Tag: education

Trust Trump: Taking the fight to the enemy to either convert them, or destroy them

A lot of people seem worried about Donald Trump after his talk with Democrats about DACA and the announcement that the president would attend the Davos event in Switzerland. For those who don’t know much about Davos, that is the Socialist International gathering that decides strategies on how to take over the world implementing various degrees of Marxism wherever possible. Those two things happening after the Michael Wolff book about life inside the Trump White House that has caused so much consternation and destroyed the career of Steve Bannon, has people noticeably concerned—on every side of the political spectrum. But I’m not surprised by any of it. It’s all in Trump’s most famous book, The Art of the Deal. I continue to tell people that they should read Trump’s books—they’d understand a lot more about what’s going on.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/01/why-trump-rsvpd-to-a-globalist-lovefest

We have a lot of problems to solve over the next few decades and all those problems are made worse by a generation of young people raised in the public-school system to function under socialism. That has always been a topic of great importance at past Davos meetings and knowing that George Soros himself will brag quite spectacularly that the damage is already done—America as it was is just a projection of its former self, the standard belief is that it’s too late for America. Soon it will all fall in on itself and socialism will take over as the mode of operation in the last great capitalist country on earth. Literally every corner of the world is functioning from some dysfunctional plot created by these Davos progressives because they usually entail people with huge amounts of money who essentially view themselves as modern aristocrats of European design—the ruling class by merit of their wealth reshaping the world.

Trump knows that there will be no changes to people’s support of capitalism if the fight does not go to the doorsteps of the enemy. Traditionally Republicans move away and avoid the confrontations with an encroaching leftist which is why the Saul Alinsky methods have worked traditionally. For instance, take Glenn Beck for example—with all the challenges he posed to George Soros he lost his Fox News show and then was systematically harassed everywhere he went in public—Broadway plays, shopping excursions with his family, and a noticeable attack that seemed to have really rattled him in a New York park. His response was to retreat his operations down to Texas where he started The Blaze—which has always struggled to get a foothold—essentially because he ran from liberals and sought to moderate his tone to their liking. Another notable Fox News personality, Bill O’Reilly is now on the outside looking in sending pictures of his dog every other day on Twitter when he used to be a person of great command of social dialogue. He’s been reduced to nothing essentially because he chose to run from liberals instead of engaging them. He still writes best selling books, but that is due to the overflow of his audience from when he was on Fox News. Now without that vehicle of delivery, he is a diminishing character of social shaping.

What makes Trump different from virtually everyone else is that he is battle hardened and confident in his own positions. He is not enamored by glitzy billionaires and their cars and women because he is one of them. He doesn’t have to be nice to them hoping to get campaign donations—he can work with them or around them however he sees fit. So he can go to Davos and sputter on about American first melting away the faces of the Socialist International members and walk away intact. He has no problem fighting anyone anywhere, so he can’t be forced to retreat and that makes him very special. That type of engagement is what it takes to beat the left. We are at a point where conservatism must consider not only winning elections but in selling conservative values to those who don’t presently have them, and the only way to do that is through victory. People need to see those ideas competing against those at Davos and come to the decision that they’d rather follow the America first policy rather than the globalist proposals of Socialist International. Conservatives must be willing to go into the Lion’s Den and to fight liberalism on their own homelands. That is the only way.

Fighting doesn’t always have to be contentious either. If a victory can be achieved with pleasant talks and back slapping—that is a preferred way. Take into account the remarkable efforts at talks that just took place between North and South Korea. Amazingly just a few months after the world was fearing nuclear war with the communists of the North on the Korean Peninsula now Kim Jong-un is ready to send people to the Olympics in South Korea. The North Koreans stated that their weapons were not pointed at their brethren in the South, but at the United States—which is fine. Trump understands the nature of playing good cop and bad cop and if playing the antagonist brings peace talks to the table, that is a good thing. The sanctions from China have worked, there is no power play at work to divide South Korea and the United States—there is only getting the North Koreans to participate in the world of markets without threatening to blow everyone up every five seconds—and Trump has achieved that. Without Trump being president, there would be no talks between the two Koreas, and there certainly wouldn’t be any Olympics participation between Kim Jong-un and his former rivals to the south. By giving the kid an “out” in the West to hate, Trump opened up the possibility of uniting Asia under a common need and peace will be the result. It was quite a masterful strategy.

It is ironic, but I certainly feel it. Not even 10 years ago I could go to dinner with some Hollywood people and have enough common ground with them to carry on a conversation. But liberals especially the hard-global progressives, made their bold moves during the Obama years and have made it impossible to have conservatives and liberals speak to each other. As a matter of fact, being conservative is a dirty word—I never yield to it, but if I’m talking to museum people, scientists or anybody in the teaching profession, I feel I have to explain myself as a conservative. Even traveling in Europe where everyone seems to be a little liberal there is the sentiment that there is something wrong with you if you are an American conservative—and that is just appalling. A lot of that occurred because conservatives never sat down with Democrats and forced them to talk or defend their positions—or ever challenged them except from the safety behind a fence of Party ideology. That has empowered progressives, especially the liberals at Davos. Unchallenged, the billionaires there who control most of the world’s media feel they can impose their beliefs on the rest of us making conservatives feel like an inferior and outnumbered party when the truth is far from it.

With Trump going into their places and talking to them he is taking the GOP into a realm it’s never been before, and he’s mixing ideologies in a productive way that forces the collision to produce a new tomorrow. As divisive as a president as people attribute to him—Trump will go down in history as the only one who was able to bring the world together on the bases of philosophical truth that no text book has yet discovered. To do that you can’t be afraid of the other side—you have to go into their homes and meet them where they eat and sleep, and take your position to the places they are most vulnerable—and force them to look at it. And that is precisely what Trump is doing, and I think it’s wonderful.

Rich Hoffman

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

Why Trump is Very Mentally Stable: The poor definitions for leadership that robs so many people of success, logic, and victory

Thinking even further about the assumptions made in the anti-Trump Michael Wolff book about life in the new White House the definitions for winning, and victory are not the same from each side. Liberals clearly do not understand what “winning” means because they are not a performance based political party. Trump’s methods of negotiating are foreign to them and the means of achieving wins is as well—which is very apparent by the kinds of things that the people around Trump said about him to the fly-on-the-wall writer. Steven Bannon in particular obviously was looking at the president and thinking, “I can do this, and I should be.” But that is a common mistake made by second-hander people. What they don’t understand is that the master negotiator, and the person who often wins most of their engagements are not the types of people who spike the football in people’s faces. They are the ones who build up those around them and teach other people how to win as the residual effects migrate into the circumstances of the leader whoever they may be—in this case Donald Trump.

Trump said a lot when he said that he makes winning look easy. Winning is a skill as much as it’s a strategic result. Most people don’t know how to win, but there is no question that there are people who always find themselves knocking on the door to victory time and time again while others consider it a mystery and an opportunity given only by luck. Anyone who has read Trump’s books, especially books by Trump University like Trump 101: The Way to Success, understand that there is a lot more going on with Trump than just powering his way into beating his opponents at whatever objective he seeks to accomplish. From day one in the Trump White House—even before, this is how the new president went about his work—learning what all sides on a matter wanted, then learning how to use that knowledge to achieve his objective.

Winning is not about out powering your opponent, or even check-mating them into submission. Often when it comes to negotiations you want the other party to feel good about what they are doing—even if its losing. Winning and crushing your opponent into oblivion is not synonymous with success. Sometimes it is—but often not. Winning is about achieving your objectives while letting everyone else feel that they were a part of the process—and that is why Trump ran, and still does to a large extent, a loose White House. People need to be comfortable, so they can reveal their needs to you, so that you can use that information to help build in their minds the parameters of victory.

From its inception in the modern sense—as in from the Dark Ages to the present, occupational responsibilities in Western cultures tend to be focused on specializations. In oriental cultures it is expected that an individual will become somewhat curious about many fields, but in the West we are projected to learn one thing and to stick to that relying on the next specialization to do their job correctly and if they don’t we throw up our arms and blame that person for failing. People who constantly win however are usually good at many things in life, and are curious about many others. What they have in common is that they tend to not be overly specialized, but have developed within themselves many skills for which to use in improvisational context to solve problems and build support for their viewpoints among other people.

What we have going on regarding Donald Trump in the White House is a fear from the majority in Washington D.C. that function from a specialized trade that a multitalented businessman will forever raise the bar of expectations for them. For those who voted for Donald Trump, that is exactly what we wanted, but for those who believe in a specialized skill conducted through institutional protections, Donald Trump is a nightmare. For Washington D.C. to work the way they learned it does requires that the formula of specialization be maintained. But for Trump to do his thing he needs to be part psychologist, part inspirational speaker, part numbers cruncher, part fashion model, part strategist and to be able to recognize in everyone he speaks with what their specializations are, so he can turn them to his advantage. The way to do this is to let people have a free rein and study their behavior so that it is easy to ascertain their characteristic tendencies. Saying that Donald Trump is stupid, or insane—or anything resembling an unstable personality is more of a wish than a statement. For the institutional addicts who need the structure of specialization to be maintained Trump is “unstable” because their definition of stability is to keep personalities within the specialization of their institutional expectations. Yet Trump is results driven which does not adhere to a structure—because often the structure stands in the way of the needed results—otherwise there wouldn’t be a need to fix anything—which is what the opposition against Trump is really after.

To those who have mastered the art of just about everything they have no need for advice—at least in the traditional sense. Trump has shown that he does listen to people, but not in the way that people hope—where their specializations are respected. Trump listens to what people say then he uses his experience to make gut judgment calls based on his unique leadership skills. This is something that most people in the world do not have the ability to do—including most major presidents throughout history. It’s not that Trump did anything wrong, it’s just that our current society doesn’t understand the nature of leadership very well—and why only a very few people per capita seem inclined to proper leadership. Leadership isn’t about following the rules of an established institution, it’s about getting good results even when the institutions let us down with poor resolutions. Solving those problems isn’t about doing so within the context of institutional boundaries, it’s about discovering the correct solution and then bringing about the conditions to implement those solutions. To be free to make decisions on your own is to be able to more quickly ascertain the needed objectives. If the problem is in the people who are advising, to protect their specialized roles within the institution, then speaking with them about their opinions won’t solve the problem, and this is why Trump has achieved so much in such a short period of time. He is not hindered by the limits of other people who don’t strive so far as he does.

In the traditional sense of presidential roles within the nation of America—it is expected that the Executive Branch be treated like the Monarchy in England—as kind of a figurehead that acts as the face of the nation while the specialized experts do their thing for whatever purpose is identified on their institutional charters. But most Americans during this last election saw that the process just wasn’t working, so we voted against the institutions themselves and put a CEO in charge instead of just another political hack. To a certain extent it is understood that people will have problems with that approach because they don’t have the definitions in their lives which explain why Trump is successful. They only know that Trump does not respect the institutional parameters for which they exist. Stupidity in this regard is a matter of perspective—and as history will chronicle, it is the institutionalists who will be shown as lacking. Trump is a change, a demand in real leadership—not token sentiments meant to protect the Skull and Bones Society, or the charters of the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security. Nor the secret societies, hate groups, or ideologies of long dead philosophers. Trump was hired to solve problems and that is what he’s doing, and history will respect what he did even if it does piss everyone off. The more he does piss off, the better our nation will be in the end.

Rich Hoffman

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

Why Donald Trump is a Genius: The history of how we arrived where we are, intellectually

From the times of at least the Mesolithic era humans have built ritualistic centers of symbolic significance to integrate the experiences of the individual with the greater collection of society. The roots of communism and socialism in 2018 point back to this innate desire of humans to be accepted by their peers. There may not have been ever in politics at a high level a person like Donald Trump who is so self-assured that he doesn’t require the approval of others to function. He enjoys approval, but he does not require it to make decisions, and that is a very new thing relatively speaking in human development over the ages. And to those who control the transfer of power, or rather, have controlled it—this is a scary time. When they’ve needed to deny Trump social authority to keep him under control from their perspective, the United States President has proceeded on without them showing remarkable self confidence—which culminated in gasps of horror when the political left threw all their bets into a new Michael Wolff book about Trump hoping to paint him as insane—to stir up congressional sentiment to remove the president from office using the 25th Amendment. Instead, Trump stood with the leaders of congress and declared that he was so smart that he was a genius which is something a person just doesn’t publicly declare about themselves. Humans are not supposed to be that vain; they must await that assessment by others—aren’t they?

I didn’t talk about it at the time but on April 24th of 2017 the great American philosopher Robert Pirsig died at his home at the age of 88. Pirsig was a great thinker and created the metaphysics of quality philosophy which in the business world I consider much more important than the business shift to Lean manufacturing. Pirsig had a lot in common with the transcendentalist William James and his two books Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Lila were classics that stand up to even the greatest thinkers of philosophy. But life was not always good to Pirsig—his philosophy was forged from a hard life. Shortly after his second child was born Pirsig suffered a nervous breakdown and spent time in and out of psychiatric hospitals. As part of his treatment for what they called paranoid schizophrenia and clinical depression he was treated with electroconvulsive therapy. It was a rough go for Pirsig—his wife left him and he had to start all over as his children were growing. Less than ten years later Pirsig found himself on a motorcycle dealing with his schizophrenia taking a road trip with one of his sons. The result of this trip became Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. The book was a hit catapulting Pirsig into the upper echelons of thoughtful Americans then in 1979 the son who went on the trip with him was killed in San Francisco, stabbed to death after a mugging. Although the work he produced in many cases was considered genius, everything he did was a product of his mind collapsing on itself and falling into insanity for a period, if not the entire time.

Just six years after the publication of the fantastic work by Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra the German philosopher was hugging a horse outside his home trying to stop it from being flogged with a whip. He wasn’t even 40 years of age yet and the great man was having a mental breakdown for which he never recovered. His much maligned sister cared for him after the suicide of her own husband and it was under her care that essentially the Nazi party emerged. Not long after Nietzsche died did Adolf Hitler emerge who loved the work of the German philosopher so much that he built much of his ideology around it. How much of Nietzsche’s work was genius and how much was pure insanity is hard to tell because the definition of sanity is shaped by the masses. Those who step out beyond what is considered normal are what shape the thoughts of tomorrow, not compliance to a previous order. Yet to move too far from the norm means that a human mind is on its own—it loses the support of its peers which biologically has always been a concern.

And so it has gone for many generations, mankind has pushed against the psychological needs of society to conduct mass rituals publicly ordained and to align the yearnings of the human soul to an authentic experience specific to itself—and much of the time insanity has followed. In Nietzsche’s case his desire for anti-institutional mechanisms to free individuality from group think actually became the foundations for socialism in Nazi Germany and fascism in Italy—because mankind fell short of the high mark objectives of those uniquely new philosophies. And certainly the work of Robert Pirsig still is giving the world fits in how they could possibly bring together the two philosophies of East and West to arrive at a definition of quality that goes well beyond the subject-object scientific method. Just because the kids in the front of the class get good grades in school, it doesn’t mean they will become the best elements of our society—it may actually be them who become the destroyers of civilization—yet we continue to conduct our society in the fashion of such insanity—even though we have the books and understanding to know better. It’s like knowing you have diabetes and yet you eat a whole cake and a twelve pack of sugary soda anyway—then wonder why you have to cut off your legs because of nerve damage. One thing causes the other yet it is difficult for our group think to accept such a radical change in living pattern—so we continue on with the destructive behavior.

The genius of Donald Trump is that he has emerged through his life and all the tragedies that come with it, as a remarkably complete and self-assured man. Part of his genius is that he is able to act without the collective approval of the society at large—which keeps him from being manipulated by lesser minds. He’s been able to do this where so many others have failed before him—people we consider great in hindsight. However, we’re not yet ready to say that what Trump does is a genius because he does not let the second-handers come along for the ride like previous voyagers into thought have done. Trump is truly his own man and can function completely on his own. Although he does like approval of his peers, he is not crippled into inaction if he doesn’t get it, and that is something new. New for the human race—while there are certainly free thinkers functioning in the world, they have not made it into such a high office before. In that regard what Trump is doing is what Zarathustra was attempting to do in Nietzsche’s famous book. And that’s not insanity. The only insanity that is going on is the group thinkers trying to reconcile their collective yearnings to this new individualized standard. But the standard itself set by Trump is actually the sanest thing in the world and if he doesn’t say so—who will?

Human beings for over 300,000 to perhaps millions of years have required group think to accept a new idea and this has kept mankind from ever breaking a cycle of birth and death for which has loomed over all our efforts since the beginning of recorded time. It has held us back tremendously and it was only when the United States declared its independence from the world and survived the War of 1812 that a new philosophy emerged that climaxed long after Nietzsche, Marx and many others came and went. Robert Pirsig was onto it, and he went crazy trying to develop it—because it was essentially the first time in the history of the world that a human being scratched away at the protections of group think to see what might reside outside of our intellectual bubbles. The result has been and is Donald Trump—a character that essentially stepped out of the pages of Ayn Rand and the ministry of Norman Vincent Peale—and emerged from a uniquely American city to become it’s master of capitalism and the morality of money. Then for Trump to be voted into the White House to bring those values to the rest of America—the action becoming one of the greatest events in world history—not in a political sense, but a philosophical one. In that regard Donald Trump is a vessel of immense intellectual capacity, only it’s different from what came before. This time it is individually based whereas everything that came before was of a collective consciousness and we can see now that the madness was never in the individual yearning from the freedom of institutional controls, but the institutions themselves trying to hold back the individual from discovering their true potential all along.

(And for the record, it is quite obvious that humans and Neanderthals evolved separately, not in succession. The fossil record and radio-carbon dating of many human developments go well back to pre-Ice Age establishments. At this point science is saying that humans are much older than we previously thought.)

Rich Hoffman

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

Stephen Miller’s Take down of Jake Tapper: Fighting back in the right way

To see the wonderful interview by Stephen Miller on Jake Tapper’s CNN show; here it is.  Enjoy, and share it with a friend.

Rich Hoffman

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

A Review of ‘Fire and Fury’: The profound sadness that emerges at the end of the controversial book

My first thought about the new Michael Wolff book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is sadness.  My second thought is that it is good for the book publishing business and that I think it’s wonderful that people are reading it.  At least they are reading something.  I went down to my Barnes and Noble store at precisely 9 am when they opened to buy it.  They had two copies for promotion and were able to release them once the publisher moved up the publication date, due to Trump’s cease and desist order, so it was one of the more dramatic books to hit the shelves in a long time—and that is a good thing.  But after going through it my opinion of Trump only solidified.  It was obvious to me that Wolff took a calculated risk that will make him forever wealthy—but will always place him in the category of a tabloid writer.  He threw away his reputation to exploit this one unique chance in history and that is what lead me to feel the sadness—not just for him, but the people who said the things about Trump that they did.  It was a grim reminder to me of how small people most of the time think—and that is a real tragedy that I hope diminishes with each year that Trump is in office.

Of course Melania cried when her husband won the presidency.  She’s a young woman still who could walk the streets of New York with her son and go to a store or restaurant and enjoy some anonymity.  With Trump’s successful election she lost all that in a moment for the rest of her life and there is no question that it was a real punch in the gut for her.  What shocked me about Wolff’s book, as a writer, was his complete disregard for those types of little moments and what they really mean.  He simply took a Never Trump vantage point of all the events of the book and interviewed people who were ankle biters.  Ankle biters are those second-hand people, who usually constitute most of our society, who need a leader to show them how to do something once, then they try to associate themselves with the original idea through group think and try to claim jump in some respect for shared ownership.  You can know them by the type of people who stand around the coffee machine in any given morning talking about nothing until the boss walks through.  The boss might say a thing or two about current events for which the ankle biters will laugh and agree with.  Then the moment the boss leaves those people retreat into small-minded topics talking about the boss and how stupid he or she may be—and how they could do a better job if they were in charge.

Trump dealt with ankle biters all his life from his various businesses.  However, given his later celebrity status and the role his children played at the top of his company, Trump had some insulation from them.  In public life the ankle biters are much worse because there is a feeling of entitlement that often comes with their jobs and when Trump took office those second-hand people where literally everywhere.  It took Trump about five months of working in the White House to start to get his stride and figure out who was doing what.  He learned enough to figure out that Comey was a leaker on the intelligence side, but the people closest to him were harder to detect. Trump sincerely tried to show everyone in Washington D.C. that he had no plans of being a tyrant so he went to dinner with Mitt Romney, and put people on his staff that he hoped would bridge the gap between the Never Trumpers and the rest of the GOP—conventional choices that would make passing a legislative agenda a higher probability.  Those people, and Steve Bannon turned out to be one of them, assumed that Trump’s attempt to do this meant that the new president had no idea how to go about his job.  In their minds they fantasized that they could do a better job, so they were not loyal, and they found the ear of another second-hander in Wolff and their gossipy recollections produced the contents of this book.

Trump being the eternal optimist figured he could bounce though anything, so he didn’t mind taking the gamble, and when it began to be clear by May of 2017 that he’d need to get rid of quite of few people from the White House staff and replace them with new hires—he did it. Trump also obviously hoped to convert the Obama holdovers around the country who had been working on the previous administration.  I found myself sympathizing with Trump quite a lot in Wolff’s book because I’ve been in similar situations—where you take over management of other people’s problems and you try to reform them with your much better personal philosophy—but they don’t get it and you eventually have to let them go.  Trump at his core is a really nice guy.  I’ve met him a few times and he truly is an eternal optimist and he and I have that in common.  There are lots of places where we are different, but on that topic, I feel a real connection to this president.  He is always hopeful and that is a unique trait, one that is making America great again.  On the day that this book was released, the Dow exploded up over 25,000 for the first time ever which is astonishing.  That is purely because of Trump, because the investors out there understand what this Trump presidency means.  They are leaders in their fields and not the ankle biter types—so the economy reflects better than any other indicator how good this president is for the world.  That’s where I felt a real sadness for Michael Wolff in this book, and Steve Bannon ironically.  Their vantage point of reporting their opinions—as was the case of most of the quotes, was from that of a defeated state of mind.  Wolff didn’t surprise me because there are a lot of people like him out there.  But Steve Bannon did.

As Wolff stated the essential theme of his book was that everyone concluded Trump was essentially a man child—that he made everything about him all the time.  I’ve heard this one before also, and that is why as I closed the book I felt a profound sadness for a lot of people in it.  We start out lives as children with endless imagination and optimism.  We learn all we can in a short time—usually before the age of 5 and it is a real miracle of the human mind that we do so much in such a limited time.  But most of us—like more than 99.99999%–don’t make it past our teens and into our twenties with the gift of childhood intact.  Slowly over many years we fall into adult habits of steady bed times, we learn what works and what doesn’t so we regulate ourselves to reality and thus find ourselves shaped by the weakest links of our society and their lack of ambition.  Trump as a president still has that energy of a child who wants to build a tent in the living room—only he has spent most of his adult life building actual skyscrapers.  To do something like that requires endless optimism—like children have. The great motivating pastor from New York City, Norman Vincent Peale in his book The Power of Positive Thinking attributed a genius status to those adults who carry that childlike quality of thinking throughout their lives.  It is why Trump can see and do things that most people can’t and it is his best quality.  However, Wolff presents it as a detriment and that is unfortunately what is wrong with most people psychologically these days.  People see in Trump a quality they have long-lost and they feel resentment toward him reminding them of what it was.  That hatred is not just politically ideological, it is visceral.  It’s a mode of self-preservation that is not related to the performance of Trump—but the state of mind for which the readers and interviews of the book were conducted.

That visceral platform is what shines through in the end.  Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House I thought only strengthened the Trump administration because it clearly places on the table the type of people who have been against him.  Trump can now crack down on all his enemies—which happen to be the primary villains of American ideas—and he can say he tried.  This book is the testimony of that effort.  When it comes to people like Steve Bannon there are always people like him who fly too close to the sun and have their wings melt away.  Most humans don’t handle power very well—the Lord of the Rings books can attest to that—power can corrupt the weak minds—and often does.  But for those who do carry power with the mind of young people who just want to do and learn great things in life—power doesn’t corrupt—and Trump is at a place in his life where a hamburger in bed with three televisions on is his idea of a great life.  He’s accomplished all the things most people associate with success and he is now a president who is in the White House incorruptible.  What I learned from Fire and Fury is that Trump is far better than even I thought he was—but the people around him were not nearly equipped as such.  They were mere mortals who have not yet touched the face of eternity—which most children do possess until they learn to stop listening.  And that realization comes with it a profound sadness.

If you’d like to read the book but can’t get your hands on a copy, here it is in full PDF.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Bt6BSc-kxJeTUpMEoJkkbEgEZaSmPjA3/view

Rich Hoffman

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

Tom Steyer’s “Novacaine” Moment: Democrats learn ‘How to Live as Ghosts’

I hadn’t been paying much attention to Tom Steyer’s multimillion dollar campaign to impeach President Trump—because I don’t watch much television—so I didn’t see his ads.  With Netflix, Amazon Prime, new movie releases at the theater—countless books—family activities, a busy professional life followed by needed time for myself—my life and Tom Steyer’s just didn’t connect. Aside from that, I think he’s a loser and I only have room for a minimum number of losers in my life and he’s not on the list.  But I did catch one of his ads over the Holiday and was pretty amazed at his audacity.  What makes him think someone like me is going to let him get away with impeaching Trump?  If such a thing were to happen doesn’t that open the door to do things the other way—using violence if necessary?

Tom Steyer is exactly the reason we needed Trump in the first place.  There are all these billionaires out there who are very liberal, who don’t want competition—like Steyer, Soros—Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg and many others who have thrown their money at candidates America hates to take the country in a direction traditionalists don’t want to go.  They are used to controlling Hollywood, they are used to controlling the publishing industry, the mainstream media and virtually everything we see and hear—so it drives them crazy that a fellow billionaire was able to run for office and win—and he doesn’t need their money so is beyond their control.  And now they are getting desperate.  Steyer might otherwise throw his money behind Democrats in 2018, but guess what—there aren’t any worth spending money on so all they have as progressives is the hope that they might be able to push Trump out of office.  Obviously, because they aren’t very smart, they haven’t thought things through to their conclusions.  What they do now sets a tone for the future and they’ll have to live with the consequences.  Speaking for myself, I’m not going to get behind anything that Tom Steyer is involved in.  It’s just not going to happen.  Even by some remote fantasy Steyer and his progressives were to impeach Trump—does he really think we’re going to turn in our guns and say—“well, I guess you guys won.”  LOL, not a chance, they are cheating and those progressives have opened themselves to really bad times in the future if they persist.

There is a lot of unneeded concern about how the Democrats might do in 2018.  Let me remind everyone that I predicted an end to the Democratic Party within a few years, and they are right on track.  The desperation that billionaire donors like Steyer are exhibiting now are due to their lack of options and their ads sound foolish in reflecting that.  Trump had every right to fire James Comey—there was no obstruction of justice for a phony campaign created by Democrats to try to stop the inauguration of a justifiably legal election that Trump won.  Where FISA warrants were granted based on inflammatory and bogus information meant to unmask legitimate members of the Trump campaign. The Democrats and their progressive supporters have broken so many laws and made such embarrassments of our legal system that trust will never go back into their direction. That pendulum has shifted forever and Steyer apparently is so corrupted by ideology that he doesn’t see it.  But you know what bothers people like him even more—his money suddenly has no power—as it once did—and that has all these types of people terrified.

The other benefit to Donald Trump is that he largely made his money off his charisma—they guy is an all in one package master communicator.  These other guys, including Zuckerberg from Facebook are stiff nerds who come across on camera as idiots—and their money can’t protect them any longer.  They can’t compete with Trump and they can’t buy people who can for the first time in their lives.  In the past we’ve tried on the political right to elect our own wealthy people—like Steve Forbes and Ross Perot, but they were too much like Tom Steyer—they didn’t have great screen presence the way a very charismatic actor would.  Their political campaigns came out flat, and that’s what’s happening now with progressives.  They are discovering that with all their control of the media, with all their manipulation of the Beltway that now people have a choice, they don’t have candidates in their stables to compete with the world that Trump has established.  That is why they are in a panic, because they know the world as they have controlled it, is now over.

Trump’s New Year’s celebration bringing in 2018 was a rebirth of American spirit in many ways that we haven’t seen in this country since the Golden Days of Hollywood.  It was optimistic in all the ways you’d expect from a nation born by Adam Smith’s philosophy of economic morality articulated in The Wealth of Nations.  That is what people like Steyer have been trying to keep away from the American people yet it is happening regardless.  It’s only been one year of the Trump administration and he has accomplished quite a lot.  He’s on par with my expectations and has set up a 2018 that will be even greater, because now he has had a chance to put his feet in the water and started swimming.  The Republican Party needed to be united after a difficult 2015—and that essentially happened with the tax cuts at the end of 2017.  The Democrats have not had their come to Jesus moment.  They have people like Steyer and Soros ready to write them checks, but there is nobody worth spending the money on, only ghosts from the past.  Progressive ideas and Democratic Party platform concepts have been rejected and that is part of a new trend which is emerging.

Calls for impeachment based on loose accusations while the other side actually did break many laws aren’t going to cut it in this new age.  Watching Tom Steyer’s commercials against Trump is like watching the ghosts from the music video by 10 Years called “Novacaine.”  It’s a song from their album called How to Live as Ghosts and I think it fits quite accurately the condition of the current Democratic Party.  They are chasing ghosts, things that worked in the past but are no longer relevant in the world and they keep going through the same failures over and over ad infinitum.  No matter how many checks Steyer and his progressive insurgents write, he is still going through the same routine over and over going nowhere only to come back to the beginning and wondering if anything happened at all.  Meanwhile, Republicans are moving forward with a fresh guilt free philosophy of renewed interest in capitalism.

I personally consider Tom Steyer’s attempts to be an insult to my vote—but I have more faith in our government this year with Trump in control of it than I did last year when Obama was hanging on to power with everything he could utilize to stop 2017 from happening.  I know for myself if our government ever tries to present what they have, knowing what we do today, that I will exercise my rights to overthrow them—because they are not competent to run my government.  Now that I know how dirty the progressives really are in America, I have no desire to share my country with them.  They need to leave and go someplace else—like Europe if they want all the socialism that they seem to enjoy so much.  To Steyer, he is fine with socialism because he figures he can control the parties at play with his money, so he will always have a seat of aristocracy to enjoy.  But that just isn’t acceptable to the American way of life where anybody willing to work hard can have a shot at the highest levels of power.  To achieve those needs we had to have a president like Trump who didn’t need to appease people like Steyer, or even Mark Cuban, Bezos—really a countless list of very wealthy people who fundamentally want to change America into something else that limits opportunities for other people.  I am pleased to see that like the music video “Novacaine,” that Tom Steyer is already a ghost replaying his failed philosophy over and over again as the rest of the living world moves on without him—and that is a truly beautiful thing.

Rich Hoffman

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

Immersive VR Education’s Apollo 11: A technological achievement that brings a moon landing to your livingroom

I treated myself to some catching up by New Year’s Eve to welcome 2018 with as clean a slate as possible.  I finished reading seven books over the last two weeks, some of them quite difficult reads—and I did it by not turning on the Playstation 4 except for once.  As everyone had parties celebrating the New Year I took a trip to the moon utilizing Immersive’s VR Education LTD fine triumph—their Apollo 11 VR experience.  I’ve talked about this before and have been excited about it—but until recently hadn’t had time to get into it.  The project was a big one, and was mostly funded with private Kick Starter investment that was credited at the end.  It was an educational documentary virtual reality experience that put you in the left seat of the Apollo 11 launch vehicle out of Kennedy Space center and into the command module during the approach to the moon.  Then landing on the moon you are in the left seat of the Lander standing next to Neil Armstrong.  Once there you get to stand on the moon and have a look at the Sea of Tranquility like it’s never been shown in a museum exhibit that I’ve seen.  It was simply amazing.  You also get to witness the return to earth and the perspective of the astronauts as they reentered the atmosphere awaiting splashdown.

I think where the 3D environments of the Playstation VR system really shine is within cockpits, such as cars and aircraft.  I have been amazed by the graphic displays of games like Battlefront VR and Driveclub where every little toggle switch is shown just as it would in a vehicle with such photorealistic display that you feel you can reach out and touch them.  So the same method works brilliantly in the Apollo 11 experience.  Graphics that might otherwise look terrible in 2D are easily forgivable in 3D so the ride up the elevator to the top of the rocket at the Kennedy Space Center was something I thought was also very impressive.  I’ve been there several times and know what things look like and even though a lot of details were missing, the overall feel of the area was certainly captured. Getting the feel of the height and the relationship to the surrounding terrain was what mattered and once inside the Apollo capsule awaiting launch that is where the VR part of the experience really shined.

As the launch occurred you could see out the windows as the rocket blasted through the various cloud layers and watch the earth fall behind.  Out the front window you could also see the sky go from a blue to black as stars gradually came into view—just as it would.  You could look at all the dancing lights on the control panel and look over at the other two astronauts as they answered alarms shaking in their seats from the momentum.  The radio chatter was ever-present and was synced up to the mouths of the pilots.  Occasionally I’d find myself staring at their faces and they’d look you in the eye as if they knew you were there pulling you into the experience.  It was all very thrilling and unexpectedly brilliant.

http://immersivevreducation.com/

Questions I’ve always had like where is the moon in relation to their perspective on the actual trip and how did it look were easily confirmed by me just by looking out the windows like a kid in the car first arriving at Disney World.  I was free to look out any window I could to see the relative positioning of the vessel as it plunged through space toward the moon.  Once on the moon I enjoyed much more than I would have expected at looking up into the earth as it just floated there in the dark of space. I’ve seen many picture of the earth from the moon in good resolution, but the presentation in VR was so much better—because it gave depth to the craters and the mountains surrounding the landing site that pictures just couldn’t capture in any way. I’ve also heard all the recordings of this epic landing seemingly hundreds of times, but being there in a VR world was a much better way to experience them.  First the speech by Kennedy at the beginning sounded like I had heard it for the first time.  It was presented in a very unusual way that sounded fresh to me.  Then the well-known speech of Neil Armstrong stepping onto the moon for the first time was particularly gripping as I was already out of the vessel watching him do it and looking all around me for perspective.  Shockingly I heard the voice of Nixon as he called from the Oval Office to talk about the experience.  As he spoke I was looking at the earth trying to see if Washington D.C. was pointed at us as he spoke considering the distance in between.  It was very easy to get caught up in the whole thing.  What this VR experience did particularly well was give depth and scale to the world we were exploring, which I think really opens up the way we can educate ourselves in the future.

Education is essentially the strength of this new VR technology.  The ability to go to places from the comfort of your living room and see things on a grand scale and interact with objects of history are the keys to our future.  What Immersive Education is doing I think is one of the most powerful education tools I’ve seen yet ever presented.  I often advocate that there is nothing that teaches better than a good book, because reading requires work and personal investment so that the information tends to stay with you longer as a participant.  Passively watching a television documentary doesn’t have the same effect.  It can still be good, but it’s not as effective.  However, with the kind of work Immersive Education is doing, you have no choice but to participate, because your mind actually thinks you are in those environments.  Even poorly rendered graphics in VR become sellable realities because the way our eyes participate in reality lends strength to the technology.  I can see the future of learning foreign languages within the countries of origin, and interaction with environments that would otherwise be exotic to be the strengths of this exciting new technology.  There is real potential here that is extremely new and creates so many options.

I would have never thought that I’d be able to spend a New Year’s Eve going to the moon then still having time to usher in the New Year in the traditional way.  But that is the world we are living in now.  Technology brings us options that curious minds can indulge in, and I consider that a real privilege.  For as many times as I’ve heard about man’s first trip to the moon, and heard the various speeches, Immersive Education managed to make it a fresh experience which was thrilling for any science buff.  But for the general public it is a real gift that can be easily downloaded into any living room that has a Playstation VR device.  I would go so far to say that I’d buy a Playstation VR just to take this one trip to the moon; it is that good, and revolutionary.  And what thrills me more is that it is just a sign of things yet to come.

Rich Hoffman

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

Karoshi: The difference between efficiency and a lack of ability

Recently I’ve written a few articles on the scam which is Lean manufacturing.  It’s not that the work of Womack, Jones and Roos in The Machine that Changed the World is inaccurate in its observations of mass production cultures versus lean manufacturing strategies—but that their academic lenses failed to identify the crucial ingredient that made Asian efforts superior to those in the West.  In essence, it is the Japanese word Karoshi which allowed for the explosion on the scene of the revolutionary work ethic for which those three observers tried to capture in a bottle to save the West from itself and start a new kind of industrial revolution based on Lean manufacturing methods.  The Japanese specifically are willing to outwork the rest of the world and put country before self even over small things, which is why the comparisons in The Machine that Changed the World made traditional mass producers look so terrible in side by side productivity comparisons—yet nowhere in their book did they successfully make that point.  The closest they came was in declaring that the transplant operations in America were more successful when they had Japanese managers as opposed to American.  With all things considered equal, American workers, American labor laws, and American supply chains, Lean manufacturing did show dramatic improvements in American productivity—only they typically only worked best when the manufacturing plant was conducted by Japanese leadership as opposed to those of Westerners.  If you break that down even father it is because of the Japanese tendency toward Karoshi that one was more successful than another—the willingness to put in the time to build such a Lean culture at the management level.

For whatever reason at the end of the 2017 calendar year a lot of people have been pushing me to discover what my next book will be.  Honestly, I have a number of fiction projects brewing on the back burner but at this point in my life it’s all about business.  To many people from the outside they look at my life and think I, like the Japanese, are functioning from Karoshi—which is their word for burnout—or death by work.  After all I do work with people from those far-flung places on the other side of the world and even by their standards I work longer days and compress more into my 24 hour day than they can imagine.  What makes me different from other people is that I have this background in Western arts, (a form of martial art) that has also made me a very efficient person—personally, which for Christmas this year I shared with some of my employees for their benefit.  (click to view)  Working harder isn’t necessarily good—but working smarter is.  My lessons to others about the nature of the bullwhip is about more than just a novelty act—it’s an actual philosophy for which I run my life—and without it I’d be in the same boat as everyone else.  And now for the last couple of years I have been experimenting with Cowboy Fast Draw which has led me to several conclusions regarding Lean manufacturing—and that my next book will likely deal with these Western methods of approaching business that are of the next generation of thinking.  I need to tweak a few things first before committing them to paper—but my next literary project will likely have to do with this crucial issue.

One thing that led me to Cowboy Fast Draw to begin with was my engagement with many American manufacturers who were getting frustrated with my methods as we were setting up a massive supply chain together and many of them put up a lot of resistance—which ran counter to my way of thinking. Most of these people were classic mass production people—which I think still has a lot of merit to it from a traditional standpoint.  Their companies have made them adapt Lean techniques so being the typical students of Western education systems they went and memorized all the charts and graphs—and the Japanese words for things without understanding the core philosophy of what Lean manufacturing did.  When they ran up against me they would frustratingly utter that I’m all too willing to “shoot from the hip” too often which led to a name they called me behind my back as a “gunslinger” which to their minds was an insult.  We call quarterbacks in football gunslingers when we want to insult their impatience in the pocket to throw too many risky passes.  Only the risk isn’t that all that risky to my mind.  Using bullwhips and now shooting techniques that do not involve aiming I am extremely accurate and fast in those hobbies and naturally I carry those elements over into my personal life.  Just because you can make fast decisions on critical elements without a process map to guide you, it doesn’t make you risky, only “ultra efficient.”

With the help of Womack and many others Japan has been placed at the top of manufacturing respectability for the last half of a century and why not, they earned it. But there has been a cost.  Their very industrious culture in Japan is suffering from Karoshi to the point where 1 in every 5 people are suffering tremendously from it—and if you subtract females and elderly people, that leaves most of the adult males from age 20 to age 50 pressed with overburdened stress that actually makes them less productive.  Of course the slack-jawed hippies and micromanaging academics think that the solution for the entire industrial world is to force companies to regulate their workers to a 40 hour work week—which is pretty stupid.  That is no solution—because the work demand is a product of production necessity.  There is a need for the work, otherwise it wouldn’t exist.  And forcing workers to only work 60 hours a week forces payrolls higher which hurts companies because they have to add to their overhead—which academics don’t care about because that’s their solution to everything—being that’s their role within education societies.  The work is needed and you can’t just throw bodies at the problem because all those bodies are not equal—everyone can’t perform work at the same level.  But we can focus on performing work in the most efficient manner possible, and doing that we can greatly reduce the need to overwork ourselves.

I personally work 60 to 70 hours per week and I still have time for many things in my life.  Outsiders might look at my pace and declare that I’m at risk of Karoshi myself—but they don’t understand.  To explain it to them I’d use one of my bullwhip tricks in putting out a candle with it to show how speed, accuracy and judgment can all come together to project focused efficiency into very tight target radius.  Or in the case of Cowboy Fast Draw where a gun has to be drawn from a holster and shot into a target in under a half a second—the work still gets down.  If the goal is to shoot a gun into a target, that task can be done whether it takes a half a second or up to a minute as the shooter takes their time aiming the weapon and firing.  The fast draw artist is obviously much more efficient at performing that basic task.  They might be able to shoot that same target 20 or 30 times while the cumbersome minded shooter wastes huge amounts of time pointing and aiming. The aiming is only a task needed for those who lack the faith in themselves to perform the task.  So in essence, the reason that countries like Japan have so much trouble with Karoshi is that they have brought in so much work—their society cannot process it all on time using the methods of approaching that work which they are utilizing now.  They need methods that still perform the work, but only much faster and still have the accuracy needed.

When I hear some inefficient person—whether it’s the president of a company that is filled with inefficient workers and is struggling to meet quotas, or an old-fashioned engineer who says we are working too fast to not make mistakes I get pretty mad.  What they are really saying is that I should bend my life to their limits because I can do all those things fast and accurate.  Speed does not mean a lack of quality—it’s only a detriment if the person performing the task is an inefficient human being.  And that is the essence of human behavior that Womack never addressed in his Lean manufacturing work—and why I’m not a big fan of the guy.  The reason the Japanese beat the West in manufacturing over the last several decades is not because of Lean methods.  It’s because they simply were willing to outwork the world to climb back on top after they lost World War II.  It was their path to redemption.  Now however that the world has looked to them for the method to perform work, the pressure is crushing their culture with high incidents of Karoshi.  And I’m saying there is a better way, one that still has all the efficiencies—but puts more of an emphasis on speed so that productivity doesn’t stack up behind the incompetent—but that the good manager can figure out who can do more in less time than the sluggish mind of those less capable.  That is how we solve the problem of being overworked even as the world demands more productivity at a much more rapid pace.  We can’t say no to that challenge—we simply have to figure out a better way to do it—which I’m thinking seriously of helping to formulate.

Rich Hoffman

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

The White House Should Get Behind, ‘The 15:17 to Paris’: What makes Americans so quick to take down terrorists–(the ultimate authority figures)

Just a hint to the Trump administration, after all the good things that happened in 2017, if I were them, I’d get behind this new Clint Eastwood film, The 15:17 to Paris. It’s coming out at the start of February, but I’m sure there will be advanced screenings at the end of January and after all the negative activity regarding the anti-Trump Spielberg movie with Tom Hanks about The Post, putting the seal of administration approval on this film will really launch 2018 in a positive pro-American light. After watching the preview and knowing Eastwood directed films nearly shot-by-shot, I knew enough about this story of three American young people on a train from Amsterdam to Paris that stopped a terrorist attack, to get excited about it. If a normal director handled the material, it might come off as a kind of television movie, but with Eastwood, there is a whole different layer that the master filmmaker taps into with great depth behind what on the surface seems to be very simple. And in this specific instance it answers the question—why do Americans have a tendency to stop terrorists outside of institutional reaction to these matters? Why not three French guys, or three English lads—or Germans? Why don’t we ever hear of those types of stories, why is it always Americans? Well, I know the answer and honestly this blog is about that topic almost daily. But I wanted to read the book of the movie to make sure that Eastwood’s source material contained that type of sentiment, like American Sniper did—and guess what—it does. Even better, it ends on a high note instead of the sad ending of American Sniper. I predict that this movie, The 15:17 to Paris will become the hottest film out of the gate in 2018 and will become many people’s favorite movie. I read the book over the last couple of days and it answered my questions very well and can report that this movie is the perfect companion in pop culture to the Trump presidency. It couldn’t have been slated for release at a better time—after the first full year of the Trump inauguration.

In a lot of ways the three heroes who stopped the terrorist Ayoub El-Khazzani (the ultimate authority figure who literally uses fear to invoke compliance)–Anthony Sadler, Alek Skarlatos, and Spencer Stone where social outcasts who had really hard times with authority figures. Their public-school experiences were miserable. Their teachers wanted to put them on attention deficit medicine, which Spencer’s mom became very angry about—to the extent that she pulled her son out of school and put him into a private church oriented school. Alek went with him and the two boys had daily problems with authority finding themselves always in the principal’s office. After a few years of that miserable failure the parents put the two kids back into a public school but one that they thought was better in the suburbs of Sacramento, California. There they met Anthony who taught the two misfits how to dress and think like other cool kids—which worked to a minimum effect and ended up bonding the three boys for life. After school Spencer and Alek bounced around. Spencer wanted to join the special forces but got bumped because essentially, he couldn’t learn to sew. He continued to get bumped down the military ladder as his classic problem with authority figures held him back tremendously. But as life does often, things stabilized and to try to outpace those resentments in their young lives the three boys managed to meet in Europe for a grand vacation while they still could, which is how they found themselves on The 15:17 to Paris.

The book arrived at my house on a nice day during a Christmas vacation as the snow was falling slowly outside. I had been reading several books that day, but I was really excited to get my hands on this one for a specific purpose. One thing that Eastwood knows that the rest of Hollywood has forgotten is what Americans are. In the case of these boys when they were in high school, they were not the popular kids. They did not take orders well. They were very rebellious, but in the essence of their core personalities, they were good kids. They just needed a chance to do something and they were always on the outlook for what that might be. So when it happened on a train to Paris, they were ready to pounce. I would say that the goal of every American is to be one of these types of people, but in our education system and then in our introductions to the outside world of employment we are always looking to put saddles on those wild horses breaking them into normalcy. But deep down inside we love the wild stallions of youth and we cheer that they might make it into adulthood free and happy—even as most of us yield to the pressure and tap out.

America hates authority figures even though all of our institutions are filled with them. We learn very early in public school to find our “peer group” and for kids like these, they never really do because they can’t yield authority to others who control those groups. What the institutions of American life fail to understand, including Hollywood these days, is that even those in the peer groups yearn to be as free as people like Spencer and Alek were. Of course the anxiety that young kids like Spencer, Alek and Anthony felt at not fitting into any particular peer group was enormous, what reality later tells is that all the world fantasizes about being one of those rogues in life who does what they want whenever they want to. I’ve personally never met a person whom I’ve spoken to one on one who doesn’t have at least a little of this individualistic fantasy in them—even in Europe and Asia. But in America we have a system that allows people like Spencer, Alek, and Anthony to have a good shot at success if they can figure out how to outsmart the system, and ironically some of the best and brightest of our culture are these types of people. But it’s not easy and in most cases people do die trying.

So here were three unbroken American stallions unsaddled roaming through the French countryside looking to make their mark in the world any way possible when this dumbass terrorist put the opportunity right in their lap. The fact that they were in their 20s and unbroken says a lot about the nature of American life—because even though it is hard to function in the world as a rugged individualist who hates authority—in America you can do it while still making a living and getting though the education process. Because of that, they were there when the world needed them. There are others like them, and they are a rare breed, but they are specifically an American creation. In other nations they would have been saddled in life one way or another and broken before they were 18 years of age—likely earlier.

Once I was able to get through the book I was able to see how Eastwood would shoot this movie. He understands this unsaddled sentiment, you can see it most in his movies like White Hunter Black Heart, Heartbreak Ridge, even going all the way back to the first western he directed, High Plains Drifter. Eastwood has never been a fan of authority figures, so it was obvious that his decision to put these young guys into the movie playing themelves was because he wanted to get that raw untamed element that is central to their characters on the screen for all to see. He understands the power of this kind of story and it looks to me like he held nothing back. As a person who is just mildly obsessed with this very specific American condition, that is why I am so excited about this project. And as a strategist of a good reputation this is a film that is very Trumpian. It would be wise for those who have the president’s ear….hint, hint……to have a nice screening at the White House with the stars and Eastwood there for a little dinner to launch this film. It is going to break box office records and will be big for Warner Bros—so why not help it strong out of the gate? Let the young men get their picture next to Trump—and more for their benefit, Melania. I think it represents all the reasons Trump was elected in the first place—and Eastwood understands that. Look for this one to be BIG in 2018.

Rich Hoffman

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

Trump Makes Idiots out of the United Nations: Gold always rules, not bureaucrats

Boy we’ve come a long way in such a short time. You know dear reader what I’ve said for many years—that the purpose of public education is for people to assimilate into their peer groups and for the pressure of those groups to enforce behavior patterns for which centralized societies can more easily control. Public education was never intended to teach children how to read, and conduct math. There are other ways to achieve those same objectives. But schools use those necessities as a cover story for their real intention—to teach people to follow the direction of their peer groups. That is the entire purpose, and is the primary cause of most modern forms of neurosis. But it was only five years ago where smart meters and other Agenda 21 United Nations initiatives were causing so much consternation among sovereign Americans. Now under Trump the United Nations has received a death-blow of its own by a President Trump who shrugged them off as worthless one day after revolutionary tax cuts cleared a House vote. The U.N. foolishly tried to apply peer pressure on the Trump administration with a 128-9 vote against the American measure to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/sns-bc-un–united-nations-us-jerusalem-20171221-story.html

The United Nations budget is around $7.8 billion dollars and the United States contributes around 28% of that—or $2.8 billion. I learned a long time ago from a business deal I had with the head of Servatii Bakery in Cincinnati that “he who has the gold rules.” It was a hard lesson for me, I was only 25 years old and my proposal which involved the head of the popular Cincinnati bakery involved many millions of potential dollars and a lot of private upfront investment. Essentially, I was working with no cash but a lot of effort I had done in partnership with a small team of people the leg work in showing this business leader how to get a change of use plan approved through the Cincinnati Building Commission. Once he had that information he changed the deal on me—which cost me a lot. When he flew back in from Las Vegas to a have sit down meeting with me for what I thought would be good news—he dropped the bomb that for him it made more sense to take what he learned from me and apply that knowledge to a partner who had deep pockets on another deal which had much less personal risk for him. Of course, I felt betrayed and that’s when he told me that line—which I’ve never forgotten. The same applies to the United Nations—they don’t have any gold, they have a lot of utopian ideas, but no cash to work with—so they are at the mercy of those who do have the gold—and that is the facts of life. Like it or not, that’s the way the ball bounces in life.

If you want to lead and make decisions for yourself and others who may want to follow you, you have to get your hands on some gold. You have to be willing to do the work, to have the proper philosophy in your life to allow you to have gold, you have to compete with the world to get it. In the case of the United Nations, they are running most of their countries on socialist economies, so they have very little gold. America is a fabulous capitalist economy—so it has a lot of wealth to work with. Yet it makes no sense at all to fund 28% of the United nations budget—for what? What do we get out of it? Agenda 21 threats—smart meters, washing machines that spy on how much water we use? The United Nations can mind their own business—and I don’t want to give those idiots any of my money—I can tell you that. However, for years no politician listened to us—instead they caved into the pressure of the United Nations as if it were an equal partnership. It was never equal. If it wasn’t for the United States there wouldn’t even be a United Nations. So why would any of our past presidents bow to anyone within the United Nations?

It took me nearly a decade to recover from that deal with the head of Servatii, but I eventually did. For many years I hated that guy and if I had caught him in the street after that initial shock wore off, there would have been trouble. But he was at the top of the pyramid and had cash to burn. He came to America as a German immigrant and worked his way to the top. I had a few opportunities to go to lunch with him and a few other multimillionaires and learned how those people thought—which ultimately was much more valuable to me than if the business deal had actually concluded. They certainly weren’t what the political left thinks of them—people like the Scrooge, or the Grinch—interpretations of wealth by socialist minded artists. They were smart guys who liked to compete and make money, and they were good people. That’s why it was so shocking to me to feel that sting of betrayal. At one dinner I was at with these guys I saw that the check came back at $13,000 which was all the money in the world to me at the time. When they saw my reaction, the laughed and told me that was a normal lunch cost—they did that everyday. And they were serious. I never forgot that either. So many people depended on those guys to spend their money on things–they had gold, they were the ones who ruled what happened and what didn’t. After my deal went sour it took me ten years and many jobs, sometimes three at a time to make ends meet and recover. For a long time, my wife and I only had one car which I left for her in case the kids needed to get somewhere. I rode a bicycle everywhere—all over the city of Cincinnati to whatever job I was doing, and I did that for many years. For a solid four-year period, I held two full-time jobs—both of them demanding overtime minimums at times of at least 10 hours each—a lot of times demanding Saturdays as well. All that time I read books on my break times and always strived to get back on my feet. I worked harder than anybody I ever met, and eventually I pulled back out on top and those expensive meals are something I experience again. This is what the United Nations is about to go through, they have now been cut off from the gold and they don’t have a means on their own of obtaining it. Will they work hard to solve their problem like I did on the microcosm? Probably not—and the result is that they will be destroyed.

The United Nations assumption that they had some ruling power over the United States was simply preposterous. They learned a hard lesson with Trump that gold truly does rule the world, not bureaucrats—the aristocratic societies of the past are officially dead—and it was Trump that killed them all with just a simple strategy of letting them defund themselves. You see, Trump always meant to defund the United Nations—that is after all why people like me voted for him as president. If he did it on his own he would have been a villain, just like that Servatii bakery guy needed me to figure out how to solve his permit problem so that his real objective could be fulfilled. Trump knew the United Nations would scrutinize his decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem. So when they made idiots of themselves by voting against the measure at the U.N. they gave Trump a free pass to withdraw the huge amounts of money that the United States pours into it. And who will win in the end—who do you think? He who has the gold always rules—and it is they who define fairness in the morality of value exchange. And that’s life.

http://www.politifact.com/global-news/statements/2017/feb/01/rob-portman/us-contribution-un-22-percent/

Rich Hoffman

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