The Trap Behind the Deal: Danielle Richardson standing against a tide of corruption

Danielle Richardson has been leading the way to save the Old Union School within the Lakota school district. She led a group of protestors to the school board meeting on Monday June 8, 2015 to stop the giveaway the district is attempting to create with a Boys and Girls Club offering free babysitting service to area tax payers. The deal is essentially a levy building consensus exercise designed to pull together the business community with the progressive aims of the government school. What is being destroyed in the process is a bit of history within West Chester, Ohio and the efforts of the tax payers at maintaining sanity from the runaway costs of the Lakota school system—for which they are paving the way for yet another tax increase.

Karen Mantia the superintendent of Lakota is up for a contract renewal, which should be allowed to expire and part ways because of her ineffectiveness from a community perspective. Under her watch taxes have gone up and so have her labor costs not resulting in an increase in services offered to the community. She is everything that people like me said she would be at the very beginning. Lakota during the levy fights have since yielded to the labor union strategy of pay for play programs and reduced programs putting as a priority their employees over the kids who attend resulting in a failure that is only hidden by the benefits of an affluent district. She has ridden the coat tails of that success and sought wherever possible to utilize progressive consensus building mechanisms like the Community Conversation program which costs $40K per year to do nothing but change people’s minds about increased property taxes. The other strategy utilized by her has been to make alliances with former opponents from No Lakota Levy to quiet them during upcoming levies, which is what the Old Union School giveaway is all about.

Danielle’s protestors had a hardy presence even though it will fall on deaf ears, because Lakota has no other management option but to ask for more money and make deals to gain public support for tax increases. By giving away the Old Union School to development, the cost of the tax increases for the property owners involved are marginalized and everyone gets to walk away from the deal thinking they did something nice for kids—and everyone sleeps well at night with that belief. But that’s not the end of the story for everyone else not associated with the deal—and that’s the issue of concern.

Through an alliance with the Community Foundation Lakota has one of its largest levy cheerleaders which penetrate the heart of the GOP community within Butler County. In this way Mantia and her consensus builders within the Lakota organization gets the Republican Party to support unionized labor which indirectly works against them politically with the amount of PAC money that is generated through union dues. The Old Union School deal is something more reminiscent of Hillary Clinton’s backroom deals with Uranium One. It pulls local Republicans in on a trap set by her, using children as bait, to attack their financial base indirectly with union fees. It marginalizes their protests in public because they are all in on the deal, and moves them politically to the left neutralizing their future opposition when tax increases are proposed.

Lakota is too far committed to this Old Union School deal to listen to protestors now. Their goal is not to work with the local GOP as Mantia is a former school teacher herself—they are a progressive advocate intent to water down the GOP into a more centralist organization which has shown itself to be the case over the last four years. Mantia’s not alone of course; the woman who hired her was Lynda O’Connor who openly befriended many of the No Lakota Levy people in 2012 to the point where we supported her for re-election. She’s now the president of the school board and has helped pull all these elements together with consensus building of her own. People who would normally disagree politically play ball because they want a piece of the pie that this Lakota team helped build. In this case the Lakota alliance with the Community Foundation and area developers whom I worked with in the past are the primary players. I along with a few others exposed this ill begotten alliance when we started our own foundation to compete with the Community Foundation which resulted in a violent backlash toward myself—which has been well documented—much of it led by the same person who is advocating on behalf of this Boys and Girls Club project. The evidence had been emerging for quite some time, so we flushed it out, and not everyone had the courage to stand up to it. In the end, there were a lot of people who quietly showed me their support, but really in the end just like Danielle Richardson is experiencing now—it’s a lonely road that only one or two people at any given time have the guts to expose. Danielle’s protest is more of an exposure of this vile behavior than a hope for change. The silence and slander from Lakota is the confirmation of her validity because it’s the only play they have in the matter. The slander doesn’t always come from direct sources, but in the roundabout ways within party politics.

But it should never be taken for granted that the overall goal of the Old Union School deal is to weaken the grip of the GOP, gain support for a future tax increase, and offer free babysitting services to already addicted parents who cannot afford to put their children in daycare so both parents can work and pay for the large mortgages it takes to live within Liberty/West Chester Townships. It is far cheaper to pay the taxes for those levy addicts than the yearly daycare costs—and that is at the heart of the entire strategy which pulls all these parties into supporting indirectly radical labor union intentions dedicated to progressive politics—anti GOP strategies. So while the Old Union School demolition and rebuilding of a new Boys and Girls Club might give local developers some much-needed work, the gains are short-term exclusively but the impact to the GOP down the road is gradual erosion of its small government platform.

As much as area Republicans might want to chastise Richardson for being a radical activist and a say-no-to-anything and everything related to progress type, she is more Republican than a whole room full of GOP leaders—and she’s not even a hard-core Republican. She’s a libertarian in almost every way yet her intentions and goals benefit the GOP far more than Todd Hall’s grand unification of the GOP strategy of pushing out all the radicals and pulling in all the business types under the same tent. Because when it comes to levy time, those who took the deal won’t be able to stand against the tax increase, and Lakota knows that. That’s the main objective of the Old Union School demolition and property giveaway. It’s a flytrap for insurgents who have too high a profile to stand honestly against the corruption as Danielle Richardson is. And for her, it’s going to be a lonely road.

If you want to join her you can at the following link:

http://www.saveoldunionschool.com/

As for fans of Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom who are distraught that No Lakota Levy members are involved in the Old Union School deal, do not fret. The resistance to the future tax increases is alive and well, and more vibrant than it was even four years ago when No Lakota Levy was in its prime. Things evolve and new faces emerge as other faces fade off under the pressure and make deals. People like Danielle Richardson will be a part of those future fights which of course begins with events like this one centering on the Old Union School. I wonder what Lakota will do when they can’t answer the questions that Danielle brings up……………..they certainly can’t call her a sexist. Ummmmmm, that might be a difficult problem for them to overcome. What’s the old term……………………….”what comes around……………goes……………..”

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

In Defense of Selfishness: Explaining the nature sex and relationships

Peter Schwartz from the Ayn Rand Instituted has been doing good publicity for his latest book released on June 2 titled In Defense of Selfishness: Why Self-Sacrifice is Unjust and Destructive. I thought the title odd as the word selfish has been so mischaracterized in our culture that it comes across as a negative. But Peter knows that and calculated that the opposition cast at him would set the trap for his philosophic argument—which is the point of the book. Schwartz has been successfully collecting the bounty of that trap with many interviews and making his point well.

I am of a mind that something really terrible happened in the pre-Deluge days of human history. What we have been told was sinful and wretched behavior may in fact have been translated by an insurrectionists revising historical perspective in a dominating need to rule over others. Somewhere in that struggle the word selfishness was destroyed of its meaning and the word “altruism” became synonymous with the word—“good.” All the religions that sprung forth from this period embraced altruism while they chastised self-interest forcing human beings to admit by their very birth an inclination to sin as defined by the quantity of self-sacrifice a given human being is willing to make on behalf of the greater good. Later this mentality would evolve into movements of communism and socialism, but the stage was set in religion.

However, for thinking people there are cracks into that façade which allow us to peer back into a time when such philosophic notions were not yet forged in such a destructive way and reveal a more sophisticated approach to pre-Socratic philosophy that has been defaced by the more recent translation in order to protect a desire to control the masses like sheep set to slaughter. It is on this stage that Peter Schwartz released his book described on his website as such:

In Defense of Selfishness is a cultural analysis of a deeply ingrained idea, one that influences our most important personal and political choices. The book makes the case—a sober, meticulous case—against the tenets of altruism. It shows that what altruism demands is not, as many superficially believe, that you respect the rights of your neighbor and refrain from acting like Attila the Hun, but that you subordinate yourself to others. Altruism entails not benevolence and cooperation, but servitude. Whether you are told to sacrifice by liberals in order to provide for the medically uninsured or by conservatives in order to preserve your community’s traditions, the code of altruism insists that the needs of others take precedence over your own interests. It declares that whenever you have something others lack, you have a duty to sacrifice for their sake.

The book asks why the fact that someone needs your money makes him morally entitled to it, while the fact that you’ve earned it, doesn’t. It explains why altruism leads to the opposite of social harmony: continual conflict. It scrupulously demonstrates, in theory and in nuts-and-bolts practice, the injustice and the destructiveness of self-sacrifice. And it offers a rational, non-predatory alternative.

People generally view the alternative—“selfishness”—as personified by conniving, murderous brutes, who embrace a do-whatever-you-feel-like-doing philosophy. People believe that our only choice is: sacrifice ourselves to others by being altruistic or sacrifice others to ourselves by being “selfish.” In Defense of Selfishness rejects this false alternative. It rejects the entire premise of sacrifice, under which one person’s gain comes only at the price of another’s loss. Instead, it proposes a true alternative to altruism, whereby people deal with one another not by sacrificing but by offering value for value, to mutual benefit, and by refusing to seek the unearned. This is an alternative, based on Ayn Rand’s ethics of rational self-interest, under which individuals live honest, self-respecting, productive lives. Because the truly selfish person lives by the guidance of reason, not by mindless impulses, he repudiates the unthinking, short-range mentality of the crook, the fly-by-nighter, the drug addict, the playboy, the drifter—all of whom are acting in contradiction to their self- interest.

http://peterschwartz.com/in-defense-of-selfishness/

To prove the merit of Peter’s theory all one needs to do is look toward the human activity of sex to understand. In sex those good at it understand that the selfish needs of their partner must first be met if they would like a return experience. Sex is largely driven by self-interest—it’s something that someone wants to do with—or to—someone else because of their selfish desire driven by animal impulses. Men known as bad lovers are those who do their business with a partner then the moment of their objective are no longer able to continue on. Men known as good lovers will make sure their partner reaches that point before they do so that the partner will want to do it again. The man is making a self-interested investment not only in the present but into the future by ensuring that his lover gets what they want as well.

The modern trend at three-way and group sex—along with the pornographic desensitizing of sex by cheapening it with a barrage of sexual addiction purely focused on imagery is a social attempt at the communal aspects of sex as opposed to the property rights of self-interest. The word “my” in such relationships is replaced with “we” or “us.” Instead of that being “my” wife or girlfriend, it becomes “our,” which then becomes an altruistic self-sacrificing practice. The woman who has miserable sex with a husband who is too busy thinking about other things to see her satisfied is an example of the religious sacrifice to a larger institution above her self-interest to enjoy herself. She will give him what he needs because the Bible tells her to ignoring her needs for the sacrifice of the Biblical laws of conduct. The corrupt man who is the bad lover is then in the power position to take advantage of his dedicated wife in the same way that a congregation might fall to the whims of a church leader of any denomination. The origin of the villainy is in the belief that altruism is the higher moral premise even in spite of the body’s desire for the needs of its terrestrial interests.

A happy couple will acknowledge their needs to one another and will tend to keep those needs within the self-possession of their relationship. Once those needs are met they can resume some other activity freely, and contentedly knowing that they will have another opportunity with a willing partner at their wish. That is because the needs of both parties are met—just like in a free market society. Sex and capitalism are very much applicable to the same moral premise. Orgies and swinging parties are indicative of progressive politics that lead to socialism because their emphasis is on the collective whole, and not their individual needs. The ecstasy of such an experience is on the social assimilation instead of the merit of an individual.

For instance, at a rock concert when a woman flashes her breasts to the stage or to the swarming hoard, she is declaring her sexuality to the group as a kind of sacrifice. When a woman holds the sight of her breasts to her chosen lover, she is giving him a gift intended for his possession in trade for a gratifying sexual experience. If she gives such a sight to many the effort is cheapened when in the privacy of a bedroom—because everyone has seen them. So there is nothing special in the exchange. It could be argued that breasts are breasts and are merrily sacks of fat—but in our culture they have meaning related to sex—so are symbolic of the exchanges made during such physical activity.

It is for this reason that we don’t have open topless beaches in a society that is overtly capitalist. It’s not because of religious origins, it’s because of the value of the one on one exchange with a sexual partner. In France where topless beaches are common, if a woman is topless with a male partner she is still advertising herself as either not in possession of a lover, or open to a new one if one happens by. She is a product of society not her individual sanctity. Society might declare her a liberated woman not afraid to show herself in public—but her sexual power has been marginalized because she will have less erotic capital with her potential mates because their self-interest desires to have a woman worthy of their efforts as individuals—not every guy who has found their way into the woman’s bed. There is nothing special about such a woman—that’s why men call such whores. Men may want first to take care of their needs, but they want the object of their desire to have some value. When sex is shared with many the capital investment of potential suitors is far less.

These are just examples that are easy to understand because everyone has sex who is human. So the correlation is easily assimilated. But the same mentality could be rolled over into virtually everything that involves value—for which money is but a symbol. Yet we have been taught the opposite in our culture, that money represents selfishness, and that communal activity is superior to individual merit. Thousands of years of communal investments have proven to be wrong at their very core and that this whole mess started sometime after the Biblical Deluge. The entire philosophy of perhaps six thousand or more years has proven to be totally incorrect and in drastic need of revision. It is upon that foundation of thought that Peter Schwartz is making his argument. Selfishness is a dirty word in a culture that has been trained that altruism is far superior. However, to truly understand why altruism is a grand lie, just look to the satisfaction of your sex life and what works and doesn’t and apply those same values to everything else. It will then be discovered that Peter Schwartz is far more correct than Plato or Kant. And that society needs to reset their philosophy to a time before Moses built an ark during a world-wide flood.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Jack Horner’s Science: The future being born from Jurassic World

The best things that come out of the Jurassic Park movies are the lasting impact their theoretical sciences impart into the future. When the first one came out in 1993 it changed the way zoos and theme parks operated. There is a little bit of Jurassic Park in just about every amusement park to this day. A quick trip to the Cincinnati Zoo will show even more evidence. The films and science that come from them are a nearly perfect marriage of imagination and reality. So it is quite exciting to see another film emerging called Jurassic World. Each time there is a new Jurassic Park film, of which Jurassic World will be the fourth, the outside world suddenly becomes interested in the very important work that the paleontologist Jack Horner is conducting that will change the future of the sciences in unimaginable ways very soon.

Not being able to complete the foreign language courses and therefore not obtaining his bachelor’s degree the budding scientist fought through great opposition to discover incredible dinosaur fossils and flesh out new theories as to their origins. It was Jack Horner who pushed the science community out of the box from thinking that dinosaurs spawned reptiles. The emerging answers was that dinosaurs are the parent DNA of birds which attracted Michael Crichton to write his novel, Jurassic Park by incorporating the new theory into a compelling story which brought to life dinosaurs through DNA resurrection into a modern theme park for children to enjoy. Steven Spielberg then made a film from Crichton’s book and history was made. The world learned about DNA and how it could be used to bring back creatures from the past—but ultimately cure humans in the present. Jurassic Park had a positive effect on the emerging science in a very positive fashion. Because of his voluminous work within paleontology Horner was awarded an Honorary Doctorate of Science in 1986 by the University of Montana where he works to this day in Bozeman.

In his 2009 book How to Build a Dinosaur: Extinction Doesn’t Have to Be Forever Horner unveiled his latest theory about genetically nudging the DNA of a chicken through reverse engineering into a dinosaur. It was a concept that he came up with during the filming of the first Jurassic Park movie over two decades ago—and now science has caught up to his vision. It won’t be but a few short years before Horner finds a way to pull off the attempt. He is now funded by people like George Lucas, so he doesn’t have to dig for dinosaurs and money at the same time—which is the largest impediment to science. Because of that Horner’s operation in Bozeman is one of the hottest spots in science and is revolutionizing the world with ambition and options.

Once mankind can build a dinosaur obviously there will be implications to the human race. Everything that we are, and our fates are locked in our DNA sequencing. Once we learn to work with that DNA like we would put a car in the shop for a proper diagnosis of something amiss, humans could be fixed at the genetic level to cure whatever issue we wish. Once Jack Horner builds his dinosaur and future entrepreneurs build actual Jurassic Parks the impact on humans will be much more significant. A new era will give us many options that we hadn’t considered and a whole host of new philosophies and intellectual options will be presented to us. That is the impact of a new Jurassic Park film. Without one, Jack Horner would be just another obscure eccentric digging in the badlands of the northern United States scorned by the scientific community and their accolades.

Even though it is old and dated now, one of the best parts of any amusement park I have been to is the Jurassic Park portion of Universal’s Islands of Adventure. It is there that reality meets fiction and I was able to actually walk through the closest replication of the fictional Jurassic Park on earth. For me personally, who has loved dinosaurs since I was a very little kid the discovery center at the real Jurassic Park was like entering the gates of heaven. I raised my children on the Jurassic Park movies, and on the music of John Williams, so there was something very special about the place to me. The movies and subsequent theme park attractions have all the optimism of early adventure films like the Jules Verne inspired Journey to the Top of the World, and Around the World in 80 Days—but then has the action and horror of something like Jaws. Then mixed in with all of that is quite large does of Indiana Jones—the nothing is impossible human spirit that Dr. Grant came to symbolize in two of the three Jurassic Park movies. These elements have been combined no place else and are central to the optimistic essence of the upcoming Jurassic World.

Once Jurassic World hits theater screens, museums all across the country will open up exhibits trying to recapture the movie experience and millions upon millions of children will learn something important as a result. Book sales of Jack Horner’s material will skyrocket and adults will learn much about what’s coming in science. These are things that are available every day, but are typically ignored until something like Jurassic World puts the focus on those options. I’m looking forward to seeing the new movie just because of the conceptual design of actually implementing the original thoughts of the John Hammond character who was an unabashed capitalist that made everything possible. The Jurassic Park movies are extremely interesting in how they rock back and forth between capitalism and conservationism. Without the money and financing nobody would have anything—but left unchecked and disrespected, things spiral out of control quickly. So there is a core to the films that philosophically is at the heart of just about everything facing our world today economically and politically.

The premise of Jurassic World is fantastic and is what is facing real amusement parks like Disney’s Animal Kingdom and Sea World—how do you balance out a nice respect for science while still driving up park numbers to the levels it takes to make them financially profitable? It costs a lot of money to care for large animals and once people get used to seeing them, interest curves off—even when it comes to genetically recreated dinosaurs. So because they can, scientists play a bit of Frankenstein with the DNA of dinosaurs to make a new creature—which is something that we are all facing in the very near future. If we can remake a dinosaur like Jack Horner plans to, why can’t we then make what we want in any form that we want it? Then, why can’t we apply the same to our own bodies as well. If we want to be 6’ 6” basketball players we could make ourselves into one. We could also build the perfect Victoria Secret models. Or we could turn off old age in our own bodies and live for several thousand years instead of just a measly 100. But to do that what happens to our religions and philosophy of sacrifice when so much is being built that is not dependent on invisible gods from realms unseen? Those are the themes that Jurassic World explores but against a canvas of optimism and wonder. It is an extremely unusual enterprise for a film that is about more than just thrills.

At the heart of Jurassic World is Jack Horner. Without him, there wouldn’t be a movie or the books that were the source material. The science of Jack Horner is changing the world from Bozeman, Montana and shaking the foundations of the establishment. The profits from Jurassic World will directly help Jack Horner build his real life dinosaur and that is the best aspect of the new movie. The hard questions about the morality of such a task are dealt with in the films, and then in reality they will be formed into new options that just weren’t there before. Or maybe they were. Perhaps this is how Noah lived so long and in the times before the Deluge giants ruled the world and genetics were manipulated in such a way to give people extremely long lives. Perhaps we are truly resurrecting a past that was imposed on us long ago that we are just now rediscovering? We will find out and leading the way is Jack Horner.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

“Winds of Change”: Denise Hastert and snuff parties of the Illuminati

So, now we know that Denise Hastert didn’t just have one male lover in his life—he had at least two and he cared about that second one enough to attend his funeral when he died of AIDS. Statistically when a young impressionable male is abused by a more dominant father figure, the impact of that sexual encounter essentially ruins any hope that the young male could hope to have with a future wife and children. The traditional head of household role becomes out of reach for such males leaving them as a basic survival mechanism the alternative lifestyles of homosexual behavior. This dirty little secret is at the heart of why there is a spread of homosexual lifestyle acceptance emerging at a rapid pace. There are a lot of abused children emerging into our world with nowhere else to go, intellectually. When the static patterns of normal childhood thought are imposed by a corrupt older person, whether it’s a trusted older male like Denise Hastert was to these young boys as a wrestling coach and Explorer Post leader—or some other source, the hope of a normal life is robbed from these young people for life, and the legislative debate that emerges from Capital Hill is an attempt to erase the evidence by normalizing the behavior.

Hastert was a rich and powerful person, the FBI knew of his conduct—he’s had a wife during this entire span of his life—yet the public knew nothing of the behavior. It was kept from the public eye and was used by more powerful forces to control Hastert for the rest of his life—or at least until the present. As a compromised person Hastert wasn’t in a position to take a stand on anything and had to do as he was told, or face the music of his past misdeeds—which eventually came out anyway. The entire escapade shows just a bit of what is under the surface of evil that is currently plaguing our entire world. A bit deeper than that is the revelations from the bass player of the old rock group the Scorpions inauspiciously uttered from behind the veil by Ralph Rieckermann.

Rieckermann reveled way back in 2012 in the video above to a TMZ cameraman that he had attended a snuff party in Germany where wealthy attendees would watch people actually get killed. The story has surfaced now three years later into the conspiracy outlets, which of course is about three to five years ahead of the Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh types—who are then about two years ahead of the mainstream outlets. Those mainstream outlets are slow to the story because it is the head of those companies who tend to attend some of these controversial “Illuminati” events openly trading sins in exchange for power with the belief that ancient pagan “gods” will assist them into finding success.

I have discussed a bit about these ancient pagan rituals and where they reside in space and time before. One of my favorite books Finnegans Wake by James Joyce is entirely dedicated to this pre-Catholic notion of Irish history and the gods from those erased pagan days. The Illuminati had its role in forming America just as it did and continues to shape governments away from regional control into a global consensus—and they seek pre-Christian deities to help them achieve their task utilizing fully dimensions outside of the four we currently live within. I don’t see the Illuminati as an ominous organization of banking cartels and devil worshipers—I see them as just another misguided religion with a not so “illuminated” world outlook rooted in sacrifice—the old evil that perpetually chains mankind to the Vico cycle.

Yet it cannot be ignored that this religious group committed to sacrificing life to these ancient deities with the belief that ultraterrestrials will aid them successfully through life is occurring at a maddening pace. Ultraterrestrials are a term from the reporter John Keel to explain the type of beings who hop in and out of four-dimensional space in mysterious ways manipulating events to suit their needs. He covered the evidence of these beings in the very good book which was made into a movie called The Mothman Prophesies.

The attempt through science to map these creatures through space and time is called cryptozoology and is an emerging field of endeavor. It is presently as a science where archaeology was at the turn of the Twentieth Century—largely filled with grave robbers and speculation but is quickly taking root in the orthodox as evidence emerges. But in such studies it is impossible not to run into the underbellies of our present civilization where snuff parties like Rieckermann discussed are a normal activity.

Each year just in the United States approximately 800,000 juveniles are reported missing, half are runaways. The other half stolen by family members in court disputes and related activity. Only about 100 are kidnappings by strangers. Most are between the ages of 12 to 17 and are 80% white. So around 400,000 runaways each and every year leave home often driven to rebellion away from their families by the same music industry that Rieckermann made his living with—and become drug addicts, prostitutes, and sometimes far worse. It is these kids between the cracks of society who end up at snuff parties. A mild version of these types of parties was the subject of the film Eyes Wide Shut.

The belief that through sacrifice—which virtually all religions behold to some extent—that aid will be provided to those making the offerings is an ancient belief, and our modern political class and entertainment culture certainly believes in that theory wholeheartedly. Experience dictates that ultraterrestrials do what they want for their own reasons and can manipulate the minds of human beings to suit their fancy—nearly unimpeded. They are a class of insurrectionists in and of themselves. The Illuminati believes they can control these beings with violence, seduction and other forms of ego massaging, but ultimately the ultraterrestrials have their own agenda and no religion on earth has their finger on those strategic objectives. Illuminati members may find some level of career advancement for massaging the ego of such ultraterrestrials—but they do not control them—that is for sure.

It should not therefore be a surprise that the music and film industry is obsessed with the Illuminati—or that the political class is equally enchanted. Those industries are currently populated by altruists and infantile religious fanatics hiding their poor conduct in life from themselves through a justification of sacrifice and will seek redemption anyway they can. In the case of Denise Hastert while he may have shown the world a love of Christ and regular family behavior with his wife and children he had a dark underbelly that represented the core of his being—a love of young boys whom he could control and manipulate to suit his needs. For such a person where is there for him to go where justification for his behavior could be explained in a way that would prevent him from committing suicide over his vile evil? Now you know dear reader why celebrities and the powerful are attracted to the Illuminati message—why they attend “snuff parties” and why they attend the pagan rituals at the Bohemian Grove. It is because of the old world belief in sacrifice to supernatural aid, because they lack the courage to face life and all its elements on their own merit. Because most of them are compromised people, they seek to retain that old world mystic so that they can remain within the world dominate among their kind.

Like the budding homosexual who often not by choice had a trusted mentor abuse them early in life, the Illuminati members seek those of their own kind to protect the Vico cycle so that they may stay in charge of it. Once one life is sacrificed to an evil perversion like minds find each other for the purpose of preserving their sanity from the guilt they are running from. The conspiracies which follow are the byproducts of that. The Denise Hastert story is interesting because it shows how well the government can keep a secret even at the highest levels. Further proof of what’s going on in the world behind the veil is revealed by former rock and roll icons like Rieckermann. The saddest part of the entire ordeal is that millions of lives are sacrificed in such escapades over the course of the decades by the very few so they can gain an advantage over the rest of society. That same Illuminati sent communism into Russia to destroy its economy and protect Europe. Hitler was a product of the Illuminati and the pagan cults that wanted to rise to power behind his madness. And the Illuminati was part of the American Revolution in destroying the grip that European kings had on a new world—to allow a new world order to emerge under the pagan philosophy of cult driven diatribes who still resent in Europe the spread of Catholicism. That same Illuminati still finds its strategies in our movies, and music framed within the context of snuff parties and Bohemian rapture. The world is not necessarily what we see, it’s what we don’t see that has the most influence—and the reason we don’t see it is because it has been deliberately hidden from us. Just like Denise Hastert was hidden from us all along—for nearly two decades. It just goes to show that if the problems of the world really are to be dealt with—we have to manage the unseen more than the seen—because it is there that the root cause analysis points most vivaciously. If evil in the world is to be stopped in its tracks, you have to look where evil is hiding—in this case—right in plain sight.

Now listen to the old Scorpions song “Winds of Change” and see if you don’t hear it differently…………………………………knowing what you do now. The videos above will provide more information as will the links contained within the text.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

U.S. Economy Drops 0.7%: The cost of too many rules and regulations

Not surprising the U.S. economy contracted 0.7% in the first quarter of 2015. At least it wasn’t a surprise to those outside of the Beltway, and progressive cities of Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Seattle and San Francisco. Everywhere else in the America they saw it coming. Only in the progressive quarters of the nation are the illusions of government tampering not glaringly evident. Unfortunately, most of the surviving newspapers of any merit are still located in those cities, and the reporters there seemed alarmed by the economic retreat into the negative numbers.

No matter where you go in America, there is a big problem. Work ethics are at an all time low. Employees expect higher wages than ever for doing the least amount of work. Yet their competency is dismal. It is actually shocking now when someone does what they are supposed to do in a task, as opposed to doing something incorrectly. Competency is in short supply. But that’s not the worst of it. Government regulations driven by slack-jawed attorneys have crippled American manufacturing methods with stifling rules that prevent common sense in creating productive goods and services. There seems to be this infinite belief that more rules imposed on businesses will not correlate into a lack of productivity. Most companies, even large ones these days will declare that they are late to a schedule because they don’t have the manpower to execute compliance toward all the rules they have to contend with. For most companies compliance to their industry is a majority of their occupational commitment.

Government has imposed itself into virtually every crack of every endeavor in the United States which has destroyed the creative process of producing GDP. The evidence of this trend is actually in our artistic endeavors culturally. After seeing the latest Avengers movie I came away disappointed. It was a pretty good movie, but it was of a quality that was nearly television from the 80s quality—which is saying that it wasn’t new, spectacular, or worthy of a big screen treatment. Sure the special effects were good, but the music, direction and overall plot wasn’t much different from a typical Dukes of Hazard episode. Aside from the new Star Wars movies coming out, the film industry looks to be in desperate trouble. Most of the big movies hitting the silver screen are 1980 retreads, Mad Max, Jurassic Park, Terminator, etc. In the 70s, 80s, and early 90s, a new movie seemed to come out every few weeks, many of which were memorable cultural benchmarks, like the Matrix, Twister, Disney’s Beauty and the Beast and so on. But with all the talent and film schools out there, Hollywood is incapable of producing anything new. That is a huge problem.

The music industry is even worse. While at Kings Island recently I couldn’t help but notice that many of the young people were mouthing the words to songs that came out when I was a teenager, and heard while at that very same park. Also, the 80s Store was busy with people of all ages relishing all the great memorable aspects of the 1980s that they remember, or want to remember if they’re too young to have actually been there. The 80s Store features film memorabilia from E.T. to Ghostbusters, which is reportedly another retread coming to screens soon this time with women from Saturday Night Live instead of the original cast. I’ll go see it for fun, but do producers think they can recreate the magic of Ghostbusters just by changing women actors from men and stimulate a new audience? That’s part of the problem. The music they play in that store is a trip down memory lane. Back then every week was a new top 40 song and that went on for the entire decade. It was similar to the 1950 and early 60s where the music industry just hit it out of the ballpark with just about every song released. The art in the songs were about things people care about and reflected a culture of capitalism and freedom that was trying to find its way. There was an underlining sense of optimism in 80s music that was not heard in the late 90s or subsequent decades. The music of today is so hell-bent on political diatribes that the music goes out of fashion within a few months, not even years. Creatively our culture is in trouble, the people in it cannot produce original material, and those that can have been ostracized politically out of those progressive cities to preserve the ideology of those regions and our culture is suffering—clearly.

But those are just the symptoms; the cause is in the heavy-handed regulatory climate of our present government. During the 80s, Reagan gave people the impression that the sky was the limit and that the American dream was obtainable. For a lot of people, it was. For some it wasn’t, and for the undisciplined, they spiraled out of control due to indulgence in excess, whether it was money, drugs, or women. But at least there was a belief that anything could happen in America. The 1950s were similar, it was a post war-time, Americans had a good standard of living and businesses were booming. There was no lack of opportunity for those who wanted it as the world put itself back together after World War II. The music was reflective of the overall culture.

When I came out of Avengers: Age of Ultron movie I told my kids that our culture was headed for real trouble. The movie was average at best, and the filmmakers knew there were high expectations after the first movie did so well. Well, the Avenger movies aren’t a shiny penny anymore. There is a level of expectation that the public has and the franchise is slipping. I first noticed it during the latest Captain America movie, which was good-but not as great as it should have been. With all the resources available from Disney, Age of Ultron was the best that they could do with a comic series that came out in the 60s and 70s? It should be expected that a movie like Frozen should come out every year instead of the occasional hit that it was. Again, with all the resources at Disney, that’s the best that they can do?

While watching Avengers II, the prescreening stuff was obsessed with progressive causes, such as the new ABC Family channel “Becoming Us,” which features a transgender family dealing with a dad who wants to become a woman. Really? Who thinks that thirty years from now in the Kings Island 2015 store that anybody is going to want to buy a t-shirt or hat with the logo “Becoming Us” on it? Progressives are more interested in being a change agent for an extreme minority rather than giving people what they really want in entertainment. Two or three more people might want to have a sex change operation because of “Becoming Us” but the vast majority of people will just tune out because the subject matter turns them off.

Then there is the ACLU case accusing Hollywood of hiring only men for big projects like Avengers instead of women. They ask questions like “why are all the directors of big blockbuster movies all men?” In fact Melissa Goodman, director of the L.G.B.T Gender and Reproductive Justice Project of the ACLU of Southern California said, “Women directors aren’t working on an even playing field and aren’t getting a fair opportunity to succeed.” Goodman doesn’t see the reality on the wall, she assumes that if a woman is cast in some below the line job or as a director that people will rush to the multiplex to see whatever they put up on the screen and it just doesn’t work that way. Transgender issues are not an issue. Boy George in the 80s had great success and people bought his music. But he wasn’t in everyone’s face about it every 15 minutes reminding people of his rights. He just made decent music that people wanted to hear. These days everything is about fairness and regulating an industry into making things fair. To that effect, in order to make something fair the good must give way to the bad, the strong to the weak, and the brilliant to the stupid, which of course waters down the end product in favor of stylish sentimentality. Yet the net result is a blasé commitment to the final product by a customer base indifferent to the consumer drive to participate.

The same ridiculous laws have migrated out of entertainment and into mainstream occupations. It is more important to government regulators to have a company hire minorities, women, or immigrants than the best people for a job who can make the best product. If companies don’t show an interest in bending to the will of government sentiment, then a government audit of some kind will come in for a shake down forcing the company to either shut down or pay extraordinary fines as a “payoff.” While all this is going on of course the company is less productive and not making whatever it’s supposed to be good at. The energy of the company is on compliance, not productivity.

Then of course comes the most intrusive element of all, taxation. There is a belief that a corporation should be willing to pay infinite amounts of tax just to operate within the United States. Well, that’s not how it works. Companies exists for one reason, to make money. Not to lose money. If they have to pay too much in taxes, they have to cover their margins somehow, and usually that means either relocating their business to a region that has low taxation—or they will just decide to shut down. There is no moral case for paying taxes to support government programs invented by politicians who know nothing about running a business. Companies will either not produce their product, or they’ll leave the country.

So when it’s wondered why there was a 0.7% drop in GDP during the first quarter of 2015, now you know why. Regulations are too intrusive, taxes are too high, and the political climate is more interested in all the wrong social issues than in actually making things people want. That has created a stifling atmosphere that is quickly evident in our arts, which directly translate over into our more productive sectors of society. Regulations and rules kill GDP. They do not enhance productivity, they hurt it, and in American society there are too many rules. That is why there is a retreat in productive output. Government has intruded itself into the affairs of the American people and the net result is less of what makes us good. Why is that so hard for progressives to understand? More rules don’t work in sports, why does anybody think they would work in business?

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

How to Defeat ISIS: Pay American Soldiers of Fortune

I stated rather emphatically what I thought was behind the ISIS terrorism and the inability of the world’s government to deal with them in yesterday’s article. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. I have no confidence in any government body to deal with many of the contemporary problems of our day. In the United States there are a lot of lawyers who enter politics to enhance their legal profession, but they lack something very important to the management of tax payer resources—actual experience in management. All of them should have at least at some point in the past managed a McDonald’s at some point so that they might develop a basic ability to manage resources—which they obviously lack. Needless to say that if ISIS and any foreign entanglements are to be dealt with, it must come from the private sector. Governments are by their very nature incapable.

With that said I can think of a few times in the past where mercenaries were hired to handle instances of violence. Ross Perot during the late 1970s hired a mercenary to get his employees out of Iran during the communist led hostage crises. The American government was not up to the task, so Perot took it upon himself to finance the effort with his own special forces. The other time was prior to World War II. America had not officially entered the war but Roosevelt wanted to do something to help China fight off Japan. The AVG was set up where mercenary pilots were hired with an unofficial bounty to shoot down the enemy and defend China from invasion without America being officially involved in the activity. Guess what, it worked marvelously well. CLICK HERE FOR MY STORY ON THAT. I propose that the best way to deal with ISIS is to turn to the private sector. There are obviously plenty of gung-ho Americans looking for cash and justice against ISIS. ISIS has declared war on America including the assassination of our president—who even if we don’t like his politics and communist roots—is still our president. It’s unacceptable and many of us take such threats very personal. So ISIS has asked for a good punch in the mouth in return.

For this particular ISIS problem the best strategy would be to funnel money through some corporate sponsor—perhaps a face organization just for the paper trail accounting and offer $100,000 a head for each proven ISIS member turned in to an assessor for review. Before the bounty could be collected proof of ISIS affiliation would have to be made, but once displayed a nice healthy check for $100,000 would be issued to the solider of fortune. For many young warriors up to the task and armed with a nice .300 Winchester Magnum Accuracy International all decked out with the $20,000 goodies, they could become millionaires in a simple afternoon with no problem. It would be easy money for a few weeks and would make many people very rich in the process. It would only take a few weeks for ISIS to evaporate into thin air. The hunting would be easy starting in Mosul then chasing them down into the outlying countryside. The problem would be over before congress could get together and figure out what they’re going to have for lunch.

That leaves the next question, how much would it cost to dispose of $50,000 ISIS scum bags in such a fashion? Well, only about $500 million dollars, which is a bargain considering how much other occupations have cost in the past as shown below.

Estimated War-Related Costs, Iraq and Afghanistan

According to the Center for Defense Information, the estimated cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will reach $1.49 trillion by the end of fiscal year 2013.

	In billions of budgeted dollars
Operation	FY 2001+ 2002	FY 2003¹	FY 2004²	FY 2005³	FY 2006	FY 2007	FY 2008	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011	FY 2012	FY 2013	Total
Iraq		$53.0	$75.9	$85.5	$101.6	$131.2	$142.1	$95.5	$65.9	$45.0	$9.6	$2.9	$808.2
Afghanistan	$20.8	14.7	14.5	20.0	19.0	39.2	43.5	59.5	104.9	113.9	105.7	85.6	641.3
Enhanced security	$13.0	8.0	3.7	2.1	0.8	0.5	.1	.1	.1	.3	11.2⁴	8.2⁴	48.1
Totals	$33.8	$81.2	$94.1³	$107.6	$121.4	$170.9	$185.7	$155.1	$171.0	$159.4	$126.5	$96.7	$1,497

It’s pretty evident that the capitalist approach is far cheaper than state sponsored occupation. It’s not even close. There are plenty of volunteers in America perfectly willing to sign up for that kind of thing including myself. Who doesn’t want to make a year’s worth of wages in a few days? The ISIS terrorists are armed, but they don’t have an infinite supply of ammunition, so they are not very deep on the bench. Their knives won’t do much good against American soldiers of fortune.

So why not do it. It’s not like anybody would have to officially sanction it within the American government. Just get the money funneled to the guys, and don’t prosecute them once they re-enter the United States border. The entire ISIS problem would be gone and the world could return to peace—if that’s really what anybody wanted. It’s been done before and it will be done in the future. It’s being done right now by somebody somewhere, just on a much smaller scale. So hire the money guys to take care of the problem so the American government can have clean hands and deniability. It wouldn’t cost anything significant given the implications of further inaction.

The lesson to the story is an old one, state sponsored efforts like what we typically associate with in war, such as World War II and WWI, Vietnam, Korea—are inefficient ways of dealing with conflict. Loyalty, honor, and sacrifice are ridiculous when associated with service to a collective entity. What works best, and most honestly, is capitalism—making it profitable to win a conflict. That’s when problems get solved, when there is a financial gain to be achieved in resolving an issue. Right now the money is on the financiers of the fear that comes from ISIS, so the conflict is poised to linger for years. Only when it becomes financially viable for individuals to profit from the conflict will the situation end. It is then that governments will no longer feed conflicts from under the table allowing groups like ISIS to flourish that the well of support will dry up and end the sieges seen so prevalent today. Once individuals can profit the financiers of terror will have to hide in the cracks leaving ISIS alone to run for their lives, and the roots of this vast evil will be pulled away from their nourishment. The solution is a no-brainer, so why aren’t we doing it? That is a question for you to ask and answer dear reader. That answer will also prove what I have been saying all along. Governments will never be able to solve such complicated problems like ISIS. But to the private sector using capitalism as wind in its sails, the problem becomes suddenly very easy.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Only 50,000 ISIS Nut Jobs: The strategy of global fear

Before I talk about this whole ISIS situation, as both proof of gross mismanagement from government toward a radical group that fancies world domination, but also the perpetuation of conspiracy with strategic objectives aimed at the United States—I’d ask you dear reader to take some time and watch this Alex Jones broadcast shown below. Jones is a little too emotional for me, and reactive—but he cares about what his group investigates. His Infowars group does a lot of good reporting digging too deeply into things sometimes, but that’s better than the alternative. For instance, in the report below, Alex Jones gets the new Mad Max film wrong. All the men do not die at the end and Fury Road is not a feminist film designed to destroy male leads in motion pictures. But most of the rest of what is reported below is good, and better than what is being offered on the nightly news. Watching this report puts on the table just how much is going on today, which exceeds what most people can or are willing to deal with. It is in this climate that Americans must make decisions about the ISIS terrorist situation in the Middle East.

ISIS continues to terrorize the world with threats while destroying extremely valuable archaeology in the Iraq region essentially unhindered by any reminder of justice. For perspective, the troop numbers for ISIS consist of somewhere between 50,000 hardened radicals with an additional 150,000 boot lickers. That essentially is the size of a crowd at a typical professional football game in America. That’s not very many people—yet the militaries of the world have not been able to stop ISIS in any real way. Why is that? A real concentrated military campaign by Zimbabwe should be able to handle 50,000 nutcases—yet even the United States has not been able to stop their military advancements.

That means the governments of the world are behind the ISIS radicalism and the media involved is in the business of making the Islamic radicals appear to be larger than they really are to spread the theocracy that they are advocating. The reason is to support the Vico cycle for which we are all on, using the chaos of anarchy to advance the world to a new social cycle of theocratic origins for which government control is aligned. A people who easily worship a maniacal deity is likely to also worship the mediators in government who offer keys to the kingdom of the everlasting, which is what government fantasizes is their role in human affairs. Using fear and turmoil to advance a theocracy built on collectivism, the global governments hope to unite under a big tent of United Nations advocacy. ISIS in this case serves two objectives, first it provides a common enemy the world can hate, and two it advances a theocratic notion of human management. By attacking directly the Christian faith, the world might unite under Islamic influence in reaction to the spread of a Middle Eastern caliphate. So nations are sitting on the fence and essentially letting a stadium full of radicals turn the world toward self-destruction.

If the United States wanted to, ISIS could be ended in about a week of truly diligent effort. America has the tools to do so and there are easily enough Americans who would be willing to fly over to the Middle East and engage directly one for one the ISIS radicals. But the government will not get behind the effort because they obviously want the strategic implications of the terrorist organization to manifest to full maturity—which is the end game of a resetting of the Vico cycle.

The situation can be very confusing if taken through the prism of all the news stories hitting Americans at the same time. But even that is by strategic design. By overloading the American people with critical news events, there is no emotional capacity to deal with the ISIS issue—there is no will to unite behind ending the problem so long as it stays far away in the Middle East—while the caliphate around the Mediterranean forms around the collapse of the Greek economy, soiled deals between Turkey and Russia and the European Union holds on for dear life from being sucked down the drain as a failure. Northern Africa is falling toward radical Muslim influence as two of the major dictators from Egypt and Libya have been removed in favor of a subtle communist insurrection led by the Muslim Brotherhood, and we have on our hands a global crisis. All this is happening while China pushes the limits in the South China Sea threatening Japan and American interests. Meanwhile as seen in the Infowars report the same communist insurgents behind the Muslim Brotherhood are making their moves in minority communities in the United States such as in the Cleveland riots challenging regional police forces and pushing for a DOJ controlled national force—essentially nationalizing the police in America as a military unit controlled by the central government. Can you smell what’s cooking in the kitchen dear reader?

There is a lot of money to be made from emerging markets as old strongholds in America and Europe topple and investments made throughout Africa, Russia and China emerge through the current geopolitical turbulence. If money is followed as to who has withdrawn their financial support from those old markets and invested in the new, the instigators behind the ISIS terrorism will begin to be clear. It is then that the answer to the question would be answered if anybody dared to look. But fear of hit squads and being politically ostracized through financial support prevents such inquiries, so a continued insurrection of a stadium full of insurgents will continue to rule the hearts and minds of the world against common sense. There is nothing rational about the entire ISIS problem. And there is nothing religious about its continued perpetuation. It essentially all comes down to money.

For the communists at the heart of all these insurrections they also win by painting the extreme rich as evil capitalists who are instigating all these events from the comfort of their poolside phones. Capitalism will take the blame when it is not capitalism at work behind these wealthy radicals, but the evil brand of cronyism. Wealth under cronyism uses the political process to eliminate competition and protect their investments not through vibrant competition, but by cheating using greasy politicians to run cover in destroying emerging markets to hedge their bets in a lazy way through economic tampering. The villains of our society make billionaires look like the bad guys causing the clueless to clamor to communism for fairness—but what they don’t know is that this was all part of the strategy from the beginning. The entire escapade, the communists behind the riots in Cleveland, the ISIS terrorists, the collapse of the European Union and the transfer of wealth from superpowers to developing countries all point to a singularity of cronyism advocated in a direct way to demonize capitalism and force the youth of the world toward an embrace of communism.

If Americans were allowed to solve the ISIS problem it would quickly. But America is being deliberately held back from resolving the problem through political indecision and slack-jawed cronyism to evoke a reset of the Vico cycle. The end game is a unification of the world behind the theocratic desires of a class of global citizens who want to rule the world. It’s as diabolical of a plot as a typical James Bond film—but in this case it’s real and lacking the beautiful women or cool gadgets of “Q”. So to answer Bill O’Reilly who asked this very question about why America doesn’t just kick the crap out of 50,000 ISIS radicals—it’s because all the facts of the case have been hidden from view and therefore proper assessment of field reporting. The situation is far bigger than a regional ISIS problem, it’s a global chess move toward something else entirely using the pawns of radicalism to advance a theocracy in favor of global domination—and it all starts with 50,000 murderous nut cases hailed by villains as heroes of a New World Order. To that extent, Alex Jones is not overstating the end game. It’s only that such a realization is too painful to accept. But it is a grim reality revealed all too clearly by the inaction of the United States and the world in general, against ISIS.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The American Gun: Remembering Adam Smith and the heroes of westward expansion

It does not escape me; especially when I travel or experience cultures abroad that the cultures mostly seem proud of their histories. Of course the Japanese are proud of the samurai culture which is obvious in their business dealings. Australians are proud of their outback ruggedness, the English of their Empire, the French of their topless beaches, wine and ability to throw down a rifle at the first sign of trouble thinking that Napoleon’s empire was enough to show they had testicular fortitude for the next millennia. Only in America do we find this notion that we should forget our past and reject our historical figures. Like the samurai America had a period of valiant heroes and desperate villains that were exacerbated during the period of time referred to as the Old West. Unlike the samurai warriors of old the Wild West characters exemplified by this period were driven to their glory by guns instead of a sword, and allowed for what may be the first time in all of human history a true path toward individual achievement. The samurai had some of the same noble tendencies as a typical Wild West gunfighter, but the Japanese warrior was usually bound in service to some noble land owner—whereas the cowboy was pursing their own unique life. That is the dramatic difference.

The moment that a few rival motorcycle gangs in Texas fired shots at each other the national American media jumped all over the story personifying the incident as a shoot-out in the Old West hoping to throw logs on the fire of further gun restrictions to prevent the violence. Progressives especially refer to the Old West as if our society had “moved on” beyond such primal achievements. Then once an Amtrak train jumped off the tracks in New Jersey for some unknown reason they filled the airwaves and print media with demands for more tax dollars for such an ancient means of transportation—that was ironically invented during the Old West and the expansion across the New World to the opposite ocean. We’re supposed to feel guilty that the Gold Rush brought out too much greed to mankind, that the saloons across the new nation were filled with gamblers and prostitutes and that the streets were often bathed in blood from so many human beings carrying around personal firearms. We have been told by progressives that our society today is much better because of rules they made and that if only we listened to them, we might someday be more like Europe is today. To accomplish this we are supposed to forget our heroes of the American West, give up our guns, our music, and our culture as if it never was—and that is a mistake of epic proportions.

I remember some of the stunned poetry of William Blake—whom many believed was part of the Illuminati movement that was taking place in America during his young years into the early period that would become the Wild West. By the time there was an American Constitution he was in his mid-thirties and as a painter and poet watched as the New World throw off the chains of a kingly society for the first time in history. There was no “leader” in America—no King Louis, Edward, or Henry and this was extremely unusual to the world stage. In America people made their own way. They were free to pursue their own dreams at risk of peril or plunder and as a result New York City rose up to rival Paris and London in just s few short years. The world was shocked and the bloodshed was considerably less than all the battles between England, Spain and France during the previous centuries. The story goes that the Bavarian Illuminati was the shadow government of the United States working to bring the Scottish Rite to public acceptance through backdoor means to overthrow the grip kings had on the world. In this way “illuminated” individuals could rise up to their own levels of competency without having to suck up to a king in order to achieve success. Blake watched as this experiment blossomed into an extraordinary success which led directly to the freeing of slaves to the invention of the most powerful economy the world had ever seen. And for that the progressives want to erase the memory.

For many the Old West was a hard place. It might have led to direct conflict with Indians, with some despot in a bar over a card game, or dying of ill-health while panning for gold. But, for the first time in human history if a man wanted to make their way in the world to wealth, they could grab a horse, a gun, and head for the horizon to make a life anyway they saw fit. This would be a byproduct of the capitalism invented by Adam Smith as he envisioned the invisible hand of enlightened self-interest in his great book, An inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. That enlightened self-interest would give rise to heroes like Davy Crockett, Wyatt Earp, Kit Carson, and Wild Bill Hickok. It would also give rise to villains like Jessie James, Black Bart and many other railroad tycoons who would attempt to manipulate this new-found capitalism into something like the cronyism of old Europe. But at the center of all this new-found individual independence was the gun which equaled out the big and strong from the weak and soft spirited. Bill O’Reilly’s recent series Legends and Lie deals specifically with this period of western heroes and villains very well.

Progressives despise the Old West and seek at every turn to erase it from history’s memory—and with that the American gunfighter mythology. The reason is that the gun embodies the utilization of westward expansion when mankind for the first time in history had gained individual mobility that gave rise to an economy the world envied terribly. Yet to Americans the gun culture is every bit as important as the samurai sword is to the Japanese or a fortune cookie is to the Chinese. The gun is the symbol in America of individual will and the ability to pursue it to advance the enlightened self-interest of enterprising human beings. This gave rise to new money like the Rockefellers and J.P. Morgan and gave opportunity to inventors like Nicola Tesla and Thomas Edison. The gun and violence of the Old West paved the way for the great inventions of the 20^th Century—and without those inventions; mankind would still be in horse and buggies enslaved to kings, queens and stuffy nobility. In America a new kind of economic freedom had emerged and it was driven forth by the gun—which is our history and source of pride.

Nobody ever said that the American West was perfect—or that innocent people were not killed. The times of the samurai were not free of sadness and the Chinese certainly had their fair share of tragedy after being ruled by the Mongols then the subsequent Dynasties of emperors starting with the Yuan. Yet, history remembers those times fondly in their cultures as pictures of ancient heroes litter their artwork. In those cultures the people embrace their past even with all the sorrow left in the wake. In America we are told to run away from history and invent something new—which is really a trick. We are told by modern progressives to run away from Adam Smith and into the arms of Karl Marx and the philosophers of Europe. We are told to give up our guns and independence so that we can be ruled once again by kings and nobility. Those who know history of course avoid that fate. Those who don’t are falling for the trap and future aggression is brewing because of it. But there should never be an ounce of shame regarding the American West or its expansion. For every memory of detriment was a blooming flower of opportunity for somebody who otherwise wouldn’t have had it—and the means for achieving such a feat was the American gun. America became what it did in such a short time not because of any particular president, or any corporation—but because of the enlightened self-interest of Adam Smith’s economic theory and the American guns which preserved that right in the wild days of westward expansion. While it’s true that many people suffered, many more lived for the first time a fate of their own design. And for that we should always remember with great fondness the heritage of our Wild West and the cowboys who experimented for the first time with capitalism as free from government and pinheaded nobility as any human beings under the flag of a new country had ever conceived. And for America it worked and should be copied across the entire world—starting with a reverence for the gun in all its glory.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Bankruptcy of Chicago: I told you so two years ago

Lets see, two years ago when I was talking about the need to control the Lakota levy in my home town of Liberty Township, Ohio I did a warning video shown below where I emphasized voter management to avoid the kind of diabolical situation that takes place on the macro scale in places like Detroit and Chicago. Detroit filed bankruptcy and I said in that video that Chicago was about two years away from the same fate. Of course people thought that I overstated the problem and was speaking as a right-winged pundit dramatizing the situation for political gain. Well, it’s been nearly two years and Chicago is exactly where I said it would be. Here’s the video as it was presented.

Chicago under progressive Obama friend Rahm Emanuel made a deal with the striking teacher’s union a few years back that has now caught up to the city. Municipal bonds within Chicago have been downgraded by Moody’s to a “junk” status which is a nail in the coffin leaving nowhere to run for the third largest city in America filled with progressive policies that have bankrupted it. It is a failed society and has avoided showing that failure with debt spending. America as a nation is on the same path, but the overload hasn’t quite caught up to Washington yet. In Chicago that happened a long time ago, and once the teacher’s union in Chicago had a major strike that Emanuel settled with appeasement it toppled any hope of austerity to recover years of overspending. Public employees pensions are so underfunded that the shortfall is nearly equal six times the annual budget for the entire city. It’s quadruple what it was only a decade ago which works out to $60,000 per Chicago household. Progessives within the city hoped for a bailout from the state. However Governor Bruce Rauner has refused to even consider such an action stating that Illinois has its own problems, and won’t be bailing out Chicago’s runaway public employee costs. So progressives are turning toward the hope of further tax increases and we all know what will happen next. To understand the enormity of this tragic situation watch all the videos included in this article. These problems will soon be at your doorstep as well no matter what part of the country you live in.

The responsible thing is to attack the parasitic nature of public sector workers in our hometowns in an aggressive fashion to avoid the problems that Chicago is currently facing. There is no way out for them, just as the Greeks are learning. Socialism doesn’t work and that is the means of economic mobility progressives utilize and believe in fervently. In communities where they have had their way for years, they have destroyed their economies. In the case of Chicago progressive supporters look around at the vibrant culture that is present, the nice mix of businesses, and the standard of living and believe that they have a progressive utopia. But that utopia was built with debt. It wasn’t legitimately created by value, and there was always an assumption that somebody would bail them out of their troubles because they were too big to fail. That bail out would likely come from the state or the federal government—or at least that’s what progressives believed.

Many feel that my criticisms of the teaching profession are unwarranted and mean-spirited. They assume that because children are involved that unlimited money should be spent on education. However there isn’t a single statistic that shows that all the money spent per pupil anywhere in America on government schooling makes subsequent generations better in any way at all. Public schools are cesspools of liberal driven social concerns more interested with programming children to become future progressives than actually intelligent members of American society. That leaves the entire value of the teaching profession to be categorized as a simple babysitting service for busy parents who may not be liberal, but are too busy to raise their own children and too poor to send their kids to a private school. That is the typical tax and spend voter who supports infinite school levies and teacher unions out-of-control regarding their financial expectations.

Public schools may have value as a baby sitting service, but they don’t have enough value to bankrupt a city, which is what’s happening in Chicago. The public unions in Chicago did not regulate themselves and kept asking for more until they ran out of money. When the money went dry they continued spending in a deficit mode until finally it was determined that they would never be able to recover financially and had their bond rating lowered to a junk status. Moody’s did them a favor by giving them plenty of time to right their ship in Chicago. The numbers were on the table a decade ago. I reported on it two years ago, and now it’s done. Chicago is bankrupt—they just haven’t gone through the formal procedure of it yet.

For years the rest of America who were not progressives were told that their way of life, their steadfast conviction to actually paying for things with cash on hand and saving up for things they didn’t have cash for avoiding debt like the plague, was a backward approach to social living. People like me were told that my cowboy hats and love of tradition were stuck in the past whereas cities in California, New York and specifically the city of Chicago were the way of the future. Of course I never bought it for a moment, because I knew better. The proud supporters of Chicago who advocated all the progressive lifestyles spent way too much time riding the coat tails of Michael Jordan and other athletes while running up bills for their massive progressive society that they could never pay in many lifetimes expecting everything somehow to magically work out in the end. Of course that is a path to destruction.

I live in an affluent area and know a lot of people with financial means. I understand what motivates them and what doesn’t—and higher taxes will guarantee that they leave for places where someone isn’t trying to dig into their pocketbook to steal the money they worked hard to make. My video was a warning to my school district not to follow the way of Detroit and Chicago and to stop the bleeding now before it’s too late. Sure those who want more tax payer money to fund their unrealistic wage expectations will be mad at me, but they aren’t the people who have to pay the bills. Those who control budgets are seldom ever liked and those who manage multiple resources are even less so—but they still have a job to do, and that job is seldom ever popular. But if that job of management is done correctly, people are better off than without it. Without management you get the trouble seen in Chicago. With management, bills get paid and society advances with a vibrant skyline. Governor Rauner is taking a page out of the Scott Walker book and doing the unpopular task of controlling costs in his state. Walker broke the code with the labor unions up in Wisconsin much to the benefit of millions of people. Illinois really has no choice but to follow the example. As far as investment dollars Chicago is only an hour south of Milwaukee so if investments are to be made in the area and taxes are too high because of out-of-control spending, then those investments will go to areas where financial management of resources is occurring, instead of the bottomless pit that is currently sucking in the famous windy city voraciously day by day.

Never let it be said that I didn’t tell everybody about what was going to happen in Chicago. And I wasn’t the only one. It should also be noted that when I put something up here for analysis, no matter how crazy it might seem at the time, that eventually time will prove it correct. Also, I have an extremely long memory, and I will bring it up in the future. The Chicago tragedy hasn’t been heavily covered on the mainstream news even though it is clearly one of the biggest tragedies in America at the moment. The liberal driven media really can’t deal with the reality of one of their treasured cities failing in such an epic way. But it is, and I’m making sure that everyone knows about it, and that the evidence was fairly easy to see on the horizon. So when it comes to other things that I am saying now—please listen. I don’t say all these things for my health. Because if I feel strongly enough to put something in print, it’s because there’s something to it.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Preparing for War in America: The way to turn the tide against enemies both foreign and domestic

I certainly wouldn’t consider myself an alarmist. I tend to underplay things in favor of analysis, so when I say or write something it comes after lots of careful consideration. By nature when dealing with observations well over the horizon of contemporary concerns, some of the reports from those unseen frontiers seem like conspiracy. But they aren’t. When Glenn Beck said during his Monday radio show referenced below, that Americans need to prepare for war, I was already thinking the same thing. In fact, it was the premier reason that I finally went out and bought my .500 magnum after many years of contemplation. When you combine the incredible mismanagement within the United States government of our finances, cultural priorities, failed education system and declining Christian conviction, it adds up to a country on the decline. Couple that with a world filled with radical extremists of all walks of life that openly want to attack the United States any way possible, and the blueprint for disaster is clearly at hand. Then to top all that off is the United Nations that wants nothing more than to see America topple as a superpower so that its aim of global socialism can then take root. It is they in the United Nations who are silently rooting for this upcoming war. We’ve talked about it here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom for years, and finally the time is upon us. As I said in a previous article the responsible thing to do for all peace-loving Americans is to go to the store and buy a gun, because when firearm sales spike up, it just might put the scare into these encroaching forces to retreat from their current plans. But a failure to act will encourage them. That failure will lead to much worse than the implication of buying a gun for personal property protection. Here’s how Glenn Beck’s The Blaze news outlet reported the issue:

Glenn Beck on Monday suggested that Americans “prepare for all-out war, war unlike we have ever seen in our lifetime.”

Beck was discussing the Iraq war on his radio program when he made the warning, saying it should have begun more aggressively, with “shock and awe” from the outset. He has long maintained that in war, one should fight to win and then come home.

“We talk about World War II, where they did shock and awe,” Beck’s co-host Stu Burguiere said. “Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of civilians died. It was not a pretty picture. And obviously war is hell, but is there any way that America — with the backbone we have today, with the 99 percenters and Occupy Wall Street as part of this country, with all that — they are going to accept a war effort like that?”

Beck said the next truly devastating terrorist attack will be perpetrated by “home-grown” terrorists, and “they will be in multiple cities, so you won’t know” what to expect next.

“Did you see what ISIS came out and said? That ISIS, their number one goal now is to hit America and kill the president. I cannot imagine. That would change perspectives entirely,” Beck remarked. “We got the Patriot Act the last time. Can you even imagine what the Department of Homeland Security would do if they, God forbid, hurt the president?”

Beck said he doesn’t know how exactly the attack would manifest itself, but he suggests that “you prepare for all-out war.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/05/18/glenn-beck-says-this-is-why-americans-should-prepare-for-all-out-war/

To get through this time of massive collapse not only of hopes and dreams that previous generations may have had for the future—but a literal collapse of resources available, it will take a swagger from the typical American that has not been seen since its inception. To get that swagger it helps to have a well stocked personal arsenal in each and every home. The police and military are useful for keeping the peace in this current environment, but they are collective based organizations who take orders from a failing government. So they really can’t be trusted to deal with the acts of terror that are coming both domestically and from foreign aggression. When the resources truly run out in poor sectors of a city for instance the looting of the outlining suburbs will become a lucrative target and as seen in Ferguson and Baltimore recently, the police will not be able to help and the military won’t be willing as they were in the 60s to step in. That leaves residences alone to protect themselves from enemies both foreign and domestic—which is why there is a Second Amendment in the first place.

It really would only take a few days without power for instance to set off the massive violence seen in recent movies like The Purge to unleash across society. The only thing that really keeps mankind working together is easy access to food and water. The moment those two things are gone, human beings quickly become nothing more than animals—and for those who do not want to be victims to animals, you need to protect yourself with a firearm. For instance, consider the logistical problem of making deliveries to a local store during a crises situation, such as a roving mob of radicals looking to steal whatever they can get their hands on exacerbated by a long sustained power outage. The police would be overloaded with crime breakouts everywhere and could not protect every truck delivering supplies. Carriers would likely not risk delivering to places where their drivers might be attacked, but if the area is affluent and well-protected by thousands of homes all containing firearms, where crime is lower, they are more likely to continue supplying to those areas. That is just a small way that owning a firearm is the responsible thing to do. The easy targets for such mobs will be areas where there are few firearms, particularly urban areas where only the bad buys have guns. But suburbs where there are lots of firearms would be much harder to attack just because of the sheer volume of firearms located in those regions.

I remember when Hurricane Fran knocked out power to Liberty Township, Ohio for about 4 days. I had to buy a chain saw from Tractor Supply to get fallen trees off my house. They had to make the financial exchange the old fashion way, with cash and a hand written receipt. The banks couldn’t give out any money because of the lack of power, gas stations couldn’t pump fuel, and credit card companies couldn’t do phone transactions. If I hadn’t had $600 in cash on me I wouldn’t have been able to buy the chain saw. But if that Tractor Supply store had been in an area that was not surrounded by homes with an average gun ownership of four or more, they might not have been willing to take the risk of holding all that cash in a safe until the power was restored. And they would have stopped deliveries because they couldn’t protect their inventory. That’s the benefit of gun ownership, when the grid goes down—which will be the objective all the upcoming maniacal terrorists—the best way to keep some semblance of a civilized society is to offer up your guns as protection of capitalist endeavors. Delivery of products and services is what the Second Amendment guarantees. When traveling through areas of the country where gun ownership is high, you tend to see more financial investment by entrepreneurs. Where gun ownership is low there is less. And in those areas where gun ownership is high you are more likely to see people treating each other civilly whether it is like Tractor Supply allowing cash transactions during a power outage while carrying hundreds of thousands of dollars in raw cash in their vaults, or a grocery keeping deliveries coming because their client base isn’t a threat to their operations. Gun ownership is the backbone of a capitalist economy.

When terrorists attacked the World Trade Center on 9/11 2001 they intended to start a chain reaction that would harm the American economy. They didn’t care about killing 3000 people, but they did want to kill the American economy and it is a sure bet that future attacks will be focused on a similar outcome. They don’t care if it is a slow death. They only care that America dies. The poor management of our current government in America whether by design or sheer ineptness has set the stage for making our economy an easy target for those who hate the United States and its capitalist endeavors seeking to put an end to our country’s sovereignty. There is no reason to think that there isn’t more attacks coming aimed directly at our very lifestyle—and most of the world is behind the effort. We have to be honest about that.

One of the reasons that Japanese society flourished so well after World War II is that their whole society was destroyed—including their rules and regulations. They were able quickly to take their samurai warrior mythological background with their collective unity and adopt American capitalism to rise to the top of the economic standard in a few short years. Enemies of America have sought for a long time to further encumber our economy more and more one rule at a time until it is so difficult to do business in America that our economy would just collapse from the sheer debt collected over time and the inability to deliver enough GDP to sustain that debt. It’s a strategy being used against us all, silently, slowly and with great patience. When the time is right, they will strike. As Beck said, a major strike now would cripple us with more branches of government, more regulations, more taxes and fees as the panic driven types who were caught mismanaging the situation attempt to throw money and resources at the issues to mask their incompetence. And even that is part of the strategy against us even now—to get the panic driven in the United States to assist the enemy with more self-imposed regulation. If there are any fantasies of holding on to your country, you better prepare for all out war. And you don’t prepare for war without guns and ammunition—not for this war that’s coming.

Over the years I tend to deal with personal threats without guns. I have a collection of melee weapons that do just fine for assailants of three or less. Nine times out of ten melee weapons are just fine for staying out of trouble while protecting assets. However in the back of my mind if the situation calls for that tenth occurrence, then I have firearms that can handle the task. But preparing for war is not just about personal protection. Its more than that—it’s about keeping your society functioning when elements of safety and structure are threatened. For that you need to have guns—lots of guns. The more the better—because guns ensure that pockets of violence will be isolated to areas that don’t have guns—which gives those in charge of retaking areas dominated by violence and chaos a chance to strategically do so. Guns help a lot more than any study has so far proclaimed. They bring peace of mind to more than just the family residence—they make it hard for bad guys to run loose and prey on the innocent where opportunity through economical means is more prevalent. Guns mean defense not just of private property, but entire regions. So the most practical and best way to prepare for this upcoming war—and perhaps even prevent such a tragedy is to buy a gun today. And better yet—several guns. Guns mean stability.

Those who are against private gun ownership ironically are those who have mismanaged the situation to the level they currently are—and they are not in a position to offer their criticisms. The world has gone astray under their advice so its time to stop listening to them. They were given a seat at the table of thought and they failed—miserably. That leaves the rest to deal with the crises they created—and to do that—we need guns–lots and lots of guns. The war of tomorrow won’t be fought with tanks, airplanes or even ground troops. It will be fought by individuals against collectivists and for the individual the gun gives them leverage against the terrorism that comes often from mobs of activists seeking to advance their cause—whatever it may be. In the case of Islam it is the worship of a god. In the case of politics, it is a left-leaning Karl Marx philosophy. But in all cases individuals have to protect capitalism and to do that—we need guns. When a society has a lot of guns, it will have the swagger that’s needed to fight back against horrible enemies who think like animals and are willing to do anything to anybody just to advance their version of reality.

Rich Hoffman

CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

	Anonymous on Paradise Lost, Pickle Rick, Jo…
	Anonymous on Why Christianity Survived as a…
	Anonymous on Christianity as a Weapon of Wa…
	Anonymous on Christianity as a Weapon of Wa…
	Anonymous on Is God an Idiot: I don’t…
	Anonymous on Christianity as a Scaling Move…
	Rich Hoffman on The Jonathan Edwards Study Bib…
	Anonymous on The Jonathan Edwards Study Bib…
	Anonymous on The Day the Past Arrives in th…
	Rich Hoffman on The Day the Past Arrives in th…

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Estimated War-Related Costs, Iraq and Afghanistan

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: