Tag: Down the Rabbit Hole

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Stop Being Afraid of Guns: Matt Clark and Rich Hoffman talk about gun free zones on WAAM radio

Matt Clark had me on his WAAM radio show in Ann Arbor, Michigan recently to discuss some of the hot stories of October 2015. There was enough to cover to last a lifetime of live radio—the stories and their frequency are exponentially increasing by the moment, and it’s a lot to keep track of. Without talk radio, it would be nearly impossible for the average person to follow everything. That’s why I’ve always been a fan of talk radio, because you can get a lot of news provided to you as other tasks are done, such as driving, changing the oil, and installing new hot water heaters. Talk radio is miraculous in its ability to cover a lot of ground quickly, and on Matt’s show, he is one of the best. Typically in a short hour, he can hit a lot of topics in a very fluid manner—and when he has me on with him—we really hit the topics in a furious fashion. That broadcast can be heard below.

Toward the end of the broadcast there were a couple of callers that Matt wanted to get on the air. I am typically sympathetic to callers because it takes a lot of guts to call into a radio show, to sit on hold for up to an hour not knowing when the host will put you on the air to millions of potential listeners.   If the callers are respectful I typically don’t interrupt them because it’s important to get their view points out on the table. A police offer took issue with my proposal that regarding gun control, my more guns are best approach was something he had a problem with. Matt and I let him talk which directed him to the real point he was trying to make—but it was near the end of the show, and we didn’t have time to expand down that line of thought. The cop of course felt that civilians were not as equipped to handle a crises situation as compared to law enforcement. As Matt and I had been talking about gun free zones needing more independently armed citizens to keep things in check, the officer wanted more police on staff to protect schools from violence.

Well, more cops won’t work because they are too expensive. There is a cost for safety and security, and if it does incur too much of a burden, there needs to be other alternatives. The solution to gun violence is not more gun control laws, or more cops patrolling the streets and schools—its more armed citizens who will do the work for free not in a reactionary way, but a proactive way. A cop in the school in Oregon would not have stopped that violence. A well armed student could have. More cops working off tax payer funds are not the answer in almost every situation. We do need the police, but more for the report that happens when violence occurs so that courts have evidence to look at. So I don’t agree with the nice guy who called into Matt’s show. From his point of view, more cops in schools make sense—because he doesn’t care how much police cost an area in increased taxes. To his mind taxes can be perpetually raised so long as safety is the focus. But that’s just stupid.

There is always a danger when tragedies occur for the timid minded to seek out more government to provide security. More cops in schools are an expansion of government. Whereas a more open gun carrying society would provoke cheaper and more direct security in a laissez-faire kind of way which big government types simply don’t understand. If progressive minded people are not tampering with the lives of other people, they don’t feel secure themselves, so my typical laissez-faire style of security is something that drives them crazy. Gun laws in America should essentially be the same as the laws that govern business and commerce. Less laws and more responsibility invoked at the point of contact driven by self-preservation.

There was a lot right that occurred during the “Wild West” period in America of which guns were such a part of the mythology of western expansion. To consider the effort it took for Americans to load up in covered wagons and head west for up to a year of travel at roughly 20 miles per day with all the dangers that such a journey provoked, and that within 100 years of that type of settlement, there were railroads, cars and airplanes invented that could connect all that open space seamlessly is quite a miracle. Forget about who the Native Americans were—whether they were caretakers of Mother Earth’s land, migrant Chinese people, left-over Viking warriors, or a lost tribe from Israel, the effort of frontiersman is one of the great stories of human innovation and tenacity ever conducted by free people. Guns evolved from muzzle loaders at the start of western expansion and ended as a pretty significant technological innovation resulting in lever-action repeaters and the Colt .45s that tamed the West into one of the freest land masses on the face of the planet. Progressives hated the Wild West because it was a period of history where laissez-faire lifestyles provoked hopes through capitalism and innovation that has never been repeated at any other time in known history. For all the barbarity of frontier life, it paved the way for a wonderful country that exploded upon the world an immense economy. Without the gun, none of that would have happened.

I am of a mind that Americans shouldn’t even have concealed carry anymore; they should make guns a part of their fashion. It should be as common to see a gun on the hip of a person as it is to see a business suit now. The American gun is a tribute to our heritage and a reminder of what a laissez-faire approach to legislation, and justice can provide a free people. As a society, we have to get away from this crap of being afraid of guns. We have to stop putting orange indicators on toy guns at Wal-Mart so not to scare some pansy police officer with a happy trigger finger willing to shoot anything that they might consider a threat. It ruins the experience for a kid of pretending that guns are real when they play with those toys. Schools need to stop trying to keep kids from playing shoot-em-up at recess by making fake guns out of their hands. Playing with guns is good for kids—they should do a lot more of it—especially boys. Avoiding guns is making our society into a bunch of wimps and it’s getting worse year by year. That’s what happens when you take advice from people like that caller into Matt’s show. More government employees and more gun laws turn our society into a much more regressive one. Aside from the obvious expensive nature of continuing to add government employees at tax payer expense, micromanaging society is an even more cost incursion that has detrimental effects on social responsibility. The 100 years where America operated as a much more laissez-faire society between the War of 1812 and the rise of the progressive era with Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 America became a global superpower. Under progressive influence, America has regressed steadily from 1912 to 2012.

2012 will be viewed as a pivotal year in American politics. Obama won a second term, Ohio’s governor Kasich lost his battle with the unions, and many of those who refused to hold their nose and vote for Mitt Romney as a Republican presidential nominee decided they had enough of politics as usual. Since 2012 the American people have started to turn more toward a desire for a laissez-faire approach to all things related to government which will increase as millenials realize that most of their educations during the first twenty years of their lives were a complete farce—they learned all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons. It is among them that they watch the big government reaction to all these failed progressive problems and are starting to consider other options. Of those options I believe we will see a new trend that guns will become more open and accepted. They should be, they are an important aspect of American culture.

As Matt and I closed out his show it was obvious that the government has well overplayed its hand in this card game called politics, and police officers have seen the last of the days where panicked parents and squishy minded voters just increased taxes and threw more bodies at every danger that presented itself. We are dealing with a whole new age in a new century, and if America is to survive, it will only do so with an overall political approach that is laissez-faire toward everything—starting with guns. Once more guns are injected into our society with more frequency, and openness–then all things related to our commerce will reflect that less restricted approach. It’s a mentality that we are missing in America that goes or comes based on how our society maintains its relationship to the gun. A laissez-faire approach to firearms is not an extreme position with equal measure against the gun grabbing liberals on the opposite side of some political spectrum. It’s not up for debate with a high low bar between positions where left and right politics meet in the middle. Guns are a part of America and there should be no apology in wanting them, carrying them, or using them. If America had that attitude presently, a lot fewer people would be dying in these mass shootings. The shootings themselves are caused by failed policies and an overly cautions society that is so afraid of guns that they can’t even allow a child to have a toy unless it’s colored in some way so not to scare other people into believing its real. Nobody should be such a bunch of wimps as to be scared of guns. Our education system has made our society that way—to our own detriment. And now its time to stop being afraid.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Carl Icahn’s ‘Danger Ahead’: Why Trump University failed but the billionaire would succeed as president

DOk course I daily keep up with a wide range of subjects and read heavily on them—which is quite a task if I were to think about it. It’s for no other reason than I have a lot of passion for many things. For instance, I forgot to sleep over the past weekend for both Friday and Saturday nights because there wasn’t enough time to do everything I wanted to do on those days. Sleep was not an option. But of those things I have not read lately much in the financial journals. You might remember my alarm while buying a car recently at the extremely low-interest rates. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. I have been thinking about other things, so didn’t really hear the loud voices coming from people like Carl Icahn about low-interest rates. However, as a Trump supporter for president, I did notice the Icahn had endorsed Trump and his tax package for reasons that I had noted centering on interest rates. Icahn is one of the most respected investors in the world so I felt a little pride at recognizing something that he was uttering which should concern every American immensely. Icahn put his thoughts together in a video called Danger Ahead that should explicitly encourage people to favor Donald Trump. The situation is dire and requires immediate attention. I’ve been warning about this phase in the American economy for a long time, but now that it’s here, we have to take action to solve the problem as we are well beyond the point of no return.

Icahn has done several such videos and doesn’t just stop on the corporate inversion concerns mixed with extremely low-interest rates. He goes further and addresses the other major crises present in America, which is so grossly obvious in politics and in business—our society has lost the quality of its people to do basic business. As a supporter of unfettered capitalism, the only way to keep everything in reasonable check is for people to function from a distinct cultural morality. For instance, as Icahn points out, many of today’s CEOs, and Board of Directors along with hedge fund investors are morally bankrupt so they invite snake oil salesman in the form of politicians to induce unneeded regulation on economic matters further restricting the free flow of financial expansion. Icahn has specifically pointed to a particularly low quality breed of manager class that has emerged in America which is proving to be catastrophic to our ability to deal with the financial crises that is coming.

To be a good manager a person has to function from a general foundation of ethical behavior. If a manager has hidden deep within their psychosis insecurities and didactic desires, they are likely unequipped to be good managers. Even worse, in the chain-of-command structure of most American business managers are reluctant to put second-in-commands to nip at their heels challenging their authority with anybody competent. So the incompetent are often the types who find promotions. The best and the brightest are most of the time left to die in some corner of a manufacturing environment as the worst and weakest thrive. This is a trend that has been going on for a long time—so it’s nothing new. But it’s beginning to have an effect on our national GDP that is measurable.

I can say from experience that the world is dying in regard to management. It’s really bad in the United States—most people on the other end of the phone or on an email are completely incompetent for their positions. They are culturally destroyed so that they are not equipped to function in a modern business environment. Good management is becoming a serious lost art in America, but it’s not limited to our borders—it’s the world over. The primary fault of these phenomena is our education systems which have been heavily influenced by politicians who know next to nothing about money. There is serious knuckle-dragging going on in modern business, when the issue should be reversed. Considering what is spent on modern education we should have the opposite problem. So the blame is on our educations system.

There is some criticism of Donald Trump and his Trump University that was in operation during the last decade. Essentially, Trump wanted to create a new generation of business leaders with his education institution infused with his perpetual optimism. It was a failed enterprise, so many in the media are pointing toward that failure to hang on Trump the selling of false promises as if the whole thing had been a scam—and why the billionaire would be a failed president. But where Trump would succeed as president but not as the head of a university is due to the Metaphysics of Quality which I’ve talked about extensively before. CLICK TO REVIEW. Trump as a president is largely a salesman for all things Americana whereas institutional learning cannot teach people to think from the front of the train of thought. Leaders are a special breed. As president, Trump can help create an environment for leaders to emerge, but education institutions cannot make poor managers into good forward thinking people. It just doesn’t work for the masses. Trump tried, but not everyone was ready for the effort of leadership, and this is what’s essentially wrong with all education institutions—even ones infused with optimism of Donald Trump. It takes great leadership to create good managers, and leadership is not the criteria used to invoke promotions. Instead, we have created a system of brown-nosing and schmoozing to accomplish promotions—and that doesn’t automatically create leaders. Leadership cannot be bought with the price of tuition, it has to emerge from within individuals who have value and know how to spot it in others.

Trump and Icahn are free to say what they think because they are rich. They don’t have to worry about making anybody above them angry with their opinions—which most smart people in the world are very concerned about—because their upward mobility depends on it. If they show up their boss—who may well be an incompetent loser, they may not be able to buy that house next year, or a new car. I’ve had the opportunity to do a lot of hiring over the years and a common question I ask of new employees is how hungry they are to perform the task they are being hired for. I say to them that I expect them to challenge me for my job—that I want them to bring their best to the game table. I don’t want ass-kissers, or appeasers of any kind. I want people who will challenge themselves every day and look beyond me for their opportunity. I never worry about somebody down talking me to someone else because my reputation speaks for itself. All people who are involved in management should feel that way. But they don’t. They watch with fearful eyes always over their shoulders worried that somebody might notice that they are incompetent—because they have been taught that having faults and being not so good at things was a virtue rather than a detriment that it truly is. Trump and Icahn at their senior ages can afford to be critical. They may not have felt so comfortable saying these things 20 years ago, but now they are because the evidence is so grossly obvious. For the record though, I have always said these types of things, so it’s nice to see others joining the party especially people like Carl Icahn.

The net result of this present debacle is due to the failed philosophy of power within the collective instead of the value of individual merit. When Icahn says that the unions are somewhat at fault for the situation, he means that good managers have thrown up their hands and tossed the meat to the dogs instead of sticking around to fight it out. Those who do tend to stick around these days are the suck asses and losers who are more interested in titles than in the merit of their positions. As low quality people, they look toward the position of their office for social value leaving them little intellectually to provide the masses by way of leadership. So America has destroyed one of its valued commodities—the breeding of good hard-nosed leaders of which people like Trump and Icahn are a dying breed. They are both looking for one last shot at fixing the world starting with America—because both are old men who I believe want to leave the earth better than when they found it. And right now, the risk is that they will leave it far worse—not because of them—but in spite of their efforts.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

George Lang For Governor of Ohio: Why you can trust him first in West Chester

There really isn’t any reason to say anything against Chuck Cramer after watching his performance in the following video debate with George Lang, the sitting president of the West Chester Trustees. Chuck sounded like a good man. But he was certainly out of his league as the clear winner of the debate was my friend George. George Lang graciously helped Chuck through the ordeal without embarrassing the challenger, which was respectful even if it was unnecessary. In politics you can’t take anything for granted, but after watching this video–George will easily win re-election as Chuck–as well-intentioned as he was–doesn’t pose a challenge at the level it would take to remove Lang from his current position. Lang did reveal during the debate that he plans to run for Governor of Ohio sometime soon, and has higher political ambitions so West Chester better enjoy him while it can. He won’t remain as accessible as he is now for long. He’s just too politically talented.

I don’t like politicians, but I do like George. Because of politics I don’t have many close acquaintances. I know a lot of people, but I avoid close attachments because you have to reserve the right to act on your own accord when needed. In politics there are often hundreds if not thousands of people who expect something from whoever is in a public office, and it becomes clear really quick that you can’t please them all. So you have to stay very true to your own inner compass and navigate the mine field accordingly. I don’t trust career politicians who have been in the business very long because after a period of time, it becomes nearly impossible to listen to that inner compass while at the same time satisfying all the social requirements of the people who donate money to your campaign. I know George to the point that I know his core function isn’t very far from mine and that he wants ultimately a small government that does not want additional tax money, because as he says, government will spend it. As a trustee he has done extremely well in West Chester and I have no doubt he will have success wherever he ends up. Independently, he’s quite successful, so politics is not his primary endeavor. But he enjoys “the game” and believes he can do well there and I see him as the best option to penetrate those depths in a search for treasure that has thus far been hidden.

Daily I live a rather complicated life myself, which I share with George to some extent. The reason I trust him more than the average politician is due to parts of George that I have seen under duress. I’m a pretty controversial person and if George really wanted to “play the game” in the typical way that politicians do, without merit—then he would not have come to some of my private Overmanwarrior meetings (located in the back room of the Liberty Township LaRosa’s) that we’ve had for people who have most supported this site over the years. I have never asked for any special favors from George, but he has supported what I’m doing under his own free will even through it may not have been politically expedient to do so for him. Not everyone gets to see that side of him, and it may have been a huge political gamble for him at the time, but when gambles pay off, they usually do big. And working with me is always a safe bet, which many people have come to learn over the years. So I benefit from knowing George under pressure and under duress and therefore knowing more about his true character than many people have the opportunity to see.

Politics however, especially for people in leadership is a tricky field. When you are in charge of something, there are thousands of nipping parasites called second-handers who loom in your wake waiting for a mistake by you to exploit for their own advantage. They are second-handers because they often do not have the courage to live out in front, so they exclusively make their livings in the wake of people in a leadership role. The trick in politics, whether it’s in a public setting like what George is doing, or whether its being the head of a company, is to not get caught up in what the second-handers want or need from you. When politicians get corrupt it is at this point, when second-handers begin to take over the decision-making of the leadership of those out in front. A leader has to accept that they will be hated often by somebody in their wake at some point, if not constantly. That hatred is not necessarily against a leader, it’s really against themselves for lacking the courage to live their own life authentically, depending on someone else to give them something. Politicians go bad when they start giving in to this relationship which then degrades them into a second-hander themselves. Often, donors are these second-handers because they want something from government, so politicians who may start off as valiant leaders who need money to run campaigns have to step out of that leadership role to solicit funds. The business is tricky on a philosophical level, and without good philosophy a leader loses their authenticity, and potency.

It is lonely at the top, not because there are always people who want your attention. When people pass you in the parking lot there is never a stranger, because most people are second-handers who are nice to your face hoping for a favor down the road, whether it’s in a job, or a political mechanism in their favor. It’s important to know that they aren’t being nice to you out of a human need for kindness. To best articulate this phenomena the Clint Eastwood western High Plains Drifter best illustrates this issue in the most defined way possible. For the person in the leadership position, the best way to maintain their sanity is in accepting that deep down inside, most people do resent you and would cut off your head to suck out all your blood in a second if it were legal and they could get away with it. As cynical as that may sound, it’s correct, and resembles best what is in most people’s hearts—truly. It’s a bad reflection for most to gaze at in the mirror, so they avoid the characterization, but if a politician or leader of any kind is to remain uncorrupted, then they must accept this reality. And to a large extent, I see that George has.

I see in George potential, but I like him not for what he does or what he may do, but because of who he is. I see in him a little boy who wanted to grow up and do something really good, and that same enthusiasm is present even in polished campaign speeches. There are of course those who want something from him that they may not get, and they will be upset with him. If I had a dime for every person who is upset with me on a daily basis, I’d have more money than Donald Trump, so you can’t get caught measuring the worth of somebody based on their popularity within second-hander social groups. That is not an accurate way to measure worth—only merit can determine the value of a leader. The masses will always want what falls off the wagon of true productivity and will like or hate a leader based on what they can get from them. So it does no good to pay them any mind, but to stay on target with the objectives often only the leader can see. If people lose faith in that direction, they can vote the politician out of office. If they sense that they’ll gain an advantage by keeping a politician in office, then they’ll continue to vote for them hoping for success through someone else’s leadership.

Regarding West Chester, there is little not to like. Sure, George has enemies, he gets sued constantly and there are hoards of people in his wake who would love to knock him off his pedestal in a fraction of a second because they fantasize that they might do better. But George knows how good he is and when the chips are on the table through all the smoke of wheeling and dealing, I know what’s in his heart. And what is there is gold, which is the reason why West Chester is currently flourishing. One person does make a difference, and West Chester is the direct recipient of the gold that flows out of George Lang in ways that some resent, others overlook, and many others want to consume for their own advantage. But without George, nobody would have it, and deep down inside, I know that he knows it. That’s why I trust him.

By no fault of his own, Chuck Cramer didn’t have a chance.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.