versus the state because that was something that George Lucas believed in during that part of his life.  The new movies are about decentralized authority and consensus building.  For kids going to the movies today, the films will be the best thing they’ll have seen, but in the long lens of history, these new movies will lack the punch of the originals because of the method for which they were made—just like any company that tries to make a product after a strong leader has either left them, or they’ve tried a more inclusive approach—a rule by committee.   That is exactly the problem the Apple Company is suffering through right now.  They still make a good product, but they lack the innovation and spirit they had when Steve Jobs was in charge.   They can hold their own for a while, but are slipping a bit each year under weak leadership.

Trump would be a good president because of what Cuomo asked him.  Trump instinctively knows what’s right to do.  A good leader can make a decision even if nobody else understands the nature of the problem yet. The reason why is because of Robert Pirsig’s Metaphysics of Quality.  CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW.  Leaders are simply at the front of the metaphorical train instead of the back.  It doesn’t matter if you are talking about Jim Harbaugh leaving the San Francisco 49ers  to become coach of the Michigan Wolverines in college or George Patton, strong leadership is immediately noticed the moment its gone.   Good leadership is noticed on a restaurant drive through—good leadership keeps the food moving, bad leadership drives down the food quality and window times.  The moment that Jim Harbaugh left San Francisco for Michigan, that professional football team went into decline but the college team was on the uptake.  Good leaders never listen to the world around them except for intelligence gathering.  Good leaders always act from the inner voice that only they understand at the front of the train of thought—on the cutting edge of decision-making.  It’s not a mystery to those who naturally possess the trait.

However, our education system teaches kids like Chris Cuomo that answers to life come from collective consensus, and is a very unfortunate misunderstanding.  I won’t say that it’s a deliberate lie, just an improper understanding of where to put specific emphasis on personal value.  The schools have lied to these poor kids and taught them all the wrong things for all the wrong social reasons.  Everyone can’t be a leader, because most of the time they lack the courage to be.  It takes a lot of strength and courage to be a leader, and some people just don’t have it in them.  It can be taught to some extent, but only in small degrees.  It actually makes me sad to visit a hospital and see people having babies because most children have indications of the leadership trait available to them as infants–after all they had just survived nine months inside a womb and overcame the immense psychological trauma of child-birth.  If treated correctly, many of those children could be nurtured into the kind of mind that producers good leaders, and if America really wanted to solve some problems, it would focus on strengthening its children right out of the womb, not through some government confiscation program but by empowering the parents to promote self-reliance in infants as soon as possible, learning to walk, learning to play by themselves—not with other children—and developing a strong imagination with stimulation of many aspects of thought as soon as the neurons in their brains have connected to allow such thinking.  But what happens to most of those children is they are coddled too long next to their mothers, and their fathers take orders from society at large falling in behind some authority figure that is probably incompetent by default.  Children directly mimic everything they see from their parents so if the parents are social messes, the children will struggle with those aspects for the rest of their lives.  For many children their limits in life are pressed into them before they are even six months old, and it just saddens me every time I see it.

What’s unique about Trump is that he’s always been way in front of the cutting edge—his whole life.  He’d be a great president because he wouldn’t listen to the opinions of other people—that’s the point!  He doesn’t need consultants, he doesn’t need focus groups.  He needs information, but he doesn’t need anybody to tell him what to do with it.  It would be my hope that under a Trump presidency that he’d cause a renaissance in American leadership just because his methods would be on full display around the world and people would want to copy him.  That might bring out a few more babies per year who have the potential to be strong leaders in the future.  Trump often compares himself to George Patton, and it’s not because of the militaristic nature of both of them, it’s because they both possess similar beliefs in themselves—even when the rest of the world thinks they are crazy—they can see clearly what to do and when to do it.  To those without that skill, they are baffled as to how Trump and Patton could possible know what to do without some support from their peers.  But leadership is a lonely enterprise.  Leaders are alone in the troubles of their minds and they are alone in the successes—they are alone most of the time, even when they are with people who love them.  Being a strong leader is much about being alone—even in a crowd, because nobody understands.   American culture needs to at least embrace its leaders and if such a thing became fashionable through major changes in our education system and a populist president who would make bold front page news every day of his time in office, then maybe some of those children born under freedom might develop in them the natural inclination of leadership.  But before that can happen someone like Trump would need to be able to sell it to the masses.  Only then would the qualities of leadership become more widely acceptable—and understood.  But it will take a generation to get there.  There is nothing easy about leadership.  It is the most important element of a free republic.  Consensus building is absolutely the wrong approach.  It doesn’t work, and it never will.  It can produce moderate results, but spectacular ambitions will always reside among the few who embrace the cutting edge and by their very nature—who always see most clearly and act most decisively.  Trump is one of those rare few who do it so fluidly so this is a rare opportunity for the United States, and I’m excited about it.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Brilliance of Donald Trump: Why being a little wild is a good thing

Amazingly, Donald Trump’s recent position of monitoring and restricting the movement of Muslim’s in and out of American borders is creating quite a stir—politically.  While most in the Beltway believe Trump is a madman, I would say that Trump is behaving like the brilliant tactician that he is.  No wonder the United States is losing around the world, because the people in mainstream politics are clueless about negotiation and strategy.  Trump’s comments are brilliant for several reasons.  First he’s playing the typical high low game needed in any negotiation.  He knows by taking an extreme position, he’ll force elected officials to at least consider some measures of security in relation to the Muslim religion.  The terrorist element is obviously hiding within that religion behind peaceful people, but there is no way to root the bad guys out if you don’t force the Islamic community to separate themselves from the radicals.  In the short run, radicals are forced into hiding until things calm down which obviously makes the world safer through the Christmas Holiday.  Additionally, all the idiots who are coming out against Trump, which is everyone pretty much in the Beltway—are demonstrating why they are unqualified to be president as Americans want somebody to make decisive decisions even if they are standing alone.  To understand the extent of the issue, watch this ABC Report on Trump with clips from a recent Barbra Walters interview.

Trump knows exactly what he’s doing.  Six months from now he’ll be able to say that he was the first Republican to identify the problem, which will prove to be quite extensive in its sleeper cell network, and he will show Republican delegates that he is willing to do anything and everything to beat Hillary Clinton ahead of the convention.  That is after all what they all share in common as a concern, beating Hillary Clinton in a head to head election.  No other Republican candidate has a chance because it will take extreme positions to outscore her in a media field that is clearly in her corner.  You can’t play nice with her and win.  You have to hit her lower than she is willing to go, which is lower than most anybody can fathom.

Trump has many business interests around the world, particularly in the UAE, so he’s showing Republican voters that he is willing to go against his own interests to do what he thinks is right—which dispels one of the concerns Republicans have with Trump.  The New York billionaire has had a friendly relationship with the Clintons in the past, so Trump has to prove that he will hit Hillary hard and not go soft as a candidate.  So this Muslim debate does several things that are needed for Trump and the nation and he has orchestrated it all very brilliantly.  It puts the issues of Muslim terrorist cells hiding behind the religion on the front burner for discussion which is needed.  Complacency will only lead to many more domestic attacks—particularly through the Christmas Season.  Trump has also thrown cold water on the millions of dollars of attack ads that Jeb Bush and John Kasich have taken out against him ahead of the primaries.  The money of those other Republican presidential candidates and their donors has been completely wasted, so of course they are mad at Trump.  Then of course there is the Obama administration that is quietly terrified of a Trump nominee, as there will be unfettered criticism and bombastic dissemination of Obama and his former employee Hillary Clinton in his last year as president, establishing his legacy forever as a complete failure. Of course they think Trump is unqualified to be president, because they have set the bar so low that Trump would be unable to live under that bar.  Trump is promising to make fools of all of them and that’s the real fear of the comments about Muslims.   They don’t care about those people of religion; they care about being exposed as political losers.

The way that ABC presented that report was interesting, it was essentially no different from school kids debating who the best band is, or what is fashionable or not fashionable.  If a kid in school distinguishes themselves as a stand-out from the crowd, they get picked on endlessly until they comply with the recommendations of mass association.  Peer pressure is what public schools are all about—fitting into a crowd and merging with the collective opinion on a matter.  But real leaders are those who stand against the tide, who are the first to see a problem and offer a solution—even if nobody else understands it.  I was always one of those kids; I never fit neatly into place and constantly pushed back against the masses.  I never did what was expected of me, and now many years later, I have been proven correct time and time again.  Eventually people in the masses follow a good leader—they do come around to the correct way of thinking by necessity of their own survival.

Trump more than anything has shown himself to be a leader.  As the world turns against him he has managed to put himself on the front page of every newspaper in the world with hundreds of millions of dollars of free advertising showing himself to be willing to be a decisive leader—which is the most sought after trait that voters are looking for in the 2016 election.  There is no issue more important than that one to normal people outside of the Beltway.  The Trump comments were controversial, but there is no downside.  What he has done is made an investment that will pay off greatly by the time summer comes around in the northern hemisphere, and there will be no stopping him.

To prove themselves competent, authorities will have to bust terrorist cells during the Holiday season to prove they are doing their jobs—and they’ll do it to prove to Trump that all Muslims are not terrorists.  Because of their anger at Trump they will be forced to actually do their jobs for a change—something they wouldn’t have been motivated to do before Trump’s comments.  Likely we will all be a lot safer for the short run as Muslims themselves seek to push their radicals out of the darkness into the light of day to avoid association which will only help our Homeland Security investigations. And the Obama administration for helping these terrorists gain strength will be forced to pick sides—which they obviously don’t want to do.

All this will play in favor of Trump going into the fall of 2016 where he’ll be poised to take credit for it all—because it was his actions that provoked all the behavior change which left unchecked would have led to many more San Bernardino shootings.  Of course the political establishment doesn’t understand all these techniques of strategy, which is why they are the ones not qualified to be president.  All this that Trump is doing is outlined in his very good book on business, The Art of the Deal.  There is no secret—he spells it out for all to see.  Anybody with half a brain would know what he’s doing—and fortunately, many Americans do have a brain when they are given the right things to think about.

This is the only way to break loose the issues that are destroying our nation—the bad guys have to be rooted out and exposed in this fashion.  I know a thing or two about these strategies and have used them myself many times.  They work in both small and large situations.  But in Trump’s case, they will strike fear into his enemies when he takes the desk of the Oval Office.  He will be in a wonderful negotiation position by then, because it does pay to be a little wild.  Often it pays very well.  But to sell that wildness you have to be willing to carry out an act when called upon.  And if you have to pick something to display it, you do it with the most strategic subject possible so that if you do have to pull the trigger you accomplish another objective with the wildness.  That’s why Trump is the best.  And that’s why he SHOULD certainly be president.  You don’t win by playing patty cake.  You win with being a little crazy when it counts most.  Christmas of 2015 after a terrorist attack that the current president is avoiding to name is a good place to start.  New York will be safer because of Trump’s wildness, and so will everyone else.

 

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

 

President Obama’s Pathetic Speech: Keeping Donald Trump, alive

It was so astonishingly embarrassing how President Obama delivered the “terrorism” address to the nation on Sunday, December 8th 2015. First of all, Obama avoided using the Oval Office desk—a place where so many presidents of the past used that tool to calm the American public after a tragedy. Instead, Obama used a pedestal in the middle of the room. That was a very strange thing to do which points obviously to everything that Dinesh D’Souza has been saying about Obama, that he’s so anti-imperialist that he hates the reputation of the United States around the world and is seeking to change the nation into “something else.” Whatever it is, this guy is just terrible, and way over his head. His presidency was launched by terrorists, namely Bill Ayers, and it has been defined by terrorism. What else would we have expected from a Marxist community organizer? Did anybody really think a University of Chicago intellectual could manage the most powerful country on earth just by waking up in the White House every day? Well, apparently some people did think that. And they were obviously wrong.

Those same Obama supporters point to Donald Trump and declare that he doesn’t have the track record to run the country. Please………..give me a break. Look, I’m a Trump supporter. I love his books and think he’s the best example of an Ayn Rand type of candidate that we are likely to ever see. I’m not crazy about Trump’s positions on eminent domain, or casinos—but he’s as self-made and smart as they have ever been in American business. And I want him for president after this joke Obama has mismanaged our precious country into oblivion. I’ve said it so many times now, the message should be quite clear. But for a change don’t just read my words, but the words of another Trump supporter that put the politics of 2015 in a proper context. Read it for yourself and pass it along to a potential supporter. Politics as usual will not suffice, its time we turn things around into another direction—the opposite of where Obama is currently. And that won’t happen doing things the way we have in the past.

What I See Happening In a Trump Presidency

By Bill Bennett

They will kill him before they let him be president. It could be a Republican or a Democrat that instigates the shutting up of Trump. Don’t be surprised if Trump has an accident. Some people are getting very nervous: Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few. It’s about the unholy dynamics between big government, big business, and big media. They all benefit by the billions of dollars from this partnership, and it’s in all of their interests to protect one another. It’s one for all and all for one. It’s a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich, everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We’re the patsies. But for once, the powerful socialist cabal and the corrupt crony capitalists are scared. The over-the-top reaction to Trump by politicians of both parties, the media, and the biggest corporations of America has been so swift and insanely angry that it suggests they are all threatened and frightened. Donald Trump can self-fund. No matter how much they say to the contrary, the media, business, and political elite understand that Trump is no joke. He could actually win and upset their nice cozy apple cart.

It’s no coincidence that everyone has gotten together to destroy The Donald. It’s because most of the other politicians are part of the a good old boys club. They talk big, but they won’t change a thing. They are all beholden to big-money donors. They are all owned by lobbyists, unions, lawyers, gigantic environmental organizations, and multinational corporations – like Big Pharmacy or Big Oil. Or they are owned lock, stock, and barrel by foreigners like George Soros owns Obama or foreign governments own Hillary and their Clinton Foundation donations.

These run-of-the-mill establishment politicians are all puppets owned by big money. But there’s one man who isn’t beholden to anyone. There’s one man who doesn’t need foreigners, or foreign governments, or George Soros, or the United Auto Workers, or the teacher’s union, or the Service Employees International Union, or the Bar Association to fund his campaign. Billionaire tycoon and maverick Donald Trump doesn’t need anyone’s help. That means he doesn’t care what the media says. He doesn’t care what the corporate elites think. That makes him very dangerous to the entrenched interests. That makes Trump a huge threat to those people. Trump can ruin everything for the bribed politicians and their spoiled slave masters.

Don’t you ever wonder why the GOP has never tried to impeach Obama? Don’t you wonder why John Boehner and Mitch McConnell talk a big game, but never actually try to stop Obama? Don’t you wonder why Congress holds the purse strings, yet has never tried to de-fund Obamacare or Obama’s clearly illegal executive action on amnesty for illegal aliens? Bizarre, right? It defies logic, right? First, I’d guess many key Republicans are being bribed.

Secondly, I believe many key Republicans are being blackmailed. Whether they are having affairs, or secretly gay, or stealing taxpayer money, the National Security Agency knows everything. Ask former House Speaker Dennis Hastert about that. The government even knew he was withdrawing large sums of his own money from his own bank account. The NSA, the SEC, the IRS, and all the other three-letter government agencies are watching every Republican political leader. They surveil everything.

Thirdly, many Republicans are petrified of being called racists, so they are scared to ever criticize Obama or call out his crimes, let alone demand his impeachment.

Fourth , why rock the boat? After defeat or retirement, if you’re a good old boy, you’ve got a $5 million-per-year lobbying job waiting. The big-money interests have the system gamed. Win or lose, they win. But Trump doesn’t play by any of these rules. Trump breaks up this nice, cozy relationship between big government, big media, and big business. All the rules are out the window if Trump wins the Presidency. The other politicians will protect Obama and his aides but not Trump.

Remember: Trump is the guy who publicly questioned Obama’s birth certificate. He questioned Obama’s college records and how a mediocre student got into an Ivy League university.

Now, he’s doing something no Republican has the chutzpah to do. He’s questioning our relationship with Mexico; he’s questioning why the border is wide open; he’s questioning why no wall has been built across the border; he’s questioning if allowing millions of illegal aliens into America is in our best interests; he’s questioning why so many illegal aliens commit violent crimes, yet are not deported; and he’s questioning why our trade deals with Mexico, Russia and China are so bad.

Trump has the audacity to ask out loud why American workers always get the short end of the stick. Good question! I’m certain Trump will question what happened to the almost billion dollars given in a rigged no-bid contract to college friends of Michelle Obama at foreign companies to build the defective Obamacare website. By the way, that tab is now up to $5 billion.

Trump will ask if Obamacare’s architects can be charged with fraud for selling it by lying.

Trump will investigate Obama’s widespread IRS conspiracy, not to mention Obama’s college records.

Trump will prosecute Clinton and Obama for fraud committed to cover up Benghazi before the election.

How about the fraud committed by employees of the Labor Department when they made up dramatic job numbers in the last jobs report before the 2012 election? Obama, the multinational corporations and the media need to stop Trump. They recognize this could get out of control. If left unchecked, telling the raw truth and asking questions everyone else is afraid to ask, Trump could wake a sleeping giant. Trump’s election would be a nightmare. Obama has committed many crimes. No one else but Trump would dare to prosecute. He will not hesitate. Once Trump gets in and gets a look at the cooked books and Obama’s records, the game is over. The jig is up. The goose is cooked. Holder could wind up in prison. Jarrett could wind up in prison. Obama bundler Corzine could wind up in prison for losing $1.5 billion of customer money. Clinton could wind up in jail for deleting 32,000 emails or for accepting bribes from foreign governments while Secretary of State, or for misplacing $6 billion as the head of the State Department, or for lying about Benghazi. The entire upper level management of the IRS could wind up in prison.

Obamacare will be de-funded and dismantled. Obama himself could wind up ruined, his legacy in tatters. Trump will investigate. Trump will prosecute. Trump will go after everyone involved. That’s why the “Dogs of Hell” have been unleashed on Donald Trump.

Yes, it’s become open season on Donald Trump. The left and the right are determined to attack his policies, harm his businesses, and, if possible, even keep him out of the coming debates. But they can’t silence him. And they sure can’t intimidate him. The more they try, the more the public will realize that he’s the one telling the truth.

 

William John “Bill” Bennett is an American conservative politician, and political theorist, who served as Secretary of Education from 1985 to 1988 under President Ronald Reagan

As this article said at the beginning, don’t be surprised if something happens to Donald Trump. I’m sure there are plans as I write this. But accomplishing a task is quite different from planning it. And I think Donald Trump can handle himself quite well. But I’ll say this, if Trump needs it, all he needs to do is ask, and I’d be happy to help him survive to another day. And I’m sure you dear reader feel the same way too. We’re not playing patty cake here. We are in an ideological war, and Trump is the battle flag of what’s left of American culture. We can’t let the bad guys capture it.

If you find you need some help Donald, just give me a call. I’d be happy to help.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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


image

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Proof That American Muslims Celebrated During 9/11: The selective amnesia of mainstream media

It is truly astonishing the level of collective hypnosis that is occurring on the topic of radicalized Muslims within the United States. Exchanges like the one below on the Morning Joe with Donald Trump continue, where they berate him for his assertion that there were cheering Muslims in New Jersey who were having block parties in celebration as the World Trade Center buildings came down on 9/11 2001. I saw it, my family saw it, and obviously Donald Trump saw it. I know it was a long time ago and YouTube had not been invented yet. I also understand that many of today’s reporters were probably just learning to read in grade school so they probably don’t remember. They think the world and its history started once YouTube came to life in 2005 where video was suddenly readily available anytime to anyone. However, I’m sure there is video of the occurrences, we know what some of those Islamic groups were called—so it shouldn’t be too hard to dig up the video proving correct what Donald Trump is now saying—because we all saw it that were alive and cognoscente back then. I think many people are just choosing to forget about it because the implication is so scary that people would rather not know of it. One of the groups cheering was an organization that became Revolution Islam. Before we get into that, have a look and listen to the extreme denial displayed on that Morning Joe program. It really is astonishing. There is evidence to the contrary of what they are saying in the very next video.

Revolution Islam was known as recently as 2009 to protest outside of mosques in New York City trying to recruit peaceful Muslims into their radical agenda. They openly celebrated 9/11, the Fort Hood shootings, and every act of terror catalogued by Islamic radicals anywhere in the world. As they say, the Quran commands them to terrorize non believers. They would gather in the streets of New York and shout down all passers-by right in the light of day. They made no attempt to hide their behavior and the media reported on it. CNN did as well as others. There may have been an attempt to re-edit history to favor a pro-Palestinian vantage point, or perhaps the oil barons threw money at news organizations to erase their past financing of terrorist activity, but something happened to hide the videos from 2001 showing groups like Revolution Islam cheering in the streets after 9/11. But you can bet on it, those videos are out there, the news organizations just need to dig them out. Revolution Islam is part of a fringe group within the United States of radical Islamic fundamentalists who want a global caliphate and they will stop at nothing to get it. They openly worshipped Osama Bin Laden with great love—even saying that they cared more about him than themselves. Don’t believe me; well watch the video below from Anderson Cooper’s show 360 on CNN. He’s a credible source and did a story on this group with a sit down interview in 2009. I have no question CNN could dig up in their files the video of the cheering Muslims as the 9/11 towers were falling down. I know what I saw. If they need help searching their data bases just look under this group’s name, Revolution Islam. Likely the FBI, CIA, and every other news organization have the same video. Even if they don’t, or have destroyed them, this video at least shows the remnants of their behavior before they went into hiding after the terrorist attacks. These radicals were still operating out in the open.

If you haven’t already, make sure to copy this video on a private file so that you’ll have it later. If you are reading this story a week or so after I have written it and the video is gone, it’s because it was pulled from YouTube. As of this writing over a million people have seen the video, but if it gets out in the open it will likely be removed. It’s hard to say where Google’s loyalties are in regard to this global desire to help radical Muslims establish a global caliphate rooted in Dark Ages mentality. I wouldn’t think that Google or other forward leaning organizations would support this kind of censorship, but you never know. I am surprised that the collective media is so adamant about creating a separation between Muslim behavior and radical Islamists because the proof has been quite evident for a number of years. CNN’s report shown above is all the proof you need to comprehend the scope of the problem.

There really are only two explanations—we are talking about an Alex Jones massive conspiracy theory involving globalists who are using Islamic fundamentalists to perpetuate war and anxiety so that Americans will give up their Constitutional rights in favor of a global government which they control—or Americans endured such a trauma on 9/11 that they have eliminated the facts from their minds to deal with the terrible tragedy. After all, we all know Muslim people and want to think of them as nice and peaceful. Nobody wants to think that the person they know could be one of these nut-case terrorists so perhaps we have blocked out the unpleasant thought in favor of a national dialogue that preserves our sanity. Such bad news isn’t good for television ratings, and maybe that is the reason for the mass elimination of video from that period. But one thing is very clear—there were American Muslims very happy about 9/11 and they were celebrating.

Living in New York Donald Trump surely saw the CNN story and reflected back to the 9/11 period eight years prior. As much as Donald Trump had been interviewed and pays attention to the news—I have no doubt that he saw such reports in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. I remember such things too. I certainly remember the celebrations overseas, and I remember having discussions with people about homegrown Muslims sympathizing with the World Trade Center attackers—that were generated by what we saw on TV. After 9/11 a lot of Muslims felt they had to go underground so they hid their religion for a time. There were lots of reports from the media who felt sorry for these people as the established order of things took on the Muslim cause almost as a civil rights issue. Much of the bad behavior that we feared about radical Islam was being ignored so that innocent people wouldn’t be caught in the crossfire. Without question that is why so many young reporters today are reluctant to criticism of Islam in any way—even if the evidence points right into the doors of a mosque.

Over time it became so unfashionable to criticize radical Islamic behavior that the media had decided to ignore it. They put them in the same class as other minorities in America propping them up as a civil rights issue and threw their support behind massive America collection programs like the NSA hoping that Homeland Security would protect them from further attacks. When those attacks did come the blame was placed everywhere but the obvious. Fort Hood became a situation of “workplace violence” while the Boston Marathon Bombing became a couple of misunderstood children—not focusing on their radical Islamic exposure as the cause of the violence. For the same reasons that many people can’t remember much of the events during a violent automobile accident—because the brain shuts down as a survival mechanism—Islamic terror is undergoing the same type of process across American society, and the media certainly has a huge case of that selective amnesia. Whatever the cause of it, whether conspiracy, or psychological—it is a factor that shows up glaringly in these Donald Trump interviews with the media. They chose not to remember, yet the presidential candidate does—just as many do and the evidence is there for everyone to see.

Even if there is never any evidence of video from 2001, it cannot be denied that there weren’t American Muslims who were just as crazy as the typical ISIS terrorist now. CNN interviewed them with a credible journalist who was mainstream—and gay. Anderson Cooper is as harmless toward advocating false conspiracies as it gets. He interviewed members of Revolution Islam to get the facts and they weren’t hard to get. Those people were standing in front of a mosque advertising to fellow Muslims why they should become radicalized. What Donald Trump is saying isn’t conspiracy, or even politically incorrect. It’s a fact, as clear as the daytime sun on a cloudless day. The only difference is Trump hasn’t decided to ignore the facts he’s observed through history—while the general public and the media have. Yet that doesn’t change the threat level, and that is something we all need to take very seriously. Not every Muslim is a radical. But it only takes one or two, and given the recent history of treacherous acts, terrorists aren’t coming out of Christianity, Buddhism, or Hinduism—they are coming out of the Islamic religion. All that anybody needs to do is pay attention to the obvious.

Sorry to say it to the people who don’t support Trump, but he’s right again. He has a good reason to double down on the issue. Because he’s not wrong.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT