Tag: George Lucas

‘Revenge of the Sith’ Made 25 Million Dollars: Its all about the artist, not the product

My son-in-law said it best when we were on a family vacation in Florida and attending the Disney Parks, as we were at the Star Wars Land they have at Hollywood Studios, that Disney didn’t buy an entertainment franchise, they purchased a religion.  And they never understood it.  And you can see that with the new films compared to the ones that George Lucas directed himself, who created the franchise and sold it in 2012, with good intentions.  But honestly, and I hate to say it, Star Wars would have been better off if Lucas had never sold it to Disney.  I get why he did; he had many employees, wanted them to have something to do, and wanted to retire.  But Disney screwed up a lot with their woke politics and they significantly reduced the brand of Star Wars with their ownership.  And it has been a disaster.  Some good things happened, like their theme park presence.  But Bob Iger never understood what Star Wars was, the writers of the new movies had no idea what they were doing, and the films themselves were filled with woke ideas that modern audiences have soundly rejected.  And I have to say all that because we just recently had the now-famous holiday of May 4th, and I noticed a few things that were certainly interesting.  Primarily, the old movie Revenge of the Sith was re-released in theaters for a limited run to celebrate its 29th anniversary, and it made a really good 25 million dollars over the last weekend of April 2025.  It’s a movie that is free on television just about anytime that anybody wants to watch it, yet people were so hungry for Star Wars that they returned to the theater to see the movie one more time in actual movie theaters that says a whole lot about where people are and how valuable Star Wars is to our modern culture.

I wanted Disney’s ownership to succeed and Star Wars to be available to a new generation.  But Disney certainly screwed that up, what they have contributed to Star Wars was woke garbage that was astonishingly bad compared to what George Lucas directed.  And other people obviously feel the same way.  They aren’t rushing out to see the new Star Wars stuff that Disney produces. They rushed out to see the old movie and were quite celebratory over it.  I understand that there is real value in the old Star Wars movies. It is truly fascinating to see how corporate institutionalism, with all the money to work with, could not come close to duplicating that original magic.  But people didn’t let that stop them from celebrating the new Holiday, Star Wars Day, on May 4th, as in “May the 4th be with you.”  It was everywhere on May 4th 2025, from all kinds of surprising parts of society, especially at baseball games that now openly support the Star Wars Holiday, and people seem to really like it.  Even sports jocks like to brag about their Star Wars knowledge and are not afraid to geek out on May 4th dressing up as their favorite character.  And regarding Revenge of the Sith, it is stunning to hear how people today love that movie so much.  I remember when it came out and how people talked about it then, as well as the prequels of George Lucas in general, and I never would have thought that that movie would hold such a dear place in people’s hearts. 

But that is a testament to just how bad things are these days.  I knew it was bad when Disney got rid of the canon that George Lucas had built, leading up to the Disney merger by rewriting the history in novels, comic books, and then in the movies.  That was the biggest mistake that Disney could have made.  I said it at the time because my wife and I had personally read hundreds of Star Wars books, all of them ever produced at that time.  We tried to read some new ones under Disney ownership and couldn’t do it.  Disney was too woke to tell the story of Star Wars, a struggle for freedom from tyranny in deep space, a long time ago, and very far away.   Disney was incapable of getting it, and the story group at Lucasfilm was way too San Francisco progressive and anti-Trump to continue what George Lucas started.  That was obvious this year when Trump was back in the White House and stated how he wanted to make Hollywood great again.  Well, it starts by understanding what made it great to begin with, and clearly, people like what George Lucas did with Star Wars much more than what Disney was able to do with it.  And a sad wedge has now been introduced to the fanbase.  But this year, as opposed to the past, people are openly embracing the old Star Wars much more than just holding their nose to support the new stuff. And those very successful box office numbers for Revenge of the Sith are exciting.  People are hungry for good traditional values in the Star Wars movies.  But Disney never could get their arms around it. 

It hasn’t all been bad; a few Star Wars shows like Andor have been good.  Ahsoka is a pretty good show.  There have been a few movies there and there, like Solo and Rogue One, that were good.  But most of it has been garbage, including the most recent sequel movies.  You wonder how a bunch of people could sit in a room and, by committee, produce such garbage.  But George Lucas used to write stories in a notebook and with a pencil, a very anti-technology thing to do for one of the most technology-driven enterprises ever attempted.  It has been a lesson in arrogance, where institutionalism thinks it is superior to individual achievement.  However, with all that Disney had as resources, they could not do better than George Lucas did, all by himself.  Of course, thousands of employees made Star Wars great, but the vision started and ended with one guy.  And that’s what people wanted to see: the interpretation of an artist and their work.  Not some corporate collection of nonsense.  It’s like seeing a Picasso painting and thinking about the guy who made the art, as opposed to the same image produced by a museum committee trying to duplicate the genius of a Picasso painting.  People have voted; they love the old George Lucas stuff, but they don’t like the new stuff.  You don’t see people going crazy over the newly made Disney material.  But people will go to the movies dressed up to watch a free film that has been out for 20 years, because George Lucas, the artist, made it.  And they will spend time and money on that while rejecting the much more expensive new stuff.  And there is a lesson for the entire industry on May 4th, Star Wars Day.  Corporate collectivism does not beat individual merit, in any case.  Time in mass culture has proven that, overwhelmingly.  The artist is what people invest in, not the product or art itself.  And there can’t be any good Star Wars without the artist who created it, being the center of the conversation.  It was an experiment in entertainment that has shown a true trend that everyone should learn some hard lessons from.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Why DEI Was Always a Dumb Idea: What we learned from the Swordsman Scene in ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’

I really loved the book about Howard Kazanjian called A Producer’s Life.  I’ve referenced it many times over the last several weeks because it was an enjoyable book.  It’s the most fun I’ve had reading a book in a while, and it is one that I promised myself I’d read if Trump was re-elected into the White House.  I wouldn’t let myself think about these kinds of things as what is in Howard’s book prior, even if I do love the topic.  For a large part of my life, I wanted to be a filmmaker, and Hollywood producers like Howard Kazanjian were the kind of people who inspired me.  He produced most of my favorite movies from a key period, when he was on top of the Hollywood pile with Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and many others, with films from 1975 until 1982.   Howard was always good, but if you are trending good movies and who made them over the entire history of Hollywood, this specific period set the stage for what the industry would become, and mean to the world as a whole regarding entertainment.  So, I find it very interesting to study what went right and wrong during this period.  Ironically, learning these things is precisely why understanding DEI policies and why they failed is important.  Because currently, after the Trump election and his spectacular victory, the world is giving up on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, and rightfully so.  We’re not talking about a Republican versus Democrat position here; Howard Kazanjian, I would say, probably leans toward Hollywood liberalism and likely wanted Kamala Harris to win the election.  But with Trump back in office, the world is a lot better, and I have more tolerance for people who are not so bright on political matters.  Which is why I couldn’t let myself read a book like this before the election. 

In that book, I read a good illustrative example of why DEI failed and why companies needed to get rid of it for the sake of everyone.  Picking employees based on their skin color or assuming they are equal to other people and that they should be included in something just because they exist was always ridiculous.  Some people are better than others, and if you want something to be good, you have to find the best people and put them in place; that’s good management.  And in the movie business, good people are few and far between.  But Howard Kazanjian, during that period I mentioned, found a way to be around the best people in the business, and specifically, a conversation I had never heard about regarding the famous swordsman scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark, being filmed in 1980 for a 1981 release.  Everyone, no matter who they are, knows the scene.  Indiana Jones is looking for his lost girlfriend, Marian, who the Nazis have captured on the streets of Cairo.  And he has to stop them with a glorious shootout with lots of explosions and good stuff.  Along the way, Indiana Jones is stopped by an Arab swordsman who wants to fight.  But the hero doesn’t have time for it.  What does he do?   People remember with great recollection that Indy pulls out his gun, shoots the villain on the spot with no fanfare, and gets back to looking for his girlfriend.  In all the documentaries of how that movie was made, we learned that Harrison Ford was sick that day and just did the scene as a joke because there was supposed to be a fight with bullwhips that was very elaborate, and the whole crew was sick of filming take after take.  When Spielberg saw what Harrison Ford did, he wanted to keep it as a new version and print it for the film.  But there was more to the story I heard in this book on Howard Kazanjian for the first time.

George Lucas still wanted his bullwhip fight scene.  One of the reasons he was making Raiders of the Lost Ark as the executive producer was to create a modern version of the kind of movies he liked as a kid, and he wanted a classic bullwhip fight like might have been in Don Q Son of Zorro, or Zorro’s Fighting Legion.  And he wasn’t convinced that just having Indiana Jones shoot the bad guy and get on with his business was the right thing to do.  So, here were the most talented filmmakers in movie-making history who disagreed with this famous scene.  So what were they going to do?  George Lucas decided to run two film versions by a test audience, one Spielberg’s way, the other with the bullwhip fight.  They were going to let market desire determine the film’s final version.  So they played George’s version first to a test audience.  People came out of the movie liking it, and Paramount Pictures felt they had a hit.  It was a good movie.  But when Spielberg’s version was seen, people applauded when Indiana Jones shot the swordsman.  And it became everyone’s favorite moment in the movie, even after all these years.  They made 5 Indiana Jones films over the next 40 years, but none would ever have a better moment than that one to mass audiences. 

Ultimately, even with all the talent of all these people involved, it was the marketplace that picked the scene. The filmmakers came up with ideas, but to determine the success of the enterprise, they tested the waters with market analysis. The audience clearly picked one version over the other, and the rest is filmmaking history.  Presently, they are test-screening the new Captain America movie for Disney, and it is going through all kinds of trouble because nothing is working.  The film is filled with a bunch of woke politics, and people don’t like it.  It’s going to bomb when it hits theaters in February.  Ultimately, that is why DEI programs destroyed market share and value for all companies, from cookie makers to high-tech offerings.  DEI was an imposed value put on the marketplace that would have been similar to George Lucas keeping his whip fight in the movie because he wanted it, to force the audience to like it because he did.  Instead of listening to them, which is what happened.  When companies try to impose themselves on the public and force values on them that they don’t have, failure is almost assured.  However, when products appeal to the audience’s sentiment, great success is possible.  It is rare because good ideas are complex, and companies often hang on to them even if the market pressure rejects them.  Only to plot an enterprise to its doom.  But when we say that getting rid of DEI suits all businesses everywhere, this is what we mean and why.  In capitalism, value serves the marketplace.  In authoritarian governments, values are imposed, and a monopoly status is sought that limits the viability of options.  And the world is far worse off because of it.  The best example of why some ideas work over other ideas can sometimes come from interesting places, which is undoubtedly the case with a movie most people agree has some value to them over time, and that is how Indiana Jones was created in that old classic movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Individuals Beat Corporations Every Time: Why success happens

This could apply to anything, but studying why some movies released at the theater are better than others is critical because of how the movie business works.  People get together and tell a story, and the value of that story is released to the public for them to vote on.  People tend to think of Hollywood as very glamorous, but in truth, very few people who work in the industry ever get to be a part of an extraordinary success, a ratio even less than in other fields of endeavor.  So it is always interesting to understand why some people put together a string of hits, such as Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, along with producer Howard Kazanjian.  An even more important example is the role that George Lucas’ first wife, Marcia Lucas, played in some of the most memorable and good movies of all time.  Also, why did a small, family-owned company like Lucasfilm lose its magic once it became a corporate conglomerate under Disney?  All this was in a fabulous book called ‘A Producer’s Life,’ which was about the life and times of Howard Kasanjian, who produced several of the Star Wars movies and the start of the Indiana Jones franchise, among other classic films like Cool Hand Luke, The Wild Bunch, and working with Alfred Hitchcock.  This book caused much stir when it first came out because Marcia Lucas was just as upset about Disney killing off Han Solo as I was for many political reasons.  That was just another example of how corporations that use processes to isolate individual contributions produce products in the world that are not as desired by the market.  In the case of the new Star Wars movies, the belief was that the film itself held all the magic and that a girl could replace a character like Han Solo to accommodate all kinds of woke rules wrapped around the axil of globalism. However, the Disney people never understood Star Wars, and this book had the opinions of someone who was very close to Star Wars, who was the key to their success initially. 

The book came out in 2021, right in the middle of the Covid monstrosity, and Biden had just been inserted into the White House, so I wasn’t in the mood to think about movies.  But I promised myself that if Trump returned to the White House, I’d get the book, take a bit of a vacation, and allow myself to think about some fun things.  For me, these are some of the most fun things, and they show how entertainment impacts culture as a whole.  And when it comes to those movies, Indiana Jones and Star Wars, few people have put together the kind of hits as filmmakers such as Steven Spielberg and George Lucas.  The corporate belief is that just anybody can make a good movie or a good anything if only enough money is spent on the project, and in film, typically, the industry attracts all the same kind of sharks looking for an easy dollar as Wall Street does.  But few of them, if anybody, understands what makes hits and misses in the marketplace.  I have always wondered why George Lucas was so good from 1975 to 1982.  After that period, George Lucas wasn’t very good at all.  He may have been interesting, but he had lost his touch, and I always thought it probably had something to do with his wife, Marcia. 

There were two good Star Wars movies, and then everything fell off the rails with Return of the Jedi.  The movies were self-funded and only distributed through 20th Century Fox.  George Lucas hated corporate filmmaking; he wanted to make independent films from a family-driven company.  This allowed someone like the film editor, his wife, Marcia Lucas, to put her personal touches all over those early movies, which were key to their successes.  Something Disney and all its resources today don’t have is that personal touch.  During Return of the Jedi, Marcia and George divorced, and she ran off with the stained glass window guy working on their Skywalker Ranch.  That sounds kind of cheap and stupid, but George Lucas was working hard at the time to maintain his independence from the studio system, so he was putting all the pressure on himself.  This is another reason why those family-made movies were so good.  It wasn’t the board of directors or BlackRock assets making the decisions; it was George Lucas.  But it drove a wedge between him and his wife, and he never recovered.  Neither did she.  They should have stuck it out, but that’s history now, and the results tell quite a story.  Because she worked with her husband, Marcia knew how to get the best out of the coverage shots he provided as a director and could make a story pop on the screen that resonated with audiences.  You have to be an excellent person to produce good work, which gets lost in all corporations: those individual contributions.  For instance, if SpaceX lost Elon Musk, the company would fail quickly.  We always see it in sports: a star player carries a franchise.  As the saying goes, there is no “I” in team, but there is in win.  Teams are not values, they are places where people can hide so they don’t have to deal with the pressure of taking on too much responsibility.

One time, when the character of Indiana Jones was being created, Harrison Ford, Steven Spielberg, and George Lucas designed the character before principal photography, and they were all talking about giving Indiana Jones some flaws that the audience could relate to, such as making him smoke and drink too much.  But as she often did with many of those early Lucasfilm movies, Marcia stepped in and gave her opinion that was critical to the effort’s success.  Keep in mind that these three moviemakers were some of the best of the best in the business. But it took George Lucas’ wife to point out the obvious.  She told them this was a kid’s movie and they couldn’t have Indiana Jones drinking and smoking.  He’ll lose all his charm, which they didn’t understand then.  But George listened to his wife, as usual, and the character became one of the most beloved in all movie history.  They are still trying to make money off Indiana Jones, with Disney running the studio.  But they don’t understand the character because they don’t have someone like Marcia Lucas in the editing room polishing everything up.  They have access to tens of thousands of talented filmmaking types, but very few understand the subtlety of success and failure.  Without question, Marcia Lucas, as a high-quality individual, made those early movies better.  She also made Lucas, Spielberg, and Harrison Ford better.  Better than any of them would ever be again once she was no longer a part of their lives.  After the divorce, it went all downhill from there.  They still made good movies, but they had all lost their touch, never to duplicate it again.  And no matter what business we’re talking about, that same kind of ratio applies.  Corporations often don’t get it; they mimic what made them great and hope nobody notices.  But to become great in the first place, there is always some charismatic individual, or a collection of them, who come together and make magic happen.  And without those individuals, no process in the world can promise success, purposefully or by accident.  Family-owned businesses are some of the best ways to achieve that success, and Lucasfilm was a family-owned business in those early days.  Once they became a corporate conglomerate, they could no longer make magic, and the brands they were associated with died in the court of public opinion. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Woke Politics is Killing Disney: We are not “global citizens” we are Americans–the world follows

You can’t kill Indiana Jones. But that is the word from test screenings or previews that are coming out of rough cuts of the movie. And it wouldn’t surprise me that they would try. In this new ESG world for which Disney is offering itself as a leader, killing off an 80s representative of toxic masculinity with a time travel story that ends with Indiana Jones sacrificing himself to the next generation female woke hero is consistent with everything that Kathleen Kennedy has done since she became president of Lucasfilm in 2013. I’m sure George Lucas had good intentions, but he never expected this from his former company and the brands he worked hard to build over many years. For all the reasons he hated corporate filmmaking while trying to finish his famous film, THX-1138, now he is seeing that, left in the hands of corporate control, they could screw up anything. Filmmaking is not a collaborative enterprise, even though that’s what they tell everyone in film school. It is a top-down driver of unique minds who tell other people what to do to obtain a strong vision that audiences can then enjoy. The previous Indiana Jones movies were all from the mind of George Lucas, and that’s what people wanted to see. And what will be interesting about Indiana Jones 5, which is getting some press with about six months until the release in June of 2023, is how different it will be without George Lucas or Steven Spielberg. You can put the same actors, music, and color pallets into a movie, but it won’t be Indiana Jones without George Lucas. And clearly, Kathy Kennedy didn’t understand anything; she thought these popular movies would be vehicles for woke politics and would hold up. But ultimately, audiences will reject them.

I thought the trailer preview looked pretty good, but the problem was it confirmed all the rumors that also indicate that Indiana Jones dies at the end. So like the ESG values of BlackRock have indicated, the way to give audiences a last look at an 80s icon of heroics and toxic masculinity is to erase him from history and to replace him with a woman. Without question, Kathy Kennedy would sign up for that. Whether they stick with that ending after the terrible online reaction is left to be determined. Are they that radical at Disney these days? Well, of course, they are! They are crazy, so I don’t have much hope for the new movie, just as I don’t for the new Avatar film coming up. People don’t want to go to the movies to see woke propaganda and gay rights messages. They want to be free of that, which is one of Indiana Jones’s appeals throughout movie history. But the ESG values of stakeholder capitalism are all about social governance, and Disney has dedicated itself to that leadership, and it is showing in their stock. They have brought back Bob Iger as the CEO to help them make the transition from value-driven content to the traditional way to make good movies; they earn a lot of money at the box office, and Disney is rewarded with a lot of cash. But over the last few years, those values have changed, at least on the corporate side. Driven by Larry Fink and the Klaus Schwab types at the World Economic Forum, stakeholder capitalism is the new value system and a global currency. And Disney expects Bob Iger to navigate that new world in a beneficial way to show other corporations how the stakeholder model will work. So there is much more going on here than Disney killing off one of the most beloved screen heroes of all time. It’s about replacing the value system that western civilization has for this new global view of the world.

But people are people, and what they value won’t change. As Disney has learned with its release of Strange World, which feature a gay plotline for the primary characters, and the weak showing for Black Panther II Wakanda Forever, wokness doesn’t excite people. There was a lot made of Bob Iger’s statements about taking politics out of Disney to repair the brand a bit, but what didn’t get talked about much was that he went on to say that he didn’t believe that Disney was very political. Rather, he saw much of what they were doing as the responsibilities of a “global citizen.” He said that Disney has been telling stories for over 100 years and takes its responsibility to be good global citizens very seriously. And to the ESG values of the World Economic Forum, gender-bending is much more important than box office votes. So Disney is deep into it now. They are off on their projections, and stockholders still measure value in dollars, not ESG scores. And that will continue as we move into 2023, and they find out Avatar won’t make the kind of money they are hoping because nobody wants to waste more than 2 hours on a climate change lecture about nature being more powerful than imagination and productivity. And if Disney sticks with the previews of Indiana Jones that have him being killed, that will kill Disney in ways they can’t even imagine right now. They thought Crystal Skull damaged the Indiana Jones brand. Killing Harrison Ford and replacing him with a woman just isn’t going to work. 

Oh, I wouldn’t mind a female type of Indiana Jones story. I loved Lara Croft until they gave her a stupid bow and arrow instead of the double guns she used to shoot. There is nothing wrong with strong female characters but much wrong with wokeness. And Lara Croft went woke years ago. And yes, the people who want to bring down western civilization and big media companies who have told lots of great stories selling western civilization to the world want to see it all come to an end. Disney these days is a woke company that has permanently damaged its brand. Of course, China and its partners at the World Economic Forum are happy to have that competition removed. But the world is truly at a loss. Yet, people will get over it and move on. They won’t care if there is never a Star Wars movie again. They can live without Indiana Jones. If this movie Indy 5 goes woke the way reports say it is, it will fail, and Disney will further slide down the ESG pit of doom. And Bob Iger won’t be able to save it. Disney was already slipping when he left as CEO just a few weeks before the Covid lockdowns hit in 2020. He knew all about it from the role-playing that went on at Event 201 at the end of 2019. Disney was always built on a house of cards of value that depended entirely on the public sentiment to enjoy the movies. And if Disney isn’t making movies people want to see and instead is committed to woke politics that nobody wants to see, then everything will dry up for them, and their stock will tank. And ESG isn’t going to catch, leaving Bob Iger and the gang holding all the losses for history to remember. People will paint this Indy 5 from their minds, just as many have Crystal Skull. And they’ll live their lives. But Disney will not survive, and Bob Iger looks like he’s going to dig in, much to his own demise. The preview confirmed the rumors, and that has already damaged the brand.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

The Failures of Institutionalism: Disney’s New Star Wars Hotel Rejected by the Fans

Corporate Failure

To understand why and how liberalism is failing currently and will continue to fail, a great example of what’s to come was displayed when Disney released a preview video for their new Star Wars Hotel experience.  Fans had been waiting for over eight years for the opening of this more than a billion-dollar investment, and what Disney showed the public instantly went from ambitious hope to fandom scorn for the immense wokeness contained in the project.  I certainly wanted to give the project a chance. I would have liked to take my grandchildren and children to this hotel if it looked any good.   After all, I raised my family on Star Wars and the various stories of good and evil in such a modern storybook fashion.  But what Disney did with Star Wars and the hotel experience was full of contemporary liberalism in every way that we can see it failing, from the Biden administration to the global greenie weenies at the United Nations.  These people at Disney, who had infinite resources to spend on this hotel experience and Star Wars itself, didn’t understand what they had bought from George Lucas. They presented the ultimate failure of liberalism, which I found very interesting and relevant to our modern observations.  After a very long wait, the hotel is supposed to open in a few months, March of 2022.  The video itself looks like a child made it, and for what Star Wars means to people, everyone expected from Disney a lot more. 

Part of that billion-dollar investment went into making the Galaxy’s Edge experience at the two Disney parks in Florida and California.  My wife and I went to the one in Florida once it opened, and I thought it was magnificent for the price of a $100 admission ticket.  To see some full-scale props from the movies was worth the money.  I enjoyed myself and thought it was a great experience.  But this hotel experience was poised to be something like a “West World” experience, or Fantasy Island from the old television show where you came to Disney to realize a fantasy of living in Star Wars for a two-day affair.  And for that experience, it would cost around $6,000 to $10,000.  So naturally, what they were selling was very ambitious, and people were excited about it.  The point of releasing a preview video, which they did in mid-December 2021, was to book reservations for the rest of 2022 and into 2023.  But the video turned out to be so bad that the opposite happened.  People started canceling their reservations as soon as they saw the video because it looked and felt nothing like Star Wars.  I covered this problem years ago on a radio show with a guy who is now a Disney employee.  Way back in 2013, when this Disney Hotel was just announced, we contemplated the problem Disney would have with its anti-gun politics when Star Wars was all about guns.  How do you have fun with Star Wars without promoting “war?” When fans attended the hotel experience but couldn’t wear around their blasters, it wouldn’t feel like Star Wars, and that is precisely what the first problem was with the video promo. 

It looked like the people who developed the concept for the hotel were more in love with the movie, The Fifth Element rather than Star Wars.  The cantina singer as the feature in the video was a clear sign that the Disney creators thought Star Wars was all about funny colored aliens, space, and orchestral music.  They didn’t understand the heart and soul of what made the films so beloved in the first place. It’s the kind of corporate failure I see all the time and talk about extensively in my book The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business.  I wasn’t upset by the video, but it certainly solidified my plans for 2022.  There was no way I would spend $20-30,000 in 2022 to take my family to this Star Wars experience.  To understand their target audience at this hotel, the Disney planners would have done well to study the current video games, Battlefront, Call of Duty, and Fortnite.  With the amount of money Disney wants for the hotel, they should know that, at a minimum, they should be offering some kind of competitive laser tag experience, something that simulates pulse-pounding action with real consequences to the story.  People were not going to spend that kind of money to watch people sing and eat food.  But to be fair, the Disney philosophy had no chance out of the gate; as a woke company going after what they think is the emerging middle class of China, they are not prepared to tell Star Wars stories.  They believe that as a media company, they set society’s values instead of offering the products that society wants. It’s a fine line that they have lost, but it’s more a condition of modern liberalism in general and institutional failure on a massive scale.  Institutions are not powerful if they don’t embody what the public wants as a consumer class.  And Disney has lost its way the more corporate they have become and moved away from the foundations of Uncle Walt Disney himself.  That is the same thing that has happened to Star Wars the more they have moved away from George Lucas, who created the franchise. 

The mistake was that the modern corporate Star Wars approach had all the tools for success right in their breadbasket, but they approached it all with the wrong philosophy, which carries over to the more significant message here.  If all the values of institutionalism were as they assumed, the Star Wars Hotel would have been a slam dunk for Disney.  They had the money.  They had the best and brightest of modern college graduates.  They had a proven brand that spanned decades as a money maker.  What could go wrong?  Well, wokeism, for one.  But deeper than that, it’s the corporate approach that fails in all companies to some degree or another, whether it’s McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, or Nike.  Once a product becomes affiliated with a political movement, such as globalism, it loses its use as art. It becomes simply a tool of a detached class of people stuck in their own versions of quicksand in life.  Star Wars was always about rebellion against tyranny.

Here were the Disney people all too happy to be a compliance culture trying to make a Star Wars experience for people, complete with masks indoors in a state-run by Ron DeSantis, who has been the best against such idiocy.  Because of their political intentions toward liberalism, Disney masks their employees and guests on purpose.  They didn’t have to, but they wanted to be part of that “woke” culture they think the world will be driven by.  In the video, they put out there were no signs of masculinity, which is essential because Star Wars was always designed for boys 8-12 years of age.  Trying to create an “expanded market” with outreach to girls and people of color has only destroyed the original base of the franchise.  So now Disney has made something that nobody wants.  Their target audience for this hotel experience would have been the Comic-Con types who would spend thousands of dollars on a Star Wars experience.  But now, they have all those types of people against them as they are insulted by Disney’s approach.  And after watching all this, it looked like our nightly news and the perplexity that many global institutionalists are having when they wonder why people don’t want Build Back Better, the CDC, or to be controlled by the United Nations.  When institutionalism and the necessities of individuals are not aligned, we can see these kinds of failures everywhere.  But what’s essential about the Disney case is that it proves that no amount of money can solve the problem and make people think something they don’t.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

Why the Super Rich Love Communism: They took over our government a long time ago

Its not as if there were a century of buildup to this communist plot, so none of this happening now should come as a surprise to anybody.  But that’s what it is and its what a band of unelected wealthy people have joined together to give the world so to usher in the New World Order that conspiracy theorists have been talking about for years.  Climatically, its that old communism that has been in charge of most of the world for all of Warren Buffett’s life, and certainly Bill Gates, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg and all the big tech millennials.  Like their influence in global politics, they have kept the name and goals of their communist movement quiet so to spring it on us at just the right time.  For them, that time would have been in 2016 when nobody took Donald Trump as a serious threat from the established side of politics, and it would have been Hillary Clinton who pulled the rip cord on all out communism.  This time around these billionaires left nothing to chance, even though Trump won 10 million more voters this time around as opposed to when he won in 2016, the global communist insurgents simply bought the election results so that they could control all three branches of American government, the Legislative of course, the Executive, and through threats and intimidation, the Judicial.  Additionally, the media was bought and paid for too, so from there perspective, the election of 2020 was a game over situation.  There was nowhere for dissent to go but into their waiting arms like broken horses looking for a master to ride them to their deaths. 

Yet the mystery that emerges is why would the billionaire class align themselves to anti-capitalist communists?  Well, the answer was found in the Carroll Quigley book Tragedy and Hope which I’m referring to a lot these days because of its relevance.   I could also point to all of Jim Marrs books which are categorized as severe conspiracy theory, even though most of what he has written about is turning out to be true except for the proof of an Alien Agenda.  Those books are fun to read and think about, but nothing says global conspiracy than an author who was so arrogant that he told the plot himself in a massive book to prove how smart he was, and that one of our presidents emulated religiously, Bill Clinton.  When people use the lazy word, “globalists” they are referring to people like Quigley and the communists who are looking for global domination as the way to bring peace to the world, as they see it of course.

The fear that always comes up on the conspiracy theory front is that we must accept a reality that exists outside of our constitutional republic.  Our government was not built to protect itself from such foreign invaders as those who are domestic and foreign at the same time operating above global governments where they treat our republic like a state government for which they heavily influence with financing.  And once they have conquered the federal and state governments of the United States, there is nothing to protect the people of America from hostile communist takeover.  The billionaires picked communism just as most corporations do because its easy for a top manager to use in order to get everyone to do what they want them to do.  From their perspective we are looked upon as pawns in a great chess game, not people with individual rights.  And in chess you know how the game works.  You don’t want the chess pieces doing all kinds of crazy things, they are meant to be used to protect the king and the queen, not to have independence from the game.  Communism fits this mode nicely for them because it simplifies the rules for those who want to rule from a global elite status, a club that requires you to be a billionaire and to accept the unspoken rules.  Trump made this group angry as a fellow billionaire because he used his status to become president, which delayed their long-laid plans, and they are furious with him over it, which explains the barrage of antagonism they have employed to destroy him over the last four years.  The government of America was simply acting as pawns on behalf of this elected billionaire class of people, and that is why we have this helpless feeling in the wake of Trump.  Trump was elected to bring republican government back without having to have a civil war with violence.  Now that we have seen these villains come out of their hiding places, now we have a dilemma. 

I’ve always been skeptical of communism, but I have trusted our government to keep these powers in check.  I would read Jim Marr’s conspiracy books like a kid would read a comic book, for entertainment and fun things to think about.  I say fun because to accept those proposals as a reality would require very serious conduct to correct, and that’s why we had elections.  So, in trust of that system, those were the rules.  But now we see that the worst-case scenario is the situation and that forces us to take things to another step.  Yielding to these people is not an option, but to what degree we must take action, that is the current debate which is evolving as we speak.  But before we can do that, we must know what we are dealing with, and now we do.  It’s a billionaire class of insurgents who are using their wealth to bypass our global governments and to instill communism to unite the world under an easy management system for them to deal with.  Communism has never been successful, especially for the people downstream of it.  But for the very top, the absolute authority it gives them over what they consider to be the “pawns” of life is beneficial to them.  The Trump presidency forced them to reveal it, which we should be grateful of.  Because prior to 2020, we had no way of knowing who was playing the real chess game because we were led to believe it was our own government representing us as a republic, not as an insurgent class operating outside the rules of our Constitution not just for a few years, but decades, really planting the seeds for a century to implement.  They were patient the way chess players often are.  And they carried it out with their fortunes passed from one generation to another to have their grandchildren implement, or in George Soros’ case, (first generation because he’s as old as dirt). 

However, to answer the question for this purpose, now you know and can use that knowledge to help solve the problem.  It is good to read books on conspiracy to know what questions to ask, but nothing is better than actual perspective from one of them, which is what Carroll Quigley’s book represents.  From him you get the Georgetown perspective of academia who are all for this billionaire class taking over America with communism.  They have been teaching it to us and our kids for a very long time, without mentioning the “C’ word of course.  But now the masks are off, and we can see what they are, and now is the time for us to do something about it.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,


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

Why Most Scientists are no Better than a Common Whore: They’ll say anything for grant money

So it’s been thrown around a lot lately, especially in the wake of the Wuhan Virus coming out of China, and it plays a huge part into the reason so many Americans were duped into accepting so many cancellations to prevent the spread of the virus. This notion that the “scientists” are beyond refute and should be listened to like sages of knowledge that are beyond political theater is just ridiculous. Politicians desperate for President Trump to be controlled by the same fears that everyone else is functioning from have been saying with increased voracity that he needs to start listening to the scientists. This of course has been in reference to the Wuhan Virus but more largely the climate change studies that are being done by federally funded scientists who will say and do anything to their paying clients, just like a common whore, for the purpose of setting policy to their statements. And anybody who thinks on their own is considered stupid, uneducated, and dangerously reckless because in their thinking they have deviated from the established source material published to support some reckless conclusion not meant to cast mankind into space as an independent specimen of evolving character, but to lay prostrate before a ruling class who desire to control every aspect of their lives. It’s not the great warriors of the hunt who are the top of a political food chain, it’s the academics, the scientists who are used as hammers to pound a point into the consciousness of a population to control it, not to advance it into any type of newfound state of understanding.

My unique relationship to this issue is that I love science and I deeply respect the work of the curious. If I didn’t have so many interests, I might have been one myself, but I could never stuff myself into one bottle of a field that could claim such a title. So I was never willing to limit my talents to one specified academic field and to declare to the world, this is what I am, a geologist, an archaeologist, a paleontologist, meteorologist—pick one of the fields and its likely I had enough interest in them all to be one professionally. And in college, where I was on a path to studying economics, it was the same problem. The professors would issue the textbook needs for that semester, and I’d have the books all read and understood within a week. I just never accepted putting on the breaks to my mind that wanted to move at 1000 miles per hour and this used to concern many people who were worried about my future. They would call it a lack of focus, but what it really was, was an understanding of things that was very hyper in its origins. The result was that after several decades of openly studying all the things I wanted to in the pace that I could consume the data, that I know a great many things and can speak about my thoughts on them in a way that is far beyond the single topic scientist. And because of that, I can comment on things that people functioning under an orthodox understanding just wouldn’t see otherwise and that has led me to many topics that I discuss that involve these giants of the world that are found in grave sites displaying a past history that has never been talked about except in far flung books that are outside the purview of accepted cultural academics.

Studying those topics of the giant race of people who are obviously part of our distant past and do not have a place in the anthropology record that has been established has been quite a journey, and that tangled web is still being uncovered as we speak by more and more people who like me are saying, “wait a minute.” From what I know on the subject its only the greatest conspiracy that has ever been pulled in front of the eyes of mankind and at best we should all be insulted by what scientists have tried to perpetrate on us, not just in the realm of history, politics, religion, but psychologically. Let’s just say this much, scientists have been lazy, a general statement that applies to many of them. Those who have allowed their minds to be limited to one field of study have been all too willing to allow that limited vision to direct their attention to the understandings that political tides shaped by religious needs allowed to be known—not what actually was and needs to be studied under the umbrella of multifaceted science. Because the fields of understanding in academia are defined in the ways they are, and funding models for those fields require minds to stay in their lane, many of the things that need to be known just aren’t because the system is set up to always keep them from coming together and sharing information that the other would need to know to advance the fields of science.

So when anybody says that we should listen to the “scientists” they are essentially declaring their frustration that a president like Trump won’t stay in the lanes established to control the minds of mankind and focus their attention on the political needs of that culture. Personally, I have found that its far more conducive to understand the mysteries of our times because I never accepted one field of study over a long time of being passionately driven toward understanding, because I have been free to read and explore whatever the evidence presented. I have not had to shape my thoughts to fill the parameters of federal funding through a grant or some other finance hurdle that is so common in all fields of study. The academic system that we inherited from Europe still has way too much Roman Empire in it, and from there the way study emerged from the Catholic Church of France and England. We still want our fields of study to follow some path that reflects the monk like lives of those who professionally read the Bible for a living and many of us, most of us, have accepted that limit openly. And that is why the professional scientist can lie and mislead the public on the nature of the Wuhan Virus or of the dangers of climate change without a nervous twitch to their eye, because in their way of viewing the world, they believe what they say because they don’t have supporting evidence from other points of view that could dispute them.

Only by thinking in multifaceted ways can the true nature of science be understood, and as a business guy, I think that gives Trump a better grasp on the nature of scientific understanding than the fragmented specialization of the most dedicated members of their fields. We are all better off not listening to the scientists, not the other way around. The truth can only be seen by understanding many things, yet it is concealed by forcing minds to only look at fragmented things and to build a case study around that limited knowledge. And due to this nature, great veils have been pulled over our own history that many people just aren’t prepared to deal with emotionally. Yet, that doesn’t make those notions wrong, just inconvenient. In a free society where people are free to think and do what they want and they can defend that right with the personal ownership of guns, the truth is going to get out, and it is rapidly these days, especially under President Trump. And that has establishment types more terrified than ever, and is the true nature of the massive amounts of consternation that can be witnessed daily on the news cycles and text books that go out to young minds looking for answers, and when they don’t get them, get bored and just accept the locked doors placed before them.

Rich Hoffman

A Review of The Mandalorian: Boys never wanted the girls to invade their tree house.

There is no impeachment, even though that is the news of the day. All there is or ever was regarding the attempts of the Democrat controlled congress to attempt to get rid of President Trump is a frustrated attempt to manipulate the law in an effort to avoid their perilous fate of a 2020 loss even more embarrassing than over the past two elections. And my resolve is not to care too much about it unless they try to remove my president from his elected office, where I will then grab whatever volunteers are needed to defend him with the Second Amendment from those villains that have infected our government. Its that simple. No further commentary needed. Meanwhile, and I was glad for the options, Disney+ opened this week and we were all finally able to watch the new Star Wars show, The Mandalorian and let me just say this, it was fantastic.

I also say that for me visiting any story within the Star Wars experience is like a vacation for me. To understand that I’d refer to a recent article I wrote on the value of thinking like a 12-year-old. Children think in big, broad terms with solutions in focus and are not restricted on how to create the questions that might complete such a journey, so I see great value in it. The adult world would say that such a way of thinking is immature, but then look at their lives. They are heavy on burdens with limited options to deal with them, and their lives are most of the time a complete disaster. Nobody should listen to them under the best of circumstances. Star Wars was never meant for adults, but specifically for boys between the ages of 7 to 12. Of course, Disney wants to reach out to girls and older audiences if it can get them, but Star Wars as we have always known it was geared toward the problems of young boys. Visiting that way of thinking has always been fun for me because I like to explore lots of options with infinite optimism, and when everything fails in the real world, Star Wars has always been a place that values those sentiments.

As I have pointed out the new Disney owned Star Wars has not been as good. It’s been like that moment when all the young boys had a boys only tree house and the girls found out about it and wanted to join in. To be nice the boys let them but started grumbling when the girls brought with them dolls, cooking utensils and brooms to replace the guns, knives and acts of war of the boys. And instead of play fighting the boys found themselves talking about raising families and the difficulties of getting to the store, and they were noticeably upset about it. Under Disney, Star Wars became less about war and more about social justice and the skin color of the actors, and it became just boring. The Mandalorian much to my delight was made for the boys. Girls of course are invited, but the show was certainly an attempt to put Star Wars back to what it does best, and I think it exceeded at that.

The key to understanding big issues, such as this impeachment fiasco is in thinking without all the constraints that most adults learn to live with, and within Star Wars stories where big concepts are always at the front of discussion as we are talking essentially about the problems of a type 3 civilization, one that can use the power and resources of an entire galaxy yet have all the challenges of our present condition, it helps put the mind at play to behold the concepts. While most adults scratch their heads and attempt to put whatever the context of the modern problem is, such as the perplexity of the current congress to even attempt impeachment. That is because the reality of the present circumstances do not fit the adult assumptions of our understanding, which is precisely what the villains of modern government are counting on. To understand their game, you have to pull back your vision enough to play with various thoughts so that the true intention can only then be seen.

Such lofty thoughts are certainly at play in The Mandalorian, which was a nice science fiction/spaghetti western platform to tell some very interesting stories from. It was energetic and reminded me a lot of many Clint Eastwood westerns, everything from For A Few Dollars More to The Outlaw Josey Wales. It was fun and remarkably girl free. Not that girls are a problem. But the focus of The Mandalorian is being faster on the draw, not whether or not he cooks breakfast for his wife. I was a little shocked reading the most recent Star Wars book Resistance Reborn, which sets up directly the events of the next Star Wars film Rise of Skywalker, that the old hero Wedge Antilles was cooking breakfast when pilots arrive to recruit him back into the fight. Its not that cooking is a big deal, but the book was written by a woman and women think differently about things than boys. Wedge was a great warrior of the rebellion, yet the focus of his efforts was on cooking. Not something boys are naturally concerned with. That’s what I have been talking about with Star Wars with girls inviting the tree house of thought the boys would otherwise prefer to be in.

This is also why women are so easily tricked in politics, because their concerns are so quickly trapped by political theater and their natural predilection is not to fight, but to conform. When you can fight back against oppression, you tend not to find ways to live with it, and at the heart of Star Wars is that premise. Girls are invited, but its clearly a boy concept, and with The Mandalorian, that is clearly what is happening and its good to see that Lucasfilm can still reach that place even after so many progressive missteps toward social justice. Yet in other reviews about The Mandalorian the value of the largely female reviewers was that they thought it was great that the male leads in the show were from diverse backgrounds, one black, one Latino. I personally don’t care as long as somebody is shooting someone else. Its not about being white male that attracts me to a plot line, it’s the body count and the kind of guns they used. To get to the big ideas of anything the main character needs to be over the primal fears of a herd, and with women, they typically are trying to live with the world, not trying to change it.

Concerns about cooking, and feelings about things are not the natural state of boys. But overcoming problems and oppression are, and The Mandalorian certainly put its focus on those items. So, it’s the perfect entertainment to divert too while in real life congress is attempting to perform the worst scandal in human history. The goal is not to live with the consequences of that endeavor but to fight back against it. Star Wars was always about saying no to complacency and endeavoring for real change, not concerns of docile domestication, but in saving the galaxy from itself in spite of itself. And watching The Mandalorian it showed that the makers of Star Wars still understand what that looks like, and I’m looking forward to a lot more.

Rich HoffmanRich Hoffman

Professionals are Predicting a GDP Loss over the Government Shutdown: I think not

It is interesting that many investment firms and others connected to the financial world are predicting zero GDP growth in the first quarter of 2019 due to the government shutdown. I am not so sure that will be the case, in fact, consider what might happen should we discover that GDP growth remained at 3% to 4% in spite of 800,000 government workers stuck in limbo over the budget problem between the Trump White House and House Democrats who are refusing to make any concessions on a border wall. Gas prices are lower than they’ve been in years, taxes are lower and money is flowing quite robustly. If the GDP doesn’t fall as many are predicting, what would that do to future leverage that Democrats have over government shutdowns? What would happen once people realize that the government working or not doesn’t affect them very much and where it does, new methods of service should already be in place to prevent a loss in services.

Let’s face it, much of this “no work extortion” was designed by government labor unions to make it painful for voters to not pay for government services, by attaching very static services to consumer needs without regard to economic expansion. Actually, the goal of GDP stagnation was always the hope because it forced people to continue paying taxes and extraordinary fees for government workers in an inflated fashion just because people didn’t want to deal with the loss in services. But we live in the day of the smart phone, of Amazon where you can get anything anywhere at any time. Why should government be able to impede goods and services artificially—and why should a loser like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi be able to use a government shutdown as a means of bringing the American economy to a halt?

In reality, I don’t think the world cares about the shutdown. I don’t think the GDP of the United States will even notice—in one report I heard one of the reasons given was that government workers weren’t flying around doing business and that would account for a loss in GDP. Well, with fuel prices down and more expendable income in people’s pockets, I don’t think any of those losses in government transportation is going to amount to much and will easily be offset by the civilian sectors. So where is all this loss in GDP going to come from? Government doesn’t make anything and what they do interact with shouldn’t stop productivity from happening except where they have been artificially inserted by law, as opposed to a genuine need by market forces.

As I have been saying for many years, the socialism that has been taught in our public schools is hitting a critical juncture, many of those little kids are now in the market and interacting with the world, and socialism is very much their political platform. You can see that easily by some of the new members of congress. Additionally, many of the new Democrat 2020 presidential candidates are openly socialist and talking about confiscating businesses to redistribute wealth from those who have it to those who want it. They are openly talking about these things these days instead of hiding it. I think that is because of Trump’s victory in 2016, it forced the radicals working in our government to accelerate their long time plans and the same thing is happening in regard to this government shutdown. There is a race to make the final case for socialism before people discover that everything they have been taught their whole lives in public education was a lie. The election in 2020 is really the last time that socialists are going to have a shot in the United States before people realize that the economy is much better off under capitalist influence rather than centralized socialist mechanisms by incompetent insurgents.

That is after all how so many government jobs were placed in the way of the free market, to hopefully stop an economy if the government led by some conservative radical wanted to shut it down to make a point. The safety valve would be to wreck the economy and prevent conservatives from ever doing such a thing in the future. But what if conservatives stuck together and forced the revelation of such a scheme to be known with continued growth of the GDP even during a government shutdown? Then what happens? Of course, the answer is that government doesn’t really do anything to help our economy, it actually hinders it. With government out-of-the-way, the GDP should increase and that is the big secret that nobody wants to let out to the public. And with the market watchers leveraging their investments knowing the world of government and how much pain it can give them, they are saying all the things to make the beast happy and off their backs. But they know that free market forces unleashed will continue to expand the GDP of a nation, not whether government workers are there to stand in the way.

At the heart of this debate is the role government plays in the economy, socialists want to think of the government as a major employer, capitalists want the government out of their way as much as possible. That means that for the first time in American history we are about to learn to what extent the government actually plays in the economy because we have a president who actually understands economics, better than any advisors in the matter. And we’ll see how it turns out, but I’ll make a prediction, I don’t think its going to make much difference. The economy has a lot of money flowing through it, the trade deals that are being made are generating revenue for the American treasury and China is drowning currently. Instead of all that money flowing into their economy, its flowing into the American economy and that is something that the big government types just can’t bring themselves to an admission. The issue has a duel cut for them, first it shows that the communist Chinese were never as powerful as everyone had projected them to be, and second, it shows that government really doesn’t have any power. Government is not the king makers that liberals had always dreamed of, a free market system can’t be stifled when pure economics are applied.

Only when artificial constraints are placed on the ambitions of a nation’s GDP can an economy really be stifled to a zero sum. And Trump knows better than to buy that line of dialogue. He’s holding out so that the truth can be witnessed and when it is, then what? What will Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer say on that day in March and April when it’s revealed that GDP actually was not impacted by the government shutdown. What happens in the future then? The answer is that the extortion racket will lose its bite and I would think we’d all be happy for that. Except for those who want to see a government dominating all aspects of life. Their illusion will be crushed by such a revelation. That is what I’m predicting will happen, and as President Trump waits out the storm, I would be willing to bet that he knows it too.

Rich Hoffman

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

There is No Such Thing as Universal Health Care for All: It’s a dumb idea created by dumb, lazy people hungry to control us all

When we are born there is no right to healthcare. Other people are not burdened with our support for life, and there is no guarantee that, that industry will even be around for our lifetime. The socialist fantasy of universal healthcare like a universal living wage are ridiculous notions born of lazy, below the line thinking. The problems of course are that people cannot be compelled just because they live to care for other people other than themselves. But more than anything, the healthcare industry itself is a changing business model and in its current state needs a lot of work. There is more to the fantasy alignment of socialism politically and socialism in medicine. One thing about modern medicine is that it is a very socialist enterprise and I personally despise it. Demanding funding to fill that monster isn’t a good idea and that is truly at the heart of the matter.

I am normally a very healthy person. One of my best features that I am very proud of is my immune system. As a kid I had perfect attendance for years in school and was seldom ever sick. As an adult I almost never miss work for anything and bounce back quickly when something major does happen. But I am over 50 now and that brings with it new challenges to a body that is beyond its reproductive usefulness. Nature has a way of rejecting bodies it no longer needs and as we age we all deal with the consequences of this effect. The world has little need for a human body that is no longer reproductive or seeking to be, so disease and degradation are facts of life for any aging person. But I still don’t accept that I am powerless to not determine my own fate so I found myself deathly sick for about three weeks at the end of 2018 and wondering the aisles of Wal-Mart at 6:30 AM seeking a way to combat my multiple ailments. I was highly suspicious that I may have ingested some government formed mutation of the flu designed to kill me because I just couldn’t shake this sickness and there were moments when I wondered if I was actually going to die.

My children were very worried, and as we moved into the New Year there was pressure to get over the sickness, so I could resume my life and all the people who need me to do my thing for their own benefit. So I won’t get into the details of what I had to do to fix myself. It certainly didn’t involve illegal drugs which I would never do under any circumstance. But I’m not going to give any of my enemies any knowledge of what I know about medicine and how to overcome attacks to my body from either genetically modified viruses or nanotechnology, let’s just say that. But I know more than most people could imagine and that condition will remain. However, for a while, I was concerned and actually considered that if I got it wrong, I may have ended up dead. So things got pretty serious. Yet when faced with the worst of it, going to the doctor was not an option, for contextual purposes.

There are times and places for doctors, but the system is so corrupt that I will avoid going even in life and death circumstances. I would trust myself more to come up with a solution than a doctor. Doctors as they are now are designed to take a sickness and extend it so that people lose their individuality and independence turning to drugs instead of their own immune systems and that is the dark little secret to the medical profession and why Democrats and other progressives want universal healthcare. They don’t want to fix people, they want to make more people’s lives dependent on the healthcare industry for which government seeks to control. It’s a very malicious plan.

As I explained to my daughters at the height of my own sickness, if a doctor had the ability to diagnose my condition then they would find prostate problems, cancer cell counts that were high, spinal alignment trouble, heart pressure problems and many other factors for which they would attempt to advise prescriptions to remedy. Most people would follow their recommendations to their own graves. As I told my kids I wasn’t ready to surrender any of my personal independence to drug companies and would rather die in the process, which I almost did a few times. But that’s how serious I was about it. As I have said many times the entire medical industry is turning toward regenerative growth, and it is there that I turned to solve my own problems, and likely always will. It works, it’s not a bunch of hippie science but in using what our bodies have their entire lives to stay healthy. I trust my immune system to fight off anything. If unusually genetically modified assailants come in contact with it, then sometimes that immune system needs a boost, but ultimately, that immune system needs to stay fighting ready all the time, and to be healthy. Our modern healthcare industry unfortunately seeks to destroy that trend and make adults more dependent on drugs than their own systems and that is the real terror that is behind the progressive universal care fantasy that is being championed by today’s Democrats.

By accepting universal healthcare for all it would be like accepting a dial-up telephone as the end of technical innovation for the medical industry. Instead of pushing for the next iPhone in technical breakthroughs where people weren’t just treated for being sick, but to restore them to complete health so that doctors and medicine didn’t have a monopoly of control on their lives is the trend that is trying to be born. With more political involvement the desire from Democrats is to prevent that opportunity because their ultimate desire is to use the medical industry to control the population, because like open borders, when they control whether or not people will live or die, that tends to have an effect on the ballot box and so far I haven’t heard anybody talk about that aspect of this argument. The Democrats don’t want to save people with universal healthcare, they want to control them.

As I provided in my personal example, I’d literally rather die than give up that personal freedom. I do not trust the medical industry to have my best health in mind when advising me on critical health issues. I’d rather take care of it myself which should say a lot. I’m by far a paranoid person, but I see a trend in medicine which indicates very below the line thinking. As an employer I am not impressed with a doctor’s note from an employee that does not come to work. I have to honor it legally, but it certainly changes how I feel about the employee as an option of investment for the future. And I exercise my rights to have such an opinion. Doctor’s don’t run my life in any way, they don’t tell me what drugs to take, what surgeries to have, or how productive I’ll be. And I am certainly not open to giving them more power with a guaranteed government backing for their industry with universal healthcare. I think that is the dumbest idea in the history of ideas for an industry that needs much less bureaucratic elements and much more innovation. People need to be restored to health not dependent on more government and the current health care industry does not fix people properly, and that is the heart of the conversation, not a right to something that is bad for you to begin with.

Rich Hoffman

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