Tag: Free Will

The Choice Between Good and Bad: Something special that nobody else these days will give you

Not to continue bashing the Disney Company every day, but because of their placement within the pantheon of cultural standards, they make themselves such a large target—by default.  Matt Clark and I in the video clip below had a rather powerful show for talk radio on WAAM in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  I like that station even though it’s a small market enterprise because it’s still a family business for them and they are real patriots who believe in traditional America as opposed to the giant conglomerates at Clear Channel which are failing by the business quarter.  It could be said that I am a professional at lots of things in life and one thing that is consistent across my résumé in all endeavors is that I specialize culture building.  I understand the signs of decline and I can read the upticks—and many of the reasons I have been positive in regard to Disney is because of its history in preserving traditional American values.  But, over the last two decades they have been increasingly a progressive organization and that makes them a prime concern for me regarding culture building not only within the United States but also in regard to the entire world.  That is the nature of the conversation that Matt Clark and I pondered during his radio show which will appear on 1600 WAAM during the weekend of January 2nd 2016 at 1 PM.  If you’d like to hear the entire two-hour segment CLICK HERE.

I don’t think there is another radio or television broadcast where such an in-depth analysis of the situation concerning our modern problems can be heard.  I was trained by Joseph Campbell to read and understand mythology—the same place that George Lucas learned it from, so I am uniquely positioned to provide commentary that nobody on cable, network, or radio news can provide regarding Star Wars, terrorism and the cultural responsibility of the Disney company to resist putting metal detectors at their entrance and banning toy guns from their properties.  What is wrong in Disney and of course throughout the world is not related to security, it is in cultural values, which is what Matt and I focused on.  Matt is in fact such a good radio guy that he knows how to set up the topics to extract it from me—which is why these conversations are so interesting.

The problem starts with culture and understanding what makes it, is it a reactive thing built from didactic desires, or is it a product of intellectual necessity?  I would propose the later while Disney is currently functioning from the former.  They believe that because they lack a strong CEO type who understands the complexity of culture building the way Walt Disney or George Lucas innately did.  As a company of second-handers they have had to mimic the behavior of their former leaders, like Lucas and Disney, they are clueless in understanding how the responsibility for building culture falls on their shoulders.  Similarly, they are clueless to understand when there is trouble how to deal with a crises.  Because they are second-handers, people who live through others for their sustenance, they assume that somebody understands a situation better than they do, leaving them prone to put too much trust into governments and other collective forces to guide their decisions.  That is why they prefer committees and boards of directors to make decisions instead of strong individualized leadership.

Disney made a huge mistake with The Force Awakens, every toy and commercial mostly featured the bad guy from the latest Star Wars movie to sell those products.  In a desire to recover their investment into the film franchise and to get their market projections, they rely on marketing the villains as a way to guarantee their financial expectations.  The net result is that the social impact on the population in general will be negative—kids are more interested in playing the bad guy when interacting with their peers than the good guys, which is a major problem.  Just a few decades ago kids used to fight over who was going to be the good guy when playing among each other.  Now nobody wants to be the good guy, and that is the fault of culture.  What makes up that culture is every progressive who has pushed for less heroic characters in movies giving good reviews to flawed heroes as opposed to the squeaky clean types who don’t drink, smoke, or have sex before marriage.  Our culture through music, movies, and television have put bad behavior on a pedestal and criticized good behavior.  So it shouldn’t be any surprise that young kids fight over being the bad guy when playing instead of being a good guy.   When there is nothing marketed for a new Star Wars movie but the bad guys, and the good guys are killed, or appear to be losing all the time, the behavior that children will mimic in their daily lives will reflect those priorities.

When Disney makes a film, or a television story of any kind, they must be careful not to allow the good guys to appear subservient to the bad guys in any way.  The progressive experimentation with the gray areas of life is not healthy.   It might make some Santa Monica bar slut feel better about her decisions in life for being a sperm receptacle during her twenties and early thirties, but it will not help young girls in the future not make similar mistakes.  Hollywood is full of these young women who work in the industry and party at the bars around Wilshire Blvd and they think they are the smartest people in the world because they manage to show their boobs to Quentin Tarantino at a party, who is essentially the same little boy growing up in Knoxville, Tennessee that he has always been. I like Tarantino, we share a taste for Sergio Leone movies and car chases, but he’s not very sophisticated as a filmmaker. Yet because his movies feature good guys who go bad, often, and bad guys who do good, there is mass appeal to the gutter sluts and social misfits of our culture. But Tarantino currently sets the standard on Wilshire and those slutty Santa Monica types who put on heels during the day and strip it off for anybody at night create market value based on their intellectual assumptions. Marketing executives assume that those Hollywood filmmakers and the agents who dangle from the industry know what they are doing, so they follow right along, and soon the entire industry is copying off each other because nobody has an original idea about anything because nobody dare go against the trends of the day which are often set in those Santa Monica, and New York City bars by skanks, whores, and insecure social climbers.

Meanwhile a kid at Wal-Mart wants a new Star Wars toy and they see Kylo Ryn on the cover who looks like he’s always beating the good guys—otherwise he wouldn’t be featured so prominently on the marketing material. After five or six years of playing the bad guy, when the kid hits adolescence and has to make decisions about, drugs, and individual integrity, they stand on the foundations created for them by the toys they played with and the lessons they learned in their youth. If the message is confusing, that bad guys sometimes aren’t so bad and that good guys are often just as bad as good guys, then that person will grow up to be a messed up adult. And before anybody says they disagree, just look around at the adults you know dear reader, the world is full of such people—and this is how they were made. The instruction for proper intellectual value and social relationships is directly built from the type of stories that we tell our kids. It’s OK to market those stories under a capitalist banner, but there is a responsibility in doing so.

Now, I know the next thing the curious reader here will say is, if I had the opportunity to make millions of dollars selling stories featuring bad guys over good guys I would as well. Well, I have a long history with this, a background that had personal instruction by Sol Stein, Linda Nagata, and even a little help from Skip Press in putting me directly in contact with Steven Spielberg’s agent for a project I was working on. I have looking back on it a lot of experience with Hollywood, so I know what I’m talking about and let me say this. When given the opportunity to have a lot of money by writing bad guys, or sticking with my good guys, I have never surrendered my position. It may not be what the market desires right now, but I refuse to participate in the perpetuation of evil by promoting bad guys over good—and by supporting the gray over black and white morality, it accomplishes just as bad of an end result. I have forgone personal wealth to do the right thing, so I expect others to do so as well—especially the Disney Company. I’ve known quite a lot of those skanks, and whores in Hollywood and believe me, they aren’t all women—and I turned them away several times—because it was the right thing to do. So for the same reasons, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for those who do sell-out for some quick money.

As talked about with Matt Clark, the cause of the problems in our culture will not be solved with metal detectors and gun restrictions—the source is in broken culture perpetuated irresponsibility by the weakest and worst that our society has produced. If we really want to be safe and to have a good and productive society then we must focus on separating the good guys from the bad and avoiding designations of gray and muddied fantasies of equality where the bad are placed at the same level as the virtuous. The root cause of most of our societal misery around the world is in this very simple concept. And the only way out of it is to be good. That is why during my next show on WAAM I will focus on just that type of concept and will offer society something they won’t get anywhere else. A path toward virtue in America once again—be sure to tune in, because I will promise this, you won’t get this kind of show anywhere in the world in any media format. It will be one of a kind. My path through life is very unique and I am offering those important lessons for those who are best positioned to utilize them. I wouldn’t ask anybody to do what I have not been willing to do myself, if I can make decisions based on ethics for the benefit of culture building, then so can Disney—and everyone in entertainment.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Quick Cal Eilrich on WAAM 1600: Rich Hoffman hosting January 9th 2016

 

In a capitalist society it was always supposed to be like this, the best and most competitive are supposed to be free to perform at their maximum potential without being restricted by inferior minds.  The Internet may have been invented as a means for population control by government influence, but it has turned out to be one of the best aspects of laissez-faire capitalism to emerge essentially since Adam Smith wrote An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776).  And in the United States, it has been one of the finest examples of free speech.  It allows someone like me, who can run circles around most people with sheer effort to by-pass the gate keepers of the “professional” media to get a message out that would otherwise not be heard.  I have known a lot of reporters over the years and I can’t think of any who live the way I do, where they may work 12 hours, read about two hours each day, then turn around and do 2 hours of live radio on WAAM in Ann Arbor, Michigan.   Typically, they only do about a quarter of that work per day, and that’s why their reports often are terrible, and lazy. In that regard, largely because of the power of competition, new media, and the productive acquisition of massive amounts of information, I have the opportunity to be on WAAM radio with Matt Clark for three weekends in a row.  Matt and I did a live radio show on Wednesday December 23rd which was used for the next two Saturday shows on WAAM 1600. Then on January 9th while Matt is in Disney World for his annual marathon run, I am hosting in his place with a very special guest.  If you missed the Wednesday live shown, broadcast around the world, here it is—along with a few sample video clips as teasers of the content.  As usual, we covered a lot of ground.

https://soundcloud.com/clarkcast/the-force-awakens-review-and-the-fate-of-disney-12-26-15-podcast

Regarding that special guest, of course when given the opportunity I’m going to give listeners at WAAM exactly what they want.  I’ve done plenty of radio in my life, and I’ve listened to talk radio for longer than I’ve participated on the air.  As a kid who grew up in sight of The Voice of America radio station towers in Mason, Ohio I understand the power of a voice over the airwaves.  I also understand how wonderful it is to work on a car during Saturday afternoon in a well-lit garage next to a double stacked Craftsman tool box full of gadgets and gizmos accumulated over twenty previous Christmas seasons and to listen to the soothing sound of logic from talk radio.  Both of my grandparents had farms and constantly had WLW radio on in their barns—it was for them a kind of verbal newspaper that they could listen to as they milked cows or prepped equipment for bailing hay.  So to thank the WAAM audience and the technical crew at that fine “independent” radio station which is a rarity these days in the marketplace, I’m going to give listeners a special treat on January 9th at 1 PM.  Click the following link to listen live at that time.

http://www.waamradio.com/

If there is trouble at that link for whatever reason, then try this one.

http://www.clarkcast.com/

As readers here know, I work very hard—as I always have.  I also push myself often by stepping out of my comfort zone.  My name is typically equitable with bullwhip work as I am one of the few in the world who have mastered that particular weapon.   Bullwhip artists are a very small minority of the global population and I am among the best of them in competency—but—that’s not enough for me.  I’m entirely too young to be satisfied with just that on my résumé.  It would be safe to do so, and to point at my record of personal successes, my public speaking, my family and a half-dozen other hobbies and say that all those things were enough.  But they aren’t.  There is something I’ve always wanted to do, but didn’t have the time or resources to apply to it, so it’s always been on the back burner for me, and that is Cowboy Fast Draw.  In a lot of ways, I became good at the bullwhips because it was a western art that I could practice in my backyard, or in the neighborhoods I lived in without scaring all the people who lived around me—too much.  But I have always loved guns as I have seen them as natural extensions of Adam Smth’s invention of capitalism.  While the rest of the world wanted to maintain an aristocracy on production, capitalism freed the best and brightest to conduct their efforts free of restriction, and the gun ensured that personal protection from third-party authoritarian intentions.   Much of the anxiety that the world outside the United States has toward capitalism and guns can be traced back to this basic relationship between the two.  So I’ve always had a love for guns and wanted to make them a larger part of my daily life.

I recently conquered a project that I had been working very hard on—a business enterprise that was very difficult—and I promised myself that if I got through it to a successful conclusion that I was going to purchase a Ruger Vaquero and take up the skill of Cowboy Fast Draw.  I could have done it a few years sooner, but I had to complete one major task before beginning another, so I waited to force myself to complete the targeted intention—which took several years to punch through.  I knew some of the shooters from the Ohio Fast Draw Association as they competed next to me at the annual Annie Oakley Western Showcase in Greenville, Ohio each year while I performed with bullwhips.  But I wasn’t sure how to get started.  The very day that I completed the business task, I purchased my Vaquero.  Then I contacted the organization that my guest runs, the Cowboy Fast Draw Association and I joined as a member.  Then I purchased a practice shooting lane system, and ordered a custom-made holster from Bob Mernickle. 

I was quite impressed by Cal Eilrich, a.k.a Quick Cal who is the executive director of CFDA not just because he is a very accomplished professional shooter, but because he is running Cowboy Fast Draw as an expanding sport that is very organized and well-equipped.  As my packages began to arrive from CFDA I was impressed that everything I needed, the .45 casings, the wax bullets, the timers and targets, virtually everything was able to be obtained from CFDA—and everything worked.  The quality of the products had the markings of a man who was very meticulous and polished at a field of endeavor and that elevated my interest greatly.  Cowboy Fast Draw wasn’t any longer just something I wanted to drive myself into a new skill set, but it was a way of thinking that I considered important to the American way of life.  I found out months later that Quick Cal was also a fan of the novel Atlas Shrugged, so I have been able to plunge myself into this new sport with a voracious hunger knowing that the end result falls within my overall philosophy.  It wasn’t just another skill to learn, it was a way of life.

Quick Cal has been a competitive shooter since joining the Chicago Colts FDC in 1968, at age 15.  He won his first World Championship in 1972 and in 1973 hosted his first contest. He went on to be the Match Director of two National Championships and three World Championships during the 1970s at the Hacienda Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas along with several state and regional tournaments.  He served as an officer in the Mid-Western Fast Draw Association, Western Fast Draw Association and served as Chairman of the World Fast Draw Association.

In the 1980s he became very active in Practical Pistol Shooting.  While competing at the top-level of the sport he built the largest IPSC club in the country and founded and served 9 years as Match Director of the Western States IPSC Championship in Reno. He was an original Range Master and Instructor for USPSA, while also being a top competitor and earning a spot on the National Team in 1990.  He has been a firearms instructor for law enforcement and security companies and still teaches defensive shooting and is a NRA Instructor.

In the late 90s he started getting very involved in SASS and won a national championship as a top shooter.  In 1999, he created the original SASS RO Program and served as Chairman of the RO Committee for 9 years, he was inducted into the SASS Hall of Fame in 2011.  He also founded a SASS club, The High Plains Drifters, and built a shooting range that is still in use and created and served as Match Director of the Western States CAS Championship for 10 years.

In 2002, Brad Hemmah called Quick Cal for advice on guns and holsters in setting up what was to become CFDA.  In 2004, Quick Cal attended the National Championship in Meridian, ID and won the event, and recognized the potential that Cowboy Fast Draw had.  Fast Draw had been Quick Cal’s first love in shooting sports, he dreamed as a young man that the sport could somehow become much bigger than it was if only given the chance.

Quick Cal has always believed in giving back to the shooting sports because they have added so much to his life.  He now serves as the Director of CFDA and is determined to give the Sport of Cowboy Fast Draw a chance to build itself into an organization that can last for future generations to enjoy.

To learn more about him, here are his résumés in greater detail. 

  1. Shooting Accomplishments

  2. Sport Administration & Firearms Instructor

As a fan of talk radio, I know what I like and don’t like on a Saturday afternoon, and likely, you feel the same way.  So I promise that this radio show featuring Quick Cal will be entertaining, and informative—and it will be my intention to make it so exciting that you’ll want to join CFDA after our broadcast.  I am thankful to Quick Cal because in essence what he gave me which I wasn’t sure about when I got started, was a way to shoot my .45 Vaquero at my home in a pretty suburban setting.  The wax bullets and the 209 shotgun primers that are used in Cowboy Fast Draw along with the targeting system utilized make it so I can practice target shooting right in my garage without disturbing my neighbors.  I built a special backdrop to keep the bullets contained in a safe way, but the wax bullets do not shoot through plywood, so there is no danger to anybody outside my home.  And the noise is about as loud as a well charged cap gun.  This makes shooting at home an entirely new reality that everyone can enjoy.  A shooting range could be easily set up in a basement or garage so long as practice distances of 15’ to 21’ can be maintained.  Where shooting radio shows often get boring is that often the talk is about things that most of the audience can’t participate in.  Getting out to a shooting range for a lot of people is difficult.  But shooting at your home is something anybody can do, and it’s a wonderful way to expand the usefulness, and participation in the Second Amendment.  People tend to value something more if they can participate, and Cowboy Fast Draw allows shooters to partake within the comfort of their own homes and that expansion of utilization is largely an invention of Cowboy Fast Draw under the direction of Quick Cal.

http://www.cowboyfastdraw.com/index.php/about-the-cfda

So be sure to tune in on January 9th 2016 at 1 PM on WAAM.  If you want to call in during the show dial (734) 971-1600 and we’ll get you on the air.  It will be a fun show, and educational, but more than anything, it will make working in the garage, or wherever that much more enjoyable.  It’s the kind of show that comes straight out of competition, you won’t get this kind of thing on CNN or Fox, but because of deregulation and the marketplace of the imaginative, you can get it on WAAM and more specifically, the Clarkcast and Matt Clark’s mini, media empire.  It is good to push yourself in a free society, and the first step toward that monumental endeavor is to turn on WAAM and listen to an enlightening interview with Quick Cal of the Cowboy Fast Draw Association and enjoy something you won’t get anywhere else.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Why Disney Destroyed Han Solo: Progressive activism and attacking “white, American, family men”

I knew there was trouble on June 3rd 2015 when Marvel comics announced that Han Solo had an ex-wife in its comic #6 issue.  I didn’t want to believe it, but after later seeing The Force Awakens, I am 100% sure that what I was watching Disney do was on the scale of the old medieval churches in Europe re-writing history with their printing of Bibles to control the mass population through religion.  Star Wars was becoming something of a religion around the world, and now that the Disney Corporation had paid 4 billion dollars for it they were taking great liberties with very important characters in an attempt to change their original meaning to the overall story.   They didn’t have to, because the property had already been developed by George Lucas over three decades into a positive household name with no signs of abating.  Even more alarming was that Han’s revisionist wife was a black woman named Sana Solo proving that Disney was more interested in establishing progressive values in their ownership of Star Wars instead of just continuing the story that so many loved.   Disney was deliberately smearing the market impression that Han Solo had on the Star Wars stories and they were doing it not to be more successful, but because they wanted to change the meaning and mythic impact of the overall story arc.  That is why if you were listening to WAAM today at 1 PM in the afternoon, you would have heard Matt Clark and I dismantling Disney’s ownership of the Star Wars franchise.  If you missed it, you can hear it again here and above this paragraph in two parts:

http://dorksideoftheforce.com/2015/06/03/meet-sana-solo-han-solos-wife-star-wars-6/

I am quite a believer that the Bible has been revised to such an extent by political forces over the years that it has lost much of its original meaning—so I don’t trust it.  One fine example is the missing Book of Enoch which would have been an important part of Genesis.  It is not considered by Jews and many other Christian groups to be part of the Biblical “canon” and knowing that one can only wonder what else has been left out, or added to the stories that have made three of the world’s religions, Jews, Christians and Muslims.  Like it or not, Star Wars has become something of a religion.  Another few hundred years and it will likely have more influence over mass populations than Christianity does today—and that all starts with these seemingly simple stories being shown in our lifetime.  So it concerned me greatly when Han Solo was introduced in Marvel #6 with a black wife—which I didn’t believe at the time.  My wife and I talked about it a bit, I was then involved in a large motorcycle accident which soaked up a lot of time and attention.  I was also involved in a massive international project that was taking a lot of time.  But my concern was so great that I stopped buying Star Wars merchandise at that moment.  I had been reading the books and comics to alleviate the daily pressure associated with my life.  But upon the release of Star Wars #6 under Marvel Comics, I stopped, immediately.

When Marvel took over the comics which were supposedly Pablo Hidalgo approved from the Star Wars story group six months earlier from Dark Horse I was curious that they didn’t show a desire to connect the story material between the two publishing conglomerates.  I didn’t let that bother me too much because comics I don’t consider to be as important as novels—especially the New York Times bestselling books that had taken over the Star Wars canon for two decades in a really positive way.  But under Disney’s ownership of Marvel they had introduced a black woman to be Han Solo’s wife in an effect to emphasize negative character traits of one of the most popular characters in Star Wars.  Solo was a white guy superman type of character, so I wondered if Disney’s direction was a political one.  Later when I saw The Force Awakens, it clarified it emphatically.   Disney had revised the Star Wars canon personally created by George Lucas to make the stories more progressive politically.  They were essentially destroying a major character for the sake of editing the impact the character had on established mythology.  This was equivalent to the way that progressives have attacked Thomas Jefferson as a real historic figure with the Sally Hemings allegations, or to attack Jesus and his relationship with Mary Magdalene, the prostitute in the Bible who traveled with Jesus and was there at his execution.  We have witnessed revised history taking place in our public schools and colleges for the purpose of erasing history and now it was happening in Star Wars—an entertainment property that was just supposed to be for fun.  Yet Disney was purposely destroying the character of Han Solo because of the impact he had on so many fans as being a very strong, and reliable character. My suspicions were confirmed at the beginning of September when a gay character was included in the new Star Wars novel Aftermath, which I reported a warning to Disney upon release.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. 

I’m not against black characters in Star Wars, or even alternative sexual types.  However, Star Wars has always been an updated western, a space opera intended to communicate mythic stories that propelled our society with foundation philosophies.  Until Star Wars comic #6, then the novel Aftermath followed by the confirmation of all my concerns with the movie The Force Awakens, I felt I could trust Lucasfilm with a story canon that was personally managed by George Lucas.   I could read a story in a book or comic and believe that it had meaning to the overall collection of stories that had been canon until the Disney acquisition of Lucasfilm from George Lucas.  Now in a very short time, Disney didn’t even try to cover their intentions with subtlety.   They disrespected the long-time fans so much that they counted on sheer numbers to justify their collective activism of taking a deeply traditional story like Star Wars and turning it into a progressive mess.  Disney was showing itself to be much more interested in selling the politics of the Obama White House than in just telling a story set in a galaxy far far away.   Disney was promoting gay sex and interracial marriages over protecting the value of what made Star Wars successful to begin with.  So for me, the only Star Wars canon is the one that took place before Disney took over.  The last official book in the Star Wars canon under the guidance of George Lucas was the very good book The Crucible.  It takes place 45 years after the Battle of Yavin in the film A New Hope.   After watching A Force Awakens, which takes place around 15 years earlier I had thought that there was some time travel going on that gave the Star Wars story group an out if things went wrong with their progressive activism, but I’m now convinced that it’s too late.  Disney executives have made progressive concepts their priority which has ruined Star Wars forever, they can’t go back now—they are too committed.  Here is how The Crucible went and is officially the way that Han Solo and the other characters of the George Lucas canon rode off into the sunset of storytelling. 

http://www.starwarstimeline.net/

When Han and Leia Solo arrive at Lando Calrissian’s Outer Rim mining operation to help him thwart a hostile takeover, their aim is just to even up the odds and lay down the law. Then monstrous aliens arrive with a message, and mere threats escalate into violent sabotage with mass fatalities. When the dust settles, what began as corporate warfare becomes a battle with much higher stakes–and far deadlier consequences.

Now Han, Leia, and Luke team up once again in a quest to defeat a dangerous adversary bent on galaxy-wide domination. Only this time, the Empire is not the enemy. It is a pair of ruthless geniuses with a lethal ally and a lifelong vendetta against Han Solo. And when the murderous duo gets the drop on Han, he finds himself outgunned in the fight of his life. To save him, and the galaxy, Luke and Leia must brave a gauntlet of treachery, terrorism, and the untold power of an enigmatic artifact capable of bending space, time, and even the Force itself into an apocalyptic nightmare.

I have praised George Lucas often because I think he’s a great filmmaker.   He is too liberal for me, but I respect him greatly.  He does have a black wife, which I don’t think is a big deal and he supports Obama.  I gave high praise for his film Red Tails because it was an important story that needed to be told.   When he sold Star Wars to Disney he did it because he was 70 and wanted to retire—but he had a massive company with over 2000 employees.  It would have been better for Star Wars if Lucas would have just maintained control of his property, but then he couldn’t just let his employees rot—at least in his mind.  So he sold Star Wars to a corporation he thought might preserve it, and washed his hands of the responsibility of being a major employer.  I can understand all that.  I thought it was a good move so long as Disney respected what George Lucas had built.

There is a lot more of George Lucas in Han Solo than in any other character I think.  I’m sure George would say that he’s Artoo Detoo, or Yoda and that Star Wars is all about Luke Skywalker.  But Han Solo is the old drag racer that Lucas used to be—and in many ways still is.  I have read hundreds of Star Wars novels, most of them have Han Solo in the stories so I know the character very well—and he’s what George Lucas wanted to be.  And let me say, Han Solo would have never had a wife during A New Hope.  He had a long time girlfriend who was a drug addict prior to meeting Princess Leia, but he was not a sleep around.  He wanted to be as far away from attachments as possible to protect himself from the obligation of maintaining those relationships and violating his opportunities for freedom.  He wanted nothing more to limit his loyalties to his Wookie friend Chewbacca and to travel the galaxy in his hot rod Millennium Falcon.  Much of his gruffness toward others was an act, just as he deliberately kept the Millennium Falcon looking like a wreck to disguise the power within it—the ship was the embodiment of Han Solo himself.  Solo would have never had a wife, and once he did, he would have never left her. Han Solo is not the kind of character who gets drunk on Nar Shaddaa and wakes up with a wife.  Han Solo was the embodiment of all the cowboys that George Lucas grew up loving as a kid, and he created a character that modern kids could look up to.  That’s why he was always my favorite character, so it was very easy for me to see the revisionist history that Disney was attempting to perform without getting caught.  Only, they got caught.  I know too much about all this stuff not to see it.  I know Star Wars not just from the surface but the structure of it—where it all started from the perspective of the Joseph Campbell Foundation.  I was a member way back when George Lucas was on the Board with Campbell’s wife Jean running things.  I’m not just a fan boy who didn’t want to see Han Solo killed in The Force Awakens.  I’ve studied history and I know the impact of mythology, and why politics seeks to capture stories to control mass populations.  That’s what Disney is doing with Han Solo, destroying him so that they can rebuild him in a progressive way to satisfy their political activism.

Star Wars fans really want to like The Force Awakens.  I’m one of them.  My opinions as of now are in the extreme minority.  Just like a religion, when people find out something is wrong with a mythic device that contains all their foundation thoughts, people tend to get defensive—and some of that could be heard on the broadcast I did with Matt Clark on WAAM radio.  But being in the minority does not make me wrong.  A million fools cannot erase a truth and what Disney is doing will bite them in the ass—because they are changing essential portions of the Star Wars mythology to satisfy current political concerns.  But those concerns will change over the next 60 years and these gay subplots will seem silly to future readers—especially when they seek out the original stories under George Lucas and compare the activism that occurred under Disney.  Disney could have made a lot of money and done something really good by just leaving Star Wars alone and letting the profits from the endeavor follow.  But they chose to be activists politically—for progressive reasons.  Executives at Lucasfilm and Disney looked at Han Solo and noticed that he was a strong, traditional white male, and they wanted to dirty him up.  So they gave him a wife that he was cheating on, and she was a woman of color to make her more of a victim.  Then they had Han leave Leia in A Force Awakens to return to smuggling as if that was all Han Solo was ever good for without his marriage to a woman of stature and prestige.  They purposely muddied up the character to make a point and create more social diversity because that is their value system.  And that is why the Star Wars stories for me ended with The Crucible, a New York Times bestseller that has as much value to me as the novel Lord of the Rings, or The Bridges of Madison County.  Disney by corporate design to elevate minorities, gays, and women in their stories to appear more diverse, politically, took the strongest character in the Star Wars mythology and erased his essence with a revised canon that makes him into a scumbag more relatable to modern audiences.  We are living in an age where a lot of children cannot relate to a Han Solo type, a man who stays with his wife and is loyal to a fault. So Disney tried to weaken the character to appeal to younger audiences—but all they did was cause trouble for themselves.  I’m not the only fan who will reject their product.  Many others over the years to come will follow and Disney will only have themselves to blame.

For me this whole exercise has provided proof of something I’ve long suspected, that mythologies over time are radically redesigned by politics in all cultures to justify the failures of social mismanagement.   The Bible has certainly been altered over the years to reflect the values of the Roman Empire, and the churches of Europe who wanted to use religion as a natural extension of that imperial control.  Modern progressives are trying constantly to re-write history from the vantage point of the conquered Indian to erase the merits of cowboy capitalism in the West.  And China prohibits proper archaeological study of their many pyramid-shaped mounds to suppress the real history of their ancient culture.  Those are just a few examples.  And right in front of our faces we have watched Disney revise something in our lifetimes in spite of the many witnesses.  I read just the other day a defense of the movie A Force Awakens straying from the original plots created in the Expanded Universe by declaring that Solo had a wife in the EU.  No, Solo did not have a wife under the EU.  That plot device was created six months before the release of the 2015 Disney film to justify why Solo left Princess Leia after Return of the Jedi to become a typical white, American male—a Homer Simpson loser who can’t keep his pants on, and is unreliable to family life.  In Disney’s desire to make Star Wars more accessible to women, and minorities, they have deliberately tampered with what made Han Solo one of the most popular characters in the saga—and they did it out of political activism, not intellectual necessity.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

‘The Art of the Deal’ versus ‘Rules for Radicals’: Trumping Democrats and their lock on the media

 

The answer is an easy one, as much of a killer as Russia’s Putin is accused to be, is he really guilty of crimes if nobody is around to bring forth the evidence.  It’s the old tree in the forest analogy, if it falls down in a forest and nobody is around to hear it—did it really happen?  When politicians destroy evidence revealing their guilt, did they really commit a crime?  That is precisely the accusation that George Stephanopoulos leveled at Donald Trump after the New York billionaire received unsolicited praise from the current leader and former KGB operative.  In the following interview, Trump did a fabulous job of turning the tables on Stephanopoulos who is the premier news man at ABC—owned by the Disney Corporation—who is a long time Democratic insider very close to Hillary Clinton.  It could be argued, successfully, that the Clintons are every bit the killers that Russia’s Putin is—yet they have been very successful in harassing witnesses, destroying evidence, and outright denying all accusations against them no matter how guilty they were—yet Stephanopoulos felt that the vague evidence against Putin was more than sufficient.  But when that same rational was leveled at his friend Hillary Clinton—by Trump, the same criteria was not honored.  Watch closely.

And that ladies and gentlemen is what we are up against.  In the past, Republican presidential candidates allowed themselves to be regulated into a media corner that the Democrats controlled.  No matter how strong their message was, it would never be heard correctly because Republicans simply didn’t market themselves in the hostile environment that is considered today’s media—largely controlled by people like George Stephanopoulos—flaming liberals who are activists against traditional America.  Republicans didn’t go on the late night comedy shows, they didn’t do media interviews on MSNBC, or CNN—they didn’t do Good Morning America—and they stayed away from George Stephanopoulos knowing that the table was tilted out of their favor.  That allowed scum bags like Hillary Clinton to cruise through political mine fields without harm knowing that the people conducting the interviews where her type of people.  It’s been a nice little game that Democrats have controlled completely for over twenty years now.

Trump completely changes that game in a way that nobody knows how to control.  Trump will go on any show at any time and argue with anybody. While he avoids fellow conservatives like Glenn Beck because the popular radio personality has been against Trump from the start and Trump knows there is nothing he can gain by granting Beck an interview because of the hit pieces that would follow—when it comes to Democrats in the media, Trump shows a willingness to engage them all in debate—and he’s successful.  For any Republican to hope to win the White House they must be able to enter the arena of the Democrats and be willing to do shows like The View, and Ellen and meet liberal arguments head on without surrender if they ever want to win a national election.  The Karl Rove methods are old, and have not been successful.  The Bush Family reign on politics is over—they did not do a good job, and now it’s time to push them off the stage for a new kind of Republican—one who is actually successful—personally.

After watching that interview between Stephanopoulos and Trump, it is clear that Hillary Clinton is in big trouble.  She cannot win this upcoming election crying about unfairness, or sexism.  Trump is far too smart to fall for that sentimentally.  I have been telling Republicans this for years, sometimes you have to call a latté sipping prostitute what they are and expose them.  It’s not hard, but a candidate has to be willing to face the ridicule which has protected the opposition for far too long.  In such a case the recipient has no choice but to call Trump a bully because they have no defense against what is being dished out against them.  Hillary Clinton has too many skeletons in her closet to win the White House and Trump is the only Republican in the current field who has the ability, and will to expose them.

No other Republican presidential candidate has the ability to meet Democrats on their controlled turf—they can’t go on George Stephanopoulos’s show and duel him in the manner that’s required-because they simply don’t have the self-confidence, or media persuasion to perform the task.  Ted Cruz does, but his voice just doesn’t command the presence required by television and radio to project strength, which isn’t his fault—but it just won’t do in the 2016 political climate.  Perhaps in the future when the rules have been changed, but presently, the media world is stacked against him in a way that prevents mainstream media platforms from working in his favor.  Trump takes away Hillary’s strength, and that is her ability to commit crimes and have the media hide those acts from the public.  In 2016, Trump has more media command than Hillary, and that is the most important aspect of the upcoming presidential race.  But what’s more important than that, Trump is more than willing to duel with people like Stephanopoulos over ANY issue.  Trump always believes he’s the smartest guy in the room and is never intimidated by degreed journalists or Rhoades scholars—so he never gives away the high ground in any kind of debate—and that is big trouble for people who have a lot to hide like Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton cannot win an election against Trump without ruining her career.  Everything that she’s worked for during her entire adult life is in jeopardy with Trump—and you can see it in her face already—it is her worst nightmare to come to the end of 2015 with Donald Trump as the Republican front-runner.  She cannot survive the daily attacks on her character and her insider politics.  She is much more vulnerable than Jeb Bush was and once this presidential race moves from just Republican primaries to a general election, the numbers will dramatically favor Trump.  The only reason polling does not favor Trump versus Hillary in a head to head election presently is because Hillary has not been in the cross-hairs.  Trump has left her alone letting the email investigation percolate in the minds of the electorate for the opportune time to exploit.  Once he locks down the Republican nomination and there is only Hillary Clinton to worry about—Trump will expose everything making a complete fool of the Democratic presidential hopeful.  The usual stories about rich white men maintaining the office over the first woman president will not be enough to win in 2016.  Trump knows how to overcome things like that—because he can work the media in a way that nobody else can.

Looking back over Trump’s career he just loves to fight, and he has shown a tendency to take on giants.  Back in the 80s he was one of the most influential owners of the USFL professional football league.  They used to play in the spring while the NFL played in the fall.  Trump wasn’t happy taking a back stage to the NFL, so he convinced all the other USFL owners to take the NFL to court over anti-trust charges.  And they won their case against the NFL.  Eventually the USFL fell apart leaving the NFL to return to its monopoly status, but Trump led the charge and showed no fear during the entire endeavor.  Trump was at the time in command of players like Herschel Walker, Jim Kelly, and Doug Flutie—players that would later dominate in the NFL.  Even after the lawsuit victory which denied USFL owners financial awards as part of the settlement leaving a bad taste in everyone’s mouth, Trump was able to unload his contract with Walker to the Dallas Cowboys.  Jim Kelly went on to take the Buffalo Bills to three playoff appearances, and Doug Flutie became a superstar.  Trump has a long track record of dealing with very tough people—the smartest the world has to offer.  He also is personal friends with dominate athletes and hard nose franchise owners.  Taking on Hillary Clinton for Trump is like sneezing out a bacterial virus.  It’s no effort at all, but it will make a lot of noise and leave quite a mess.

Comparatively, Hillary has no track record of personal achievement.  She has been a manipulative second-hander her entire life.   She and her husband Bill have only had success because they’ve managed to cheat their way through trouble.  CLICK HERE FOR EVIDENCE.  Hillary cannot win a presidential run playing things straight, and Trump will force her to try.  That’s when he’ll have her and she knows it—and George Stephanopoulos knows it.  Trump is a different kind of person.  His book, The Art of the Deal is an innovation over the favorite book of Democratic strategy, Rules for Radicals.  It literally “trumps” the Saul Alinsky tactics that Hillary Clinton has used since she was in college.  Trump is her worst nightmare and there is nothing a single Democrat can do about it in the media.  They cannot strop Trump because it really comes down to the rock, paper, scissor relationship of strategy.  For Hillary, her Rules for Radicals are ineffective against Trump’s Art of the Deal.  And she cannot win.  By the time 2016 comes to a close, she’ll be lucky if she can ever show her face again.  That for Republicans is the best news we’ve had in several decades—and is truly something to look forward to going into a new year.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

A Company Out of Ideas: The embarrassment of Disney and it’s second-hander employees

As this article blasted onto the World Wide Web Matt Clark and I were hosting a podcast giving the Disney Company and the makers of the new Star Wars a large dose of tough love.  And they deserve all the criticism and then some that we broadcast.  We are in a new day of media, unlike the days of old.  Disney does not control everything—they are in fact experiencing a contraction period as their media empire is feeling the effects of small media types like Matt Clark and I who are not bound by contracts or addictions to swag buying our loyalty at any price.   Quite the contrary, Matt and I have both been huge fans and supporters of all things Disney for many years now.  We offered our endorsements out of real passion, not purchased manipulation—so that relationship was built on trust.  People like Matt and I were the best assets a company like Disney could hope for.  Out of our own free will, we cheered on their behalf in small ways that often avalanched into big market impressions by sheer opportunity.  But, what they are doing with their theme parks—regarding toy guns, and what they have done with Star Wars is really inexcusable.  They are free to take any position they wish, but Matt and I as fans are also free to reject their product and to let people know why.  Disney counts on word of mouth to maintain their strength of their product marketing, but it can also work against them.  And because of their betrayal of key fans like Matt and I, they asked for it.

It was the first time in my life that a soundtrack to Star Wars arrived in my possession and I was not in a hurry to listen to it.  I bought the soundtrack because I love John Williams and have most of his music, so I bought The Force Awakens out of respect.  But I have yet to open it and the film has been out for over a week as of this writing.  I just have no appetite for anything regarding Star Wars presently, which is a big shift for me.  It was only a short time ago that was playing Star Wars: X Wing Miniatures and was sitting in a swing on my front porch waiting for new products to arrive in my mailbox.  I enjoyed immensely reading about all the different characters and playing in the galaxy that George Lucas created.  By the time that The Force Awakens ended, nearly everything I loved about Star Wars was destroyed like a Death Star blasting away the history and life of an entire species in just a moment.  It was one of the only real bright spots I saw on the horizon of our cultural mythology, and Disney had purposely destroyed it.

We’re not talking about stupid people who work at Disney, or Lucasfilm.  Kathy Kennedy had been around Spielberg and Lucas for decades and if anybody had learned to make a great movie by their apprenticeship, it should have been her.  J.J. Abrams is a great director.  Industrial Light and Magic—is the best special effects house on the planet.  Everything in their tool box was great to make a new Star Wars film.  It seemed impossible to screw it up.  Instead, what happened was that they proved emphatically what I have been saying about the metaphysics of quality over the years.  A committee of people do not surpass the singular vision of a strong individual leader.  As bad as many proclaim the George Lucas prequels to be, or his special additions, they were vastly better than what Disney came up with considering all their incredible resources.  There was no excuse, yet they failed miserably.

It was hard for me to admit how terrible The Force Awakens really was, so I know other Star Wars fans will dance around the issue for months.  But in the context of years, they’ll slowly realize just what a travesty this latest Star Wars film was to a franchise that many loved.  And it was all consciously done by Disney; they watched the screening of the film and thought they had a great product.  They sold it to the world as their best work and it clearly wasn’t.  It was essentially a fan film made by a second generation of spoiled brats, who had hitched a ride on the coat tails of greatness as perpetual second-handers. Yet nobody noticed within all of Disney’s organization—that is alarming.

It was difficult for me to accept the recent Mad Max film, because in the original, Max had a little boy who was killed by a gang of thugs. In the updated version it was a little girl.  I was willing to overlook that slight change because the film had the original director in George Miller and the film was a dramatic improvement over previous installments.  But it was distracting.  If the movie hadn’t been great, I would have felt toward it the way I do The Force Awakens.  Characters matter and once an artistic entity offers it to the public for consumption, they have an obligation to maintain those characters to their audience.  If they violate that trust, they risk alienating their audience to the characters they’ve created.  Star Wars over the years—Lucasfilm through their publishing arm—did a great job of nurturing their characters along with a sense of continuity.  For instance, a character in the novel Rogue Planet which took place well before the Prequel films appeared as a major character in Star by Star which took place many years later—like 50 years in Star Wars time, and that character had traces back to the Jedi, but lured Jacen Solo to the Sith through mental torture that lasted over many novels.  It was then no surprise that Jacen became a feared Sith Lord.  It was a set-up by Lucasfilm so that the mythology they created could be enjoyed by fans across multiple platforms—movies, books, comics and video games.  You could always trust that most of the Star Wars content was following some kind of ultimate timeline.  So when The Force Awakens borrowed all those elements but changed the names cheapening the stories told before, the whole mythology fell apart instantly.

Then it becomes even more shocking that given all the material the filmmakers had to use, that Disney couldn’t even create a single original thought worthy of a movie.  Everything in Force Awakens is borrowed, from the comparison of the Lord of the Rings plot driving the lightsaber quest to find Luke Skywalker hidden on a remote island—to a third Death Star (this time called Starkiller Base).  Every act of The Force Awakens is nearly copied from A New Hope—the movie comes across as a remake of Robocop—or Total Recall.  The big difference is that there aren’t any memorable moments of wisdom in the new movie to solidify the content. At least in Phantom Menace there are lines of Jedi wisdom—in A Force Awakens, there is nothing—astonishingly.  The filmmakers robbed the Expanded Universe of content and the original movies, and then passed it off as an original work of art disgracing all the good minds that did create new plot devices in past installments.

It wasn’t that long ago that I bragged about Star Wars having an essential conservative moral to their stories.  After all, in the novels, Han and Leia, as well as Luke lived somewhat happily ever after.   They did save the galaxy many times, but they had fun together doing it.  There was a lot of pain, but there were a lot of laughs and they all did it together, loyally.  In the later novels, right before the sale of Lucasfilm to Disney, a new Sith order had imbedded itself into the Galactic Senate of the New Republic and had begun to subterfuge politics into a New Sith Order—and they had the entire media under their thumb.  They were actually magnificent stories done on a huge scale, and Han, Leie, Luke and the Millennium Falcon and some of the children of the primary characters were rising up to become easy stars in their own way.  One of the greatest characters in Star Wars was Mara Jade who was an assassin who worked for the Emperor in the original trilogy and eventually became Luke’s wife.  They had a son named Ben who was a great character.   In Force Awakens, they named Ben after Han and Leia’s son who is the ultimate villain, Kylo Ren—essentially Darth Caedus from the Legends series.   I could literally go on and on.  If The Force Awakens had made a superior movie to the books, all could have been forgiven.  But they didn’t.  Instead the butchered the story in a very disrespectful way.  Han Solo, not in a million years would have walked out onto a bridge with no sides and confronted a bad guy—even if the bad guy was his son.  He NEVER would have done it.  He might have said, “hey kid, I’m going to blow this place up.  I love you—now get your ass out of here.”  But he never would have lowered his weapon and pleaded with him to come home like a guilty father trying to rescue a child from jail.  What Disney did was disgraceful.

I have a pretty good idea what’s at work here, so they deserve the ridicule.  Star Wars has been something I have valued, and these idiots just butchered it—so they get what they get.  Disney was more interested in making a progressive film than a good installment to the Star Wars saga.  They were intent to push out the conservative values of the founder, George Lucas—who these days is a flaming liberal.  But while he was building his companies, he was very conservative.  Disney as a company expected to rip-off and re-write the stories and outcomes away from conservative viewpoints to much more progressive perspectives.  This is why The Huffington Post and The White House love this new Star Wars and why people like Matt and I hate it.  Disney has declared war on conservative America and that has never been clearer than in their new Star Wars film.  I didn’t want to believe it was possible, but it is.  And just because I’m a fan doesn’t mean that I’ll give liberalism a free pass just because they put the name Star Wars on it.  If anything, that makes it more worthy of attack, which Matt and I are relishing in—and will continue for what Disney has done to something we both have valued for many years.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Disney’s Crusade Against Toy Guns: Hiding behind terrorism to appease their progressive base

Terrorism and the problems coming from it are the fault of a federal government that has failed to do its job.  Most of the terrorist incidents in America over the last twenty years are the direct result of a failed government to do what they were supposed to.  Yet their reaction is always that we should give them more government as a result of their incompetency, which most of us realize was a stupid thing to do.   Then of course comes the next debate as to private companies having to protect themselves due to the ineffectual policies by the government to hedge against terrorism.   People like me think an expansion of the Second Amendment is the needed result, whereas progressive organizations—like Disney believe in gun confiscation and more intrusions of personal liberty.

I am a long time fan of the Disney Company.  So it pained me greatly not only to see that they made such a terribly progressive Star Wars film but that they have announced that they are getting rid of toy guns within their parks.  For as long as I can remember Frontierland was a place where a child could buy a toy rifle and a coon skin cap as a memory of their Disney World visit.  But not anymore.  Regretfully, Disney as a company has let the liberal persuasion of capitalizing off government mismanagement marginalize their impact on the minds of our youth by pandering to gun grabbing politicians covering their own fallacies—purposely perpetrated, or by default—with gun censorship.  I would go so far as to call the following announcement entirely un-American:

Disney announced that metal detectors will be installed at the entrance to Disneyland and its Florida theme parks starting Thursday. The enhanced security measures will also ban adults from wearing masks or costumes, and discontinue toy gun sales inside all parks.

The entertainment giant announced the changes quietly Thursday, saying they were not based on “any single event,” but were intended to help security personnel and to make guests feel secure.

The portable metal detectors will be positioned beyond the “bag check” area at Disneyland and Walt Disney World parks in Florida. Security personnel will randomly select some visitors to pass through the magnetometers as part of a secondary screening.

The company also announced that it will beef up the deployment of police officers contracted to help with security around the parks. At Disneyland, that means beefing up patrols by the Anaheim Police Department. Disney did not give details about the scope of the expansion.

Disneyland will also increase patrols by explosive-sniffing dogs around the parks and related properties, such as Downtown Disney and its resort hotels, the company said.

The ban on masks and costumes will apply to all guests over 14 years old. And the company will no longer sell toy guns inside its parks, or allow guests to carry toy guns with them, regardless of age. Spokeswoman Suzy Brown said the company banned the toy guns “to avoid confusion or distraction for our cast members and security personnel.”

The rules are an apparent response to recent terrorist attacks in San Bernardino and Paris. Disney’s overseas parks will also enhance security, in accordance with recommendations from its experts at those locations, the company said.

The new rules are included on the company’s Disneyland Resort Park Rules page. “We continually review our comprehensive approach to security and are implementing additional security measures, as appropriate,” Brown said in a statement.

A Universal Studios Hollywood spokesperson said the park is testing metal detection as well, but doesn’t sell toy guns.

“We have begun testing metal detection at our theme park,” the spokesperson said. “We want our guests to feel safe when they come here. We’ve long used metal detection for special events, such as Halloween Horror Nights. This test is a natural progression for us as we study best practices for security in today’s world.”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/disneyland-other-parks-install-metal-detectors-ban-toy-183956756.html

Here is the hypocrisy of Disney, take away the guns and cannons from the Pirates of the Caribbean ride and see how many people line up to ride, or see the movies.  Take the guns out of Star Wars and see how much money the films make.  Even though the gun was taken away from Woody in Toy Story, at least he had the holster.  Guns and their application are a huge part of what has made Disney as a company successful in the past, and is at the heart of their continued success.  Taking a stand against toy guns falls right in line with the rest of progressive leaning insurgents from teachers to politicians who are suspending children in public schools for wearing Star Wars characters holding guns on their clothing—in an attempt to change Americas love for firearms—culturally.  One of the largest entertainment companies in the history of the world is taking a position against guns not for fear of terrorism, but to solidify the progressive plans of their friends and allies on the liberal side of politics.  And it’s disgusting.

Walt Disney would be rolling over in his grave!  Frontierland was intended to keep people from forgetting about their heritage in America—which revolved around the gun.  The Disney Company has shown at many levels within a day of each other how radicalized against American tradition they have become.  The Force Awakens was clearly a liberalized version of Star Wars—the most obvious one yet.  In the film again regarding the space cowboy Han Solo there were occasions where he borrowed Chewbacca’s bow caster and was impressed by the power it exhibited.  All Han Solo fans know that he prefers a powerful pistol which he’s often seen holding in promotional pictures.  It is impossible to believe that as long as he’s known Chewbacca, for over 60 years–that he’s never had a chance to fire that weapon before.  Likely there was a decision by the filmmakers to show that Solo appreciated “native” weapons to advance the progressive platform sympathetic to “native” cultures instead of imposing a particular viewpoint on others—it is a small world after all.  It could also be that J.J. Abrams or somebody else just wanted to see Han Solo shoot Chewbacca’s gun in the film.  But because of Disney’s behavior about guns and progressive acceptance of cultural values conspiracy theories are bound to flash across our minds.

Instead of slowly weaning America off firearms in their entertainment productions, why not go all the way and take guns out of their films and television shows completely?  If you want to know the truth, Disney, the reason that The Lone Ranger flopped at the box office was largely because Tonto was the featured character and The Lone Ranger gunfighter aspect was greatly reduced so to appease the progressive activists.  Americans wanted to see the gunfighter shooting guns, not flopping around in the film until the very end.   So instead of taking guns out of the parks and hiding behind reasons of terrorism prevention to sell it to the public, why not just declare to the American public that as an organization you are against guns?  Disney won’t do such a thing because it would have an impact on their bottom line.

The policy is pathetic and further evidence of how far the company has fallen from its roots of preserving traditional American values.  The rest of the world is welcome to share in those values, but it should go without saying that American culture is the best, and it’s up to companies like Disney to communicate those values in a way that helps other cultures adapt aspects that might help them be more fruitful.  It’s not Disney’s job to try to alter the advancement of American culture back to the ways of the lowly European history—the gun grabbing losers of progressive tendency.  Further imposing restrictions on their park visitors with bans on “toy guns” when much of their revenue is generated from “guns” is disrespectful, and intolerable.  And let me tell you this dear reader.  It is well-known that I love Disney World and the surrounding parks affiliated with their company.  But this will change my plans for many years.  If Disney as a company will take a stand against guns like they have over this latest issue—I won’t plan a trip in the near future.  I many abandon it all together as a future vacation destination.   I will not spend my money on such a company.  And there are many people like me who won’t either.  It’s a pretty bad move on their part.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

 

France is a Socialist Country: Understanding the intent of Four Horsmen and climate change arguments

I recommend that you watch this documentary called the Four Horsemen by Ross Aschcroft, who is an English director whose provocative film shown below evokes how the modern-day Four Horsemen continue to ride roughshod over the people who least can afford it.  It provokes a new kind of socialism that is supported by young Millennials like the group Anonymous and the Occupy Walls Street protestors.  It essentially is a repackaged hatred of capitalism that represents European socialism attempting to spread to every corner of the world, particularly in America.  It’s important to understand how the attacks on American enterprise come, how it’s being sold, and what the history of it is.  When Obama and French president François Hollande celebrated their climate change agreements in Paris recently the communist strategy behind their emphasis was not reported by the press and to those who don’t know any better.  Films like the Four Horsmen sound like reasonable suggestions—just like climate change might seem reasonable on the surface.  But it’s not reasonable, and many Americans don’t understand how deep the roots of socialism run in Europe—and how politicians in the United States have sought to mimic much of what they’ve seen there in American policy.

France is not a capitalist country that represents the values of the “west.”  It has a very long history with socialism and they are quite open about it.  Here is a bit of the history of France and its political system which was quite evident in the Four Horsmen film.  Of course the point in exhibiting this information is to show how France has influenced all of Europe, particularly Great Britain and liberal filmmakers like Ross Ashcroff.   The Socialist Party (French: Parti socialiste [paʁti sɔsjaˈlist], PS) is a social-democratic,[4] centrist political party in France, and the largest party of the French centre-left or center-right. The PS is one of the two major contemporary political parties in France, along with the Republicans. The Socialist Party replaced the earlier French Section of the Workers’ International (SFIO) in 1969, and is currently led by First Secretary Jean-Christophe Cambadélis. The PS is a member of the Party of European Socialists (PES), the Socialist International (SI) and the Progressive Alliance.

The PS first won power in 1981, when its candidate François Mitterrand was elected President of France in the 1981 presidential election. Under Mitterrand, the party achieved a governing majority in the National Assembly from 1981 to 1986 and again from 1988 to 1993. PS leader Lionel Jospin lost his bid to succeed Mitterrand as president in the 1995 presidential election against Rally for the Republic leader Jacques Chirac, but became prime minister in a cohabitation government after the 1997 parliamentary elections, a position Jospin held until 2002, when he was again defeated in the presidential election.

In 2007, the party’s candidate for the presidential election, Ségolène Royal, was defeated by conservative UMP candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. Then, the Socialist party won most of regional and local elections and it won control of the Senate in 2011 for the first time in more than fifty years.[5] On 6 May 2012, François Hollande, the First Secretary of the Socialist Party from 1997 to 2008, was elected President of France, and the next month, the party won the majority in the National Assembly.

The PS also formed several figures who acted at the international level: Jacques Delors, who was the eighth President of the European Commission from 1985 to 1994 and the first person to serve three terms in that office, was from the Socialist Party,[6] as well as Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who was the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund from 2007 to 2011,[7] and Pascal Lamy, who was Director-General of the World Trade Organization from 2005 to 2013.[8]

In 2014, the party had 60,000 members.[1] In 2012 the party had claimed 173,486 members.[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Party_(France)

 

François Maurice Adrien Marie Mitterrand (French: [fʁɑ̃swa mɔʁis mitɛʁɑ̃] ( listen); 26 October 1916 – 8 January 1996) was a French statesman, who served as the President of France from 1981 until 1995. He is the longest-serving President of France and, as leader of the Socialist Party, the first figure from the left elected President under the Fifth Republic.

Reflecting family influences, Mitterrand started political life on the Catholic nationalist right. He served under the Vichy Regime in its earlier years. Subsequently, however, he joined the Resistance, moved to the left, and held ministerial office repeatedly under the Fourth Republic. He opposed de Gaulle‘s establishment of the Fifth Republic. Although at times a politically isolated figure, Mitterrand outmaneuvered rivals to become the left’s standard-bearer in every presidential election from 1965 to 1988, except 1969. Elected President in the May 1981 presidential election, he was re-elected in 1988 and held office until 1995.

Mitterrand invited the Communist Party into his first government, a controversial move at the time. In the event, the Communists were boxed in as junior partners and, rather than taking advantage, saw their support erode. They left the cabinet in 1984. Early in his first term, Mitterrand followed a radical economic program, including nationalization of key firms, but after two years, with the economy in crisis, he reversed course. His foreign and defense policies built on those of his Gaullist predecessors. His partnership with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl advanced European integration via the Maastricht Treaty, but he accepted German reunification only reluctantly. During his time in office he was a strong promoter of culture and implemented a range of costly “Grands Projets“. He was twice forced by the loss of a parliamentary majority into “cohabitation governments” with conservative cabinets led, respectively, by Jacques Chirac (1986–88), and Édouard Balladur (1993–95). Less than eight months after leaving office, Mitterrand died from the prostate cancer he had successfully concealed for most of his presidency.

Beyond making the French left electable, Mitterrand presided over the rise of the Socialist Party to dominance of the left, and the decline of the once-mighty Communist Party (as a share of the popular vote in the first presidential round, the Communists shrank from a peak of 21.27% in 1969 to 8.66% in 1995, at the end of Mitterrand’s second term, and to 1.93% in the 2007 election).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Mitterrand

To many left leaning political people capitalism is what America is, where corporations are the targets of crony deals between politics and free enterprise.   The bar of understanding has been set so low that capitalism has been defined as the mess that currently makes up the Washington beltway.   This is largely because we have allowed Europe—specifically the socialism of places like France to define capitalism as a definition allowing film and television producers in love with Paris and London to create the standard understanding of money’s measurement in our culture with films like Four Horsmen.  But socialism and communism did not go away during the McCarthy Hearings, or the fall of the Berlin Wall.  It is quite alive and well, and being taught in our local schools, in our media, and in our admiration for the Europeans by a class of people in America who really don’t understand capitalism—particularly pure capitalism without the crony aspect.

It is important to understand history and to know that as far back as most people alive today can remember, France has been a socialist county.  It must be understood that when there are climate change discussions in Paris that it’s not protecting the environment that they are after, it’s more of building sympathy for proposals like the ones expressed in Ross Ashcroff’s film Four Horsmen.  These are not people who want a free market economy, they quote Plato in the film, but ignore that it was Aristotle who built the philosophy of American politics and economy. And that for America to work correctly, Plato’s prehistoric socialism must be eradicated and replaced with competitive environments full of inventiveness and productive enterprise rooted in profit.  It is to understand that before a true indulgence of the market forces at work can be comprehended proper definitions for things must be clear.  And clearly the kid Ross Ashcroft missed the mark as do many.  That is because they were bred to believe that Europe is still relevant and that their long history with socialism is the standard of the day.  But for us in America, we need to sever that relationship until places like France get the clear message—that they are entirely on the wrong path and are destined for continued failure.  The only way they can hide that failure is by sabotaging through any means possible the economic power of the west, and the productivity of free enterprise.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Why You Should Dump Disney Stock Now: The mistakes made on ‘Force Awakens’ will compound the failure of ESPN

On a day where every media outlet in the world is declaring the new Star Wars film an earth shattering success, I’ll take a little pride in being the only one to point at the doom on the horizon.  In a lot of ways I’ll admit hope, as often does happen—more than you’d think—that some executive at Disney will read what I write here and make the market corrections needed—and save the only company in the world truly dedicated to family entertainment.  But they won’t.  Disney is not run by a strong CEO like it was when Walt Disney ran the company years ago.  It’s now run by committees of people—and within those committees are people who seek such a management method because they lack personal courage.  Without personal courage and risk, the market potency of a company and its products surrenders box office appeal, and ultimately profits.  That is essentially what is wrong with the new Star Wars film, The Force Awakens.  As much as I wanted to like the film—and still do in fact—the business side of my brain sees more alarms going off in the cockpit of this starship than it can withstand.  Destruction is imminent.  So I’m headed for an escape pod before the entire thing falls apart.  If you have Disney stock, you should sell it right now because the value will tank very shortly and it will never recover.

Out of all the possibilities and horsepower of Lucasfilm—with all the talent at their disposal—they as a company elected to treat their long line of New York Times bestselling novels like a story treatment for a Hollywood movie.  The writing was on the wall when they released the comic series The Star Wars two years ago by Dark Horse comics justifying their decisions to mine the expanded universe and re-write it putting their committee stamp on the material proclaiming that what they did was better.  Rather than sit down with a good writer like Lawrence Kasdan is and have him write completely new material, like he did for the Empire Strikes Back and Raiders of the Lost Ark, Lucasfilm under Kathy Kennedy decided to make a reboot of A New Hope and populate it with what the “Star Wars Story Group” thought was the greatest hits of the long series of novels which had been produced carefully with George Lucas over two decades.  When they released the comic series showing how the original Star Wars script had evolved over time and necessity they were trying to justify what they were about to do hoping to sell their work as authentic.  What they did was infinitely disappointing.  At that point in time I had been buying all the comics and books I could get and was reading them all.  But when I realized what was happening, I just stopped waiting to see if Disney would do as I feared and just mine the stories that meant something very wonderful to many of the hard-core fans, or if they’d actually continue the story into new territory—which for me was the only justifiable option.   They picked the most lazy path possible at a great insult to the fans who kept the market value of Star Wars alive for so long.

The Force Awakens of course made a lot of money—it shattered records that Hollywood may never see again.  There was tremendous pent-up multi generational desire to see a new Star Wars film. So everyone who could went to see the movie over its opening weekend.  If I didn’t know better I would have thought it was a good movie–it had all the elements present, but it was clearly missing something.  That something was the conviction that a risk taking proprietor brings to a project—a leader who has put their reputation and soul on the line to make a product which clearly marked the first two Star Wars films—was missing.  The makers of The Force Awakens were happy young people writing stories from the comfort of Lucasfilm employment and the politics of the very progressive city of San Francisco.  Like spoiled brats driving their dad’s Mercedes out for a night at the country club to socialize at a charity function thinking they were saving the world—they made Star Wars: The Force Awakens without taking any real risks and mining the material of risk takers who came before them hoping that nobody would notice.  I did, and so did many other hard-core Star Wars fans upon leaving the theater for the first time.  When the fun dies down and these fans will think about what they’ve seen, Disney will find that they now have a dreadfully divided audience because of their choices which will dramatically affect the market share potential of all the future Star Wars films.  It will hurt their book sales, their merchandise, and their box office take for all subsequent films.  What they essentially did was brought Star Wars down to the level of the latest Star Trek movies—or the Avengers films.  They might make decent money, but Disney executives are planning on insane money—and they’ll need it to survive—because other aspects of Disney’s business portfolio has been wavering in these changing economic times.

Here’s how the Hollywood Reporter announced the pending doom on Friday December 18th as The Force Awakens opened to hungry fans across the world:

Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens made $57 million domestically Thursday, enough to set a record but not to satiate Wall Street’s fears over Walt Disney’s television business.

In midday trading on Friday, Disney shares were off 4 percent, twice that of the broader markets, as the conglomerate was the topic of at least two negative research notes in the past two days.

On Friday, BTIG analyst Richard Greenfield downgraded Disney to “sell” and put a $90 price target on the stock, suggesting it will fall about 17 percent in the next 52 weeks or so.

“Even The Force cannot protect ESPN,” Greenfield wrote, accusing management of “overpaying for sports rights based on overly aggressive multichannel video subscriber projections.”

Greenfield says Disney’s cable network operating income will shrink in fiscal-year 2017, causing total Disney operating income to be flat.

He also says Disney damaged its long-term prospects for cable in general “by aggressively licensing content to SVOD platforms such as Netflix to prop up near-term earnings.”

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walt-disney-stock-tumbles-as-850171

While the numbers look impressive at first glance, because of the changing market of the other business interests, such as ESPN and how cable subscribers are dumping their subscriptions in favor of Internet service for their smart phones the media empire of Disney is too reliant on Star Wars to save it from the downsides it’s facing.  The Marvel movies are beginning to fade as the newness of them is wearing away.  By the time Captain America: Civil War hits in 2016, the franchise will be in clear decline as a box office force.  The savor was always going to be Star Wars—and now they’ve screwed that up dividing the fan’s loyalties between a re-tread and the authentic novels.

It is always dangerous to base a movie off a book, because the reader often sees things differently than a film’s director.  As long as a movie producer stays close to the source material, often things are forgiven.  But regarding Star Wars, where the franchise was kept alive with cooperation between Del Rey publishing and Lucasfilm in close contact with George Lucas approving story details the novels were like the Bible and took on a meaning that Disney obviously didn’t understand.  After all, they had been re-writing great literary classics for years, so they had no problem changing things around to suit their market appraisal for the films they wanted to produce.

By insisting that the movies were cannon and not the books which were designed to connect the original movies with fresh material ultimately created by individual authors under the guidance of Lucasfilm—the creative team behind The Force Awakens assumed incorrectly that fans would forgive them.  Some will, but not everyone, and for Disney to succeed in this venture they needed everyone.  And when the smoke clears around The Force Awakens, they won’t have everyone.  And that means financial doom on the horizon within the next five years for Disney as a company.   Bob Iger will leave the next CEO at Disney with a terrible burden and there will be no recovery from it. With other aspects of the company losing money, such as ESPN based on inflated sports contracts, it needs a new explosion in growth which Star Wars was supposed to bring.

The Force Awakens felt like a small movie after reading about gigantic events in the novels over the years.  The sheer scale of the Star Wars novels would have had enormous production costs to duplicate on film.  I’m sure Lucasfilm made the decision to do what they did on The Force Awakens based on the vast number of characters that were in the Star Wars novels—which ultimately brings up the question should a novel be cannon or is the movie a superior product?  I clearly think what is written in a novel is the cannon in every case.  Movies are dumbed-down versions of books.  I can’t think of too many books that were made into movies that were overshadowed by the film version.   Star Wars started as a fresh movie experience, but it evolved into a literary journey which became much more powerful than the original films.  Lucasfilm made the mistake by trying to reverse that trend, and make a movie by committee instead of individuals and throwing out parts of the series which were too big to project on the silver screen.  Rather than trying to do that, they watered down a product that millions had fallen in love with and banked Disney’s future on the result.

Taken by itself Star Wars within Disney will hold its own financially.  The films will do fine, the merchandise will be respectable, and the other intellectual work will likely still sell for years to come.  But because of where the company as a whole is, with ESPN failing, the Avengers movies in decline, and the lack of new musicals coming from their children films every three years-Disney has serious problems.  It would have taken all the Star Wars fans to save them—and they clearly don’t have them all.  The Force Awakens proves it.  That problem won’t show itself immediately, but will begin to show up in their repeat business numbers within a month of the release.

Kathy Kennedy should have known better. On Twitter the Star Wars people put out a tag line when The Force Awakens opened showing Han Solo and Chewbacca in the Millennium Falcon declaring “we’re home.”   They were clearly marketing Harrison Ford’s return to the role of Han Solo to push the box office numbers over the top.  I replied to Kennedy’s tweet the reality of what I felt.  I said,” Yeah, we’re only home for the funeral.”  It was stunning to me with all their build-up that they killed off Han Solo, so to me, The Force Awakens became like going home to a funeral to visit family you hadn’t seen in a while—and likely may never see after.   We all knew that Han Solo would die in the movies at some point in time, but in the books he was still performing heroic acts 45 years after A New Hope, so if they had not gone back in time and killed off Han Solo and could have kept the heroics of his novel adventures intact in the canon, it would have been much more digestible.  Instead they not only killed Han Solo, but the best that hard-core Star Wars fans had fallen in love with–an epic story on a truly galactic scale.  What they gave us in The Force Awakens was the death of a favorite character and a highlight reel of the novels—stories we already knew—all chopped up and spit out with new names and a much smaller frame of reference.   Then to insist that an inferior product was the new canon spelled huge problems for the future of Star Wars which will compound into a much worse situation than what Disney is seeing currently with ESPN.   And I wish it wasn’t the case, because I love Disney and really wanted it to succeed.  But they made all the mistakes that they shouldn’t have—and arrogantly stood by those mistakes to the bitter end.

I don’t know if there is a way that Disney could fix the situation now.  I’m afraid it’s too late.  But maybe there is a way they can appeal to the hard-core fans before things get out of control.  They should try for the sake of everyone—mostly themselves.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Winners Aren’t Losers: Donald Trump’s childrens book and primary presidential platform

Actually, I’m getting a little tired of people assuming that I’ll wake up at some point and realize what Donald Trump is—and will change my mind and vote for someone like Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio.  I listen to Glenn Beck nearly every day, and also Pat and Stu and have heard people like them bash Trump for the last six months—assuming that fans of Trump are somehow asleep and will one day wake up to find they voted for a monster.  I have watched Bill O’Reilly try his best to pin point Trump supporters with a simple explanation such as “they are angry voters who just want to bust up the establishment. “  I have put up with these types of people like I would the banter of children who don’t know any better.  But let’s make something very clear—extremely clear.  I know what Donald Trump is and what he might do.  I understand his motivations—clearly—emphatically.   And I’m certainly not stupid, naive, or in any way enamored with disillusion.  I know the good and bad of Trump—I have done a lot of research into him since I started supporting him and I want him as president now more than ever knowing what I do.  I want him specifically for the reasons shown below on the Jimmy Kimmel Show where a new children’s book was revealed about Trump called Winners Aren’t Losers.

Here’s the deal, we’ve had 16 years of really bad, and stupid presidents—people who clearly weren’t intellectually up for the job.  Republicans had the embarrassments of George W. Bush and communists had the academic politics of Barack Obama.   Before that we had 8 years of scandalous Bill Clinton and before that 4 years of a New World Order do gooder George Bush #41.  They were all terrible presidents and they have embarrassed America to the world.  Congressmen have lied, cheated, and enriched themselves incredibly over the last two decades to the point where people have lost faith in both parties.  Our government does not function—at all.  The people running it are terrible and have been well before Trump vocalized it.  I want a private sector candidate, someone who will sell capitalism to the entire world and can fight for it.  Socialism is the #1 problem in the world right now—it touches in some way or another every major problem we are facing presently in the world—everything from ISIS to college tuition prices.  The fix for most problems globally start with a moral justification for capitalism and advocates who won’t waiver from it.

The Constitution is not being followed now.  It should be, but a Constitutional purist like Ted Cruz or Rand Paul will not stand a chance against the K-Streeters—and that is the grim fact.  America needs someone who loves to fight those factions without fearing anything.  There isn’t a single politician ever to hit the scene who has no fear like Trump.  He’s not afraid of the mob, of killers from Mexico, of government surveillance, of terrorists threatening his family, of boycotts, protestors—of the media.  He’s not afraid of anything—he could care less about the Bilderberg parties, or the “illuminati.”  He doesn’t fear any money men—he doesn’t have to worry about some billionaire cutting his nuts off and denying his family an income.  He is above all that, and he loves to fight and argue and make deals.  He’s my kind of guy.  He doesn’t drink, he doesn’t smoke.  He’s a loner with great charisma who loves his family.  His kids are great.  And so were his parents.  Donald Trump is a great example of the American dream.

I don’t care about his bankruptcies.  I know why he did it, and he learned very important lessons from those experiences.  I also don’t care that he’s had three wives.  I know why he did what he did.  He pushed and pushed and pushed and the bankruptcies, the wives and the incredible controversies surrounding him through much of the 90s would have been enough to crush most people.  But Trump worked through it without jumping off a roof, without ever losing himself, and without ever surrendering.  He fought, and fought, and fought until all his enemies were pushed aside.  And on the back side of it he was even better because of it.  Now he’s a legitimate billionaire, not just one in debt buried in assets that could evaporate with a housing bubble.  He’s legitimately wealthy, and as self-made as a person can be in the mixed economy that we all inherited from years of socialism trying to poke itself into our lives from beyond our shores.   If Trump screwed people over, if he made mistakes in judgment such as he did with the tenants in Central Park South, he learned from them and is much better for it.  What he has learned is exactly what to say and when to say it.  In deal making you have to perform verbal faints to test your opponent to see what they have and when they’ll use it.  When you are fighting people who believe that the end justifies the means, you better have a response to whatever they throw at you.  You can’t fight them like some Red Coats from the Revolution—all lined up and orderly so that snipers can pick off everything headed their way.  You have to be unpredictable, you have to verbally joust, and you have to out maneuver them with sheer tenacity at times.   Ultimately you have to be willing to face every problem alone, and Trump flourishes at that.

An even more qualifying condition is that you must have somebody as president who knows how to surround himself with the right people, and that those people have to love to take junk and rebuild it.  Trump loves to fix old things and turn them to gold, and his friend Carl Icahn comes with the deal.  He’s worth $21 billion dollars largely because he’s a corporate raider-he turns around failed companies and makes them into winners.  The biggest loser on planet earth right now is the mismanagement going on in the Beltway which has people like Icahn liking his lips.  Even though Trump and Icahn are billionaires, they don’t really care about the money.  They only care about the score that the money represents.  Icahn doesn’t spend money on stupid stuff—he just likes to fight and to win.  He looks for fights so that he can win.

I’ve said it many times; the first priority is that we have to get management under control in America.  We have to solve our fiscal issues first.  Then we can make the Constitution a priority.  Without a solid winning national philosophy, the masses of a democracy will not support a freedom oriented Constitution—second-hander types will always look to rewrite the founding documents to allow them to legally loot others.  So the first priority is to put money in the pockets of a majority of the country so that they will support the American Constitution.  Otherwise, we are fighting a losing battle.  People will not follow a philosophy of freedom unless they are financially secure and can enjoy that freedom.

What Trump does best is make other people feel good about the things he does.  It doesn’t matter what he says, but why he says it.  America needs to hear how good it is, and that winning is our value system again.  And it needs someone to say it that won’t back down from a media that wants everyone to get a conciliation prize just for showing up.  America needs to focus on winning at everything.

I would think that Glenn Beck and his followers would understand the strategic necessity of putting these types of people in the White House.  Every generation has their specific challenges.  George Washington had his challenges, Lincoln had his, Reagan did as well, but there is no correct way of doing anything.   You take what you learn and apply it to all future problems.  The more a person has lived and the more they’ve seen—especially under pressure, they better they are to solve problems in the future.  And I know of nobody anywhere who has stood against the fires of life the way that Trump has.  America needs a deal maker and a cheerleader.  It doesn’t need another ideological failure who comes into public office with a lot of big ideas but falls short of accomplishing anything because they don’t know how to sell it to the public, and can’t work the media to their will.

There is zero chance that Trump loses to Hillary Clinton.  There is nothing in Trump’s history that indicates that he would do anything less than destroy her completely in a head to head election.  Only Trump could out talk and out maneuver Bill Clinton on the campaign trail.  You wouldn’t put Ted Cruz or somebody else up against ol’ Bubba, history shows that they’ll lose.  If they can’t do better against Trump in the primaries, they won’t do any better against Clinton.   So my decision to support Trump for president is not locked in illusion.  I’m not “asleep,” and need to be woke up.  It’s just that I see more clearly what others will eventually see.  And each week there are more people coming to the same conclusion, and it’s about time.  In this particular game, Trump is the best bet and we are lucky to have him.  It would be my strategic hope that he would pave the way for 20 years of a capitalist oriented society that would get back to our roots of Constitutional law—someone who will pick Supreme Court Justices like Clarence Thomas and stand for traditional America instead of the progressive crap that we have now.  Beck thinks of Trump as a progressive—and he’s wrong.  Trump has progressive beliefs because he’s a New York guy, but he ultimately is a deal maker who knows smart money from bad—and to see that—there has to be conservative roots to understand the value.   Of that, there is nobody better than Trump in this election or any election in history.  I’m voting for Donald Trump because I want America to win, and I do trust him to do that much.   Because winning is important—it’s much more important than most people acknowledge.  And Trump has a hunger for winning that I understand.   That is why I am voting for the New York billionaire.  I don’t care how someone plays the game—I care that they win.  Those idiots who say that winning is not the most important thing in the world don’t know what they are talking about.  It is because of those types of people that we have all the problems we do now.  So it’s time that we stop listening to them.

I expect to win at everything I do.  Winners are not losers.  The idiots running our government now do not represent me.   They lose too much and it’s time to change that.  Most of the idiots who believe that Trump is not suited to be president also believe that empathy is one of the most endearing human traits–like the born again Christian Glenn Beck–or the Beltway political addict Karl Rove–who hopes that everything he has ever studied and loved will remain intact through this election cycle.  That is the reason we get the same rejects over and over again in the presidential cycles.  Empathy is fine for church on Sundays or Holidays when loved ones gather for Christmas dinner, but winning is more of a priority–because without it, empathy is worthless.  Without winning, we all become like animals fighting over the same piece of meat.  With winning as a priority, even when people lose they win because competition drives a culture forward and allows the best of what they are to provide leadership by default.  In such a culture that leaves us all much less to have empathy about–and is a higher quality trait.  So it’s really stupid to value empathy over winning or to vote for anybody but Donald Trump for President of the United States.   If anybody really wants to win as a nation, you must have the best people on the job.  And the way to figure out who the best people are is to see who wins or wants to win the most.  Then you have your President.

Watch the videos above for more evidence and testimonials.  I even included a hit piece against Donald Trump.  I’m OK with everything he has done because his overall goal was to win, not to get style points for being empathetic.  Empathy will make a superpower into a muddled mess, like it is now.  Winning makes you more like Donald Trump.  Sure you have a lot of enemies, but life on a daily basis is so much better–and far more interesting for everyone–even those who lose.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Benefits of Second Call Defense: Information and Christmas wishes from the sheepdogs of the shooting industry

 

People seem surprised when they find out what a nice service Second Call Defense is, and the kind of reassurance that it offers to shooters as they conceal carry.  Several people of late have signed up for the service upon my recommendation and they are enjoying the benefits.  Second Call Defense is a very respectable organization affiliated with the NRA Business Alliance and they do the little details very well.  Sometimes I think readers think I’m just a blogger who puts out material in a scandalous fashion at times locked in my basement complaining daily about the state of the world.  Rather, this blog site is only about 1% of my life and in the rest of it, I am a very productive person, both in my relationships with other people, and in business efforts.  So when you use my name to sign up for Second Call Defense, good things do happen to you.  Yesterday on a website I sometimes visit to talk to like-minded people came a testimonial that reminded me how new customers of Second Call Defense are learning for the first time how using my name can provide something to them that they didn’t think was possible in a good way:.

Posted by  $  Technocracy 4 hours, 7 minutes ago

I can confirm that you get something back using Rich’s name on your application.

I chose an annual plan and just got my materials yesterday. In with everything else was a check refunding me a month’s worth of the plan cost. So thank you again Rich / Overmanwarrior.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of… | Hide | Flag | Ignore | Permalink

https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/562d66c1/second-call-defense-protect-yourself-if-youre-going-to-carry

2016 will be an exciting time for Second Call Defense and its members.  Below is some information describing pertinent news updates, and providing information necessary for concealed carry holders.  Second Call Defense is a very informative group and a wonderful ally to have around.  My membership card is one of the most valuable things I carry in my wallet. I never leave home without it.  It has become something I consider more important than a driver’s license.   One thing that is important to know listed in the following information is how to take your gun with you while flying.  Be sure to follow the instructions so that you can do so without causing a lot of debate at the airport.

Exciting Changes Coming

Second Call Defense will be unveiling a new website in less than two weeks, right before the new year. The new site will be more informative for members and non members alike, and it will be designed to work well on mobile devices and be much easier to read.

In addition, they’ll be simplifying the membership options and adding great new benefits. If you’re a current member, nothing will change. Your membership dues will stay the same. And you’ll even pick up some new benefits.

Plus, we’ll have a member-only area where members will have access to exclusive content.

Make sure to visit our website the last week of December to see the upgrades.

TSA rules for flying with guns and ammo

Everyone knows how much trouble you can get into if you walk into an airport or try to board a plane with a firearm. But did you know that many gun owners routinely take their guns and ammo with them when they travel by air?

The trick is simply to follow the rules outlined by the Transportation Security Administration:

You may transport unloaded firearms in a locked hard-sided container as checked baggage only. Declare the firearm to the airline when checking your bag at the ticket counter. The container must completely secure the firearm from being accessed. Locked cases that can be easily opened will not be accepted. Be aware that cases that are supplied when purchasing a firearm may not be appropriate for securing the firearm when flying.

Firearms

  • Comply with regulations on carrying firearms where you are traveling from and to, as laws vary by local, state and international governments.
  • Declare all firearms, ammunition and parts to the airline during the check-in process. Ask about limitations or fees that may apply.
  • Firearms must be unloaded and locked in a hard-sided container and transported as checked baggage only. Firearm parts, including firearms frames and receivers, must also be placed in checked baggage and are prohibited in carry-on baggage.
  • Replica firearms may be transported in checked baggage only.
  • Rifle scopes are permitted in carry-on and checked bags.
  • All firearms, ammunition and firearm parts, including firearm frames, receivers, clips and magazines are prohibited in carry-on baggage.

United States Code, Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 44, firearm definitions includes: any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, or is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; and any destructive device. As defined by 49 CFR 1540.5 a loaded firearm has a live round of ammunition, or any component thereof, in the chamber or cylinder or in a magazine inserted in the firearm.

Ammunition

Firearm magazines and ammunition clips, whether loaded or empty, must be securely boxed or included within a hard-sided case containing an unloaded firearm.
Small arms ammunition, including ammunition not exceeding .75 caliber for rifle or pistol and shotgun shells of any gauge, may be carried in the same hard-sided case as the firearm, as described in the packing guidelines above.

Newsflash for unarmed Americans: We gun owners don’t carry for you

by Jeff Knox

This is an editorial dealing with the difficult issue of whether gun owners should intervene to stop a crime that does not directly involve personal self defense. While Second Call Defense believes this can only be decided on a case-by-case basis, we also think the point of view expressed in this article makes sense for most people with average firearm and self defense skills and training. We touched on this issue in a previous post titled Should you use your gun to stop a crime?

Like many Americans, I frequently carry a gun. I’ve done so for over 30 years without ever laying hand to it in need. Professor John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center reports that some 12.8 million people, over 5.2 percent of the adult U.S. population, are licensed to carry a concealed handgun. In addition to concealed carry license holders in all 50 states, seven states require no permit at all for concealed carry, and 40 states have few restrictions on carrying as long as the gun is visible.

On top of that, as I have reported recently, there appears to be a growing trend among people who routinely carry a firearm to also routinely ignore signs that tell them they can’t. It is a growing form of civil disobedience that puts no one at increased risk of death or injury. As the number of concealed carriers grows, violent crime continues to fall. This doesn’t prove that more guns equals less crime, but it irrefutably proves that more guns do not equate to more crime.

Unless you live in one of the extremely restrictive states like New York, New Jersey, or Massachusetts, any time you are on the street or anywhere that does not have controlled access, with metal detectors and bag searches, etc., there is a fairly high probability that someone nearby is legally carrying a gun. But they are not carrying that gun to protect you.

A popular essay from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman divided humans into three categories: “Sheep,” “Wolves,” and “Sheepdogs.” I would suggest that Lt. Col. Grossman left out an important fourth category: “Porcupines.”

My wife is neither “sheep” nor “sheepdog,” and she certainly is no “wolf.” She is a “porcupine,” harmless and docile if left alone, but ferocious and dangerous if threatened – even more so if her progeny are threatened. She would choose flight over fight every time, if flight is a viable option. But if flight is not an option, she has the tools, training and mindset to win the fight.

Our nation’s convoluted laws on self-defense and liability also force all but the most dedicated “sheepdogs” into the role of “porcupine” as well, making “porcupines” the most prevalent variety of armed citizen. We won’t passively stand by while the wolves have their way with us or our families, but neither can we take responsibility for protecting the “sheep” from the “wolves.”

Certainly, most people who carry would take action to help someone in need if there was an opportunity to do so and there was no obvious alternative – and while many of us would probably prefer to characterize ourselves as “sheepdogs” rather than “porcupines,” the reality is that protecting you, your spouse, and your children is your responsibility, not ours. You should also be aware that protection of you and your family is not the responsibility of the police, either. The courts have conclusively ruled that the police have a duty to protect only the public at large, not individuals.

Those of us who have a natural inclination toward being “sheepdogs” have some pretty significant disincentives to acting on those inclinations. Not only is it physically dangerous to intervene in a violent situation, it is a legal minefield that in most cases must be navigated in a matter of seconds. While laws and jurisprudence protect police from prosecution and civil liability, and while some protections exist for individuals acting in defense of themselves and their families, there are few shields for someone acting on behalf of a stranger. Armed citizens who intervene in situations where they or their families are not in imminent danger place themselves at significant risk of prosecution and civil penalties.

We also tend to be keenly aware of the fact that any error involving a firearm can be devastating and permanent. Violent encounters usually happen quickly, and they can be very confusing. It’s not always clear who is the “good guy” and who is the “bad guy.” Anyone who has ever been through a quality personal defense course has been cautioned to avoid deploying a firearm or engaging an aggressor unless there is no other alternative.

In any shooting situation, there are two key problems to deal with. Problem One is survival. Problem Two is dealing with the legal and emotional fallout from solving Problem One. Ending a life can be emotionally devastating, and the legal consequences can destroy bank accounts and quality of life as surely as being gravely wounded.

For most of us, there are no legal repercussions for running away. In the real world, this means flight is better than fight. Our training, and often the law, dictates that if we’re enjoying a movie when a homicidal lunatic starts shooting people on the other side of the theater, our first responsibility is to get out and away, especially if our family is with us. If we’re in a college class and we hear gunfire from the next building or a classroom down the hall, we, just like our unarmed classmates or students, should evacuate or “shelter in place,” not head toward the gunfire.

This approach is galling to many gun owners, especially those of us with a natural inclination toward being “sheepdogs.” We would rather fight than run. We would rather put ourselves at risk than allow evil to go unchecked. But regardless of the level of training and skill a person has, the multiple layers of risk that are inherent in any shooting situation stack the deck against playing the hero unless there is no other alternative.

Both sides of the debate over bearing arms have a tendency to relegate armed citizens to the role of “sheepdog,” but that is a role the law and prudence won’t let us accept, though some of us will try despite the obstacles. For the most part, we are “porcupines.” We are armed for defense of ourselves and our families, not for you and yours. In a worst-case scenario, one of us might be present and save your life in defending our own, but don’t count on it. We don’t carry for you.

©2015 The Firearms Coalition, all rights reserved. Reprinting, posting, and distributing permitted with inclusion of this copyright statement. www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

From all of us at Second Call Defense, we wish you and your loved ones a blessed holiday season. Stay safe and remember, even during the holidays, day and night, we are standing by to help you the moment you call our Emergency Legal Hotline.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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