Tag: education

Controversy Over ‘American Sniper’: Why evil hates the new Clint Eastwood film

The best part of the American Sniper film is that it has flushed out the counter insurgents within United States cultures—those who actively work against the ideas established in the Constitution to create an economy based on capitalism, personal freedom, and moral integrity.  The popularity of the film has forced opinions to be mirrored against the radicals of American society and display the contrast.  One of the typical and less profanity ridden examples of hate against the film is the article shown below from Salon.com–a left leaning publication.  It seamlessly combines an attack on the integrity of Chris Kyle, Clint Eastwood, and the GOP in general into one dribbling hate fest.  Have a look:

Much has been made recently about the inaccurate representation of Chris Kyle in “American Sniper.” We’ve learned that, despite the fact that the film depicts Kyle as a[youtuhero and a martyr, the real American sniper was heartless and cruel. Rather than anguish with moral dilemmas as we see in the film, the actual man had no such hesitation and no such conscience.

But to focus on “American Sniper’s” depiction of Kyle is to miss the larger problems of the film. In addition to sugarcoating Kyle, the film suffers from major myopia– from a complete inability to see the larger picture. And that is why criticism of the film has to look at its director, Clint Eastwood, and the troubling ways he represents a dark, disturbing feature of the GOP mindset.

In order to have the bigger picture we need to remember two key moments in recent Eastwood public appearances. The first took place in 2005 when Eastwood confronted filmmaker Michael Moore at the National Board of Review dinner, where both men were being honored. Moore was there for his documentary on U.S. gun culture, “Bowling for Columbine.  Eastwood had “Million Dollar Baby.” After Eastwood accepted his award, he directed comments at Moore. “Michael Moore and I actually have a lot in common – we both appreciate living in a country where there’s free expression.” Eastwood then added: “But, Michael, if you ever show up at my front door with a camera – I’ll kill you. I mean it.” The tone was I’m sort of joking, but maybe not really joking, provoking nervous laughter from both the audience and Moore himself.

Eastwood said he would kill Moore if he showed up at his door. This was his response to a film that raised much-needed conversation about U.S. gun culture. Eastwood’s reaction tells us a lot about the way that some members of the GOP treat those with whom they disagree. If you don’t agree with me on guns, I’ll just kill you.

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/26/american_snipers_biggest_lie_clint_eastwood_has_a_delusional_fox_news_problem/

For many years these types of leftists have attacked the fundamental conservatism of American culture with accusations that silence opinion so not to be labeled in such a hateful manner.  Socialist radicals just as they are taking over Europe, the Middle East, and every poverty-stricken nation throughout Africa, India, and China have successfully eroded away opinion against their schemes using the same methods and everywhere but America has it worked.  In the United States the leftist strategy is certainly at work, but it has met with considerable resistance particularly from the type of Americans who love their guns, their country and their God.  Chris Kyle is a danger to them because it gives those core Americans the knowledge that they are not alone and isolated in their thoughts and provides clarity to the true insurrection by socialist minority forces.  These insurgents have been at work for many years as change agents against the American republic trying to force a conversion into a mass driven democracy guided by socialists.  American Sniper is the movie of normal Americans, and they have showed up in mass to see it scaring the crap out of those insurgents hoping to remain undetected.

Clint Eastwood has had a battle with these insurgents for many years starting with his Dirty Harry films.  Those cop drama movies were all about the changes happening in America through those change agents as Clint Eastwood’s character represented the last vestiges of John Wayne’s patriotism.  Critics pushed on Eastwood throughout that series and in each film Dirty Harry addressed those issues.  For instance in Magnum Force, the second Dirty Harry film Clint Eastwood dealt with the thin line between his character and the vigilantes who were cops who created a secret squad of assassins killing bad guys without any court process.  It was essentially an argument between raw conservatism and fascism.  In the Enforcer the story dealt with underground communist terrorists similar to the real life Weather Underground.  Dirty Harry had a female partner which created conflict in the face to the severe danger being created by radical groups pressured by a political system to hire women to the force just for social satisfaction.  In Sudden Impact everyone was against Dirty Harry as the character was forced to step away from the politics surrounding him.  At the end of that movie when the killer was found, Eastwood’s character let her go—because there was no justice possible to rectify the situation.  By the time the Dead Pool came out—which launched the career of Jim Carry—Dirty Harry was a celebrity just trying to live his life—but circumstances would not allow him to do so.  Even with all the feel good publicity expected by Dirty Harry—in the end he had to turn toward raw vigilantism to solve the crime.  Eastwood has always answered the leftist critics with his arguments in his most controversial films.  He as done plenty of soft, non political films, but Eastwood has always expressed a lot about himself and his views in his movies.  His best films are the ones where he is most controversial because the passion of his convictions comes out clearly which is why after all these years—he is still a beloved actor/director.  Like a time capsule Eastwood has been there from the beginning and has chronicled the present insurgency in the topics of his films as they happened to our social tapestry.

So it is again with American Sniper which essentially returns to the topic of the very first Dirty Harry film.  The fight between Chris Kyle and Mustafa in the film is the same as the one between Dirty Harry and Scorpio.  American Sniper is an exploration of evil and what to do with it when you find it.  What is the responsibility of America when evil is at their doorstep?  That is the question that Eastwood answers in the film.  And American audiences like his opinion and have voted with their wallets.

Evil is among us.  It is at work and it forces us to look within ourselves to decide what to do with it.  It’s not complicated—it’s rather simple.  For Chris Kyle, because his upbringing and state heritage gave him the ability to detect evil as viewed by Christian orthodox—he had an advantage over those less fortunate throughout the world.   After all, we are lucky to be born in America.  It would stink to be born and raised someplace else—but we need not feel guilt about that to the point where we give the value of that benefit away just to make the rest of the world feel better about themselves.  The insurgents among us feed off that tendency and make it into a reckless enterprise.  Chris Kyle, like many of us are products of our environment—and those of us born on the winning team are lucky to be there.  But we have a right to protect that value by projecting it elsewhere so that other little children not born under capitalism and freedom can taste what we love and cherish.  If left alone—those other countries become cesspools of evil by default.

So the question remains, is it a higher morality to leave a country like Iraq alone as the terrorist evil there hell-bent on revenge for their arguments with Europe and a conflict that extends back to the Crusades—or should America sweep in to free people from the evil at work behind the broken ideologies of collectivism that is ever-present among the communist driven ISIS currently reeking havoc once again in Iraq upon our departure?   Would Iraq be better off or worse off without all the CIA involvement, or the alliances formed due to oil companies in Saudi Arabia?   If left alone, the entire Middle East, Israel included, would be a pit of communism and that is the real issue that leftists hate about American Sniper.  If the traditional definition of communism is defined as evil because it robes individuals of their ownership and value and surrenders to the collectivism of the mob then it is easy to designate all terrorist activity as evil.  They aren’t freedom fighters fighting against institutionalism.  They are fighting in favor of institutional religion, politics and economic viability. And that makes them evil.

Evil likes to hide in the masses.  Within collectivist systems where the value of the good is robbed to hide the degradation of the bad, evil can flourish—so it prefers collectivism over individualism because it can operate in a concealed fashion.  Clint Eastwood made a movie in American Sniper that stares that evil in the face—and the leftists advocating that vile evil don’t like it.  So they criticize the film, Chris Kyle, Clint Eastwood and anybody who expresses appreciation for the film hoping to push everyone back into the hole that they have been living in for years allowing evil to flourish.  But this time it’s not working.  And they are scared—as they should be.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

Thank Charles Koch for Artistic Expression: Defending the “rich” from the 99%

I do happen to know of some organizations in the liberty movement that are funded by the Koch Brothers. I don’t blame those organizations one bit. As I write this Greece has just swept control of their government by extreme leftist socialists so there is a lot of current against logic that funding from conservatives like the Koch Brothers provides to keep those organizations in the fight. There are a lot of left-leaning organizations who fund the efforts of collectivism and what Charles and his brother Dave are doing is just a drop in the bucket compared to the efforts of George Soros, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and the labor unions who advance like a disease political collectivism at a maddening pace. But Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom is not one of those organizations backed by the Koch Brothers. As a matter of fact in 2012 I cut all ties to such relationships after my group No Lakota Levy was applying pressure to not fight the good fight as aggressively as I wanted. At the time there were a lot of wealthy people affiliated with me. At no time did we exchange any money or did they do me any favors—and I made sure to keep it that way because when the time came to cut those ties, I could without stopping the fight at hand. So I have a very rigid policy on those kinds of matters. If Charles Koch offered me millions of dollars to do what I’m doing right now with Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom I wouldn’t take a dime of his money, because it might limit my freedom of movement on the battlefield according to my assessment of what needs to be done. So my work and his are vastly independent from each other—yet it isn’t.

I admire Charles Koch as an industrialist. Every day I drive by one of the Koch plants in my neighborhood and I wonder often what American manufacturing would be like if not for the Koch Brothers. They all by themselves are responsible for a vast amount of the wealth created in America and my only regret is that there aren’t twenty or thirty more people just like them. Often what happens to billionaires like Ross Perot, and Bill Gates over time is they go soft as the guilt of their holdings wears on their minds as their testicular fortitude fades a bit with age. For Charles Koch to say what he did at a conference on Saturday January 24, 2015 was quite extraordinary. People in his position don’t often defend themselves or their wealth as a creation of their own making the way he does which is worthy of a highlight. He stated to a packed room in public which ended up in USA Today:

“Americans have taken an important step in slowing down the march toward collectivism, Koch said. “But as many of you know, we don’t rest on our laurels. We are already back at work and hard at it.”

Koch said his vision is of a “society that maximizes peace, civility and well-being;” encourages hard work and ensures free speech and “free markets.”

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/01/24/charles-koch-warns-of-march-toward-collectivism/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=usatoday-newstopstories

Bravo……………..I couldn’t have said it better myself.

I currently know a number of people who are considered “wealthy.” Most of the people I think of as friends are certainly in the upper portion of the 1% category. And the thing that drives me nuts about most of them is their susceptibility to the guilt that society applies on them to “share the wealth” they have made for mass consumption. They are obviously smart people because that’s how they obtained wealth in the first place. The people I know did not acquire their wealth the way typical Santa Monica or New York day traders do—like gamblers betting on value and happenstance. They earned their money through a creation process of a new sustainable business and investments in tangible assets. The result is that most of the people I most closely associate with are people of means. I am in a unique position to voice my thoughts about the guilt process that is applied to these types of people because honestly, my passions reside in artistic endeavors. So I don’t put myself in a position to have my tangible assets plucked apart by a flock of social looters—and could care less if I piss off those who believe in wealth redistribution. Much of what I do and say against left-leaning wealth redistribution through collectivism schemes is based on this inside knowledge. I have been on both sides of the fence and I understand extremely well the personalities involved. There is a reason I know mostly wealthy people as friends as opposed to those who believe in wealth redistribution. My values are more aligned with them than the social looter who believes that wealth is a finite resource that is plucked out of the air for equal distribution—and the wealthy are those who have hoarded that value selfishly.

So it does my heart a lot of good when I see those wealthy people fighting back the way I always thought they should. They give power to the social looters when they yield to the voices of radicalism—as I witnessed many times during my No Lakota Levy campaigns where protesting PTA parents threatened boycotts against businesses because they supported lower taxes. It was appalling the types of things that came out of the mouths of the typical levy supporter. But the indiscretions didn’t stop there—I saw the same radicalism from police and fire departments towards friends of mine just over the allocation of tax payer resources. I have heard much about the plush life of the 1% who fights against higher taxes because the belief of the other 99% believes that by taxing the rich that somehow the world will be a better place. The belief of such advocates is raw unfiltered communism disguised by a different name of progressivism. Yet if you took the 99% and gave them all the wealth of the 1% they would squander it away in a few short years because they do not have the same abilities to maintain that wealth.

Wealth in America is created. It is an artistic expression of formulating an idea from inception to profitable construction which directly creates jobs. It is an amazing thing to do—creating wealth—and those who can do it deserve to be honored, not chastised because they have a skill that others don’t have. Hating the wealthy is as ridiculous as hating another person because they are more attractive, or can throw a football further than the average person. The hate of the 99% against the 1% is jealousy and nothing else and the collectivism spawned from that activity is sheer evil.   When the wealthy stop producing everyone suffers—mostly the 99%. When the wealthy are given a free canvas to paint upon, they create wonderful things. Tax incentives to a business are like paint to an artist. It gives the fledging entrepreneur more paint to work with—and the opportunity to create better masterpieces.

So to hear Charles Koch defend the right of the creative 1% to stand against the collectivist brutality of the 99% is 100% correct. Good for him. Instead of feeling guilty for his wealth the way Bill Gates does, and philanthropists like George Soros who is one of those scheming day traders—Koch is fighting to defend the system that he uses to create wealth, jobs, and products that make the world better off—and its about time.

Over the weekend I went to Wal-Mart with my wife, which is a rarity for me, because I don’t care much for crowds and chaos. A trip to Wal-Mart usually encompasses both. While there I couldn’t help but think of the recent attempts to unionize the popular retailer and consider the vast wealth of the Walton family. The Walton family is among the richest families in the world. Their wealth inherited from Bud and Sam Walton, founders of the world’s largest retailer, Walmart is extraordinary.[1] The three most prominent living members (Jim, Rob and Alice) have consistently been in the top ten of the Forbes 400 since 2001, as were John (d. 2005) and Helen (d. 2007) prior to their deaths. Christy Walton took her husband John’s place after his death.

Collectively, the Waltons own over 50% of the company, and are worth a combined total of $175 billion (as of January 2015).[2] In 2010, six members of the Walton family had the same net worth as either the bottom 28% or 41% of American families combined (depending on how it is counted).[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walton_family

That vast wealth created by the Walton family is providing low-cost goods to a huge demographic population in America and providing jobs to China that would not exist otherwise. They created wealth and on a typical Saturday afternoon the reason is on full display. Without the Walton family endeavors Wal-Mart would not exist and the people shopping there would be forced to pay 20% to 30% more for average items. Wal-Mart because of its vast purchasing power forces retailers to lower their prices which of course drive the entire market value down—a gift to the so-called “middle-class” and poor. Without that power, everything would be much more expensive and it would be unlikely that average homes could even hope to afford a flat screen 47” television. But these days, it would be difficult to find the home of a technically poor person that doesn’t have at least one such television. Thank the Walton family for enriching American society to such a vast extent, and they are not obligated in any way to “share” that wealth with any wealth redistribution scheme—because typical people will blow through the money like water over Niagara Falls. All the wealth in the world would be gone within a few years if given to the collectivism of the masses.

It’s about time that the wealthy start defending themselves and not feeling guilty about a $500 meal out at night with friends, or a round of golf at a posh country club. They should not feel bad because of a nice new car that is valued at $100,000 after installed options. Because they earned it in the same way that artists earned critical praise for a fine work painted upon a canvas. Building wealth is an art form and the wealthy are artists who build things that didn’t exist before their influence. I am happy to hear Charles Koch defending that value in public on a large stage knowing that the parasites have targeted him and his brother for years. He knows there will be back-lash over his comments, yet he made them anyway—and good for him. After all, only a handful of people in the world are capable of doing what Charles Koch does for a living. And he deserves to be paid for that productivity accordingly without an ounce of guilt.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

Fairfield Township Tax Increase: The signs of a declining community

No matter where you are in the world articles like this one are something you should pay attention to. Even though the story is a local one, gradually its contents will find you in whatever corner of the world you happen to reside. When I was a kid, Fairfield Township was one of the booming areas around the City of Cincinnati. With Jungle Jims bringing international attention to the area as one of the most unusual grocery stores in America, General Motors operating a parts plant off RT 4 and a number of other developments, Fairfield Township was the rising star of Ohio. I lived in neighboring Liberty Township and used to think the people who lived in Fairfield were rich and very lucky. Well, years of mismanagement and sheer stupidity have brought to the Township a promise of bankruptcy by 2018 unless the trustees put a 4.9 mill levy up to pay for their fire and police protection on the May 2015 ballot. Here are the numbers provided by the Journal News:

The problem stems from the fact that since 2012, the township has transferred more than $1.7 million from the general fund to the police and fire departments to cover budget shortfalls. Expenses have been outpacing revenues in both departments since 2011, Geis said. (Ken Geis,is the township’s interim administrator.)

Police expenses, including salaries and equipment, were just short of $3 million in 2013, while revenues were about $2.2 million. The fire department had similar figures in 2013, Geis said. The township transferred about $350,000 from the general fund in 2012 for the fire department, $1.1 million in 2013 for fire and police combined and about $300,000 so far this year for the police department.

The township’s finances are strong now, with a Aa2 bond rating from Moody’s, the second highest rating possible and an indicator of good credit risk, and a projected balance of nearly $4 million this year after expenses. However, that’s down from the 2011 balance of $6 million. Projected balances show the general fund gradually diminishing until it dips near or below $1 million in 2018.

http://www.journal-news.com/news/news/local/township-may-consider-levy-to-avoid-insolvency/nhWC6/

The smart thing to do would be to restructure the contracts and staffing levels of the police and fire departments to reflect the declining community that Fairfield is. Let’s face it; Fairfield Township is not the best place to live anymore. It is mired with the same types of challenges that most big cities face with a demographic population overly dependent on government services as the more self-reliant types have picked up and moved on to places where people think more the way they do. It was easy to keep adding fire departments as part of a gigantic international labor union and expect massive wages for mostly sitting around all day doing nothing while Fairfield Township was experiencing its economic boom that lasted for several decades during the 60s through the 80s. It’s not like the roughly 18,000 residents around Fairfield Township were having houses burn down every day. There is the occasional arson case, the occasional pot bust, and domestic violence calls that come when you put stupid young people with no money and addictions to alcohol in conflict together near a bowling alley—but other than those issues, Fairfield Township is grossly overstaffed with police and fire department employees—and the trustees know that the fight to reduce those positions will likely be more unpopular than filing bankruptcy—which is just fine with the labor unions behind the police and fire departments. For instance, the Township in the fourth quarter of 2014 hired Lawrence Barbiere to replace Jack Grove as the township law director. Guess what, Grove was charging the township for his services–$315 per hour. Barbiere only charges $150 per hour. If the trustees look at their fire department and police payrolls they will see a lot of officers pushing over $100,000 per year with their overtime roll-overs. Those employees should be cut—or put on a RIF so that newer—cheaper employees could be implemented so not to force residents to vote for a tax increase. You can still have your police and fire departments sitting on the side of the road playing on the internet all day—but at least they’ll be there if some delusional drug addict has a bad drug bust or ends up burning down their home to collect insurance money so to pay off their gambling debts.

But of course the fire department will inflate their numeric needs because it must always be remembered; they are an international labor union first—servants of the local citizens second. Chief Matt Fruchey said this of the trustees decision for a tax increase in May—“I am very pleased that the trustees have aligned with our assessment of current and future needs of the township.” What that means is that Fruchey believes staffing levels need to be increased to some magic number consistent with the number of people living in the area. Increasingly Fairfield Township is filled with people like Barbara Holland who said to the Today’s Pulse newspaper that she’s not worried about her taxes, as her property is not of a great monetary value. “They’re (trustees) going to really have to get out there and push this….it’s the people with these big houses that are going to fight it.” So essentially what Barbara said is that she wants the services of the police and fire without paying for it, and wants wealth redistribution from those “big houses” to give her community resources that she isn’t equally contributing to.

It is that kind of mentality that tells the money to leave Fairfield Township because the trustees failed to protect them from people like Barbara Holland and Chief Matt Fruchey. Fruchey knows that his guys need a few more players in their Call of Duty network down at the firehouse, so he’s protecting their interests by exploiting the stupid in Fairfield Township. So guess what happens, the people in those big houses get up and leave Fairfield Township and move next door to Liberty and West Chester where personal wealth and property value is still appreciated somewhat leaving the community who just passed the high tax rates filled with people like Barbara, and without people in those big houses. Guess what happens to the revenue stream of a community when value leaves and poor value stays? The community dies.

Yet in a different newspaper Barbara Holland spoke a different note about the upcoming levy when the trustees split the vote on a May ballot or a November vote during a special Friday meeting on January 23rd. Suddenly Holland stated to the Enquirer that “I think you need to have another town meeting roundtable. Tonight was not informative. I’m going to be cutting something out if this goes through.” So in one paper Holland doesn’t care about the tax, the next she’s undecided. What is going on is that the trustees know they have to come up with more money to pay for the police and fire services and they don’t want the pain of lawsuits if they force staff reductions to balance the books. Wishy washy residents like Holland they need to speak out in favor of the levy to put peer pressure into the community to support the next levy—they just can’t decide when the best numbers will be that will work toward their advantage. These are the decisions of a declining community—because no matter what the trustees do, failure will follow. If they pass a tax increase more money will leave the township for friendlier districts. If they don’t pass the tax increase the international unions connected to the fire and police departments will put the screws down on the trustees in ways they aren’t equipped to deal with financially or emotionally. So either way, Fairfield Township loses and will further go down in value. There will become more residents like Barbara Holland demanding more taxes on properties of little value and less in those “big houses” who will pay a lot more just because people like Holland ended up voting for the increase.

The same struggles are coming to your front door dear reader. It’s just a matter of time.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

Labor Unions in Decline: Knuckle-dragging losers, Obama and King Jayavarman II

“To give working families a fair shot, we’ll still need more employers to see beyond next quarter’s earnings and recognize that investing in their workforce is in their company’s long-term interest. We still need laws that strengthen rather than weaken unions, and give American workers a voice.”   That is the advice of a knuckle dragging idiot whose entire world view was shaped by marijuana cigarettes, Marxists college professors and a parade of communists who wanted to screw his promiscuous white mother.  Well, that idiot has been president of the United States now for a few years and even with the hard lessons about how socialism does not work, and managed economies by government infusion of their bureaucratic tendrils stifles creative enterprise instead of feeding it—Barack Obama still says really stupid things like that about labor unions.

Union membership in the United States fell to an all-time low in 2014, according to a government report released just days after President Barack Obama called for new laws to strengthen unions during his State of the Union speech. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the union membership rate was 11.1 percent last year, down 0.2 percent from the rate seen in 2012 and 2013. This trend is part of a growing realization about unions in America and the kind of rhetoric uttered by major left leaning progressives like Obama and his personal friend Richard Trumka—that the concept of a labor union is right out of the pages of Karl Marx. Labor unions are essentially anti-American, anti-capitalism, and immoral toward positive growth toward productive enterprise.

The BLS report reveals that union membership is increasingly a thing of the past for most Americans, and is a status mostly relegated to government workers—which needs to be made illegal. The union membership rate for the public sector was 35.7 percent, and was just 6.6 percent in the private sector. As of last year, there were 14.6 million people working in unions.

Labor Secretary Tom Perez picked up on this point, and noted that the BLS report showed that weekly wages for union workers were significantly higher than wages for non-union workers. Union workers saw a median weekly wage of $970 in 2014, while the median wage for non-union workers was $763.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/23/u-s-union-membership-falls-to-record-low-in-2014/

Well……………….Tom, Barry, and Richard T and all the other slack-jawed old hippies and social parasites who utter such ridiculous nonsense with the wit of a cockroach—the reason labor unions are failing is because that $10,000 dollars per year difference in pay that union workers typically make above non-union workers is sapped directly out of the profit formula that most businesses need to exist. While the communist in people like Barak Obama, and Tom Perez point to the CEOs of various corporations and declare that they should give back their high salaries and bonus checks to “the people” of the “middle class” they forget that it takes leaders to drive companies and the workers toward profitability in the first place. Under the philosophy of Karl Marx the “workers” typically left to their own devices are often uninspired toward productive enterprise and are easily out produced by the rest of the world. Yet they command salaries that are higher for less work. That doesn’t make any sense and is the direct cause of why union membership is down.

If labor unions attached to government positions were made illegal that would go a long way toward solving many budget problems in the United States. The private sector has had to learn the hard way—yet the government sector workers have no reason to change their behavior from their point of view. They can now vote themselves raises as labor unions protect them from reality leaving the only option to eliminating their corrosive influence is to cut the positions all together. As Obama lectures that CEOs should distribute their bonus checks to the “middle class” he runs off to a golf outing on the tax payer funded Air Force One to live as if he were the king Jayavarman II of the Khmer Empire presiding over the majestic Angkor monuments. The drunkenness of power upon Obama’s mind is purely funded by tax payer looting provided to him through an army of union driven thugs at his feet providing support so long as they get that marginal pay increase just for belonging to a federal labor union. Labor unions attached to government work of any kind invites corruption of the highest order and are the root cause of the inflated tax payer funded budgets demanding reforms that never come.

Most of the time workers are not worth that $10,000 difference in pay that Tom Perez is talking about because the laws of a free market economy were ignored. The value is artificial and focused on the worker instead of the net result of the product produced by the endeavor demanded—which is a fatal flaw in thinking. Only government workers who get paid for showing up at a desk without the expectation of doing any real work, like Obama and Perez, could conclude such a ridiculous proposal—that companies function as ignorantly as they, and pay employees for unproductive work at values that are unreasonably high. In government when they need more money, they just raise taxes. So they assume in the private sector that the cost of goods and services can do the same to cover their margins. But it doesn’t work that way. When the world is competing with a global economy where many workers in those far away lands are doing work for $1 to $2 per day, its hard for the worker in the middle of Tennessee to justify their existence toward productivity when they expect to make over 100 times that amount for the same work.

This blind support for labor unions comes from people who have no idea how the world really works. They have been bred in a government backed vacuum to believe that jobs are created with tax payer money and that results are never to be expected. In many ways Obama is very much like the king Jayavarman II who started an empire in the region of Cambodia around 802 AD by declaring himself king of the world sticking a penis shaped rock in a slotted stone and asking the gods to give him immortal power. To prove he and his subsequent rulers were truly divinely led, they built all the monuments popular to the region—such as Angkor Wat. But guess what, they weren’t immortal or divinely influenced. They were just men who rose and fell within a few centuries of their climb to power. And so it will be for all government workers and their inflated wages they demand. Their large houses, boats, and lavish vacations paid for by the tax payers will be consumed and cast back to ruin the moment their lives are snuffed out by fate—and nobody will remember their efforts. Only through productivity does the work of ones enterprise live on in some fashion of immortality. No matter how much people like Obama take and give away—the value of what is looted is what suffers. What is taken is productivity and without it an entity dies one hundred percent of the time. That is why union membership is down. Soon, it will only be government workers who will be in them and the next great crises will be when people not in a union are asked to pay for more taxes to justify those in government still in unproductive unions. But the sympathy won’t be there. It’s already fading fast—especially after the scandals within the IRS over the last few years.

It’s only a matter of time before those union memberships decline as well. Because there is no longer sympathy for the unionized slug who expects to get paid for sitting around all day doing very little. The reason is not so much because of the money—it’s because of the effort. America as a nation was a productive place driven by capitalism. Without that productive edge against the rest of the world, Americans feel “average” and nobody likes that. The only way to be a winner is to out-produce your rivals around the globe, and the only way to do that is to do better. A union slug won’t be motivated to do better because they get paid regardless of the work performed. So it will be that aspect to their complacency which will eventually do them in. More union workers is a guarantee to have less work done at a higher cost—and that is not a recipe for success. People, no matter where they come from expect success—yet the labor unions work against that desire in ways that are happily putting them out of business.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

Another Kind of American Hero: Taya Kyle and how love can manifest resurrection

One of the reasons that I am most happy about the astounding support and box office numbers for the new Clint Eastwood movie, American Sniper is because of the redemption it is bringing to the widow of the slain military hero Chris Kyle—the most deadly sniper in US history. In the span of two years Taya Kyle has had to deal with the death of her husband, a defamation lawsuit by Jessie Ventura, and the ongoing circumstances of the trial of her husband’s murderer Eddie Ray Routh. It has been a painful period for her—the pressure would have crushed lesser people. But she held up and stood strong, and finally through Eastwood’s movie her husband’s memory has been given proper context and a bit of closure has finally become possible. It was commendable that she held it together when attorneys told her to let things die down before making too many public statements because of the upcoming murder trial. The movie was planned before Chris Kyle’s death, so it took a lot of emotional stability for her to continue with the project—which few are talking about. It had to be difficult. And when she was told to put a lid on her comments—she did what she felt was right to preserve her family’s memory—which is one of the most heroic aspects of American Sniper.

On Feb. 11, Eddie Ray Routh is scheduled to stand trial for killing Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL played by Bradley Cooper in the film. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Routh, who confessed to shooting the deadliest sniper in American history and Kyle’s friend Chad Littlefield two years ago at a rifle range southwest of Dallas. Routh, a former Marine, plans to introduce evidence that he was experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder and mount an insanity defense, but the enormous profile of Kyle in the wake of American Sniper‘s success could present some complications.

The Warner Bros. film “is going to be an issue,” J. Warren St. John, Routh’s attorney, tells The Hollywood Reporter in an interview. “Can there be a fair trial?”

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/how-american-sniper-could-complicate-764712

Then there was the Jessie Ventura case where the former wrestler, governor, and conspiracy theorists went after Taya just because her husband had damaged his ego in a best-selling book.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune explains…

In a section of his book called “Punching Out Scruff Face,” Kyle describes a confrontation with a “celebrity” at a 2006 wake for a Navy SEAL. He claimed “Scruff Face” made disparaging remarks about the war, the United States and President George W. Bush, provoking Kyle to punch him in the face.

Kyle later identified “Scruff Face” as Ventura.

In a federal trial last summer, Ventura won a $1.8 million verdict from the Kyle estate after convincing a jury that Chris Kyle had defamed him by writing that he decked Ventura in a bar after he made disparaging remarks about SEALs. Taya Kyle is the executor of the estate.

http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/movies/289097651.html

For Ventura it is obvious it was always about the money because he has done far more to damage his own reputation than the bragging rights of two military veterans in a bar arguing over the Iraq war. The differences between the two men are essentially the differences between Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. Taya is personal friends with Glenn Beck because their values about things are essentially aligned. Jessie Ventura is friends with Alex Jones because their values are aligned. Both are considered radical right-wingers, but they are ideologically as different as the sun and the moon. They only thing they really have in common is that they are both located in space.

Ventura made an absolute fool of himself during the trial. If the debate was with Chris Kyle, Ventura should have let it go upon his death. But to go over a grieving widow was below respectable, and he will always be known for such a gross embarrassment. And now that American Sniper is succeeding, Ventura is considering more lawsuits. It is simply unbelievable that a man would stoop so low—yet Ventura did. I think Ventura’s actions were unfathomable. No reputation is worth putting a widow through what he did. If Taya had emotionally collapsed after such an example of human vileness after the trial went against her—nobody would have blamed her.

But then came the murder trail of her husband and the concern that the killer was planning to plea guilty by reason of insanity. With all the popularity surrounding her husband it looked like Eddie Ray Routh wouldn’t be able to get a fair trial. So there was risk of messing up the trial if she continued to promote the film. But to her credit, knowing that there are serious flaws in the court process anyway—which lean in favor of Eddie Ray Routh by default—she would only get one chance to pay proper respect to her husband and that was through the Clint Eastwood film.

It really is an amazing story both on-screen and off. Through it all Taya Kyle has emerged as a hero in her own right. Her children are extremely lucky to have two parents who have provided them with such magnificent guidance. They have a hero to look up to in their father immortalized forever in the movie American Sniper—and they have a mother who has stood up to some very ominous opposition and tribulations to punch through to the kind of redemption American Sniper has given to her family. According to her husband’s killer she lost her husband to a man who simply wanted Kyle’s F-250 pick-up truck. Such a stupid loss of life over something so trivial would impact Taya forever. Fast forward to the present where pinheaded attorneys are telling her not to jeopardize the murder case by promoting American Sniper. Fortunately she has enough experience after getting burned over the Ventura case to know that she will likely not get justice in the Eddie Ray Routh case either. The best thing she could do for her husband was to get behind American Sniper—and let the legal world choke on itself.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/sniper-killer-traded-soul-victims-new-truck-article-1.1255561

Taya’s story is only one of the many circling the American Sniper movie. Her heroics in the face of much misery is defiantly fuel behind the quality of the movie. Eastwood has obviously captured her spirit in his film—and it makes the movie much better. It is just one example of the kind of extraordinary feats surpassed to bring American Sniper to the big screen and why it is such a triumph to see the movie getting so much support from the public. Any other director but Eastwood would have been caught up in all the emotional drama and the film could have languished for years in development—because of all the legal cases pending. But because of Eastwood, filming started, concluded, and was distributed before the lawyers could find ways to stumble the project—which is another miracle in itself. Legal fights, grieving family members and a left-leaning Hollywood society violently against the end result. Only Clint Eastwood could have made the picture.

Like all parasites who want to suddenly hook their wagon to the star of the deceased Chris Kyle, Ventura is at it again claiming that because of his defamation suit against Taya American Sniper had a tremendous boost in sales—so he wants some of that money too. The link to the story is below. Ventura’s friend Alex Jones claims that Eastwood’s American Sniper is a giant hoax where the U.S. government is using its soldiers as propaganda pieces only to discard them when they cease to be useful. Jones utters that the whole project is designed to brainwash the American people that war is good for our society. But it is Taya who will laugh last as America has her back by supporting American Sniper at the box office. Living well is the best revenge, and because of her heroic stand against so many bullies after her husband’s death, she will get that redemption. And she deserves it.

http://controversialtimes.com/news/another-lawsuit-jesse-ventura-back-in-court-against-chris-kyle-american-sniper/

http://www.infowars.com/american-sniper-exposed-as-giant-hoax/

For every ticket sold in favor of watching American Sniper, a bad guy somewhere weeps. So for God’s sake, see the movie as many times as you can possibly can.   Taya Kyle deserves the wind in her sails that will come from it. Yeah, Chris Kyle was and is an American hero. But, his wife in many different ways was just as heroic. And that is a truly magnificent story worthy of a sequel to American Sniper.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

‘American Sniper’: Breaking $105 Million on opening weekend and being a sheepdog

Is American Sniper the best Clint Eastwood film he’s ever done? Probably. Look, I’m a huge fan of Clint Eastwood so it would be hard for him to do wrong in my eyes. I knew he’d do a great job with the Chris Kyle story of the deadliest sniper in US history. I had the entire movie laid out in my mind before I even saw it, and knew it would be great. I know Eastwood’s directorial style so well that nothing really surprised me except that he’s currently 84 years old and can still make such vigorous movies of immense complexity appear so simple. He’s a jazz musician and a very wise old man who still has the heart of a 35-year-old lumberjack which was one of his odd jobs way back in the day before his acting career took off. He’s a man’s man and most women would succumb to his seductions even in his advanced years—and he knows it. He knows that hunger from women for real men and most of his movies embody that spirit in some regard—which is why women also like his movies. He appreciates that masculine quality in other men and knows precisely how to capture it on-screen. He did it marvelously in Heartbreak Ridge, Grand Torino, White Hunter Black Heart, even in Million Dollar Baby where the protagonist was a female. Eastwood has a way of getting to the primal raw nature of what it means to be a living human being from a free country.  I probably have watched Eastwood over the years as closely as Bradley Cooper watched actual footage of Chris Kyle to portray him in this fantastic movie so accurately. Yet even so there were parts of the movie where you just forget to breathe because it was so spectacularly good. I think Clint Eastwood and only he could have made this movie. It was essentially an update of the very first Dirty Harry movie played out against the Iraq war—at least in how Eastwood approached the subject. It was raw, primal, honest, sentimental, and gloriously American in spirit.

American Sniper made $105 million dollars over the Martin Luther King Day holiday which far exceeded the box office predictions—by like $60 million. It broke every box office record there was for a January movie release, and even some in every other release month—even the Mel Gibson epic, The Passion, which seemed outrageously high at $83 million. I wasn’t going to see the picture until the buzz died off a bit—because I knew what to expect. But, when I read the box office take in USA Today Sunday morning that the film was trucking quickly by the $90 million dollar mark and not slowing down I knew something phenomenal was happening. Clint Eastwood had been tapping on the glass of a uniquely American concept for a movie for nearly five decades and he had finally struck gold with American Sniper. Eastwood didn’t star in the film at all, but unquestionably, he was there in the stellar performance behind Bradley Cooper and Chris Kyle himself. As Kyle whizzed in and out of bullets on the screen and paraded down Iraqi streets with his “Punishers” bearing the emblem of the popular character from graphic novel fame—Eastwood had hit the tap-root of American consciousness and had placed it on the screen for one of the first times in cinematic history. He captured and answered on the silver screen the debate of our day—should America have been in Iraq, what makes Americans free, and what does it mean to be a good person, father, husband, brother, friend and patriot? American Sniper was a movie that a majority of the people in the United States wanted to see, and needed to see through many years of guilt and embarrassment by politicians who have squandered away the pride of our nation. Eastwood captured that spirit in a bottle through the honesty of Chris Kyle, and unleashed it like a cyclone across American movie screens with the pent-up energy of a Tasmanian Devil.

It had been a long time since I had seen a movie sell out at the theater. The last time that I can recall was the 1997 film Titanic. So my wife and I planned to see the American Sniper during the playoff games late on Sunday January 18, 2015 figuring that it would be easier to get seats in our Cincinnati movie theater during that time frame. But just to be safe we arrived three hours early and discovered that the 3:30 shows were almost sold out upon our arrival. So we snagged our tickets, did some shopping to fill the hours from then until the movie began, and braced for an onslaught of movie goers lining up as early as 2:30 to be let in to see the film which showed an hour later. It only took about 20 minutes once they started seating to fill up the giant Showcase Cinema Theater from back to front with no spaces in between. I had not seen such a thing in years. American Sniper was having its “Chick-fil-A” moment—middle America was voting against Hollywood with a ticket for the Eastwood product—and they were doing it to a consensus of stunned industry insiders who were bewildered by the epic show of support for an R-rated war movie filled with profanity and drama. This wasn’t The Avengers or Transformers where children helped make up the audience. This was a strictly adult crowd showing up stone faced to support a rare piece of Americana placed before them by a legendary director depicting a real-life American hero.

http://www.thecelebritycafe.com/feature/2015/01/clint-eastwood-bradley-coopers-american-sniper-stuns-box-office-passes-90-million

I will likely give a more formal review after thinking about it for a few days—because there is a lot to cover. But for this examination, understanding the massive show of support for American Sniper is the key subject. What was it about the film that had people showing up in such an unpredictably profound way? Well, during the movie I thought a lot about what Liam Neeson said after his release of last week’s hit movie, Taken 3, where he stated after the terrorist killings in Paris:

“First off, my thoughts and prayers and my heart are with the deceased, and certainly with all of France, yesterday. I’ve got a lot of dear friends in Paris. There’s too many fucking guns out there. Especially in America. I think the population is like, 320 million? There’s over 300 million guns. Privately owned, in America. I think it’s a fucking disgrace. Every week now we’re picking up a newspaper and seeing, ‘Yet another few kids have been killed in schools.'”

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/liam-neeson-america-guns_n_6472266.html

Then I watched Chris Kyle and the background he came from navigating house to house searches in Iraq and dealing which what was termed as sheer evil in the movie, and comparing the conditions of Iraq to those in America. Then it became quite clear why so many people showed up to support American Sniper. What made those barbarians in Iraq evil was that they allowed dictators to breed in their culture who then sought to spread that desire to the distant shores of America. Kyle said it in the movie, “You don’t want these people in San Diego do you?” Evil had to be fought on their soil and only there so that through passivity they didn’t end up in our back yard—as they have been doing more often under President Obama’s presidency. Terrorist cells were emboldened to attack New York under the lackadaisical watch of President Clinton, another Obama type liberal. It was eight years of 90s liberalism that gave those terrorists courage as President Bush was in his first year of office when 9/11 occurred. So a failure to bring in the kind of people who Chris Kyle represented to meet that evil far away from home to keep the fight away from the shopping malls, businesses, and industry flourishing under capitalism did not happen as it should have in the late 90s. Leaving the Iraqi people alone didn’t make them less evil. What made them evil was that they wished to impose their view of the world and understanding upon others through force which is the best definition of evil that there is. America wasn’t trying to impose its world view—it tries to free people from their oppressors. Liberals thought the war in Iraq was about oil, but it wasn’t. America has its own oil and the threat of using it is what is currently driving the prices down for our transportation costs. Iraq was always about confronting evil which America helped put in power—and had to rectify morally. For a society, an individual, or a political party to be evil, it must trample on the rights of individual thought and action to achieve its goal. People like Chris Kyle were raised to know the difference between good and evil—so he couldn’t turn away from it when he saw it. He felt compelled to kick evil’s ass wherever it was out of a natural inclination given to him by his upbringing. There are many people just like him being born and raised right now who think the same. Chris Kyle is a uniquely American type of man. You wouldn’t find him in Ukraine, or France, or anywhere in China because those cultures do not make people like him. He was born and made in America to recognize evil for what it is—and to eliminate it.

America is the freest place on earth. There is evil trying to embed itself in virtually every institution—but with free speech, and the right to bear arms, it is impossible for institutions to gain the kind of traction seen in Iraq, Iran, or China over their populations. The people in America simply won’t put up with it. Currently Americans put up with a lot, they put up with a terrible president in Obama, they put up with the entire leftist political platform points, and they put up with mismanagement of government from our schools all the way up to the highest levels of congress. But they have a breaking point and to ease their minds they have their gun cabinets in their homes to remind them if all hell breaks loose, that they are still in control. It is within that 300 million gun culture that families make heroic people like Chris Kyle. It wasn’t the military that made the man great. They simply refined the kind of man who Kyle already was. It was a father who told him there were three types of people in the world – the sheep, the wolves who prey on them, and the sheepdogs who protect the herd. His father further said, “and we aren’t raising any sheep, and we aren’t raising any wolves. Do you understand boy?”

America is the sheepdog to the rest of the world struggling to climb from under centuries of oppression. In American Sniper there isn’t one apology to the fact, which was so refreshing for the first time in a modern war movie. In the great war films of the past like the Deer Hunter, Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, and Saving Private Ryan there is always a bit of guilt associated with the actions of American troops—a questioning of whether or not they had a right to be involved in a far away land or not. In American Sniper there is no such guilt—there is only a resounding YES! Kyle as portrayed in the film signs up for four tours in Iraq against the wishes of his family because he felt it was his job to kill Mustafa, the Olympic sharp shooter working with the Al Qaeda forces. Al Qaeda had put an $180,000 bounty on Kyle’s head which Mustafa intended to collect. The entire film was essentially a cat and mouse game between those two rivals. Kyle felt he could not leave the battlefield with someone as dangerous as Mustafa on it killing American troops. It was impossible for his wife to understand at the time, but it was something Kyle as a man had to do, just as Dirty Harry Callahan had to hunt down and kill Scorpio in the 1971 cop drama. It was the same masculine necessity that uniquely only Americans seem to understand. And the reason they understand it is because they too have vaults of guns in their bedrooms, and can taste the kind of freedom that gives such ideas places to grow. People certainly don’t think that way in Ireland, England, France, or even Spain. They certainly don’t think that way in China, Russia, or anywhere in Malaysia, India, or even Australia. They only think that way in America because the gun culture gives liberty a place to sink roots and contemplate the effects of evil.

Most of the world suffers from indecision and political derision because they don’t have the ability to defend themselves from evil. They, like the Iraqi people, are left to always barter with evil to keep their loved ones from being killed or maimed. They don’t have the luxury to fight back against evil if the circumstances mandate it. For people like Chris Kyle, he learned how to spot evil, and stop it in its tracks from his family heritage driven in America by a gun culture. That is the reason that Chris Kyle was in Iraq, and why his “Punishers” were there to inflict justice upon evil as defined by common sense.

Eastwood with his big shoulders and typical brashness knew exactly what he was doing when he shot American Sniper. He knew the faces of most of the Hollywood elite would melt off when he showed the Iraqi people as savages who deserved to have their asses kicked if they were aligned with Al Qaeda. He knew that the progressive usurpers currently within American culture from the academic high towers of snobby scrutiny would decry him and his film to the end of the earth. But Eastwood like Chris Kyle was willing to weave through the bullets to “punish evil” as it is not only in Iraq, but in our own missteps stateside. Eastwood is shooting again not as the Dirty Harry character, but as one of the finest directors in cinema history and this time his targets are soothsayers like Seth Rogan, Michael Moore, and all the rest of the progressive despots who want to pave the flyover states with six feet of asphalt to bury the gun culture of America forever and the freedoms that come with it. To support Eastwood in this quest America showed up and surprised everyone with a show of force that has evil quivering in its boots right now from Hollywood mansion to mansion wondering what on earth they are going to do about the 84-year-old man who can out shoot them, out-wit them, and out-work them in every phase. Not even blockbuster film directors like James Cameron will be able to criticize the fabulous work of Eastwood or his newly found box office prowess. Because American Sniper is a statement from Eastwood to the future of his country—his movie will go down as one of the greatest war movies of all time. But more than that, it will be the defining film that articulates to the present and future generations what it means to be an American. We are the sheepdogs of the world. The sheep may not appreciate it all the time and the wolves certainly hate us, but we are what we are, and we have the guns to do the job because of capitalism. Pure and simple. American Sniper is made for the sheepdogs and by the box office numbers there are a lot of them hidden in the woodworks—and have always been there. They were just ignored by Hollywood as it was hell-bent on social change and reform. American Sniper has exposed those home-grown insurgents for the intentions they have always had.

American Sniper is like a nice shower after several days of riding in the hard desert. It felt good and clean to see such wonderful articulation of values which are uniquely American—without an ounce of apology. If you’ve seen it, go see it again. If you haven’t yet, what’s stopping you!

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

A Christopher Cornell False Flag: The possiblities of entrapment for political objectives

There is something very fishy about the Christopher Cornell case in Harrison, Ohio where a twenty year old kid supposedly was planning to attack government officials in Washington D.C. Cornell wearing a very ISIS terrorist looking beard was arrested at a popular gun store in the suburb of Cincinnati by “government employees” and sent to a facility run by more government employees to be tried by more government employees. So it will be very interesting to see how much evidence comes out of the trial and of the relationship the kid had with the FBI between the weapon purchases recently made and the date where Cornell showed up at a 9/11 rally as a “truther” revealing his beliefs that the New York terrorist attack was an inside job. The mode of operation of this terrorist attack seems awfully close to motivations of the IRS in attacking conservative groups. After all, here is an angry white male—an anti government type who is converting to radical Islam and wants to kill government workers buying weapons at a gun store in the heart of America. And the kid’s father is another small government type who immediately stated that the government set up his kid. So it is obvious where young Cornell got his distrust of government. The whole story is wrapped up a little too neatly for the government case against the certain demographic types that are currently putting pressure on them to reform themselves. So the FBI—and the government for that matter—suddenly had a story that made them look proactive against homegrown terrorists, and at the same time shuts up the sector of society known as the “hard right” from fear of themselves being targeted as terrorists.

It is very easy to manipulate young people, especially between the age of 15 to 21. Kids are still kids at that age—especially these days, and not very wise to the ways of the world. If a kid in that age group starts hanging around with “wigger” kids, he’s likely to start walking about with his pants down and listening to Eminem. If a kid hangs with a gang of “narco” types, they’ll likely spend a lot of time listening to gangsta rap and planning petty crimes. If a kid hangs around nice kids who spend their weekends learning to milk cows, they will likely attend church on Sunday and praise the Lord at the dinner table. Behavior for most young people is largely governed by environmental conditions. And environmental conditions are established by peer review and pressure.

For a kid like Cornell, who it appears didn’t have many close friends, it would be very easy for a FBI agent to indirectly contact the boy after the 9/11 truther protest and provoke him into a direction of choosing since it was clear that there was an origin of discontent. It might begin with a simple positive comment on a Twitter post of something that Cornell had said, then over the course of a few months, the agent could plant ideas in the mind of the target and begin to steer his thoughts in the direction of choosing. To put it another way, think of the relationship to a first date where a man wants to have sex with a woman. The woman may be interested in sex otherwise she likely wouldn’t be on the date, but she doesn’t want to come across as cheap, so she plays hard to get. Maybe she plans to wait a date or two before she allows for the possibility of sex. But, the man needs to tell his friends about the date so that he can look like a big man with great sexual prowess.   Men need to report to their peers about how they bag and tag the women with their powers of persuasion. So the man leads the girl along with a nice dinner, perhaps a gift at a store to make her feel obligated later, then when it comes time to close out the evening, he pulls out the guilt to get the sex. The woman gives him what he wants because internally she’s insecure that she might lose such a sugar daddy, so she accelerates the process along hoping to get a date number two, and three—and perhaps even marry the guy. So she gives up her sex hoping to hook the guy to her loins.

Fast forward to Christopher Cornell playing video games in his room all day long doing very little productive in the world who is still very close to his mother. The boy never really broke away from his mother’s breast to become a man of his own—so he’s still very prone to the peer pressure of society as a direct result. This is always a typical trait of such males who are too close to their mothers. They are very socially conscious as their foundation thinking still comes from the women’s circles within family structure. Yet to assimilate with the father and behold atonement which is another major concern among most young males, Cornell adopted the notion that 9/11 was an inside job. (Of course this is all hypothetical at this time, and could be confirmed by court documents during the trial if allowed to be seen by the public) So Christopher goes to a rally with his famous sign and catches the attention of the FBI who decide to make an example of him. An agent contacts the lonely kid looking for his way in the world and tells him he agrees with him on 9/11 and earns the trust of Cornell. Then the agent starts planting seeds, just as the man who wants to have sex with a woman does—to provoke reaction and stimulate an outcome. A person craving acceptance—any acceptance will do extraordinary things to get it—and perhaps Cornell wanted to impress his FBI friend so much that he was willing to kill and maim targets of the friend’s definition so to earn that respect. In the end there was only one man who walked into the Harrison gun store to buy weapons for a planned terrorist attack. So Cornell is guilty of that. But would the kid have grown the beard, and changed his name to the ISIS wanna’ be—Raheel Mahnus Ubaydah just a few years out of high school where he was a wrestler and planned a terrorist attack against government workers and the U.S. capital? Likely not. If the FBI had not befriended the kid, it is likely Cornell would still be in his room playing Assassin’s Creed and texting his mother about his needs.

The target likely wasn’t Christopher Cornell himself, but the father because of his political beliefs. The FBI needed to make some kind of arrest somewhere to show that they were getting out ahead of these potential home grown terrorists before something happened—especially after the Paris attacks. America needs to know that its safe and the Cornells as a family were easy targets. By pushing their buttons to send them over the edge the government gets the sniffing dogs off their backs with the IRS corruption, the Benghazi murders, Fast and Furious, the communist insurgency coming out of Cuba, Russia—and China. The push toward socialism in Europe, carbon credits, oil prices to destroy American fracking, and the desire to see Islam and other religions besides Christianity spread through public education to young people with a new civil rights movement–a modern crusade. The message behind the Cornell arrest is two-fold, that the FBI was doing their job of protecting America and that even angry white tea party types are prone to the teachings of Islam—so there is no place to hide.

This could of course all be fiction on behalf of my prose. The court documents would of course provide the context of the story in greater detail. But if I had to bet money—I’d say what I stated is closer to the truth than what is being told to us on the news. There are very good reasons not to trust the government. Just yesterday John Kasich, the governor of Ohio stated people against Common Core were suffering from an inaccurate “hysteria” when the reality is that local school boards still have the final say. What he didn’t say was that his support of Common Core, and why local school boards will go along to get along is because there is federal money attached to it, and like a common prostitute he wants the money for his budget balancing, just as a crack whore wants to fund her habit. So they will justify the means to satisfy the evil. Then of course there is the local politician John Boehner who stated that someone needed to go to jail over the IRS scandal. Yet now the targeting of conservative groups is known, and even people close to Boehner suffered yet he isn’t motivated to do anything about it now that he knows it’s connected to the White House because of the 2014 congressional hearings. At every turn federal workers at most levels are showing that they are more prone to corruption and vile acts because they are protected by labor unions—such as the IRS workers were, police are, and just about every public service. So what we get is bad work from employees who take their jobs for granted. And they are only motivated to act when public pressure is applied.

When it comes to the Christopher Cornell case it solves two problems for the federal worker—it shows that there is extremism within the small government types of demographic population, and it shows that Islam is spreading to the lonely recesses of Harrison Avenue in Ohio. The hope is that people like the Cornell family will just shut up and do what they’re told to do. At least that’s’ how it looks. The trial, if it’s open and well covered by the media will either confirm or deny these accusations. But what will likely happen is the trial will be put off until the case cools, then it will happen lightening fast and without much fanfare. Christopher will be tucked away for a while to be further broken down and his parents will have to shut their mouths if they ever want to see their kid again. And once it is realized that the FBI actually entrapped the kid into saying everything he did, the public opinion will already be set and they’ll be on to the next crises.

Meanwhile the government will pardon themselves from any guilt in the debacle and will be looking for a tax increase to pay for their pension plans and summer vacations. Angry white guys and small government types especially in Ohio will watch their tongues so that they are not accused of guilt by association. And the Cornells will grieve each night knowing that their son is beyond their help. Fear makes monsters out of even sane minds, and it does much more neurotic destruction to societies in general. And the FBI was well aware of that when they contacted Christopher Cornell needing an arrest of a certain demographic type to satisfy their bosses in the Capital. After all, the budgets are being made by a new congress, and there is nothing like a high-profile arrest at a key time to ensure that budget cuts don’t strike the FBI as it has the now unpopular IRS. In the end, it always comes down to money by the looters who don’t make it—but spend it like drunken sailers in a whore house. And in my opinion that’s the way government employees treat the money we send them.

Let’s see how much info comes out in the trial. But to confirm my thoughts does anybody remember the James Holmes case? He was supposed to go to trial on December 6th. It will likely be with the Cornell case as well. Oh, they’ll cover it locally, but it won’t go very far. The Holmes case is still in jury selection just as a reference. These cases deliberately go on forever because the public losses interest even when deaths occur as it was with Holmes. With Cornell where it was just potential threats showing intent, the public will be even less motivated—and therefore no matter how guilty the FBI is, they know the public will never catch them on their imposition. So it will continue to the next victim.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

John Boehner and Charlie Brown: The Back Porch Saloon against “The Beltway”

Of coarse John Boehner should not have been re-elected as Speaker of the House. He’s a nice enough guy; he’s even a neighbor in some respects. He puts his pants on like everyone else and he makes sure people know it. He even eats lunch at the Back Porch Saloon when he’s in town just to let everyone know that he’s still the same John Boehner that he always was. He doesn’t believe in earmarks—which is good. And he really does try to keep things simple in regard to politics. But that same old John Boehner is a softy and not a very good manager. He likes too much to be admired and accepted among his peers which makes him weak and vulnerable on Capital Hill leaving him a lap dog to the insurgent President Obama. So Boehner should not have been re-reelected to a third term.   It was encouraging to see a bit of resistance to his leadership, but it wasn’t enough to really challenge him. One of those would-be challengers was Chris Stewart from Utah who ended up voting for Boehner anyway. He called into the Glenn Beck radio program to explain himself—his reasons for supporting the failed Speaker. What Chris uttered says a lot about why politics is so screwed up and why at this point only vigilant castigation will be acceptable. Being a swell guy who eats at the Back Porch Saloon is one thing—being a good and thoughtful legislator is quite another. And with comparison John Boehner has failed. Here’s why:

The Republican plan is to slowly take over the House and Senate with conservatives—united—and to put on President Obama’s desk a stack of bills that the lame duck will of course veto. Boehner then thinks that he’s going to be able to point at the White House and say, “see, we tried, you need to give us a Republican as President so we can really get something done.” Meanwhile, Obama is flying all over the country pretending he is Santa Clause giving away free amnesty, free college, and trying to community organize the black communities against cops so to enrage them to the voting booths out of sheer hate. Obama is going to point at Boehner and say “look, congress is saying no again. I can’t get anything done. Now there is a Republican senate that is making it much worse.” Well, dear reader—who do you think will win that battle? The charismatic communist insurgent or the stiff backed “pro business” guy who likes to eat at the Back Porch?

 

As the crew on the Glenn Beck Program pointed out, Chris Stewart, the Utah representative got caught playing the game—Boehner’s game so that he can stay in power. Boehner has already lost the respect of the nation with his kisses of Nancy Pelosi and quiet support of Obama so that he can show that he’s willing to compromise. But in the world of Obama—just as it is with any typical lowlife—their goal is to take everything from one side and give nothing from their position—because they have nothing to give in the first place—and therefore nothing to compromise with. This is like the guy who says to his wife—“let’s compromise.” “We’ll go to your parent’s house after we go to my parent’s house for an upcoming holiday event.” So the wife agrees. But when it comes time to make good on the deal, the husband stays at his mom’s house then says there isn’t time to go to the other leaving the wife high and dry. Obama doesn’t have anything for which to barter except his political mandate to raise taxes, spread philosophies of collectivism, and churn up the racial/economic divides between voting demographics to further erode American sovereignty. You can’t negotiate with that. Nobody can, yet Boehner has tried. And each time he has come up short. Like the wife in the example, he ends up compromising, but getting nothing in return but a lot of wasted time.

 

Remember the tough talk about someone from the IRS going to jail if they were involved in the targeting of conservative groups during that whole scandal? Well, the proof was discovered by the outgoing congress in December of 2014 which actually points straight into the White House—to a meeting with an IRS labor leader talking directly to Barack Obama—and then Lois Lerner executing the directive. The email trail is there. Yet Boehner won’t confront the bully. He instead thinks he and Mitch McConnell will load up the president’s desk with bills to veto and catch the slippery snake at his own game. They don’t see that they are being baited into inaction as we speak by a president who knows of no other game but theft, lying and stealing American wealth and redistributing it to the unearned. After all, Boehner seems to think that Obama is a swell guy too—just like he is. They are some of the most powerful people on planet earth and they have that much in common. We’re just $18 trillion dollars in debt with no prospect of paying that crisis down and all the Republicans want to do is fulfill their lobby requests to pass the Keystone Pipeline, which of course the president will veto until the end of his days. Obama will never vote in favor of Keystone and you have been told before dear reader why. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. First, it will upset his liberal base who believes in this new religion of “Global Warming” where earth has been replaced by God as the deity of worship. Second, it will mess up the profit formula of Warren Buffett’s train distribution system across the northern United States and southern Canada to the Pacific coast. Obama made a deal with Buffett in exchange for the billionaire’s endorsement on increased taxes—and as long as Obama is president, there will never be a Keystone pipeline to carry North American oil to the gulf coast instead of the Pacific Northwest for foreign markets.

Meanwhile Boehner is thinking small and playing into the hands of Democrats who want mass chaos and debt driven destruction of old “imperial” America so that communist China can hold the former economic powerhouse hostage under massive obligations. All Boehner can think about is his next golf game or what he might eat the next time he goes to the Back Porch Saloon.

 

With the State of the Union address coming up quickly, it is clear that what the president wants to do is at the expense of John Boehner—yet Boehner will shake hands with the scum bag anyway and talk about all their good times on Capital Hill—about that recent golf game where he was a stroke under par. And they’ll all laugh among themselves as the cameras set up to watch Obama sign Boehner up for all the free stuff he wants to give out so that Democrats can retake the House, Senate and White House in the future. And when Boehner and the house Republicans don’t give him what he wants, Obama won’t hesitate to pull the trigger of opinion against the House Speaker. The biggest difference between Obama and Boehner is that the Speaker is a nice guy and usually talks tougher than he acts. The President on the other hand talks much softer than he acts. He does mean it when he says something, and his intentions for America are not the same as Boehner’s. Obama doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the Back Porch Saloon, or West Chester, Ohio where Boehner lives.   Obama would like to take all those affluent people from Boehner’s district and milk them all dry until there is nothing left and then throw all that money to the communists in minority neighborhoods to be squandered away on lottery tickets and cream soda. Once the money is spent, they’ll be back with accusations of slavery, police brutality, and a congress that just won’t act and give away more free stuff. Meanwhile, the debt clock is continuing to tick in the wrong direction and in another two years it will be pushing $20 trillion dollars.

So Chris Stewart had it coming. He got caught playing the game of Washington politics that does nothing for the people of the nation—but everything for the parasites who work the Beltway. Voting for Boehner was a ringing endorsement of complacency and mediocrity. It was a vote for a swell guy who will continue to play the role of Charlie Brown trying to kick the football by a Lucy who will just pull it away at the last-minute. Obama is holding the football for Boehner to kick, and like always, he will pull it away at the last-minute. Because to these Capital Hill idiots, the whole thing is just a game of wealth redistribution. No, Boehner is not one of them—he’s not trying to take over America, he’s trying to save it. But he’s a naive, gullible, do-gooder in the manner of Charlie Brown—full of good intentions, but unable to outmaneuver the slick Chicago insurgent holding the football. Boehner can’t beat Obama at anything—ever—yet congress just threw their support behind a sure loss of the next two years, and they are trying to sell it as a good strategy? That is what’s wrong with politics. We don’t have two years to play this game. Because the game is already over—there is nothing to barter with from Republicans anymore—but to sanction the victimhood of Obama and his communist insurgents. And that is a job too big for John Boehner’s mild sensibilities and small town ethics.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

‘Quotes from a Teenage Mind’: Paul Townsend’s wonderfully honest book

Paul Townsend was born in Canterbury, England. Over the summer of 2004 he fell in love with an enchanting young lady who happened to live in Cincinnati, Ohio. He wrote a book about that experience which is now out and available at the link below. This book contains quotes from notepads he kept between the ages of 17 and 19 years old. The quotes are the thoughts and inspirations he had while maintaining a long distance relationship throughout his teenage years while traveling across vast oceans, transporting himself through mysterious unknown airports, and working his ass off on a journey that required him to leave behind everything he ever knew for a strange mysterious land and the obscure family that housed him during a decade of courting this young lady. I know this story intimately because the young lady he’s talking about is my oldest daughter.

http://www.amazon.com/Quotes-Teenage-Mind-Paul-Townsend-ebook/dp/B00RRCBMVK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420560089&sr=8-1&keywords=quotes+from+a+teenage+mind41woRPDs4mL__BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-v3-big,TopRight,0,-55_SX318_SY318_PIkin4,BottomRight,1,22_AA318_AA300_SH20_OU01_

I have a beautiful wife. So I knew when my children who were girls reached that dreadful age of puberty that I would be dealing with an onslaught of boys who would want to stick their whatevers into them as sexual conquests—and as a father it was my job to stop them—so to save my children’s innocence for as long as possible. For young girls innocence is extremely valuable, it is the kind of capital that can get them good mates later in life when they want to start families, so I made it my point to protect them from this corrosive element of human nature. And because of my wife—it was obvious that my kids wouldn’t grow up to look like an elephant’s ass. So I had to come up with something quick to help them help themselves.

On a trip through Spaceship Earth at the Epcot Center in Florida my oldest daughter noticed that intercontinental internet connectivity was just coming online in 2003 and she showed an interest in it. So for the following Christmas I bought both of my girls their very first computers. Of course everyone thought my wife and I were crazy because there was tremendous fear at the time of online predators, but for me I was more concerned about the boys in the nearby neighborhoods who were catting around near our home with increased frequency. So I had to try something radical.

Being an avid video game player I knew how much better those realities can sometimes be as opposed to real-life ones, so it was my hope that my kids would be so interested in that new computer environment that they would stay home and stay safe where I could lean over their shoulder and help explain things to them just a bit longer before the world cast its ugly claws into their virtue. To make sure of it I bought them both a new massive online game called Star Wars Galaxies, which was a world of its own. I knew that my girls would meet people on the game and that they’d play house with other players. But it was safer than the real life so I encouraged it.

It didn’t take long for a parade of young men to begin trying to have relationships with my daughter. In online games if a player just has a feminine name they’ll be hit on constantly. But it taught my kids how to deal with such things in the safety of their own home with their parents close by to advise, so it worked out. My kids learned how to say no to people who were unscrupulous, and how to be politely nice to those who they might have been interested in without over-committing themselves. Soon my daughter had a boyfriend who worked with her on the game to build entire cities, establish a vast economy, and to learn the first of firsts about puppy love.

I felt that such a relationship was harmless because the boy in question happened to live across the ocean so it wasn’t like my daughter was going to climb out of the window at night to jump into a car with him and run off to marry. Two times a year we’d arrange for the boy to come to the United States where we’d entertain him at first for a few weeks. And after a few years of dating, he came for the entire summer and Christmas break. Their relationship was quite pure and old-fashioned, which is exactly how I had hoped it would be. Being from England the young man had a lot of manners about himself, and he had good parents who taught him to be respectful, so I was happy with the kid.

He made it clear that he wasn’t just interested in my daughter, but her entire family and he made a point to learn all he could from me—which I was always happy to oblige. I always teach young people with a non-invasive manner of hands off so that they come to the answers often on their own with only gentle nudges by my hand. That is the best way for things to take when people invest in themselves instead of doing things through coercion and manipulation. And Paul was very receptive, so we had a nice experience with him, and he and my daughter eventually married and now have a nice home in Liberty Township—and are entirely a successful young couple.

 As a couple they stepped over most of the pitfalls that most young people get snared in and they did it because both of them were deeply in love with philosophy at a very young age. Part of that was Star Wars allowed them to live that life. The world of Star Wars was far more important to them than their school day experiences. In fact, my daughter finished her high school early with online classes that she played while doing missions in Star Wars. Now as a couple in their mid to late twenties putting behind them their first decade of a relationship they are everything that a father could have wanted for his daughter way back on that amusement park ride at the Epcot Center. It was a good idea then, and it really in hindsight likely saved my kids from a terrible teenage existence. The kind of values that we taught them prior to that pivotal moment was in stark contrast to the outside world and it would have forced them to compromise themselves—as it does for most young people so that by the time young people become old people, they are only fractions of their hopes and dreams. Paul at the time knew that he was embarking on something very unique especially in a modern context—so he wrote down those thoughts along the way.

The result of this decade long adventure is this very fine little book called, Quotes from a Teenage Mind. It is deceptively simple, and short, but for the price it is a marvel of purity coming from a young man who literally put everything on the line to have the love of his life. Now, many years later, he is an American citizen. He has brought his entire family to the United States and they are also very successful and live in West Chester. He paved the way with sheer willpower and love to do something that is very unique—and he wrote it all down. His story is a remarkable one as he is the modern Atlas in every category. Even when he could have, he never, ever wavered from his goals and carried literally everything upon his back. He took the ultimate hero journey and has survived to share the experience with others. Every young person in the world should read his story for inspiration because it is hard to know such people as they are as rare as the most precious gem. Yet he shares that rarity with the world for the simple cost of a download on Amazon.com.

I am very proud of Paul and my daughter for doing something that many thought was impossible. There are many weddings that hope to capture the sincerity of the type of love that these two have for each other and who so young maintain such a mature relationship. But for them it started under unusual experimental conditions and bloomed into a beautiful thing largely because Paul Townsend was as genuine of a person who currently roams the earth as there is and I can only thank God that it took the vast reaches of the World Wide Web to find him in Canterbury, England living in the shadow of Orlando Bloom. Without the internet neither he nor my daughter would have found each other and all the wonderful things they have done since or in the future would have happened. This book because it captures the moment in time where the hard decisions were made and what types of thoughts lifted Paul from one place to another is important to anyone asking similar questions. Those words have immense value to those clinging for life in a confusing world starving for inspiration. For them—Paul Townsend is the man.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

 

 

 

 

 

Being Judgmental: Be sure to throw rocks at glass houses often

 

I have heard some of the dumbest things over the last few weeks that I believe I have ever heard from the largest contingent of individual minds. Most of the reason is that it has been the Holiday Season and that inevitably puts you in touch with people you only speak to a few times a year. Between all the Christmas parties on a professional end, and all the family functions, the last two weeks of December puts you in touch with a lot of people if you happen to know them. Of course conversations spawn from these interactions which for me is often frustrating and by the time I enter the new year I am ready to never speak to another soul and return to my stacks of books as my favorite pastime due to the let down in finding out how little is on everyone’s minds. This is a typical reaction at least in my house but this year for whatever reason it was much worse. I would attribute this to the emergence of the demographic group—the 25 to 35 year olds who feel that their time for respect has come and that they have arrived to the adult world. What is discovered when talking to them is that they have microwaved intellects that begin as a frozen turkey only to be blasted for five minutes on high to emerge as a steaming carcass on the outside. But inside they are still frozen solid and are completely unthawed for consumption. This is most realized in the most usual banter that comes from them—and those pathetic souls who are in their middle years who wish to be just like them—that humans are not to pass judgment against each other, so to hide their evils. I can’t say how many times over the last two weeks that I have heard “don’t judge” as part of the dialogue.

Anyone who has had interactions with the Church has heard the Matthew quote from 7:1-6, “We must judge ourselves and judge our own acts, but not to make our word a law to everybody. We must not judge rashly, nor pass judgment upon our brother without any ground. We must not make the worst of people. Here is just reproof to those who quarrel with their brethren for small faults while they allow themselves in greater ones. Some sins are as motes, while others are as beams; some as a gnat, others as a camel. Not that there is any sin little, if it be a mote, or a splinter, it is in the eye; if a gnat, it is in the throat; both are painful and dangerous, and we cannot be easy or well till they are got out. That which charity teachers us to call but a splinter in our brother’s eye, true repentances and godly sorrow will teach us to call a beam in our own. It is as strange that a man can be in a sinful, miserable condition, and not be aware of it, as that a man should have a beam in his eye, and not considered it; but the god of this world blinds their minds. Here is a good rule for reprovers; first reform thyself.” Or in other words, don’t throw rocks in glass houses, we are all sinners and therefore not qualified to judge others—so leave that business to the church, pay your offerings and leave your neighbor be.  That is part one of this tragedy of modern times. Part two is that the secular public school system has used this ingrained tendency to further destroy in young minds the natural process of being human—and that is to think—and therefore to judge one’s surroundings and path through life.

When it is being demanded that one should not judge another in either the Biblical or secular context, what is expected is for one to turn off their minds and simply not think. Those people are expected to just leave the business of judgment to others in the church or some unknown deity interpreted by mankind itself. Just leave judgment to the authorities—more or less. Well, the result is the kind of sheer stupidity that I heard over the 2014 Holiday which led to my opinion about Facebook. (CLICK HERE TO REVIEW) Only an idiot would turn off their judgment to endorse some of the vile things uttered from the mouths of a very spoiled demographic catered to for their entire lives only to be unleashed unprepared upon the world to assume that they are done cooking like the quickly microwaved Turkey—hot to the touch but ice-cold and completely unthawed in the center. While the Church has played its part in the debacle the ultimate failure is in the public school and college system.

Many of us noticed this ten years ago when we first started fighting school levies when it was obvious that the public school system was failing miserably in teaching kids fundamentals about life and navigating through it—and charging tax payers premium fees for the service which essentially was a baby sitting opportunity for working parents too busy with their careers for the job. Now we are seeing the result of that chaotic lifestyle in these young people who are suddenly entering adulthood justifying the sins of their own loved ones with a Christian mantra against judgment backed with the secular public schools advocating placing their faith in the greater good of society rather than in their own intelligence.

Judgment is part of the human experience. We do it when we drive a car, when we decide what kind of food to eat, what we do for a living, how we conduct virtually every part of our life. Without judgment, we are rudderless animals poised for self-destruction. It is completely asinine to expect a family to sit back and watch a child ruin their lives on drugs while running around with a terrible crowd of miscreants without passing judgment on the kid or the people who paved the way toward that type of social destruction. Then for other family members to swarm to the defense of the bad behavior under the guise of not judging—as if the matter should be left to God through a repentance process. Meanwhile, evil is allowed to spread from person to person like a common cold to infect many instead of a few and everyone is just supposed to stand around and be happy about it? No. That is not how things work and anybody who then uses the Bible as a crutch has not studied the Bible properly. Not passing judgment on others allows evil to spread like fire among dry timber—fast and furious. I would argue in addition that the Biblical passivity toward judgment was caused by faults in the minds of man while interpreting “God’s Word” during a time when the Church wanted to rule the world as the premier authority on all things—namely science, so it can’t be completely trusted and only “judgment” will allow such a conclusion.

Another derogatory comment that I have personally heard all my life is that it is bad to have a “Holier than thou” approach to life—as if to say nobody is perfect. This idea that I was perfectly willing to throw rocks in glass houses knowing full well that I didn’t live in one, was somehow bad.  It has led me to a lot of trouble not because of anything illegal or improper, but because it stood in stark contrast to the surrounding world and their values formed by thoughtless surrender to non-judgment. The “holier than thou” mantra has been cast in my direction to my beginnings including the bus ride that I have talked about before when I was in the fourth grade and a pack of fifth graders told me they’d beat me up if I didn’t take the hit of speed they were trying to force down my throat on the bus ride back home from school. I threw the pills out of the window as I vowed never to take any drugs of any kind. I got into a big fight and hurt some of the kids and I got into a lot of trouble—and that wasn’t the last time. I did the same for many years to many more people all in a fight against the spread of drugs.

When it comes to young people I have earned the right to tell them they shouldn’t smoke, they shouldn’t do drugs, and they shouldn’t get drunk. I don’t do any of those things and I never have, and I never ever will. In regards to drinking it was always about showing that I could still command my senses against the current of alcohol consumption which is a practice I still embark on. In over a quarter century of adult life there isn’t one person who could come forward and declare they saw Rich Hoffman drunk and senseless anywhere at any time. That’s not to say that I haven’t drank 5 to 6 dunkel mugs at the Hofbrauhaus in Newport just because I enjoyed the old German beverage. But for me it’s always been about mastering command over intoxicants, not in surrendering to them—ever. Mind over matter in every case. If beer and alcohol were outlawed it wouldn’t hurt my feelings in the least, and I think drugs of every kind, like cocaine, heroine, meth, and marijuana should be not only be illegal, but should be removed from planet earth and launched into a nuclear furnace at the center of the universe. I hate them that much. I hate drugs and I hate drug abusers. I won’t vote for Rand Paul just because of his loose stance on drugs—that’s how bad I hate drugs in our culture. But I walk the talk and always have—as I do with everything else in my life.

Being “holier than thou” is a good thing. It is good because it makes those conducting their life in a bad way feel bad—and that is “good.” And to determine that holier than thou judgments have to be made. It doesn’t make a person who despises drugs and their abuse among loved ones a hypocrite because they don’t want to associate with the dregs of society. It makes them honest. And honesty is the core tenet of any Biblical study. For those who do wish to pass judgment—which the world needs a lot more of—live up to your opinion—stand by it through thick and thin. Don’t allow the youth trained toward evil to waver your thoughts as “old” and “outdated.” To surrender to this opinion is to allow evil to spread without restraint, and that isn’t what the world needs.

And to those who point and call those of us with opinions as hypercritic aristocrats, and violators of Christian doctrine, look at your pathetic lives and declare honestly that not having judgment in your life has been good in any way at all. The failures of the present point back to that long ago conversation in the kitchen of our youth when we had the argument about marijuana smoking and whether or not it was harmful. Look at your lives now and what that permissiveness has done to not only your lives, but those of your children. And the only way you can hide the crime and own stupidity is to insist that nobody judge you, that everybody is a sinner, and that nobody is any better. But guess what—they are. And that is a grim reality that all the evasion in the world can’t hide with backward chants, Ouija boards, and cries for help beyond the grave to rescue the circumstances of the present due to extremely poor judgment. By the way all those things have been called out against me by people who didn’t want me to “judge” them, and I have learned to deal not just with man, but the armies of thuggish demons who are so easily seduced by those Ouija boards to assist the feeble-minded in trade for some merit. I know a lot about this issue—believe me. The overman concept was forged in those fires.

I am holier than thou because I can be. And I’m very proud of it. It is the best weapon to fight evil with, and an armament that I wish everyone in the world to possess. If I have it my way, which eventually is my goal—they will. It starts with not feeling guilty and proceeds to be forged with honesty, contemplation and the willingness to move out of a glass house so that you can then throw rocks at it. And it ends with passing judgment often and with great fanfare so that the work of evil has nowhere to hide under the scrutiny of intelligence. So my advice to you dear reader is judge, and judge often and feel not an ounce of guilt about anything. Because “they” use that guilt as leverage against your opinion—and that is how evil spreads and the good work of good is destroyed forever.

Thank goodness the Holiday is over. My books are much better company.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development