Tag: Down the Rabbit Hole

The List of Accomplishments of the Trump Administration: After just one year, there is a lot to be thankful for

It’s hard to say how many articles I’ve written about the potential for a Donald Trump presidency, or the success of the events of his first year.  I have a million things to do each day it seems and little time to do any of them, but due to the truly corrupt forces that have always been at work against our nation the Donald Trump presidency was the first solution in my mind to putting those forces back into their place.  I saw the election of Donald Trump as a self-funded, outsider who strives pressure because he functions best with it to solve the many problems that we have leeched into our republic to overthrow it and cast us all back into the stone ages.  My reason for writing so much is that I don’t feel our professional media has the aptitude or reasoning to see the situation properly so that I must write about this president defending him righteously because there are so few outlets out there that will. I never expected Trump to be perfect but I did expect him to strive for perfection and he does.  After just one year since Trump was elected, when the major changes to our national outlook started to take place, the fine people at MAGAPill.com have compiled a list of all the accomplishments of the Trump administration for all to see at the following link.  It is well worth a look.

http://www.magapill.com/

That is an impressive list and as a student of history you will not find a single other president who has done more or even attempted so much.  Before Trump put his name in the ring at Trump Tower in Manhattan back in the summer of 2015 I was looking for a Calvin Coolidge type of president—someone who would bring hard work back to the White House and try to sell the idea of America back to the people who live around the world in a positive way.  It was obvious to me due to inside baseball experience that the two-party systems just couldn’t produce the right kind of person for the job so I had lost faith in the ability of our elections to find a suitable candidate.  To be president a person has to love all the things it takes to get there.  For instance, for me, as busy as I am, I don’t like it.  I love lots of private time.  I do enjoy doing television work, and talking on the radio—and standing in front of a crowd is something that comes naturally for me.  But to my very core I like my private thoughts and I hate dealing with stupid people.  A president has to actually enjoy people and all the ceremony of such a high-profile job.  But they must also like to do the hard work of reading, listening, and managing all the elements that come with such an important job.  People can say what they want about the politics of Trump, but what they can’t take from him is his enthusiasm for Americana and a genuine love of hard work.

Way too often we elect people into these responsible positions, John Kasich of Ohio comes to mind, where they come into an office with lots of ambition but quickly dissipate once they start running into the resistance of the establishment.  Being in any leadership position requires stamina and an inner drive that is unique among our human populations.  Very few establishment organizations so far in all of our history respect these traits of leadership and our education system certainly doesn’t know how to bring them about in our culture.  But we know it when we see it, like in champions of sports such as Michael Jordan, Tom Brady or tycoons of industry such as Alfred Sloan from General Motors or Elon Musk of our modern times—they all have an ingredient in their personal constitutions which drive them toward excellence. The great novelist Ayn Rand captured very well the essence of those types of people in her novels from the previous century and they are still very relevant today—but our culture is still hard pressed to understand how to invest their values into the ever-expanding consciousness of human enterprise and why it’s such an important consideration utilized across the tapestry of time and space. We often elect the wrong people to manage our governments, local, state and federal because we still don’t understand truly what we are looking for.

One thing that always bothers me about holiday-get-togethers and in speaking to family members that you don’t see very often is how they revert to the value systems of their peer groups.  Such as when people ask what my wife and I have been up to, especially the women, their first question is whether my wife is working or not.  Well, of course she works—but the next layer to their question is whether or not she is working for an employer—whether she gets a paycheck. Part of being married to me means my wife doesn’t have to sell her services to any group or organization outside of our home.  Her primary concern is the needs of our family and she likes it that way.  In our case our kids have moved out, but she is still there to help wherever a situation may arise so that the quality of our family experiences are managed by someone who truly loves everyone.  It’s a very traditional role, but one that I think is important to managing family affairs in a quality way. But other women who do not have such support are resentful and that comes out in our discussions in a very palatable way.  People don’t mean to, but most seek out the rules of a static institutional concept rather than creating their own.  Housewives have been targeted by progressive groups as a way to diminish the family experience casting individuals into getting parental support from institutional thinking, whether that entails a woman working for her own paycheck and having relationships outside the home, or in the way that we elect politicians first through our chambers of commerce, then through popular sentiment—resulting then in office holding where the concerns of donors are the first priority for party politics.  When women find out my wife is a full-time mother, grandmother and that each day she makes sure I have what I need at the end of a long day as traditional women often provided in the past, they are aghast.  You can even sense the hostility in them as they speak which of course makes the discussions difficult.  That hostility is there because biologically they are inclined to similar behavior but to survive in the modern world they have had to suppress those inclinations and to be the opposite, which of course nobody really wants.  Our institutions have adopted those traits as values so everyone ends up very confused until there is a base point of change for everyone to examine.  In our family my wife is that for everyone.

In politics we have needed to make a similar stand, where we had a politician who redefined that experience with outside the box thinking and came to office in a different way than the usual methods. Trump was and has been that guy. He was elected by what many considered a miracle, although I was never in doubt—I saw it a long way out.  But his behavior once he obtained office has been one of exceptionally hard work and a need to please those who elected him with an earnestness usually reserved for campaign donors.  While Trump may rub establishment types in the same way that modern women resent knowledge of a housewife when they meet them happily doing their work in the world, politicians hate Trump for many of the same reasons.  Trump represents a changing of the rules and institutions don’t like that.  They like to make the rules then live by them to the exclusion of new influences so that they can protect their lifestyles as they’ve lazily adopted them.  In women we expect them to work like men these days even if it’s obvious that the children of a family are in desperate need of love and attention and we see that someone needs to be there to provide that care.  And in politicians we expect them to be cheesy, corrupt, and to not serve our best interests—but when we meet one that is exceptional, it is hard to accept them because we have allowed ourselves to become institutionalized in our thinking.  Being exceptional is what we are really after and by the list showing the accomplishments of the Trump administration after just one year, it is obvious that we are living in a new world, thankfully.  I didn’t like the old one and changes had to be made for the sake of everyone.  However, it is nice to take a moment and think about how far we’ve come in just the last year.  The media like those jealous women I mentioned are reluctant to say good things about this president because they have to protect their own institutional investments, but the reality is telling another story, and the evidence is there for all to see.  To present that evidence is why I write—because few other places will and that information needs to get out there so that people can see it.

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

 

William Bradford’s ‘Of Plymouth Plantation’: How the pilgrims invented capitalism to have the first Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving is for me one of the best days of the year, I like it more than I do Christmas because it gets to the heart of things without all the pressure of gift giving.  It is an American holiday like none other in the world and I simply love it.  My feelings about it have been compounded since I was able to stand in the jail cell at the West Gate in Canterbury, England where Robert Cushman was kept due to the crossfire of politics from the Church of England that his puritans were involved in.  It was in that spot where Cushman had decided he and his followers wanted to be free of the constant struggles between the Church and the king to pursue something different, a new life in the recently discovered continent far off to the west across the great ocean to live as they saw fit.  If not for that moment America may never have come to be because the journey they were about to undertake as puritans established a philosophy that took another 100 years to flush out, but eventually became America.  If not for the actions of Robert Cushman in commissioning the Mayflower for that purpose, the settlement of America by the kings of the world would have simply duplicated the failures of Europe.  But Cushman and his Pilgrims did not have the clear lens of history to guide their philosophic advances—all they had was the collectivism typical of religious life and the great work by Plato in his book, the Republic to start with and it is there that our story begins as Americans.  It’s really quite enchanting.

https://fee.org/articles/how-communism-almost-ruined-the-first-thanksgiving/

It wasn’t called communism yet, but the Pilgrim were essentially intent to apply the methods of the kind of collectivism articulated by Plato’s Republic in this New World utopian colony.  Karl Marx wouldn’t call it communism for another two centuries but the plan from Cushman and his crew as chronicled by Governor William Bradford was to essentially operate free of private property and to share the collective wealth of everything produced by the colony.  As fantastic as that might sound to the sentiments of emotion, the reality was quite another thing. The Indians which the pilgrims encountered were of the same type of hive mind approach as the collectivism from their original cultures which were from the Far East reflected the efforts of the early colonists.  But the Indians were not industrialized, they did not know of the markets in Canterbury or the great cathedral there—or anything about the king.  They didn’t build houses like these European settlers.  They had become refugees after the great treasure ships from Zheng He dropped them off all over the world on behalf of emperor Zhu Di.  Some of the Chinese adventurers bred with the great cultures of the Aztec in Mexico, some with the descendents of the Bering Strait migration, some with the Vikings who had been coming for hundreds of years as well.  All these cultures were interacting with what was left of the great culture of giants which had come out of the Middle East thousands of years earlier and all these societies had failed, so there was nothing to indicate that these pilgrims would fare any better.

The great insult that was taught to all of us in our public education experiences was to hide these communist beginnings and to make it sound as though the Indians rescued the colony by teaching them how to farm—as if Cushman and his followers were too stupid to figure out how to care for themselves after they had shown the great ambition to even charter the journey to begin with.  Quite the opposite, the pilgrims were quite smart and hardy.  Even though many of them died within a few years of their journey they were able to think and apply what they learned to the world around them with innovation.  The Indians were watching, they were a culture of nomads who had long ago given up on private property ownership and the result was that they didn’t build houses and conduct all the fancy mathematics which had been common to the Mound Builders of the Midwest—they were content to dedicate their lives to the new goddess of earth, so they had little to do with Thanksgiving except to attend dinner with the pilgrims after the survivors of the new colony had figured out the puzzle which had been hampering the world up to that point.

As William Bradford chronicled in his Of Plymouth Plantation it took a few years but through necessity the pilgrims rejected the concept of communism as Plato had envisioned it and evolved into a free market system.  They were able to do this because they had no institutions to confine them to a set philosophy.  They were free of the ominous pressure of the church and the kings always fighting them for power over the people, the pilgrims were able to create the first free market system of capitalism the world had ever seen.  It was the combination of the industrious nature of the Europeans whom had come from a background of accomplishment—they knew what was possible so they had a foundation of intellect to begin with.  But what made the pilgrim capitalism possible was that they had all the tools to be successful, what they needed was a way to strip away all their institutionalized concepts so that the necessity of survival would surpass their desires to continue as all humans had in every endeavor previously known to mankind and that was to function within the confines of the orthodox, and to be regulated by that commitment.  That was certainly the case with the Vikings, it was also of the giants from the Bible lands, the Chinese were already functioning from the rise and fall of many oriental cultures—and what was left of all of them were the Indians who were just a mix of everyone chained to the superstitions of the past rooted to institutionalized behavior that imprisoned the mind of mankind from the beginning of time.  The pilgrims were making the same mistakes and they were dying off, until they changed course and decided to try something different while they still could.  They invented capitalism.

Once the pilgrims allowed for private property and structured their society on individualized survival they began to see after the first couple of doomed years that their colony was producing a surplus.  For the first time they had more food than they needed, and they were able to take their minds beyond the needs of daily survival—and to think about other things on a grander scale.  This is why there was a first Thanksgiving, because the puritans of the Plymouth colony were able to produce more than they needed resulting in a feast.  As ironic as it may sound, the Pilgrims were able to be successful where others hadn’t because they were smart enough to change their behavior before their failures had become accepted as institutional thinking.  Had they the rigid structure of the church there to enforce their will, or a king to confide them to the patriotism of national order, the pilgrims would have been stuck to the way of thinking which had imprisoned mankind for thousands of years.  But because they had the tools of modern thinking, and literacy, they were able to make adjustments that stepped beyond the thinking of Plato at the time and invent something new—a way of thinking that would launch a new nation.

That is why I love Thanksgiving so much.  I love Black Friday and all the advertisements that come out in the paper that day.  It is appropriate that capitalism is such a big part of our Thanksgiving holiday because it’s not just the food or the friendship with the Indians that made the annual event so special, it was the means to recognize private incentive as the fuel that propelled mankind into the future, for really the first time. The excess that was produced by the early Plymouth colony was a discovery of what human ambition could produce if left alone and not micro managed by institutionalized thinking, such as churches and governments.  And that is why Thanksgiving in America is such a special time, and they never get old. I love every one of them.

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

Criticism of ‘Battlefront 2’ is Completely Unwarranted: The challenges of marketing a capitalist product to Marxist losers

Like everything else in politics the level of hate we see today and the way that people react to a little pressure can be blamed on progressive public educations which have pretty much ruined the minds of several generations.  We can see it everywhere, in our entertainment culture, our jobs, and our politics especially; we now have an entire younger generation of Millennials who have such high expectations about everything and not a clue on how to get a happy result.  The entertainment press that is largely made up of these new types of people has control of entire industries through their editorial boards and their footprints in the sand are obvious.  As I said recently in my review of the new Justice League movie, if that film had been released in a different time, it would be considered a miracle of film making.  But today it is ridiculed for not being everything that a collective hive mind could dream of—so it is picked apart by a hostile press hoping to cannibalize the filmmakers like zombies from the latest Walking Dead episode.  I mean when did anybody consider a $93 million dollar opening weekend a problem—ahead of a four-day Thanksgiving weekend where most kids are off school and can go to the theater with their parents?  I mean Justice League is going to be more than profitable for the Warner Bros. studio that distributed it—yet somehow that’s not enough—the expectations by today’s youth is that everything should always increase and if it doesn’t then there are problems.  And that was never more clear than in the recently release of Battlefront 2 and the massive controversy about loot crates which are used to increase the performance and effectiveness of the in-game characters and vehicles used in the massive online Star Wars first person shooter just released a week ago.  The article below will set the stage for just how ridiculous the situation truly is.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-11-20-lucasfilm-reacts-to-star-wars-battlefront-2-loot-crate-controversy

Even though I am normally concerned with much more serious things, I often write a lot about Star Wars and video games because both are a tremendous part of our modern culture.  Without addressing those markets and their influence on modern people, we can’t really claim to be speaking with any relevance to the concerns of our times. In that lens of thought, I find this Battlefront 2 situation very fascinating and direct evidence to the state of our world today, and where it’s going.  But before I can say any more, I have to provide my foundation thoughts on what Battlefront 2 does and is.  As an older person I have watched the industry go from little pixellated dots on the screen of an Atari 2600 to this latest photo realistic offering from Electronic Arts putting players as directly as possible into the role of their favorite Star Wars characters and situations.  I was after all up at midnight the day the new game was released to play it as close to first as possible.  The game came out November 17th yet I had pre-ordered it so was given entry to the experience at midnight November 14th. The moment I started playing it, especially the Starfighter Assault modes which put players in very ambitious dogfights with other live players set in Star Wars environments on a truly epic scale, I was in love with it.  If this game came out with just Starfighter Assault as the offering I would have been amazed, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg, So why all this consternation about loot crates?

Let’s make one thing clear; the purpose of the Battlefront 2 game is to make money.  It makes money by offering a good product to a public that wants what they are selling.  It really isn’t complicated, and without the incentive to make a lot of money, there really is no reason to make such a beautiful game.  I have no doubt that the loot crate idea was hatched based on the Electronic Arts mobile app game called Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes.  It’s a free game, but to really get to the good stuff you either have to play the game a lot, or pay a lot of money-getting the right in-game currency to unlock the things players really want. Like to get the proper number of shards to unlock the members of Phoenix Squadron so that you can fly the Ghost in squadron combat you can pay $99 dollars for a bundle package hoping to get what you need.  In a lot of ways it was like the days of the old Topps movie cards that we could get as kids hoping to get that very special card to collect.  In the case of the Galaxy of Heroes game, a player could literally spend several thousand dollars getting their ranking up to an elite level.  I’ve done pretty well not spending a dime, but I’ve done the work—which is another option.  Based on their internal studies at EA they know that on a game like Battlefront 2 which is much more epic and detailed than a game on a phone app, players will be willing also to spend many thousands of dollars for an elite status that gives them an advantage over other players.  That was unquestionably the original plan with the loot crates in Battlefront 2—and I personally think they are fun.  I’ve only been playing the game a week so far and I find myself wanting to earn enough credits to unlock new cards within the game so that I can boost up my performance when playing against other players.  It’s very much a capitalist system and everyone comes out well in the exchange.

The problem comes from the fact that many people in the world today have been trained to be little socialists and they don’t want to compete against people willing to work harder at something than they are, and they certainly don’t want to compete against people who are willing to “pay to win” as they call it.  There are of course people out there in the world where Battlefront 2 is their calling in life, that’s all they have going on—they don’t have a family to worry about, they may have a cushy job that pays them a lot of money—and they don’t want to waste time on girlfriends and going out into the world to play golf, shoot guns, or even spend a couple thousand dollars on an NFL game, so they spend their money on video games.  If they can drop a few thousand dollars on the Battlefront 2 game to be considered elite at something in their life, they’ll do it and that is a good offering that any video game company could propose in a product.  But the players of these games have this entitled belief that the game somehow belongs to everyone—that Star Wars as a mythological institution is now part of the collective hive mind—and it’s not.  All players are not born equal in the game world, and all people are not equal in real life.  What players are criticizing EA over, and ultimately Disney as a parent company, is that they want to get to what they want in the game faster and without having to spend a lot of money—because the base game can cost up to $80 dollars.

Now to me, it’s a bargain.  I paid $80 dollars for a steak in a restaurant recently, so I have no problem paying that money for such a fun experience, and Battlefront 2 is FUN!  I find it a mild miracle still that I can play such an epic game with players from all over the world any time of day in my living room.  If I were a lazy person and wanted to get an advantage over other players by dropping a lot of money into the game to get more of these “loot crates” I’d have no problem with that option.  I mean a box of ammunition for my .500 magnum costs $65 dollars for just twenty shots. And I go through a box or so every couple of weeks because I like to go shooting at lunch to blow off the stress of my often very hectic days.  There are plenty of people like me that EA is trying to make some money off of so it’s their job to create something in their products to be appealing to me—and getting an advantage over other people is the name of the game.  That’s life.

That’s where the communism and socialism creeps into the discussion.  Star Wars is such a big cultural phenomenon around the world these days that is truly is a global reach for Disney.  They literally have to listen to everyone to market their products to them. And of course around the world especially in Europe, India, Australia, and many other places, people don’t have much money to spend on these kinds of entertainment options.  And young people in America have been so coddled for so long that they don’t think they should even have to work at anything to be able to play a game like Battlefront 2 without being dominated by players who pretty much spend their life on the game, or have purchased in-game bonuses to have an advantage.

As a general rule I don’t look to get an advantage in games by outspending other people.  I consider it a lazy approach—even in life.  I always do the work because if you can beat somebody using inferior equipment at a disadvantage, then you are really doing something—and when I’m in my leisure time having fun, always in the back of my mind is my desire to make myself better.  I don’t do anything to just waste time.  Even playing a phone app like Galaxy of Heroes for me is a way to work my mind strategically toward objectives that are pleasurable.  I may be doing business with VIPs spending money on $80 dollar steaks, but I have no problem taking a break from what I’m doing for a few minutes to run a quick battle on my phone just for the pleasure of winning something, then getting back to work. During the first week that Battlefront 2 was released I put over 60 hours into just the Starfighter Assault mode and I’ve become pretty good at it.  I am actually killing between 8 to 20 other pilots per round—which I expect to double soon—and I’ve earned some nice loot crate specialties that have really increased the performance of my starfighters.  It’s a lot of fun and I find myself often playing the game at 3 AM in the morning.  I stayed up all night two nights in a row last week playing the game because I think its fun.  It’s not as fun as winning in real life is, but I find that by winning in simulated environments that it conditions your mind to winning in real life—where things really count.  So I still love video games whether they are on my PS4 in my living room, or on a mobile app on my iPhone.  I find that games keep you on the balls of your feet staying mentally sharp when you need it most.

But way too many people these days want to just show up and have people give them things.  They want to be equal to everyone else and they want to treat Battlefront 2 as just another game of the week.  There are so many games out there that I can’t possibly play them all.  I’d love to, but I have to pick because I’m a busy guy.  The way Battlefront 2 is designed it seeks to consume as much of your time as possible, and it plans to still be a relevant game two years from now. Ultimately its purpose for the parent company Disney is to keep Star Wars fresh on the minds of their customer base until the next movies come out.  So the companies putting out this massive Battlefront 2 game, production companies like Electronic Arts, Lucasfilm, DICE and many others are always updating the content—and that all takes money.  Games, especially video games these days, are about more than just playing them, they are actual lifestyles—and that’s how they should be.  I find actually any criticism of the game by these cry baby Millennials to be unwarranted.

I personally love Battlefront 2 and I will be playing it often.  Of course my name on the game is Overmanwarrior so if you want to fight me, come and find me there.  If anybody had told me as a kid that I’d have access to something like it on a giant wall sized television with 4K definition and a Bose surround sound system to engulf my senses—I wouldn’t have believed them.  The game is a series of small miracles all culminating into quite an experience.  I think it’s beyond criticism for such a trend setting market that is still figuring out what it is.  The role these video games play in our cultural exchange is nothing short of an explosion of intellect and something Karl Marx never could have imagined.  We are literally in a whole new world—so the criticisms of Marxists, socialists and communists have no place in the discussion at all.  My advice to the makers of these games at EA, Lucasfilm, and Disney is not to listen.  Do your thing and let the chips fall where they may.  You’ll be a lot more profitable in the end, and everyone will be a lot better off.

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

Clipping the Wings of our Kids: Public education has been a purposeful disaster designed to usher in an era of communism in America

It doesn’t seem that long ago to me, but I suppose it is, that I wrote many articles, and did many radio shows talking about how public education and colleges were teaching socialism to our children.  I’ve actually been talking about it my entire adult life and even sooner.  I never liked public school not because I didn’t like learning.   In actuality I am far more educated than the average person; I have continued learning my entire adult life.  I did attend college, but I hated it—hated it passionately because I felt even back then that the institution was teaching anti-American ideas.  In my college days I read a lot of books, none of them were the kind professors wanted me to read and I spent enormous amounts of time in the Perkins at Clifton on the campus of the University of Cincinnati reading books I enjoyed, like those from Joseph Campbell.  So I came out of my “education” years protected by the primary afflictions that most American adults suffer through—the socialist indoctrination of our education system.  I had something to compare to because I did read a lot, so I was one of the few who never in my life not one time, felt that socialism was worth a try.  But in 99% of all education institutions K-12, then to college, communism and socialism have been taught and American traditions have been ridiculed and this has brought us all to a very dangerous place.  In my unique position I was clear eyed to point it out.  But only now do people finally see what I was talking about.

I always felt a little sorry for the reporters I dealt with over time when I’d tell them something about what was happening to our youth and they couldn’t get their minds wrapped around it.  This was especially problematic during the last decade when George W. Bush was president.  Socialism in public institutions was growing in an obvious way back then but people couldn’t get their minds around how much they had been taught to accept it—because it was too close to them.  It was like calling their mom fat.  It didn’t matter that she may have been, but to them it was their mom.  Their schools were places where they came to age on many aspects of their lives, where they obtained their first kiss, made their first friends, learned to color, read, and speak.  So people by their nature were very defensive of their schools.  They were even more protective of where they went to college because that brought to them many more coming of age experiences—so they’d defend the part they played with great protection, almost like their education experiences were like second parents and were beyond ridicule.  But I did it anyway and this caused much consternation—especially with members of the press.

Back when I was very involved in levy fights and public education issues while doing a lot of radio on 700 WLW in Cincinnati my political enemies would say to members of the media “why do you put him on the radio so much?  He’s in the newspaper too much and on television too much, you people in the media are giving him a platform to talk nonsense and conspiracy.”  Well, as it turned out, I was completely correct and when the media outlets did listen to my enemies, I simply turned to this blog site which has done so much more than their outlets to educate people on the truth of the matter and has been far more useful. However, what I was saying back then which was heavily scrutinized as a falsehood by mainstreamers has now been irrefutably validated.  We now know that socialism and communism have been the prime objectives of public education and now many of those long skeptical voices are talking about it toady where even ten years ago they wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole.  Now they are talking and finally people are starting to realize that their tax money has been used by the state to create this public education system that just isn’t reflective of the American experience.

To be honest many people wonder why I like people from other countries so much.  It’s true; I do love immigrants coming into America.  One of my son-in-law’s is an immigrant and I watched him go through the naturalization process which I thought was very impressive.  Most people who come from other places in the world and have not had their wings clipped by the American education system intellectually are much smarter than the average American today, and they work harder.  I find I have more in common with those people than I do with my neighbors of 30 to 40 years.  The person who has gone through the American naturalization process within the last decade knows more about America and its method of economy than the average grade school kids do graduating from the 12th grade. The immigrant knows more about capitalism than the American student does most of the time, so I find immigrants more relatable to the American experience which I personally love.  What’s so sad about this condition is that the naturalization process is relatively short, yet what it produces in people is a much better result than 12 years of public education and four years of college.  It takes most Americans over twenty years to unlearn all the garbage they learn in public schools and they do a lot of damage over that span of time.  What happens in public schools is that essentially people get their wings clipped so that they cannot fly away from the imposition of socialism.  Their minds are stunted purposely for the benefit of the state to manage them more effectively.  From the position of state control, it is much easier to organize a population that can’t fly away intellectually, so they clip the wings of their young so they can manage them better from their perspective.

Yet the worst is yet to come. Most young people today would prefer socialism and communism over capitalism and they are now starting to vote.  This was always the plan of the left, going way back to the start of the Department of Education, which bloomed under Ronald Reagan.  The DOE was never put in place to educate our young people.  They were always intent to program us all into the ways of communism from day one in 1979.  The communist conspiracy isn’t a local one where the public school in our neighborhoods lead the charge, the problem has always come from the state with unfunded mandates designed to pull us all into a black hole of recollection designed to frustrate local participation while the state continued to impose its will on the education system as a whole.  Overwhelming school boards in this top down way, it has allowed communist teachings to seep right into every school through the teacher unions—which was and always will be a communist method of socialized management providing an unfiltered path straight into the minds of our kids.  Even down to the concept of “sharing” that we all learn in the first grade, it’s a communist method of instruction from the minds of intellectuals who would rather see America assimilate into the European view of the world rather than the philosophy that evolved on the world stage just prior to westward expansion in North America. “Make sure to ‘share’ those crayons in your desk with that sloppy stinky kid you sit next to in class.”

Yes it’s good to hear mainstream broadcasts like Rush Limbaugh and Fox News finally talking about this important issue, and I think under the Trump administration that the trend will be reversed.  But it’s going to be a mess for a long time because so many kids who are now adults grew up with this open socialism and communism being taught in our primary places of learning.  It would in many ways have been better for most people to be raised in a barn without all the garbage that has been poured into their heads now than having to unlearn most that they know.  It really is the biggest tragedy of our times, the massive amount of ignorance that handicaps most people because of their educations.  For me personally I am enjoying the validation that what I have said for so long is finally being recognized.  I’m certainly not a conspiracy theorist.  When I get involved in something, I do it well and I always come out on top eventually, so it should have meant more to people when I lent my good name to this issue so long ago, because we could have alleviated so much pain and suffering.  Maybe next time they’ll listen.  At least I hope so for their sakes.

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

Liberal Men Just Can’t Keep Their Hands off Boobies: Trump is forcing errors in his opposition that is healthy for America

 

Again, if we rewind to Inauguration Day, 2017 where newly elected President Trump was ceremoniously being ushered in as the 45th occupant of the White House as socialists, Marxist college students and a barrage of angry women took to the streets to protest sometimes violently the election, where we saw something very unique happen in all of history.  I had a feeling it was coming, but just having someone like Trump in the middle of establishment politics has literally brought down the pillars of the corrupt old progressive institutionalism for the first time in over 100 years and we can all see a light at the end of the tunnel now. What we are learning is that when Madonna and Ashley Judd gave their animated speeches about how much they didn’t like Donald Trump, what they were really saying was that they had become bitter in their lives due to sexual abuse by really creepy men like Harvey Weinstein, John Lasseter, and Charlie Rose.  For Madonna she thought it was cute to seduce Hollywood moguls like Warren Betty and many others until she became just another aging woman.  When the sex no longer worked for her, she turned to progressive strategies embroiled in feminism, and sought justice for how unfair the world was—because she could no longer shake her ass and get all of Hollywood to jump on it.  Once they stood on that stage and proclaimed fairness, but nothing stuck to Trump or other conservatives, the women who had really been sexually harassed by people like Al Franken, John Conyers, and Kevin Spacey started to emerge.  If not for the Trump election, all these women would have stayed out of the spotlight and these secrets would have remained.  But because of all the voice and celebrity that was given by the liberal media to women who accused Trump and politicians like Roy Moore of sexual misconduct for purely political purposes, then the real villains were poised to be revealed by a barrage of scandals which had been building since men and women started working together.  It was bound to happen sooner or later, and when it did, liberal men in particular would be most vulnerable due to their reckless personal philosophies and lack of personal self-control.

In the same way that you don’t find NRA members out there committing mass shootings, conservative men tend to be respectful and don’t do things that get them into trouble with women.  By their nature, conservatives are old-fashioned like that, and that keeps them from bad conduct when it comes to the often confusing nature of dealing with the opposite sex.  Liberal men though, they are used to being impulsive and shunning personal responsibility so to them reckless sexual behavior is conducive to their lifestyle.  That is after all why they are liberal, because they lack personal restraints and need institutions to keep them in line.  And never forget that one of the strategies of feminists all along was to inject women into the workplace as a hostile takeover of labor.  For the most radical of women this was always a plan of theirs, to flirt with men, entrap them into bad conduct, then to take over their jobs as a gender.  Even as all these Hollywood men go down in flames, the most ardent bra burning feminists are scheming to take over those jobs with “girl power.”  However, once they have that power and find that there are no more scapegoats to hide behind, they won’t like it.  Be careful what you wish for ladies.  But the essence of the problem is the way that liberal men have behaved once they were put in close proximity to women in the work place. The lines between professionalism and sexual pursuit for many proved impossible to avoid, especially men who considered themselves progressive.

Now it’s like a raging brush fire, these sexual misconduct allegations are the flavor of the year as virtually every major Hollywood star, business tycoon, and politician has some situation of abuse, especially if they were liberal.  All that pent-up emotion that everyone makes fun of Republicans for having, well, this is why they pent-up their emotions.  You are kinda supposed to control yourself in life.  You are not supposed to be an open book that acts on every impulse.  You can’t just grab women by their boobies and run your hands up their skirts.  Even if they tell you it’s alright, you still shouldn’t do it.  It’s only a matter of time before they change their mind and will say later that the conduct was not consensual.  Usually they are just one new boyfriend away from such statements.  I mean in the case of John Lasseter at Disney, he is a smart guy who is good at what he does.  But biologically, he’s a liberal man working next to boobies and if there isn’t some code of ethics that he functions from, it would be very easy to take things out of context if he has a habit of hugging people all the time and letting his true feelings about things be known.  This is why men used to be “stoic” in their dealings with the world.  Watch an old western movie from Hollywood and you’ll see what I mean.  Being a modern man who expresses feelings, and cries, and does all that crap that they think women want to see and hear set themselves up for the day when the women change their mind and decide to come after you for sexual misconduct—because they want your job.

Of course most women just want to work and go home to their families, but the confusing rules of conduct between men and women have made it nearly impossible, because liberal men have through the media culture established the values.  Conservative men may think about it, but they don’t often do it, because by the nature of their personal philosophies, they restrain themselves—so we aren’t seeing them in trouble the way these liberal men are enduring now. The best thing to do is to treat all people equally no matter what sex or race they come from.  All people essentially want the same things out of life, they want to make a little money to fuel their lives at home—and usually there are kids, spouses, sex partners, parents—all kinds of things that are important to them.  They want to go to work, do what they need to do, and get home to their life without incident, and anybody in a position of power should understand and help them achieve those goals.  But when the message is that men should show their emotions, that they should be spontaneous, and even that they should use their power acquired through years of service to get what they want—then particularly liberal men will be vulnerable to…..as John Lasseter put it………”missteps.”

What we’ll end up with after all these losers flame out is a better society that understands the rules of engagement much better.  Everyone will be happier with the results.  Women will learn what they need to learn.  Men will learn not to be such a bunch of emotional pussies yielding to their emotional predilections.  And politics will flush out their power players and will have a chance to replace them with truly sincere people.  None of this would have been possible if not for Trump.  The pressure of Trump forced all these errors in the liberal community, just like a baseball player might overthrow first base when a speedy runner is racing toward it. The pressure of a competent person in the White House is exposing all these weaknesses in our society and it is wonderful to see them all being uncovered.  We always knew these things were there, but nobody was able to do anything about them because the issues were elusive to our discussions.  But not anymore.  Finally, people are talking about these things and that is the first step to correcting them.

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

The Grand State of Injustice Among American Institutions: Violance is probably the only way to fix it–I hope not

Like I usually do when I reload ammunition in my little workshop on Saturdays, I catch up on the radio segments of the Glenn Beck show where he has Bill O’Reilly on as a guest and they talk about the news of the week. That’s the only time I listen to Beck anymore. My interest is only in how those types of people see the world—which is a defeatist approach laced with Biblical fire and brimstone. Hearing them talk lets me know what we are up against out there as there are millions of conservatives just like those guys, which in times of peace wouldn’t be a problem. But these are not times of peace, goodwill and merriment. Not even the NFL is a safe zone for discussion these days so when pressed people often expose their vulnerabilities through discussion. Viewed in that way, Bill O’Reilly, the defeated former television star and Glenn Beck, another defeated television star from Fox News speak to each other with the assumption that they know how to win this war, which obviously, if they did, they wouldn’t be in such a state. But hearing them talk about the inaction of the Uranium One deal caught my attention, because they essentially let it be known that they expected no criminal proceedings and had lost faith in government to such a degree that it was their expectation that everyone would go free.

A few days after that broadcast Lois Lerner sought to permanently seal her records at the IRS where she was obviously guilty of using the tax collecting government agency to harass conservative groups which was a gross abuse of her power. Her actions at the IRS is evidence that government cannot be trusted with the management of our lives. They are supposed to be, but when given too much power without the ability to deal with it intellectually, they typically abuse it and make a mess of things. At that point, we all need a way to remove them from that power and to set things right. Typically, we have elections to fix the problem, but these days not even that works. So if all else fails, that is the primary reason we have the Second Amendment because once people like Lois Lerner get a hold of policing powers we are all vulnerable to the power of the state over our individual lives.

Look at the situation in the Senate, Roy Moore has a few women from 40 years ago claim he sexually abused them. Mitch McConnell who needs Roy to take that seat to keep the majority is rooting for the Democrat. While on his Senate right now Al Franken, a political enemy has done much worse, he admitted to sexual abuse and there are pictures to prove it. Yet the Senate has rallied behind Franken for some mysterious reason. What could that be? The truth is that to them, Republicans in the Senate see the whole thing as a game and they are only actors on the stage play of life. They do what their campaign contributors want them to do, and that’s the reality. They don’t represent us. They don’t care about us, and they are actually doing the work against us every day. If Mitch were sincere about his sexual harassment positions he’d be calling for Al Franken to step down, but he’s not consistent. In actuality, he wants Franken because it gives him a plot line of resistance. Republicans don’t want to lead, they want to follow—not Democrats, but their donors. And those donors do not love American sovereignty.

If we have learned anything from the Bob Mueller investigation of Russian influence of the Trump campaign, it’s that the system he represents has no definition and they think they have power over presidents elected by the people in a hard-fought election to alter the course of history. After six months of looking Mueller has found nothing and his investigation has gone nowhere, yet he looks and looks. All he really has is that an underling from the Trump campaign lied to the FBI about some time frame. If that is the standard of prosecution, then what about Hillary Clinton? She destroyed evidence. What standard of prosecution is there for her because she did much, much worse?

I literally could go on and on, and on about these types of conspiracies which have eroded away the faith that people have in their government. Even Chris Wallace (Democrat) fresh of a media award of high prestige said recently that Trump’s attack of the media is dangerous for us all. Well, how so Chris? Even over little things like the new movie release of Justice League, the establishment media attacked the film to no end hoping to scare Warner Bros. from making any more installments of the DC comic book characters. Why, because Zach Snyder is an Ayn Rand lover and his personal philosophy is something that the political left thinks is dangerous. The premise of the entire Superman trilogy which Zach directed is essentially the power of the individual, “Superman” the OVERMAN and how it helps the masses. Not that the masses are needed to make Superman. After Zach departed from the film the marketing executives at Warner Bros. tried to avoid the coming controversy by creating advertisements featuring the “we are all better together” motif, which was supposed to be red meat to the progressive Hollywood press. But it didn’t work. Justice League was all about the need for a Superman to fix the world—”Who is John Galt.” So the media won’t even let a movie alone, they attacked the film viciously hoping to sink its box office numbers to keep the message out of popular culture. When it comes to acquiring power the political progressives in both parties are on a crash course with reality and they are in every part of our lives.

Back to Beck and O’Reilly and their mild despair over the inaction of our institutions to instill justice to criminal elements. What are we to do if those institutions fail us, as they have? Well, we have elections and vote in outsiders like Donald Trump and new governors in Ohio like Jim Renacci. We replace the old and corrupt with the new and the bright and let them be free to do their work. I am proud of Donald Trump, very proud. He has done a great job in his first year and for Thanksgiving this year I am most thankful that he has been willing to do this very thankless job of being President of the United States. Nobody but him could have done the job he did and our economy shows the effort. Everyone knows I’m a big advocate of reversing the national debt. I’d love to cut away all entitlements including Social Security. But if Trump can get there through growth, I’m good. So far he has injected trillions of dollars into the American economy and that will start to reverse that debt clock very soon. If he can manage to get his tax cuts, then we will be on our way to 5% to 7% growth in our GDP and that will pay down a lot of debt. But the forces of institutionalism do not want the situation fixed. They want collapse and a global unification under the umbrella of a New World Order. And they aren’t going to let us have our desires for nationalism just because we want it. They are ready for war using our resources to deliver their promise to their multinational donors. It really comes down to that.

If elections don’t work and law and order isn’t respected—then war with the establishment is the logical next step. And for that we need guns, which is the reason for the Second Amendment. What other recourse do we have if we can’t trust the laws of mankind to instill justice to those who have violated the principles of valor, honor, and civility among mankind? If the law protects Hillary Clinton but not some low-level Trump staffer, or Al Franken and not Roy Moore, and not James Comey but goes after Donald Trump for firing the corrupt FBI Director—what is the next step when the law has let us down? I’m willing to let Trump continue to do his work and I hope for a peaceful end. But you can bet that I’m not counting on it. And in my world view surrender is not an option. What comes next is something that Mitch and the gang won’t like. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that. But how things are now is not acceptable. Not with me, and with many other people.

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

Jesus Would Have Been a Communist: How Democrats have spread mass evil into every aspect of our lives

Even though this scene is from the fictional HBO show, Game of Thrones, it is based on real historical precedence.  Watch first before reading what follows.  In this scene the mother of the king, Cersie Lannister was stripped away of all her “material possessions” to be purified by the house of religion.  In all reality it was a power play by the church to take over the throne of power using her as a symbol of a conquered ruler.

I was having a very nice time at the Canterbury Cathedral book store.  Just hours earlier my family and I had a wonderful meal at Gordon Ramsey’s three Michelin Star restaurant in Chelsea and I was enjoying a life well lived from the opulence of that dining experience to the rugged, and bitter cold of a harsh London rain dumping enormous amounts of moisture from the Jet Stream above as it scooped up water out of the Atlantic in February and dumped it on my head as my wife and I strolled the streets of that ancient town and all its history.  3CDAB75F-D952-4E2B-9C53-0C3E50679143.jpegWe had toured the old cathedral which witnessed so much history over the last thousand years that I was a little bit in heaven walking through that book store with a mountain of books in my hands standing at the cashier as water droplets from the heavy rain outside still dripped off the brim of my leather cowboy hat.

I love life in the United States, but the bookstores are much better in Europe, especially England because people still read there as part of their daily life.  Television isn’t very good in England and most of the good movies are made in America, so England still has people who look at reading as a valuable trait, and I share with them that sentiment.  The cashier joked that she had not witnessed anybody yet in the year who bought as many books as I did which was more truth than customer pandering.  And to reward me for the large bill she rang up on the register she offered me a free book which she had stacked up on the table behind her.  It was called The Red Dean of Canterbury by John Butler and was a respectful biography of the communist advocate Hewlett Johnson who spread his message of a collective based Utopia from the very ground I was standing on and that message reached the ears of all the big communist leaders around the world from 1831 to 1963.  Johnson used essentially his high position within the Church of England to espouse the merits of communism as he paralleled the teaching of Christian belief with that of communism—as one in the same.  He used the church to advocate and strengthen the communist idea around the globe as he viewed God’s Kingdom of God on earth as the ultimate Marxist Utopia.  To him, and to many that he convinced over his life span, they were indistinguishable.

I knew much of the story of Hewlett Johnson before the cashier handed me that very good book.  I don’t mean that the content within the book was something I agreed with, I almost turned it away because of the content.  But the quality of the book was very good, the binding was excellent.  It had great weight which meant great paper quality and a lot of love had gone into its publication which I thought was odd for it to be offered for free to anyone who spent over $100 in their store. Because of my large order I joked with the lady as I held it instantly recognizing its fine quality if I could have six of them since my total was large enough to ask the question.  She of course took me too literally and seemed pained to tell me that there was a limit to one per customer.  I brushed it off realizing that my American humor was out of context here in the heart of the literary world, so I took the book and looked for the first opportunity to read it.

We met up with my daughter and her family at The Old Weavers restaurant for a bite before calling it a day.  That particular place was over 500 years old and had a very picturesque view of the River Stour which flows by directly outside the window.  To get into the place I had to duck my head as people were obviously much shorter in 1500 AD when The Old Weavers was built.  Across the street literally was the Franciscan friary of Canterbury where to this very day the Anglican Franciscan’s are still functioning much the way they had since 1200 AD.  So it was a good place to start reading John Butler’s fine book and I did so here and there the rest of the day.  Our diner turned into shopping in town so as I waited for the girls to do their collection of “bits” I sat on benches around town reading the first couple chapters of The Red Dean of Canterbury. I was a little surprised that the under Hewlett Johnson’s watch the old friary was sold to the Dean in 1959 and it has functioned in that original capacity since.  As I read my book and watched the modern monks helping the poor around town my first thoughts were that everything was good in the world.  Thank goodness for the good work and ministry that the monks performed, I thought it was quite a service.

But that was only on the surface.  Underneath all that good intention, which is something I have always felt about churches in general, is a collectivism that I rejected personally a long time ago.  Another book that I bought in Canterbury was a fabulous book about Martin Luther the rebellious protestant who challenged the Catholic Church and its vast European empire with a new decentralized version of religion.  I grew up Lutheran and was actually very close to my church’s pastor.  Most every Sunday I worked directly with the pastor from the front of the church pouring wine and feeding bread to members of the congregation as he went behind me blessing everyone. I was heavily involved in church scholarship from say 13 years old to about 16 so I’ve been a part of that life heavily before, but I was always skeptical of it.  Skeptical because the concepts never seemed right to me, all the notions of sacrifice and altruistic behavior seemed foreign to the concept of American capitalism.  And the church (my church) put itself often in perpetual peril with the bank that held their mortgage—much like the monks did in England.  They made a choice not to worship materialism and the money which represented value in capitalist societies—because to them the only value worth anything was the values of the church.  My dad was part of the church leadership and tried for over 30 years to keep the business end of the church flowing since none of the pastors or the members of the Lutheran leadership in Cincinnati had any love for money—they ultimately were destroyed over time to the notion that God would provide—when God didn’t.  Not all churches are short-sighted, some actually make a lot of money—which is good.  But my experience was very similar to what I witnessed in England with the modern monks and the history of the church at the center of all politics around the world starting essentially in those very places where I was reading The Red Dean of Canterbury.

Reading that book three decades after my own experiences with the Lutheran Church in America and having the ability to walk through so many historical sites in Canterbury as I considered them was very revealing to me.  I am, and continue to be, very weary of religion because most of them around the world originate in the east, including Christianity.  If Jesus Christ were born today he’d be a communist—or at least a socialist which is why all those damn hippies from the 60s were wearing their hair long and always talking about Jesus Christ being a superstar.  The tenets of global Christianity reject American capitalism and the money our “material” culture represents.  I can’t help but notice that the communist and socialist movements are undeniably an unspoken organization of Christian Marxists which have penetrated our societies in a very confusing ways.

The vast evils that the Democratic Party have been able to inflict on American society are that they exploit this duality for which most of the conservative right Bible thumping voting base functions.  For instance, most conservatives believe in personal property and the merit of making money.  But they also tend to believe in the messages spoken by the church which can be essentially termed Christian Marxism, shedding away personal property, the merit of community over individuality, sacrifice (like abortion which is mass murder on a grand scale), and a pandering to the poor.  Modern American Christian people find themselves in a paradox for which they are locked in indecision and Democrats exploit that indecision for their own desires to expand the influence of Marxism, even into the church so that congregations will take those values into their communities and attack the foundations of capitalism.

I purposely started off this article talking about my personal enjoyment of buying books, which are material items, eating at Gordon Ramsey’s very expensive restaurant in London, and shopping in Canterbury where my girls were able to indulge a bit while traveling—because those are all elements of capitalism which are good and far superior to Marxism.  Being able to pay $1500 for a meal at a 3 Michelin Star restaurant doesn’t mean I should be flogged in the streets by the poor because they want some of what I have.  There are few people in the world who work as hard as I do, so if I want to take my family to an expensive restaurant, or buy $600 worth of books in a Canterbury bookstore, I can.  Money is a tool to use in my life to live life and experience the many miracles of existence.  Being poor is largely a decision and if young people don’t learn to work hard and make money early in their lives, they will always be victims to the message of Marxism, all their lives.  That problem is compounded by the paradox that it is essentially Marxism that is taught in churches, even today.  Most of what goes on in Bible school can be found on the pages of Karl Marx’s works.

Church lost its appeal to me long ago when after many years of telling me that I was born into sin and that I needed an institution of an official religion to be saved from that nature.  I called bullshit.  I am not an atheist by any measure, but no church on earth goes to the extent that I do to satisfy my personal spiritual sanctity.  I am no sinner and just by being born I’m not condemned to such an insane policy.  I literally think that in America a new religion based on the Christian premise of decency should evolve as a kind of Power of Positive Thinking type of evolution, instead of the crimes of the rich against the poor and the transitory nature of all life with an ever-increasing eye on the afterlife.  Marxists have latched onto Christian concepts to help sell their European collectivism to a greater audience and one of the biggest advocates of that effort, Hewlett Johnson was not shy about it.  Most people in his position, like the current Pope of the Catholic Church won’t talk about how similar their religion is to Marxism.  They don’t figure that the comparison is applicable because Christianity has been around for a much longer period of time.  Marxism is relatively young by comparison, but they are alike.  They are born out of the same notion of sacrifice being the value of existence.  Sacrifice is not; productivity is—doing things, thinking things, and always inventing things. Morality emerges best in productivity, not in sacrifice which is quite an extraordinary thing to say because for 300,000 years, likely longer, mankind has never accepted the basics of that statement—except in the United States for about 100 years—from 1790 to 1890.  Like the monks in Canterbury, feeding the poor is equivalent to feeding the problem, yet we do it because we think Jesus will love us more for it.  But in actuality we are making the poor worse because we don’t encourage their individuality to excel, we teach them to retreat and turn toward the church for guidance—or the great congregation of society to rectify the situation.

It’s a complicated problem if we try to merge the values of politics with those of religion.  But that is essentially how the Democrats attack the conservative right, by exploiting this duality of values to the point where we all just blank out.  We love money in America; we love expensive vacations, nice cars, and our big televisions, cell phones and the commercialization of Christmas.  But we feel guilty because institutional churches still rooted in the philosophies that gave birth to Marxism in the first place tell us that the way to an afterlife is through Jesus, because we were all born into sin and he is the only way to eternal life. The Jesus of the institutions was a hippie loser who was basically one of the first communists in the world—according to our history books written by modern scholars—who are mostly all Marxists themselves.  Just as John Butler loves Hewlett Johnson and reveres him as a hero of the modern communist movement.  I doubt there is a bookstore in America who would give out copies of such a nicely made book like, The Red Dean of Canterbury.  The production values of the book alone would be cost prohibitive for American audiences.  But in England where those people have been conquered 1000s of times over the centuries, they looked toward the Dean of Canterbury for guidance and his advice which many listened to was to become nice Christian Marxists and get ready for the afterworld.  But I think they all miss the point, because American capitalism has evolved into the real answer.  If Jesus were alive today I think he would have voted for Donald Trump and would have liked the church the modern president attended as a child by Norman Vincent Peale.  There is a lot more good that comes from wealth and hard work than ever came from monks handing out donations to the poor.  Flowing altruism through institutions is the point of emphasis for the church and would ultimately become the focus of communist and socialist governments.  But in America we rejected that notion and it’s about time that we declare our independence not just from governments, but even Marxist philosophies no matter how they are presented to us.  I think it’s time that we make Jesus a capitalist and take away the values of the church from the Marxists who have set up camp in the houses of religion for the perpetuation of global domination of communism—and I think it’s time that we do that now.

Rich Hoffman

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

Thoughts about ‘Battlefront II’: Stories told in a very impressive new way

 

On a lighter note we are living in some interesting times.  I have been very encouraged by the glimpses of the future that are emerging, especially the new Tesla tractor-trailer that has the potential to dramatically change the transportation industry.  I am a person who gets very excited when I see things come along that expand the imagination of the human race on a mass scale, like the latest Star Wars products—whether it’s a new toy, video game, or motion picture installment.  With each new addition to that fantasy/science fiction mythology the imagination of the human race is expanding dramatically.  And that has never been truer than in the new Battlefront II video game by DICE and Electronic Arts that expand the efforts of the first version of that game for all the major platform systems over what was released in 2015.  This 2017 edition is just marvelous, jaw dropping cool, and a seriously interesting look into the nature of politics and the human soul.  There are a lot of interesting things going on with Battlefront II that are indicative of some of the greatest art our culture has ever produced.

Nobody buys a game like this to play the single player campaign mode, they buy it to play online with thousands of potential people at all hours of the day and night all over the world.  People in cultures where guns are unfortunately banned can play a game like this and instantly they are playing the most modern version of cops and robbers that we all aspired to as kids, before public schools made it impossible for kids to even make a pretend gun with their hands.  Boys, girls, young and old are all thrown into these battles together and they force you to work toward team objectives to survive by heightening your individuality to the quickest reaction times and personal aptitude.  The desire to play such a game is a very primal one, and this game is certainly one of the best to date at making everything work well and allow players to just enjoy the experience.  I enjoy the ground based combat quite a lot, but it is the flight combat that I love the most.  I thought the first Battlefront was pure heaven for my personal tastes, but in this second installment, it’s so much better, better than I thought it could ever possibly be.  One of my favorite video games that I played as a kid was the Activison Star Wars game The Empire Strikes Back which was a blocky 2D Defender type of thing involving snow speeders and a constant wave of Imperial Walkers, each that required precisely 48 hits to kill unless you managed to hit a little sweet spot that sometimes appeared on the top of the shell.  So the aerial combat in Battlefront II is just beautiful to look at and participate in.  Stunning really.

But the real star to Battlefront II is their new story mode campaign that I was excessively impressed with.  Not only is it a nice story to add to the Star Wars canon fitting in with the movies nicely, but it’s some seriously good science fiction.  For instance, the Empire has a new weapon in this story which are satellites in space that fire into the cloud formations of planets to heat up the atmosphere and cause hurricane like storms on the ground to harass their enemies.  I thought that was a very interesting concept considering that this very year in real life we saw four major hurricanes hit the United States alone, three of which made ground fall as upper category storms.  Many conspiracy theorists believe our current government can do something similar to this now, so I found it interesting that a big platform game by Disney would even allow something like that into a Star Wars storyline.  But it worked and was very interesting.   Does it advance conspiracy theories or address a tyrannical problem indicative of world governments—I think it does a lot to get a conversation going about the temptation to use weather as a weapon against dissidents.   If the Romans could have done something similar, or the Nazis, they would have.  In Star Wars, the Empire does.

The other big surprise for me was a scene where Kylo Ryn was mind walking through the memories of a captor he’s interrogating.  It was a dreamy sequence that you play through as a participant and it reminded me of an old game called Shadowman—where you had to walk through the world of death to solve problems.  I thought it was very intelligent and exhibited great skill in advancing a pretty complicated story.  The game was already one of the best campaign story lines that I’ve ever played, so this last sequence was very interesting.  At that point the makers of the game I thought were just showing off.  They knew they had a great game and at that point were just putting an exclamation point on the end of it.  They could have played it safe, but then it wouldn’t be a Star Wars movie.  In Star Wars fans expect innovation and risk.  When science fiction fans watch something like Star Trek: Into Darkness we know we are seeing touchy, feeling content that is popcorn to the base fans—Star Wars seeks  to blow minds wherever possible with ever-expanding concepts—so it’s good to see that ambition still alive even under Disney control.

Battlefront II is a massive game with huge investments put into it.  Its targeted release was announced months ago for November 17th.  I preordered it which allowed me to start playing it on November 14th, three days early and I have to say, this is one of the best gaming experiences I’ve ever had so far.  Previous winners were of course Uncharted 4 and the latest Zelda game for the Nintendo Switch.  Battlefront II is a massive game with a lot to do and it holds that massive population of a world that wants to play it all at the same time very well.  The scope of the game is so big that I saw it being advertised on the NFL website heavily last weekend, and everywhere else that Disney felt they could penetrate popular culture.  But honestly, no wonder NFL ratings are down.  People may be turned off by the National Anthem issue, or the high salaries and spoiled brat attitudes of the players, the concussion protocols, and the softening of the game to appeal more to women but with competition like Battlefront II to occupy people’s time, a passive NFL experience is pretty boring.

If you are looking for a great video game to invest in, then this is it. It is released to the general public today in time for the Holiday season and is the perfect thing to do when it’s cold outside and the days are short.   With two new Star Wars movies coming out over the next six months, the announcement of a new trilogy and the Disney parks putting the finishing touches on their new Star Wars lands there is a lot to be excited about for even passive Star Wars fans.  Even as Hollywood is struggling massively; Star Wars is still good enough to keep the industry alive for a bit longer all by itself.  It won’t last of course.  The motion picture experience will likely give way completely to the small screen and video games like Battlefront II.   In many ways the video game industry is still able to tell stories in the classic way that great movies like THX-1138 did; only participants can actually be part of the story instead of just viewers.  That’s what makes Battlefront II such a great offering, because it is truly great science fiction and fantasy that we experience typically in great literature and it puts you in the action as a participant to interact with other people, and that makes it extremely unusual.  Not so unique for the kids who have grown up with these games, but for the tapestry of human history where information is exchanged through art–this is a real showpiece worthy of a great deal of respect.

Rich Hoffman

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

Secretly, Mitch McConnell Want’s to Lose the Senate to Democrats: There’s more to Moore’s accusers than just “girl power” complaints

OK, it’s officially overboard, and since nobody else will say it, I will.  We can’t allow ourselves to become such a panty waste culture driven by the indecisions of some women and their confusing whims of speculation, by constantly complaining and expect everything to turn out well.  Now that we’ve become so progressive and empowered them, you see the problem?  They are using their “girl power” to bitch about everything and to kill us all with their mixed messages.  But to accuse former president Bush who was 79 years old at the time of groping her ass at 16 years old, the latest victim of unwanted sexual advances by powerful men in an ever-increasing man hating society is Roslyn Corrigan.  The event supposedly took place way back in 2003 during a photo opportunity, but this girl and her mother just now decided to jump on the band wagon and capitalize off the event to get their 15 minutes of fame, which for a lot of these girls, that’s all they are after.  I seriously doubt old man Bush was thinking of throwing Miss Corrigan on a nearby table and going to town on her planting his seeds of manhood for the fulfillment of sustaining his family line.  I think this chick has watched too many episodes of Game of Thrones. 

Likely Bush meant to grab her waist to pull her in for the shot but accidentally grabbed her ass misjudging the distance.  It happens all the time in elevators and other tightly packed areas where humans congregate.  Knowing that, I am surprised that members of congress have been so willing to condemn Roy Moore who is running for a senate seat in Alabama after a series of women just like Roslyn Corrigan lined up, in October of all times, 40 years after the fact, and accused the Republican politician of inappropriately touching them?  They should all know better.  We can’t set a criteria like this.  Women do use sex as a weapon—and they are no better than men in their climbs for power.  Men are more literal, women are more emotional—but both have burning obsessions for power and if we allow every little thing to advance women who are craving attention—and thus power—to capture our minds the way this Moore case has, then a lot of people are in a lot of trouble—just as the 90 something year old George Bush is now.

http://time.com/5019182/george-hw-bush-groping-allegation/

I had almost the same thing happen to me recently that happened to President Bush, only the woman was about 900 years old and her ass was so big that I’d have to go five miles out of my way to avoid touching it.  But I always try to be polite and nice, especially to women and the way she looked at me after showed that she was starving for the contact which she may have done completely on purpose.  It certainly wasn’t on purpose on my end.  But that scenario sounds just like the recollection of Roslyn Corrigan.  These accusers of Roy Moore from 40 years ago is just ridiculous.  Are we really going to allow every woman who attempts to seduce a man but ends up losing to some other woman the ability to drudge up things a half a century later to affect the lives of the man?  I mean Harrison Ford was screwing Carry Fisher on the set of Star Wars when he was in his 30s and she was only 19—and our society accepted that as perfectly fine.  Once a girl starts having her period, biologically we all agree that she is loaded with the most dangerous weapon in the world, the ability to grant sex and to use it to get what she wants when she wants it.  That is how we are all wired as human beings, men and women.  I think Roy Moore by the way he’s defending himself probably had thoughts about those young girls at the time, but so what.  In the evangelical community especially, there are a lot of born again Christians who used to drink too much and have too much sex who use the church as a new beginning, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see that as Moore moved into his 40s, that he had some of that born again quality.  The guy has more than rectified anything in is most recent career to satisfy any desire to touch young women appropriately by biological predilection.  Anything he might have done wrong is only forbidden in modern political context.  It’s like outlawing R rated movies 40 years from now then putting people in jail because they watched one before they were outlawed.

The truth of the matter is worse than the accusation in this case of Moore, because many members of the Republican Party have shown entirely too much eagerness to throw the Alabama politician under the bus so they can have something even greater for them—an excuse.   These politicians like Mitch McConnell and Senator McCain want Roy Moore to lose the Alabama senate seat so the Democrats can take it because they want to lose their majority.  They want the Democrats to win so they can go back to the excuse of inaction as a body of politics.  They want the pain to stop, the expectation that Trump has in performance to go away so they can go back to the way things were, and these accusers of Moore from 40 years ago is their ticket to the good ol’ days.  So being the short-sighted idiots that they are they are giving voice to these accusers knowing that any of them could also be accused of the very same thing.  Yet they think that if they throw somebody else as a sacrifice to these goddesses of modern-day sexual interpretations, then perhaps they will be spared the scrutiny.

It was a year ago when Donald Trump went through the very same thing.  If Roy Moore sticks to what made him so popular to begin with, he’ll come out fine in this election.  The same politicians came out against Trump only back then nobody really thought he’d survive.  I remember how tough it was the weekend of the Access Hollywood tape.  I stood with Trump that Saturday morning and was one of the very first people to call bullshit on the story—and that’s what is going on with Moore now.  What he did with some young women who were doing their own kind of fishing with a young powerful person is irrelevant to what the 70-year-old man brings to the table now.  None of it matters except in feeding this ridiculous “girl power” machine that is on the rise everywhere these days hating men and thinking they will retain power based on the power of complaint.  Women are going to find that men will paint them out of their lives like just about every man does over 40 when sex is no longer a priority for them and they build a man cave in homes to get away from the constant bitching of their wives.  If a guy can’t cup the ass of some chick that is mutually looking to use her body to advance her career, there is no incentive for men to participate in anything women have to offer—because that is a basic interaction between the sexes.  The progressive fantasy is that men and women will sit down and speak to one another about what’s on their minds and treat each other civilly.  But the truth is men talk about banging women and women talk about manipulating men, and until that changes, the sex games will always rule the human species.  On the current political trajectory women will be left with all the power in the world but no one to share it with.  Then they’ll start bitching because nobody wants to deal with them.   All women are doing successfully with all this bitching is making America like almost every house on Thanksgiving Day where the men sit in the living room watching football while the women cook in the kitchen complaining that all the men want to do is watch TV.  Women can take over every senate seat, every house seat, they can even be president.  Taking away the game of the sexes won’t make a better world, it will simply give women one more thing to complain about as they apply their makeup and cover themselves in perfume to get men to look at them only to complain later that nobody is interested.   When the game of the sexes gets too hard and its more of a pain in the ass to deal with women who play too many games with sex, most men including the most powerful in the world will buckle to retreat to their man caves where everything makes much more sense.

Knowing all that the establishment Republicans who have so easily come out against Roy Moore should be ashamed of themselves.  By speaking against Moore they are feeding this progressive girl power movement with more logs on the fire which will eventually burn them too, just as it has former president Bush of all people.  And they were willing to do it for the simple desire to retreat back to how things were.  They want the Democrats to take over the Senate so that they can safely hide in the shadows letting Chuck Schumer fight Trump’s agenda getting the Republicans off the hook of expectation.  That’s why they have come out against Roy Moore.  They don’t care about the women, they are afraid of the social expectations that modern politics is applying to them—and they want out.  If Roy Moore is defeated, then it will only take a few more seats lost to give up the majority which is precisely what Mitch McConnell wants.  He doesn’t want to be the majority leader any more.   He just wants to protect the swamp, and instead of having the courage to say it himself, he is hiding behind a bunch of old ladies who are complaining about something that happened 40 years ago—and he’s dumb enough to think that will work out well for him and all the other men involved going forward.

For women it’s the oldest trick in the book and every married couple knows how it works. In an argument between men and women the woman brings up something from the past which the man feels guilty about to disarm him and win the fight.  Most of the time the woman gets her way as the man buckles under the guilt.  Ultimately what causes the man to buckle is his fear that he won’t get sex from the woman until they rectify their argument?  So the man being the short-sighted biological entity compelled to make the same mistakes over and over again gives in to the wife and the wife advances herself in the family always keeping that card in her back pocket for use whenever she may want something again.   Over twenty to thirty years of this, and perhaps many wives latter once a man’s prostrate starts going and they are no longer interested in sex because all the attractive women are the ages of their daughters and the women around them are losing estrogen and starting to look and feel like other men—they just retreat to their televisions, their man caves, or into politics where they can get away from women and be around other men who understand.  And now women are even going into those places where men hide, and nothing good can come out of that relationship.  What happens when you paint an animal into a corner with nowhere to go?  They get pretty vicious.  Right now they are hiding behind Roy Moore, but once he’s out of the way, where will they go after that, after they’ve lost the senate, they’ve lost their man caves, and they’ve lost people like Moore and Trump to hide behind?  I predict a bad result—nothing good can come from it.

And for the record, even though Trump and his daughter have not backed Roy Moore–I stand with Roy Moore.  I think he’s a good judge and a good Christian.  I don’t care if he had an orgy with a bunch of girls in his car–that was a long time ago and his career has shown that he’s not that kind of person over a long period of time.  If he was a horny little bastard and those sins carried him to the house of religion for which he has functioned with great conviction, then I’m good with him and would be proud to vote for him in Alabama.  He’s a lot better person than most of those senators in Washington–and given these allegations, that’s saying a lot.

Rich Hoffman

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

Women are the Carriers of a vast Evil called Liberalism: It may be politically incorrect, but behind the mask is the truth

I purposely spoke softly about liberalism in yesterday’s article because we all know them.  We know them at our Thanksgiving dinners, we know them as co-workers.  We know them as our favorite actors on television, motion pictures, and music.  We have no choice but to interact with them because they are so deeply embedded in our culture—they are metaphorically like the zombies from The Walking Dead—sick and beyond reason and in front of us dangerously every day to deal with.  I had to write that article to show that this little piece of writing isn’t from some radical right-winger beyond hope on an international stage of intolerance.  The political left usually labels such people as “Nazis” or “fascists” which is indicative of their actual state yet they often do not know the actual meanings of the words.  That’s because all liberals to some degree or another knowingly are guilty of a deliberate abandonment of reason and live their lives in a very emotional state.  That’s not to say that they are stupid, some do have high I.Qs and have the potential to be very smart.  But they are sick with liberalism and behind that is a commitment to death, destruction and everything negative that the human race represents.  Liberals are the antithesis of evil in our world and I’d go so far here today to say that they need to be destroyed as a political ideology before any of us can advance to the next stage of human development.  Before Elon Musk can put a settlement of people on Mars, or Donald Trump can Make America Great Again, we must deal with the problem of liberalism because it infects so many people that it is the primary cause of the current civil war that we are all engaged in—and until that war is won, advancement just isn’t possible.

Liberalism is such a vast sickness that most people have it to some degree, like an allergy or the common cold.  If left untreated, it utterly rots the brain and makes a person dangerous, because they can affect other people.  For instance, this is on display any time a person goes “clubbing” where dancing, and drinking are utilized to a mass effect.  The act of doing such a thing is undoubtedly liberal because the activity is clearly social, and reckless to the concept of individuality.  Anybody can dance in a room by themselves to music, but when you do it in such a public venue, you are there for the experience to do it with other people.  The music becomes the master of thought and individuals surrender to its beat in a collective manner.  In this way all dancers in a room become part of “group think” and the music becomes their master.  Therefore drinking becomes the accepted manner of accepting liberalism into the mind for an evening by drowning out thought and surrendering to the relief of “group think” mentality.   I say relief because under the condition of liberalism personal judgments are forgiven and actions can be accepted so long as individuals behave properly to the beat of peer pressure. We all feel the pressure of our individual lives and living against a constant tide that wears away at us in our jobs, our governments and our educations which then carries over into our life at home.  But when we go drinking and dancing we are relieved of these pressures for a time as we surrender to the “group think” of the club scene.

I use the dance club concept because it is one that most people can identify with.  People who don’t surrender to “group think” are often referred to as “stiffs.”  This insult is meant to penetrate the intellect of the individual who resists the pressures of “group think.”  The most common way that liberalism is sold to us is through sex, and obviously the females of our species.  Just like Aids is a typical homosexual disease transferred through reckless sex, once infected a carrier can contaminate many people even those who engage in traditional sexual practices.  Since women are the typical means of spreading Aids outside of homosexual circles where a married male may engage in sex with another contaminated male then have sex with his wife infecting her then from there it gets out into the mass population because she then carries it to other people through her interactions, not all of them sexual—the female becomes the host of destruction.  And that is the primary vehicle for which liberalism comes to the human race.  Women tend to be more compassionate and forgiving and through sex, they are the first entryway toward accepting “group think.”  For instance, in any middle school environment, it is the females who decide what is cool by the culture or not.  They are the bookends to the various classes of people who evolve in the public education environment.  If you want to date a popular girl for instance, you must do what she decides to get into that social category.  That means you must dress a certain way, play sports, and got to a great effort to maintain a number of friends which are also sharing in that experience.  Females are the glue that brings such people together for a common cause of “popular group think.”  The same holds true for the lower classes, it is the females who create the parameters of “group think” leaving all individuals to figure out which category they wish to invest themselves in.   We then take those habits into our adult lives which make us who we are and everything we become.

We all know someone who has joined an organization like Greenpeace or PETA so that they could date a girl. You don’t often find girls joining such organizations to meet boys.  It’s almost always the other way around.  The male being biologically predisposed toward molding their thoughts to the females around them have no problem surrendering their individual thoughts about a matter so that they can become potential mates to a female they have their eye on.  Males can date that female and convince themselves to care about environmental causes or the ethical treatment of animals if it gives them access to sex, then turn right around in their peer groups with other males and go hunting and fishing with no problem at all.  Therefore it is through females that the sickness of liberalism breeds and transfers from one person to another.  This is why it’s so important to liberals to put women into every institution of human endeavor because for their sickness to spread women must be the carriers.

Of course that is an incredibly politically incorrect thing to say—liberals have made it so.  It keeps the truth from the vast evil that is in the minds of every liberal from being exposed in the light of day because we can’t even have a conversation about it leaving the concept always very raw and unexplored.   This lets the evil of liberalism spread unmolested through our society providing cover for its erosion of thought with the justification of equality.  That is what makes liberalism so dangerous.  In so many ways Dinesh D’Souze did a great job of capturing the foot prints of liberalism in our society with his great book The Big Lie.  This isn’t some work of lunacy, it’s a modern examination of what liberalism truly is and you can buy the book anywhere, even at Costco.  While Dinesh D’Souze is a conservative he makes a good case why he thinks the way he does which serves as a baseline of logical human thought.  For instance in that book he covers the fact that Margret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood gave the Nazi regime the idea of euthanizing people.  Hitler and his minions didn’t come up with their idea to kill their Jewish population with mass extermination methods on their own; they got it from Planned Parenthood in the states as the Nazi were coming to power.  Sanger did what all liberals tend to do, and that is she used the notional of the female to penetrate our very thoughts of mass murder and to make it a “female right.”  Once Planned Parenthood’s abortion clinics established through our society as a “women’s right” it froze the males into accepting the concept or they would lose access to sex in those females.  So the males adopted the idea of mass murder as a means to not lose potential sex partners.   100 years later we generally accept abortion as a human right when in effect it is mass murder which inspired the Nazis to do it in a more direct fashion in their more male oriented structure.  What goes on in abortion clinics today is every bit as monstrous as the worst that we learned happened under the Nazis of Germany—but contextually, we are frozen from talking about it because our peer groups use liberalism to justify the murders under the guise of an individual right—which has a hidden appeal to us all.  Individual rights are the foundations of most of our motivations.   But in liberalism individual rights are always under attack, however are used as masks to advance the philosophy from concealment.

If a proper cause and corrective action is applied to any concept of liberalism, from “clubbing” to “abortion” we can trace the thinking back to an evil motive.  Evil uses liberalism to spread through human society.  The evidence does not support that conservatism is an equal contributor to such a preponderance of evil.  If a conservative is evil—they aren’t a real conservative.  Being conservative is a philosophical choice that supports individuality in all forms, which therefore supports values attributed to thinking.  Evil always involves the destruction of individuals for the greater good of “group think” which therefore holds us to the chains of the past where mankind struggled to light a fire or roll a rock across a field.   Evil does not want the human race to migrate into space or to drive an SUV to the shopping mall to buy $500 worth of cloths from Dillard’s so that individuals can look nice for that upcoming charity dinner.  Liberals prefer the young protester of SeaWorld and their torn cloths, their ears connected to the music of the moment through their iPhones and their minds seeking drugs, clubbing and sex to spread their agenda of “goodness” in protecting the Orca, or the rights of women to “choose.”  And that is precisely how we all get pulled into the vile evil that is liberalism–through accepting the people infected with it as a righteous participate in our Republic of thought in a culture of equals yielding toward sovereignty, when the reality is vile, despicable, and corrosive against everything it means to be human.

Rich Hoffman

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