Tag: Hollywood insight

The Unconquered Donald Trump: Results from the first GOP presidential debate of 2016

I think Donald Trump had a bit of a “crap this is real” moment leading up to the first Republican debate for the presidential race of 2016 on Fox News, but he quickly recovered—as I expected him to. It started civil, but quickly escalated into what we expected from Trump, aggression, boldness, and a very short fuse in regards to incompetence. And that’s why he’s ahead in the polls, and why he continues to dominate. People are sick of the other types of politicians who were on the stage with Trump. We’ve seen them before and they don’t have what it takes to fix what’s broken in Washington. At its heart, what is broken in the Beltway are politicians and their propensity toward greed. Only a person of great wealth can resist the temptations of K-Street and as well-intentioned as some of the presidential candidates were during the debate, I think their time is in 2024, not 2016. If I were interviewing all of them for a job, I would give the presidency to Donald Trump overwhelmingly over the other candidates for two simple reasons, he’s used to getting things done on his own and he can resist the temptation of power—because he already has it.

It was stunning really to see how the progressive left covered the debate leading up to the event. The new strategy from the left now that Trump is a serious candidate is to call his supporters dumb. One reference I read from someone at NBC on Twitter was that Trump’s supporters tended to only have a high school education or less—which is supposed to be a considerable insult. Many of those same types said the same things about Reagan, so Trump is in good company. But I found the statement interesting.

Progressives love college because they have the institutions filled with professors who are foot soldiers of recruitment for their cause. Progressives can’t wait to get young people alone from their families and on campus so they can take the bright young minds of America and steer them further toward liberalism. So yes, they encourage kids to go to college so they can get their hooks into the minds of the young without the influence of their parents around to protect them. These days the years between the ages of 18 to 22 destroy most of the potential lives of a large portion of our population with instructed progressive viewpoints preventing most college graduates from ever getting up off the mat once they’ve been knocked down upon it. People who have not been so defeated in their lives may in fact lean toward Donald Trump for that very reason, because they are not yet defeated people, and see in the billionaire a similar person also undefeated. But it has nothing to do with a lack of intellect between those who support Trump, or don’t. It has to do with whether or not those voters function from a defeated personal position, or still have fight left in them.

Trump was clearly the smartest guy on stage at least from strategic intellectual nimbleness. I couldn’t tell Megan Kelly either how I would force Mexico to build a wall, just as I couldn’t describe to someone how I would sell them a new car. People who are good at things can just do it. People who have made great livings at making deals are just good at such things. They can’t explain those types of things to the unskilled, the conquered, or naive. Most young people are conquered by one of two ways, through their military service and the rituals of basic training, or through their college experience. I think both have tragic ramifications to the mind nurtured through most of their lives toward individualism. I have watched many bright young people have their lives destroyed during the college years. Girls who were saints in high school, who practiced abstinence while at home with their parents to monitor their activities are some of the first to be conquered in college with cocaine habits given to them by men looking to exploit their relative freshness—lifestyles conducive to the college experience. I have been to college dorms, particularly freshman housing and witnessed a lot of nudity, smelled a lot of drugs, and watched young people give their lives away to indulgence for which they are permanently damaged—for the rest of their lives. Colleges are progressive utopias of intellectual destruction.

But not all kids are destroyed in college. Some actually excel, and Donald Trump was one of them. If a person survives the experience, they can actually be toughened up to a point where progressive influence cannot reach them. They are a rare breed, but they are very resolute in their decision-making. This is the kind of fire which forged Donald Trump. And it was obvious with him on the stage at the debate. Candidates like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz might be more lawyerly astute to be president, but that’s not what America needs right now. It needs someone who knows how to hire the right people, and Trump excels at that because as an unconquered person, he is able to spot others who are also of the same mind. And that is the key to solving America’s current problems. We don’t need anther lawyer or the smartest guy in the room. We need a guy who is unconquered and can staff the White House with similar types who are better at tasks than he is.

Anyone who understands management knows that they key to being good at it requires the constant recruitment and nurturing of those who are better at specific tasks than you are. A proper manager has to have a lot of general knowledge so they can speak to lots of people about their specific tasks, but they don’t get lost in the weeds, because that’s what they hire other people to do. They don’t have to be everything to everyone. They just need to know how to recruit and maintain enough knowledge to maintain those relationships. Specific knowledge on investing might be great for the field of making money, but it is useless in the understanding of arms negotiations. If a person is great at one and not the other and they happen to be president, then their administration will be lopsided in one field, and deficient in all the rest. It would be Trump’s job as president to find the best people to fill all those fields, and he’d have to have enough general knowledge to nurture those relationships with some sort of direction. But it’s not his job to perform all those jobs. So to answer the border question regarding Mexico with specifics, it’s not Trump’s job. He has no idea. But he does know how to hire the best people and recruit them to his cause, and that is how he’d perform the task. However, it’s impossible to explain such a thing to people not skilled in leadership.

But that’s the world we are living in. It is run by college graduates and military veterans who have mostly been conquered in some fashion or another. They confuse intelligence based on the scale of compliance that they have endured as opposed to the unconquered types who possess natural leadership ability. Sometimes that leadership lasts through the vetting process most young people endure through their post high school years. A lot of the time natural leadership carves their own path completely free of the gate keepers and orthodox thinking shaped by progressive social programmers. And they just excel, just as Trump did as a young man. And they do as presidential candidates because winning is just in their nature. You can take such people and bury them with impossibility, but they always find their way out of trouble and turn mud into gold—because they are part of the select few who are members of the unconquered class. Trump is certainly one of them, which is why he is my best pick for President of the United States. For him it’s a job demotion. For everyone else on stage with him at the debates, it was a dream come true. And after a while, Trump realized that once all the hoopla from the media calmed down he found himself quite comfortable in the center of the stage—where he’s used to being. It was then that he showed the progressive left that their biggest fears were coming true—and there isn’t anything they can do about it. Nothing is working, not even calling people stupid for supporting Trump, which is why they continue to do it—because they have no other recourse.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Hoffman Laissez Faire: A new style of management for the 22nd Century

The issue was not settled by Douglas McGregor from the MIT Sloan School of Management when he came up with Theory X and Theory Y concepts on how to utilize workforce motivation.  Rather constant innovation is always needed to push the boundaries and to refine previous thoughts until something new is revealed that nobody on the face of the earth has seen before.   Particularly, I have always disagreed with Theory X and have always found Theory Y to be entirely too relaxed.  So I spent the last 17 years refining a style of my own which was inspired by two people I consider to be some of the best leaders in history.  One is the football coach Sam Wyche from the Cincinnati Bengals and later Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the other is Claire Lee Chennault.  The football coach invented new aspects to an old game and was involved in developing Hall of Fame talent like Joe Montana, Warren Sapp, John Lynch and Derrick Brooks.  The other essentially prevented Japan from taking China during World War II—all by himself.   However, both men suffered from history as Theory X and Theory Y types have written the history books not sure or outright resentful of the success of their betters, which I have always found immensely interesting—actually I have been obsessed with that cause and effect.  This has prompted me to create my own management style which was developed to explain the conditions of the two leaders indicated.  I call it Hoffman Laissez Faire and I have just concluded a multi-decade research project that proves its dramatic success which I will explain the value for with some context.

In the United States, essentially created by the economist Adam Smith and his “invisible hand” concept of economic motivation and development, laissez fair capitalism is the best method of creating not only wealth for a country, but an entire race of people.  Since laissez faire capitalism scares 90 percent of the population who are not functioning from a proper personal value system that allows for that brand of economic motivation to manifest, it is important then to look at the various modes of personal management that drives people in their daily lives to understand why.  Most people live their lives in the easy way taught to them as children, the authoritarian system of Theory X which comes to them first from their parents—which they never escape.  That is the reason for the 50-year-old over-weight office employee who begins planning their lunch the moment they clock in for the day who is as productive as a flat tire shredded on the rim of a beat-up old car.  They have been taught Theory X management styles and accept them to the point that they no longer think from their own input, but from others.  In their homes, their parents controlled their first thoughts, and then it was their jobs.  So of course they vote that way and elect politicians who do the same things.  It is unreasonable to expect a company full of Theory X employees to vote in favor of a United States President who advocates laissez faire capitalism.  Rather, they would likely find socialism more appealing, because it most represents Theory X management styles.  So to fix the nation of America you cannot start at the top, but at the level of people’s personal management styles and fix that before any hope of a democratic republic can have hopes of success.

Theory X and Theory Y are models of the type of employees that managers may encounter in the workplace. These models are used to prepare tactics and protocols on how to deal with employees to maximize production and profit.

According to this theory, type X individuals are inherently lazy and unhappy with their jobs. Therefore, an authoritarian management style is required to ensure fulfillment of the individuals’ objectives. These workers need close supervision with comprehensive systems of control and a hierarchical structure is needed with tight controls at every level. According to this theory, employees will show little ambition without an enticing incentive program, and will avoid responsibility. According to Dr. Kumi Mark, if organizational goals are to be met, ‘Theory X’ managers must rely heavily on the threat of punishment to gain employee compliance. When practiced this theory can lead to mistrust, highly restrictive supervision and a punitive atmosphere. The ‘Theory X’ manager believes that all actions can be traced, and the responsible individual needs a direct reward or a reprimand according to the action’s outcomes. This managerial style is more effective when used to motivate a workforce that is not inherently motivated to perform. It is usually exercised in professions where promotion is infrequent, unlikely or even impossible and where workers perform repetitive tasks. One major flaw of this management style is that it limits employee potential and discourages creative thinking.

‘Theory Y’ managers assume employees can be ambitious, self-motivated and exercise self-control. Employees enjoy their mental and physical work duties and for them, work is as natural as play. They possess creative problem solving abilities, but their talents are underused in most organizations. ‘Theory Y’ managers believe that given the proper conditions, employees will learn to seek out and accept responsibility, exercise self-control and self-direction in accomplishing their objectives. A ‘Theory Y’ manager believes that, given the right conditions, most people will want to do well at work. They believe that the satisfaction of doing a good job is a strong motivation. Many people interpret ‘Theory Y’ as a positive set of beliefs about workers. A close reading of ‘The Human Side of Enterprise’ reveals that McGregor simply argues for managers to be open to a more positive view of workers and the possibilities that this creates. He thinks that ‘Theory Y’ managers are more likely than ‘Theory X’ managers to develop a climate of trust with employees required for employee development. This would include managers communicating openly with subordinates, minimizing the tension in superior-subordinate relationships, creating a comfortable environment in which subordinates can develop and use their abilities. This environment would include sharing of decision-making so that subordinates have a say in decisions that influence them.

Then of course there is Theory Z which came as a kind of off-spring in management evolution.  It’s a name for various theories of human motivation built on Douglas McGregor‘s Theory X and Theory Y. Theories X, Y and various versions of Z have been used in human resource management, organizational behavior, organizational communication and organizational development.

One Theory Z was developed by Abraham H. Maslow in his paper “Theory Z” and the other is Dr. William Ouchi’s so-called “Japanese Management” style popularized during the Asian economic boom of the 1980s. The third was developed by W. J. Reddin in Managerial Effectiveness.

McGregor’s Theory Y in contrast to Theory X, which stated that workers inherently dislike and avoid work and must be driven to it, and Theory Y, which stated that work is natural and can be a source of satisfaction when aimed at higher order human psychological needs.

For Ouchi, Theory Z focused on increasing employee loyalty to the company by providing a job for life with a strong focus on the well-being of the employee, both on and off the job. According to Ouchi, Theory Z management tends to promote stable employment, high productivity, and high employee morale and satisfaction.

Ironically, “Japanese Management” and Theory Z itself were based on Dr. W. Edwards Deming‘s famous “14 points“. Deming, an American scholar whose management and motivation theories were more popular outside the United States, went on to help lay the foundation of Japanese organizational development during their expansion in the world economy in the 1980s. (CLICK HERE TO READ MY OPINION OF DEMMING)  Deming’s theories are summarized in his two books, Out of the Crisis and The New Economics, in which he spells out his “System of Profound Knowledge”. He was a frequent advisor to Japanese business and government leaders, and eventually became a revered counselor. Deming was awarded the Second Order of the Sacred Treasures by the former Emperor Hirohito, and American businesses tried to use his “Japanese” approach to improve their competitive position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_X_and_Theory_Y

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_Z

Abraham Maslow, a psychologist and the first theorist to develop a theory of motivation based upon human needs produced a theory that had three assumptions. First, human needs are never completely satisfied. Second, human behavior is purposeful and is motivated by need for satisfaction. Third, these needs can be classified according to a hierarchical structure of importance from the lowest to highest (Maslow, 1970).

  1. Physiological need
  2. Safety needs
  3. Belongingness and love needs
  4. The esteem needs –self-confidence
  5. The need forself-actualization – the need to reach your full potential

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory helps the manager to understand what motivates an employee. By understanding what needs must be met in order for an employee to achieve the highest-level of motivation, managers are then able to get the most out of production. Theory X, Y and Z all play a role in how a company should manage successfully. Theory X and Theory Y were both written by Douglas McGregor, a social psychologist who is believed to be a key element in the area of management theory. In Mc.Gregor’s book The Human Side of Enterprise (1960), McGregor describes Theory X and Theory Y based upon Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, where McGregor grouped the hierarchy into a lower order (Theory X) needs and a higher order (Theory Y) needs. McGregor suggested that management could use either set of needs to motivate employees, but better results could be gained by the use of Theory Y, rather than Theory X (Heil, Bennis, & Stephens, 2000).

All those methods are insufficient to the modern task. The two great leaders I mentioned previously, Claire Lee Chennault and Sam Wyche were using something else which I would term a unique variation of laissez faire management styles.  The laissez-faire leadership style is where all the rights and power to make decisions is fully given to the worker. This was first described by Lewin, Lippitt, and White in 1938, along with the autocratic leadership and the democratic leadership styles. The laissez-faire style is sometimes described as a “hands off” leadership style because the leader delegates the tasks to their followers while providing little or no direction to the followers. If the leader withdraws too much from their followers it can sometimes result in a lack of productivity, cohesiveness, and satisfaction.[8]

Laissez-faire leaders allow followers to have complete freedom to make decisions concerning the completion of their work. It allows followers a high degree of autonomy and self-rule, while at the same time offering guidance and support when requested. The laissez-faire leader using guided freedom provides the followers with all materials necessary to accomplish their goals, but does not directly participate in decision making unless the followers request their assistance.

This is an effective style to use when:

  • Followers are highly skilled, experienced, and educated.
  • Followers have pride in their work and the drive to do it successfully on their own.
  • Outside experts, such as staff specialists or consultants are being used.
  • Followers are trustworthy and experienced.

This style should NOT be used when:

  • Followers feel insecure at the unavailability of a leader.
  • The leader cannot or will not provide regular feedback to their followers.[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_style

Obviously a society who is trying to have a laissez faire form of capitalism needs voters from a democratic republic who function best within a laissez faire form of personal management.  And in tomorrow’s article I’ll elaborate more how and why this form of management is far superior to all the other methods mentioned within this text. My Hoffman variation to the laissez faire system is not casual, as one might imagine it to be, or misdiagnosed from a distance.  It’s rather intense, but it never robs people of their merit or emotional investment in the task at hand, which is incredibly important.  It requires the manager to be uniquely good and diverse at many levels to understand the emotional climate that employees need to function within to fully utilize the gifts of their productivity. These definitions are important before moving into the more advance notions of laissez faire leadership which I will do in the next article on this topic.  This article is but a foundation to begin building upon so that everything that comes next can be referenced correctly to the curious mind.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

‘They Live’s’ Rowdy Roddy Piper: Kicking Ass in the afterlife

Rowdy Roddy Piper died in his sleep at his home on Thursday July 30th 2015 at the relatively young age of 61. He was a popular wrestler and media personality who starred in one of my favorite movies, They Live by John Carpenter. He had one of the best lines in cinema history in that film where his character declared to the half human insurgent aliens taking over the human race, “I’m here to chew bubble gum and kick ass—and I’m all out of bubble gum.” Piper in his older years began to take on a personally more of a world outlook similar to the character he played in that cult classic speaking out openly against the Illuminati and the elements of the New World Order that are so evident. When I found out he died that was the first thing I thought of—was that “they” killed him. In all actuality he was a wrestler who lived a fairly hard life. Cardiac arrest is not all that uncommon for older men, so it’s a valid way to exit the world, but given his anti-Illuminati stance of late—particularly the work he was doing with Alex Jones—it is the first thing you tend to think of if you have knowledge of these types of things.

Rowdy Roddy Piper died in his sleep at his home on Thursday July 30th 2015 at the relatively young age of 61. He was a popular wrestler and media personality who starred in one of my favorite movies, They Live by John Carpenter. He had one of the best lines in cinema history in that film where his character declared to the half human insurgent aliens taking over the human race, “I’m here to chew bubble gum and kick ass—and I’m all out of bubble gum.” Piper in his older years began to take on a personally more of a world outlook similar to the character he played in that cult classic speaking out openly against the Illuminati and the elements of the New World Order that are so evident. When I found out he died that was the first thing I thought of—was that “they” killed him. In all actuality he was a wrestler who lived a fairly hard life. Cardiac arrest is not all that uncommon for older men, so it’s a valid way to exit the world, but given his anti-Illuminati stance of late—particularly the work he was doing with Alex Jones—it is the first thing you tend to think of if you have knowledge of these types of things.

If a body is in a weakened state due to cancer or other illnesses, then it is prone to the micro attacks by ultraterrestrial insurgents under fairly normal conditions. If those insurgents were purely fictional, like many claim them to be, I think Rowdy Roddy Piper would still be alive today. But, experience says there’s something to them, and when you make a stand against their strategies, they do impose their manipulations. So if an older man finds themselves in a weakened state health wise, they are prone to dying in their sleep. Healthy people might find themselves in car wrecks or in an avalanche of stressful circumstances designed to throw the curious mind off track, but for a pro wrestler who spent their life abusing their bodies, cardiac arrest in the quiet of night is the best option for removing a mouth piece against their tyranny.

Then again, sometimes people just die. There’s not always a conspiracy in everything. Often however, things are not always as they seem. Given Piper’s stance against the Illuminati of late right in the heart of the communication center of its activity–Hollywood, my suspicions are quite properly placed. I thought the same thing about Andrew Breitbart, where microbots were probably used to destroy his cell structure hoping his publishing empire would collapse in his absence. Piper wasn’t anywhere near as a threat compared to Breitbart was, but his pop culture status did make his opinions dangerous to those who desire control.

As I’ve said before, I don’t think the Illuminati or the globalist types are such scary people. To me they are just more parasites in competition for life on planet earth. They have their point of view which they seek to impose on others. What makes them evil is that they have no respect for the rights and thoughts of other individuals whom they seek to pull under their control and manipulation. In my judgment, any group that has to hide their intentions is weak, and what makes them ominous is their strategy of subtle subterfuge—as they often say one thing, but intend totally different things.

When Carpenter wrote They Live, he meant it as a cry against Reaganomics, which I emphatically support. He’s not completely right about all things, but his concept behind They Live is very interesting, and quite valid. There is more at work behind the efforts of the political elite, and it is attached to crony capitalism and socialism—which are methods of control. I am a supporter of laissez-faire capitalism and management styles, which is a totally different kind of capitalism from the crony kind. Reaganomics was more of a “let do” approach than the tightly controlled government regulation that we saw before and after Ronald Reagan, so I’m a supporter of the type of economics that allows for more people to participate in the creation of GDP. John Carpenter saw elements of crony capitalism under Reaganomics and deemed it part of the problem of economic inequality. So the context of his articulation was wrong as to the villain of the New World Order, but his concept was correct. It was the fictional mechanism of the Hoffman Lenses, the sunglasses that Rowdy Roddy Piper wore in They Live, which showed the true nature of the hidden world within society.

In reality it’s not so simple as aliens running around among us looking like skeletons under the view of Hoffman Lenses. The real villains are within the quantum realm and share space with us. They are not visible because they live in the very small realm of the 5th dimension and higher. They have their motives and they are in competition with the human race for attention within the context of life. They are not our friends or helpers. Religions have been concocted to appeal to them, but they do what they want when they want to do it. Fiction like They Live and vibrant personalities like Rowdy Roddy Piper are threats to them as the art of humanity can sometimes intrude on those ultraterrestrial plans—but its all fair game. “They” do no have a right to rule us, just as we don’t have a right to rule them. But they try to we have a right to fight back. But before you can fight them, you have to understand who “they” are—because they hide themselves from us for a reason.

In his closing days Piper was quite vocal about the hidden rulers of our planet. Some might think it was the ramblings of a former pro wrestler who wasn’t very smart and had endured a hard life to emerge a little crazy in his elderly years. But I think he realized that there was a genius in his John Carpenter movie role that he embraced more and more as he become older and more aware of the way the world really worked. Young pop icons like Miley Cyrus do not think about such things in their 20s. They just know that if they sell sex, drugs and music, that they become wealthy, which is a typical sell-out approach to those who rule over us all. When I was a kid my dad told me that if I didn’t start learning to “play” the game that “they’d” get me. He didn’t realize at the time what he was telling me, because I was the same kid who used to sing the song in church, “Yes Jesus Loves Me” but would refuse to sing the line, “because we are weak and he is strong.” I fundamentally challenged the concept of control within the church, even as a 7-year-old. So I certainly wasn’t willing to surrender my personal integrity to any human control mechanisms if I was challenging universal order. You see dear reader, I was born with Hoffman Lenses and I started viewing the world with them from the very first moments of my life. I always needed to know who “they” were, and I was always intent to refuse submission to them. To do that, you have to know who and what you are fighting.

Towards the end, even though it was a lifelong journey, I think Rowdy Roddy Piper was learning who “they” really were. But his real heart wasn’t as big as his intellectual heart, and if failed him in the middle of a night within his home. Age, lifestyle, and of course ultraterrestrial pressure likely did him in. Doctors will say it was natural causes—cardiac arrest. But their science ignores the 5th, 6th, and 7th dimensions, so that’s all the further they can go for diagnosis. But Hoffman Lenses say otherwise, and I will miss the Piper. He was a good dude, but he will live on. In the future, as silly as some think They Live was as a movie, it may become one of the most important things Rowdy Roddy Piper ever did. And I will be forever grateful that he played his part. Where he is now, he may have no need to chew bubble gum, but he can still kick ass.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

 

 

 

 

Capital Crime: Why Planned Parenthood is guilty of mass murder and should be defunded

I support stem cell research emphatically, and my position on abortion is that sometimes death is better than being raised by a terrible parent. Society does not have a good track record in replacing parents, so if a child is crippled with stupid parents they don’t have much chance at success as human beings, and their lives are sometimes better off not suffering through that lifetime of struggle by being aborted before birth. But make no mistake about it; Planned Parenthood is an institution of death. They are evil, and vile, and palaces of complicity into murder. They kill many more lives per year than all the firearms of the world, and their employees are murderers.   And the government steals our money in the form of taxes and funds this vast evil pulling all of us into the mass killings. When John Boehner wonders why house members are moving to remove him from leadership all he needs to do is look in the mirror. He has the power to de-fund Planned Parenthood, to repeal Obamacare, to push for lower taxes, the prosecution of Lois Lerner, the investigations into Benghazi, the IRS, and many other criminal activity directly associated with the federal government, but he does nothing but illicit pretty words of sternness—while obviously protecting the political elite culture in Capital Hill. But the worse of his and all members of the federal government is the support of Planned Parenthood as an institution of death. The extent of their evil is evident in the collection of videos released by the Center for Medical Progress shown below.

Obviously the culture of Planned Parenthood is rampant with a bunch of villains from Jurassic World; a bunch of Doctor Wu’s who are willing to sell human body parts for research in exchange for cash. Because genetic research is a relatively new field of endeavor and there are more lobbyists on K-Street pushing this business of stem cells from aborted fetuses than there are prostitutes—which is quite a statement—the employment culture of the tax payer funded abortion clinics is one in dealing death with a blasé attitude toward life. The doctors shown in the videos are completely numb to any reference to life in the fetuses which indicates that all employees of Planned Parenthood are well on their way toward a Soylent Green mentality that have lost value in the human race. It’s a living nightmare that is as real life as the sun is in the sky. And we, as a species, do not know what to do with our emotions on the topic.

At this point so many people have had to make the decision to have an abortion sometime in their life that they have by default become numb to the practice of death. Since we all have some of our money involved in this abortion practice, it is hard to look at ourselves and judge Planned Parenthood as the evil organization that it is—because we all have our hands a little dirty in their activity. Just as we do with the IRS, the public school situation, and every other activity promoted by government toward collectivism over individualism—Planned Parenthood has a stance of destroying individual lives through abortion to preserve the greater good of stem cell research and social management. To the government types who have built Planned Parenthood putting unwanted children into the welfare culture unnecessarily taxes the resources of the government’s ability to manage all those new mouths to feed, which is exacerbated by the illegal immigrant stance that many on the political left have. When it comes to social management, the government is more interested in a diverse global culture so they promote white and black America to have abortions so that the future populations of those demographic groups are outpaced by immigrant populations. The goal of government is demographic management and they are willing to kill some types of potential people to have other types emerge dominate in future elections. But killing is killing, and Hitler had similar plans in Germany. It’s all evil. Hitler was vile and evil, but then again, so is Planned Parenthood. The only difference is the time of death, before or after the birth of a child.

The argument of whether life begins at conception is about as valid as to whether or not Bill Clinton had sex with Monica Lewinsky. To provide a legal term to common sense comes out sounding like a lie to hide an evil. Life is life and it wants to live even if it is just a sperm looking for an egg, or an egg looking to plant itself in a uterus waiting with all hope to be fertilized by a sperm. It is ironic that out of thousands of potential sperm it is only one that breaks through to become a child. That symbolism within that biological act signifies the importance of every individual life. That life may not make it to a fully functioning human being, but if that life is snuffed out through abortion with no chance at all—it is evil to act in such a manner. That is a human decision rooted in evil, the same evil that kills another human being after they have been born and raised by parents and society to be functioning people. Life is life whether it’s in the form of a plant, a fetus, or a 90-year-old man. It’s all life, you can’t cheapen it in one aspect then expect it to thrive in other aspects.

To my mind children are the most important resource that any culture can have. As babies they are full of life’s potential, even if they are unfortunately born handicapped. Their life is full of infinite possibilities. They are just wonderful. But around age 12-13 once puberty kicks in and they are taught to build their lives around reproductive hobbies, they are much less interesting, and begin the long march toward stagnant adulthood. By age 15 they lose the wonder of life and begin to see limits everywhere. Most adult lives are failures—they are concessions of the dreams of their childhoods—and are sad. Too often they transfer that disappointment onto their own offspring prematurely limiting their intellectual growth—and that is very sad to watch. When I see it happening, abortion seems like a reasonable alternative. One death is quick; one is very slow taking a lifetime to get there. But it is all sad. I always hope among every child I meet that they will have the benefit of a good life with good influences that will teach them to dream and achieve, instead of conceding and maintaining intellectual stagnation. But for most of them, that’s not the case and it always makes me sad to see. Without a chance at life, they have nothing to hope for—especially when that life is snuffed out of them before they are even born.

That’s where we find ourselves with this tragic situation. Planned Parenthood with the federal government at its back is promoting the death of children through abortion. The more the better as far as those abortion clinics go, but it was never revealed why so many deaths were wanted or needed. Now we discover there is an entire black market industry that is taking the aborted fetuses and selling those body parts for extra money on the side, feeding an industry of evil and there are no laws to prevent the behavior because of the lobbyists that have made sure that things remain that way. Politicians like Boehner had to know about this practice through lobby connections around Capital Hill, but only until now did the grim reality of that industry show itself in the bland comments of these Planned Parenthood workers. The only defense politicians like Nancy Pelosi have is to attack the Center for Medical Progress for taking the video. They can’t dispute that there are multiple Planned Parenthood employees who are obviously in the business of trafficking human body parts from aborted babies, they can only attack the delivery of the message and to declare through fancy public relation’s firms that death is a non issue only analyzed by a Fox News demographic. That’s how terribly evil these people are.

What is lost in the entire discussion is a defense of the life, the potentiality of all life and the basic premise of humanity to provide that opportunity—even to the very small and unprotected. Abortion is a disgusting enterprise that is now one step closer to pure evil, because of the black market that Planned Parenthood routinely supports. The depth of that activity is just becoming known. So the burden is now on congress and the senate to de-fund Planned Parenthood. Tax payers at the bare minimum should not be pulled into such a vast evil with the support of their money. If Planned Parenthood wants to be involved in such ridiculous evil, they need to do it with their own money and resources. Given the amount of babies they have sold to the black market, they should be able to fund themselves—with profit to spare. They don’t need tax payer money to make the situation even worse.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Second Call Defense: George Lang, and Sean Maloney on Matt Clark’s show as I perform to applause

About the same time that I was competing in the Speed Switch contest with my bullwhip at the Annie Oakley Festival in Darke County, Ohio, several of my friends were gathered together on Matt Clark’s WAAM radio broadcast to discuss Second Call Defense. Yes, I did win. It’s a hard contest for whip artists because it requires dexterity with both hands. You have to be able to hit an equal number of targets with both hands, and most whip artists are proficient with only one. So I usually do very well with that one. But I was thinking of Matt and his two guests George Lang and Sean Maloney of Second Call Defense as I was hitting my targets. I am pretty busy these days and can’t be everywhere at once. But I’m a pretty good manager of people and resources, so I can get a lot done with a lot of plates spinning in the air. Second Call Defense, the Annie Oakley event, Matt’s radio show and all my other hobbies, projects and interests are all part of my personal exercise of cracking whips against targets in a very precise way. For me the situation is a two-fold strategic advancement—both involving promotion of the Second Amendment. Where I was people openly wore guns on their hips that were real and nobody thought a thing about the theater shooting in Louisiana where calls for more gun control broke out after a maniac shot several people for no good reason. The people I spent my weekend with were nowhere near willing to give up their guns. It was a dramatic impossibility quite evident, which I always find refreshing. Meanwhile the solution to the Louisiana shooting was to make that theater a gun zone, instead of an area where people couldn’t be armed. And for people who do carry and find themselves in a shooting, they need to call my friends at Second Call Defense. Listen to the radio broadcast with Matt Clark, George Lang and Sean Maloney here:

The key point of the discussion was over the George Zimmerman issue. Second Call Defense could have prevented the national embarrassment that the case became, and they explained why in the audio clip, which is extremely important. At my Annie Oakley event I may have been in the safest place on planet earth, and I was surrounded by more guns than some countries have in their entire arsenal. Nobody was going to pose a danger to anybody while I was cracking bullwhips in my competition. Even our announcer at the event, Gery Deer was packing a six-gun, and nobody batted an eye. Meanwhile, a gun carrier could have shot John Houser as he began shooting 11 people. If someone else in the theater could have shot back, the incident would have been a lot less bloody.

Yet the impediment to corrective action regarding the Louisiana shooting and all the others over the last few years has been a desire to use tragedy to create more gun legislation instead of the correct effort at putting more guns into the hands of the competent. In the case of Zimmerman who did shoot someone it was decided upon first inspection of the case that he did what he was supposed to do, police are not always the friends of the property owner. As stated by Sean in the audio with Matt Clark, once you fire a gun, you and your property become a crime scene and you lose your rights until you prove yourself innocent. That is not how it should be, but that’s how it is. If you pick up the phone and speak with adrenaline behind your voice, what you say can and will be held against you, even under the best of intentions. Police work for politicians, and politicians are very vulnerable to political pressure. And that’s what happened in the Zimmerman case. It became political and soon there was a desire to sacrifice Zimmerman to the wolves of racism. The whole case would have been wrapped up in a grand jury shortly after the shooting if George Zimmerman had only called Second Call Defense right after he shot Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman went several weeks without legal protection, and he gave a lot of statements thinking that he was innocent because the police initially didn’t want to file charges under the stand your ground law. But politics demanded a sacrifice and thus George Zimmerman’s life changed forever.

There are bad guys out there and they are the goons, the punks and the creeps who stand against the American Constitution. That is the best way to frame good and evil in reference to our present society. Trayvon Martin was in a place he shouldn’t have been and he acted in a hostile way when approached by someone checking him out. Private property is to be defended by the Second Amendment. The world is not owned by collective villages and communist sympathizers created by the music industry—it is owned by private investment. Gated communities are meant to keep out undesirables who don’t respect hard work and effort. It can be argued that not everyone is worthy of privilege, and that some are born into circumstances where they have a disadvantage, but in America if you want something, you can have it. And those who do have it deserve to protect it from those who might deface, or take it. Sometimes the unfortunate situation occurs where someone attempts to impose themselves on your private property, or even your life and you have to defend yourself. That’s when you’ll need Second Call Defense. It’s as American as Apple Pie.

That of course stands in stark contrast to the direction of progressive society. But that’s OK, they’re wrong in their position—clearly. They cause far more damage to people than they help with all their rules. The correct path is the one that I know well from my cowboy friends who seek to preserve the lessons learned during westward expansion. The gun in American culture is probably more important than the sword is in Japanese society. The gun made America great and I think every human being should wear one on their hip, just as they were able to in the early days of the Gold Rush. Wear them on the golf course, wear them to dinner, wear them to the shopping mall. Sell little fringe stocking accessories for guns at Victoria’s Secret for the ladies—in other words embrace more fully the gun in American culture and stop listening to these idiotic progressives. Two well armed people sitting next to John Houser in Lafayette could have put him down in about 1.2 seconds and the situation would have been over. Help could have been on the way for the first victims and a lot of trouble would have been prevented.

At 1:35 PM on Saturday July 25, 2015 I was finishing up my round of the Speed Switch contest to an applause that I never get tired of hearing. I enjoy the hot sun, the smell of popcorn and hot dogs and the sight of cotton candy in the stands held by children watching us perform. I like seeing little kids wonder how I am able to move so fast. Every year I attend that Annie Oakley event as a spectator and competitor, it renews my resolve into not just protecting the American Constitution, but in defending the Anti Federalist Papers which challenged it during the Constitutional Convention. Yes I know the young guys are gunning for me who compete with me, and they hope that I won’t show so they can win, but it’s my job to push them along—to make them want to get better. And we all get along well in the end and have a good time. I don’t always win everything. Some of the young guys are getting pretty good—and that makes me happy. But it was about that time that my friend George Lang came on WAAM with my other friend Matt Clark and as the applause abated I wondered how the show was going in Ann Arbor, Michigan. It was to me an important strategic moment as it gave even more radio coverage to something I think every American should have—Second Call Defense.

I appreciated the call out from George and Sean at the end of the broadcast. Southwestern Ohio is Overmanwarrior country, and they know what that means. A lot more people use Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom to guide them through these tough times than people would care to admit, including many very serious national personalities. My role in all that is in shaping a philosophy that is needed for a new century of American greatness—complete with magnificent innovation. There are many very important people across the nation who read every day, and I am happy to help them sort through some of these difficult tasks. Matt and George are part of that offense, and they know what to do. But for me, I get my energy in the heart of America, in places like the Annie Oakley Festival where guns are as common as stars in a clear night sky.

There was a family that I watched shoot all that day from the Single Action Shooting Society—a husband and wife team with their two teenage boys. They competed hard all day long and were really into their work. I admired their effort, and determination. At the end of the event they all walked around the other exhibits holding hands and openly showing that they loved each other. They were good people; some might say “God fearing people.” I would just say they were people of good quality. They walked with a sureness that came from knowing where they stood in the universe. And on all their hips was a fine six-shooter .45. They were unafraid because they where all highly skilled in the art of shooting, and knew they could handle anything that came their way. If they had been in the Lafayette theater it is unlikely that John Houser could have gotten off a shot once he showed himself as a threat. The father of the family was getting routine times of about .380 of a second in his draw times. Houser wouldn’t have made it past a second shot if that guy had been sitting in that theater packed with his guns. That is the solution to gun violence. And for those who use guns to defend the American Constitution, they must have Second Call Defense to protect themselves from the parasites of progressive society who don’t even know who Annie Oakley was, or where Darke County, Ohio is in the world, and why it’s so important.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Trump and Scott Walker: Dealing with bullies, and then some

Yet again Donald Trump shows why he is gaining support. I certainly support the way he conducted himself in regard to the Scott Walker campaign and the Des Moines Register leaving Amalia Nash to issue a statement after being banned from a Trump event, “We are disappointed that Mr. Trump’s campaign has taken the unusual step of excluding Register reporters from covering his campaign event in Iowa on Saturday because he was displeased with our editorial. As we previously said, the editorial has no bearing on our news coverage. We work hard to provide Iowans with coverage of all the candidates when they spend time in Iowa, and this is obviously impeding our ability to do so. We hope Mr. Trump’s campaign will revisit its decision instead of making punitive decisions because we wrote something critical of him.” That something that they wrote was that he was “a feckless blowhard who can generate headlines, name recognition and polling numbers not by provoking thought, but by provoking outrage.” Ahhhh, did the Register get its little feelings hurt? And again from one of Scott Walker’s top supporters who called Trump a “dumb, dumb” in an email—what were they thinking?

What the press is trying to invoke is that silly little game that is taught in all public schools, the peer pressure application of majority rule. The press and these other campaigns can’t fight Trump toe to toe, so they are seeking to build consensus against him with name calling and other insults hoping to paint him a certain way to slow his momentum. This is because their methods of advancement are not built around aggressive offense, but manipulative defense. The Register wants to be able to editorialize with immunity Trump’s campaign, but they don’t want to get an editorial about their behavior back. And Walker’s supporters want their man to stay in front, so they think some peer pressure insult will preserve that. We live in a world that does not expect conflict these days allowing for passive aggressive types to rule in their usual manner—through non confrontation feeding their manipulation abilities. In this way 5’ 5” runts can take down a 6’ 3” billionaire who is obviously more gifted in verbal insults and financial backing—not to mention physical presence. That is the spirit behind their insults. They don’t want peace, or a good campaign ran cleanly by all candidates. They just want to shoot without being shot back.

But Trump engages everyone he can. I’m sure he can’t get to every insult, but he gets to as many as he can, which is refreshing to see from someone who is running for a political seat. We have had to endure many years now of President Obama’s skinny little ass manipulating his way into power unchecked, largely because nobody punched him in the nose directly for the insults he casts out like water over Niagara Falls. That silly behavior goes back to all our school days where if a bunch of kids make fun of you, the implied assumption is that it is your burden to change the behavior to avoid the insult.   But that’s not the right thing to do. When someone challenges you, you have to meet that challenge with either equal force, or greater force. My policy of course is greater force. It works very effectively. When someone takes a shot at me I go well out of my way to make their life a living nightmare. If they do it with passive aggressive implementation, I’ll give it back to them 20 times over. If they do it with force, I’ll match it or surpass it. But I typically answer every insult eventually. Sometimes it’s good to play a waiting game with those challengers, to let them think you’ve forgotten and that they’re off the hook. But that’s part of the game in winning. Sometimes it takes me ten years or more to collect on a debt, but collect I always do—with interest. It’s a policy I’ve lived by all of my life. I don’t go out of my way to make trouble. I live and let live until someone takes a shot. Then the cannons turn toward that target and I’ll hunt them down until I get them and then some. 100% of the time. I’m 47 and have always been like that, and it’s not going to change now. Trump I’m happy to say is precisely the same way, and I LOVE IT!

I understand what he meant regarding Walker when Trump said “Finally I can attack,” now that the rival presidential candidate has openly made a move against him. It’s hard sometimes to know who is doing what. In the passive aggressive world that we live in it’s hard to know friend from foe, so I usually do a lot of checking before making a commitment to hunt someone down. I give them the benefit of the doubt because I know it will be hell for them, and I don’t want to do it unjustly. Walker is a good presidential candidate under regular circumstances and he did a good job in Wisconsin under hard conditions. But now that I know more about his wife, I’ll never vote for him. She’s not the kind of woman I want to see as first lady—that’s for sure. But Walker as Trump said is a fighter so that makes him worthy of consideration, and some respect. That respect can make one pause when a punch in the mouth is needed. So now that the Walker camp has been caught as not being such a nice presidential candidate, Trump can now look beyond that initial respect and unleash his fury on the Wisconsin governor. It’s a very liberating feeling to know who your enemies are, because it gives a clean target to go after.

But in this passive aggressive world that we’re living in, that’s not how people do things. So they are a little shocked when they get it back when they give it. I learned this method in public school and took those lessons into my adult life. As a kid I resisted joining with group affiliations, which seemed to be the entire point of public school. I think the facts easily support that assumption. Kids picked at me for a number of years as I studied their behavior. Instead of complying I learned how to deal with them through bullwhip training, martial arts and essentially learning to fear nothing. By the time I was a junior in high school I had a reputation of having no fear of anything under any circumstances. And when I fought someone, they didn’t get back up on their own. It started with me actually on the first day of school in kindergarten. I never complied with bullies. In the first grade I actually stabbed the biggest bully in school in the eye with a pair of scissors. He tried again to come after me in the 7th grade, many years later and I fought him in the hall so hard that I actually threw him into the principal’s office. Yes I got into a lot of trouble, but it was well worth it. Once I hit high school starting with being a freshman I was already refining myself into what I would become as an adult. By the time I was a senior, I was untouchable, it didn’t matter who or how many. The only real vulnerability was from close friends who you’d think you’d never have to fight like that, but of course, sometimes you do. By the time I was 19 and married I turned my attention not to individual bullies, but companies and politicians, which is something I’ve been involved with now for almost thirty years. I hate bullies but I love to punish them and I can give it to them any way they dish it. And it feels good to bring justice to their antics.

Trump obviously understands everything I just said and he likely has a similar background. People who avoid being broken as children make much better adults. You can tell who is who based on their behavior. Passive aggressive types are largely those who have been broken through peer pressure in the past, so they resort to those strategies to gain control in the future. They will lie right to your face, and then do something entirely different behind your back. Because they were broken at some point in their past, they resort to manipulation to rise to the top hoping that they can sneak past the other bullies with passive aggressive domination. And it works with most of the world, except for people like Trump. Being an unbroken man he has no idea what failure is, or losing to someone else-not to a level where he didn’t recover his loses in some way or another. It’s true; you can’t win everything all the time. You can’t control the success or failure of other people. They may have luck in their sails and may come out on top in a rivalry with you. But you can control your reaction to it, and if you keep the pressure on and press, and press, and press—eventually they will open up and you can take your shot.

I want a president who will take the shot. I don’t want a wimpy soothsayer, I want someone who will pursue his enemies to the ends of the earth and destroy them utterly if needed. I have no problem with that. I live by the same code and clearly understand it. The world would be filled with a lot more respect if everyone behaved like that. For instance, I don’t bother people until they bother me. I put up with a lot to give other people their individual freedom, even if I don’t agree with their choices. I do not impose myself on others. But when they impose on me, that’s it. They make enemies of me for life. I never forget, or forgive. And the more Trump talks, the more I learn that he is the same type of personality. That is why if the press and other candidates want a civil debate with Trump, they better not fire any shots toward him. He’ll thrive on their attempt and will pursue them forever. It’s in his nature. If they start something the bets are safe that he’ll finish it. If he’s like me he’ll still be thinking about such things 20 to 30 years later and will have the silent checklist in his head that he’ll only erase once they’ve departed the earth in the form of a grave.   For me, not even then. But not everyone wants to carry around grudges that long, so I wouldn’t expect that of every A type personality. But a lot of them do, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump isn’t one of them.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Skycar in the Mainstream: The future has always been now, people are just now learning about it

A long-ago Scientific American article proclaimed:

“The 21st century feels like a letdown. We were promised flying cars, space colonies and 15-hour workweeks. Robots were supposed to do our chores, except when they were organizing rebellions; children were supposed to learn about disease from history books; portable fusion reactors were supposed to be on sale at the Home Depot. Even dystopian visions of the future predicted leaps of technology and social organization that leave our era in the dust.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/billrobinson/techfuture-hold-on-paul-m_b_5092345.html

I was just a little impressed that Scott Sloan from 700 WLW actually put Paul Moller on his radio show to discuss the exciting prospects of the M400 Skycar. As readers here know, I have been a fan and supporter of the Skycar for many years, going all the way back into the early 90s. I have pitched its benefits to every company I’ve worked with over the last 20 years and included it in my works of Cliffhanger fiction in both The Symposium of Justice and The Curse of Fort Seven Mile. I think it is one of the most important emerging market technologies on planet earth presently. Paul Moller is one of the good guys and has the potential to change the world as we know it. So it surprised me that Sloan put him on a very mainstream talk radio show.

 

http://www.700wlw.com/onair/scott-sloan-226/flying-cars-are-coming-soon-13781383/

When I talk about the terrible situation of the current American debt and the most primary reason I support someone like Donald Trump for president over a mainstream politician it is due to the extreme danger we are in relating to the creation of money versus the implication of monotonous debt. The only way out of the debacle is to first lower taxes, stop the bleeding in spending, and then create new markets with a global impact to infuse wealth back into our economy. There are no stable markets that can perform this task, such as oil, food, or even aviation as it traditionally is positioned in the marketplace. New wealth would have to come from markets that emerge from the ground up and touch the entire world, such as like what Microsoft did in the 90s and Apple has done in the 2000s. But those emerging markets would have to be even larger, and more profitable. Regenerative growth is one such field, but the growth there would be negated by the pharmaceutical industry decline—kind of a one-for-one trade. Skycar is the type of industry that would be the perfect infusion of a new transportation concept as revelatory as the railroad was in its opening days.

Skycar would be about more than just a transportation system that carried passengers from their homes to work, it would be a complete lifestyle change that would touch many more lives than just the owner of the vehicle. Along the skyways across the United States and throughout the world, industries would rise to support the Skycars flying along those GPS controlled routes. Fuel supply, maintenance, communications, and Skyports would all support a thriving business that presently doesn’t exist. Regular automobiles would still be valid, and used. Truck drivers would still use the American highway system to get products to and from their intended destinations. But the frequency and duration of travel for individual people would increase because of the ease of use.

Skycar initially as I’ve said before would emerge best in resort areas like Disney World where they could shuttle passengers from their hotel chain to their Disney Cruise ships at Cape Canaveral. That would build up the public confidence in the reliability of Skycar to get to and from their destinations without maintenance hazards. Eventually FedEx and UPS would move from delivery vans to personal shuttles making point to point delivery that would be much more efficient freeing up the roadways of heavy traffic by taking the activity to the air. Such delivery would speed up business and thus stimulate the effects of capitalism.

I can foresee a day where for business travel instead of dealing with the cumbersome nature of regional flights at a TSA controlled airport, that I could fly my own Skycar from the local skyport and land within a few miles of my intended destination in hours instead of wasting an entire day of travel. Business in Chicago could literally be concluded from Cincinnati in the same day bringing one home for dinner with time to spare because of the direct travel. If a person wanted to live 100 miles from their work in the middle of the country, they could live that peaceful life and still fly directly into the city to live a productive life. If his family wanted to fly into an urban area to partake in the arts, they could, and return home late by GPS sound asleep without worry of crashing. It would be a complete change in personal transportation and the options created by freedom.

Without an emerging technology that is significantly better than our current forms of travel, there will be no way to create the kind of wealth that will significantly help the United States solve its debt problems. Skycar by itself won’t be enough, but it will be a big help in the right direction. Skycar has been incorrectly considered a fringe science for at least four decades. But it was never fringe science, but instead quite legitimate, and justifiably orthodox. The hint of that legitimacy into the mainstream was what I heard on 700 WLW. I was happy for Paul Moller who has dedicated his life to the Skycar, to see his dream slowly becoming a reality. It’s not the science that is working against him, it’s the fearful resistance of the masses that does. So to that point, Scott Sloan brought the world to Moller’s doorstep in a way that enthusiasts like me have not been able to—because he represents the average and static past of a society spiraling into oblivion based on their own weak philosophies. With the Skycar, those philosophies will expand in ways that the human race craves to go. And with it, a dawn of a new age where Skycars rule the latest edge of transportation innovation.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

John Kasich Running For President: All the good things I have to say about him

As many know I have a lot to say.  Every day I write multi thousand word articles about topics that are on my mind.  So of course I have to comment on John Kasich, whom I once awarded as Warrior of the Week right here on this site.   He just announced he’s running for president of the United States.  I’ve met the guy personally, and he’s from my state.  So let me articulate all the reasons he should be president with my voluminous command of the English language and prodigious writing ability.

………………………………………I can’t think of a single good thing to say in support.  He lost Issue 2.  Gave Obama everything he wanted.  And he was one of the first to tag Ohio to Obamacare.  He shouldn’t be running for president…………………he should be running from angry voters.

Only in Washington!

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

John McCain is a “Survivor” not a “Hero”: Why Donald Trump is right yet again

I had to write the article yesterday about the Metaphysics of Quality because an understanding of that is needed before understanding why Donald Trump was right about John McCain.  I watched the full interview with Trump at the 2015 Family Leadership Summit on July 18th 2015 and saw the context of the McCain comments and I can say that they weren’t at all out of line from my own opinions.  The firestorm that followed against Trump is because he hit a particularly raw nerve in established thinking, that just because a veteran served in the military that they are automatic heroes.  But there is more to the matter and Trump boldly announced that just because John McCain was captured as a POW for 5 years during the Vietnam War that it didn’t make him an automatic hero.  Trump declared that he preferred people who weren’t captured for performance evaluation, and thus the nerve.  Watch the entire interview in the pre-pundit context.

I remember when it was fashionable to ridicule serviceman returning from Vietnam by many of the same types of people who now seek to exploit veterans for their own advances toward collectivism.  You see, here is the process, a young person joins the military—goes to boot camp—has their individual identity stamped out of them by a drill sergeant—then they are rebuilt into a team player within the chain of command structure which the government controls.  This assimilation into a collective unit is what government progressives like John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama live for.  They would like to see that happen to all Americans starting with pre-school children.  As adults this madness leads to Deming type thinkers at the back of the train.  CLICK TO REVIEW.  Old hippies and war protestors like Hillary have joined in the public praise of veterans to use them to sell collectivism as opposed to individualism.

Trump is clearly a front of the train guy—vastly different from a typical politician.  He looks at the do nothing McCain who lost the 2008 election because of his passivity and has decided he doesn’t care for the guy.  Being a veteran doesn’t give McCain a pass to be an idiot for the rest of his life living off the reputation of his 5 years spent in captivity.  To Trump’s mind, and mine as well, McCain would have been far more effective if he hadn’t been caught to begin with, because it made him a liability to the United States strategically.  McCain was a pilot who was shot down over Hanoi during a bombing mission.  He was then captured, tortured and suffered lifelong physical limitations.  To an A-type personality my first thought was that even with fractures to his right leg and both arms, he should have done what he needed to do to avoid capture—or escape by any means necessary instead of staying captive for five and a half years.  Knowing now what we do about McCain it is likely that his natural inclination toward passivity is what kept him prisoner.  An A type of personality would have escaped, or died trying—so there is reluctance to call someone a hero just because they suffered.

However, to the modern progressive, sacrifice, suffering and service to causes outside of individual motivation are what they are trying to sell to the world, and the American serviceman is ripe for that exploitation.  Not to mention a fellow progressive who is one of their members in the Republican Party who has been instrumental in bringing conservatives more to a centralist position on most social topics.  The Beltway political system is using veterans to preserve their static pattern way of life which assumes that people are heroes if they give up their thoughts and individuality in service to Capitol Hill.  Trump is questioning that rationality which set off a firestorm of controversy.  Reporters after the event lashed into Trump with a fury that defied reason—their assumption was that McCain no matter how effective he is, no matter what kind of quality person he is, is a hero because he was captured and tortured.  That all his actions for the rest of his life would be forgiven because he was a war hero, meaning that any critical assessment of McCain was off the table—that’s not how reality works.

The cause of the ridicule of McCain from Trump started because of comments the progressive senator made about the 15,000 people who attended Trump’s rally in Phoenix, Arizona.  He called the Trump supporters “crazies” which was an establishment desire to set the parameters toward acceptable behavior, because Trump’s support was growing well beyond the control of the GOP.  That is the essence of the fear that the Beltway has about Trump, which he will not be able to be controlled by anybody, because he’s already a billionaire, so he can’t be bribed by money.  So they have to try to build public consensus against him—and they started by calling his supporters “crazies.”  Standard back of the train behavior.  Trump then felt he had to defend his supporters which he did by questioning the performance of John McCain over the years, starting with his military service.

McCain pulled the ejection handle on his Skyhawk dive bomber at 500 knots breaking his right leg in the process.  He passed out and landed in a lake nearly drowning until some North Vietnamese caught him and pulled him into the center of a nearby town.  The peasants there were hollering and spitting on him kicking him when they could.  They stripped him, his leg was broken at a 90-degree angle, and they stuck a bayonet into his foot.  They interrogated him for the next four days then declared him for dead.  McCain realized he had a major infection from blood pooling in his leg that would kill him so he agreed to give the North Vietnamese military information if they’d take him to the hospital.  They declared that he was too far gone.  It was only when they realized that McCain’s father was a “big admiral” that they took him to the hospital hoping to use him for political leverage.  McCain was treated somewhat and spent the next five years in captivity.  From the point of view of an A type personality, McCain made several mistakes.  He didn’t have an escape plan during the crash.  His survival instinct told him to pull the lever, to not drown in the lake, and to say whatever he could to keep from dying of an injury to his leg.  But at his decision gates, he could have waited a bit longer to eject after scanning the ground for nearby villages.  Once captured he trusted too much in the system as he was a soldier who accepted that his fate was up to others to deal with—even wounded, he took a passive position on his own safety which then put mission command at risk adding to the list of POWs that were being held in military areas they’d otherwise like to bomb. So strategically, McCain put the command structure of the United States forces at a disadvantage because of his capture that likely caused more death because of his natural impulse toward self-preservation.  In hindsight it’s clear there were other options, but McCain didn’t use them.  He was under duress, and surely terrified.  But what made him a hero?  He just wanted to live.  That doesn’t make one a hero.

Is a kid who doesn’t know what they want to be when they grow up a hero because they are willing to trade freedom for security by joining the military as a young recruit?  Are they heroes because they show a willingness toward sacrifice—because they were taught that in their basic training?  Are they heroes because they accept orders without question letting other people do their thinking for them?  And if they get into trouble like McCain did performing a mission that some bureaucrat came up with at a command bunker, are they heroes for trying to stay alive?  These are legitimate questions.  The political class wants to believe they are heroes for serving as congressman and senators, but in reality they are ineffective leeches who enrich themselves off the political process.  McCain is one of those people.  He had an unfortunate thing that happened to him, and he’s trying to cover up the many follies of his past with the awards of his desire to stay alive—which is human and quite natural.  There’s nothing exceptional about wanting to stay alive.   But in the real world where people like Trump live, he measures success off performance, not sacrifice.  And under that lens McCain is a failure and not very heroic.  Just because something bad happens it doesn’t make you a hero.  Escaping and bringing back intelligence that would win the war would have.  But just lasting from day-to-day barely alive doesn’t.  It just makes you a survivor.

McCain all through his capture was very concerned about the other POWs who had been there longer than him getting home first.  He to his very heart and soul thought of others over himself, which is what progressive society wishes to see.  Trump wouldn’t be that way, and neither would I.  I could not have stayed in a prison for over five years waiting for the war to end.   I would have had to find some alternatives.   But McCain believes in the static systems of the political orthodox, which is still a problem with him.  He may be a good man relative to the politics of the Beltway, but is he a hero?  That is a matter of definitions and who makes them, and whether those definitions come from the back of the train, or the front.  In the end, McCain gave the communists what they were looking for, a confession of guilt that was beat out of him after years of torture.  He had hit his breaking point and nobody can really blame him.  That makes him a survivor.  But a hero—only in Washington politics could someone conclude that.  Donald Trump was right again.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Being at the Front of the Train: Comprehending a Metaphysics of Quality

Perhaps Robert Pirsig’s work on the Metaphysics of Quality was one of the greatest discoveries of the 20th Century, and I include Einstein’s Theory of Relativity in that analysis.  He refined that metaphysics in only two books, one was Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry in Values (1974), and the other was Lila: An Inquiry in Morals (1991).  Only a few very gifted individuals around the world have read and understood the first book written in 1971.  The book itself was a success, but practicing what one learned from it was far more difficult and many read it without being able to apply it to their lives. The 1991 book has an even more obscure audience—but is infinitely more complex and revelatory.  It is the work of genius without question, and tackles directly the problems we have in defining quality in any form.  I understood Pirsig easily—both books probably because I had a similar life experience as Pirsig as far as relationship to the outside world before electric shock pushed the core of his personality represented as Phaedrus deep within the author’s subconscious.  That is where he and I differ dramatically as I never have allowed myself to be abused the way he was by the static pattern system of an orthodox society.  I had one really good friend who was treated the way Pirsig was however, and I watched him go through the ordeal painfully.  However, my protection was my extreme rebelliousness, which preserved much of my youth for the benefit of my adulthood.  My work with bullwhips took me the rest of the way there and combined with the work of Ayn Rand put me in a special place that Pirsig didn’t have the advantage of.  It was hard for Pirsig to function as a genius in a world dedicated to static pattern commitment to systems defining quality as adherence to the pattern rather than intellectual assessment.  This is why I wrote the revelatory article about the ineffectiveness of Deming in business.  CLICK TO REVIEW.

Perhaps a decade from now I’ll write my own books about this Metaphysics of Quality. After all, I am in the middle of proving it applicable to modern society against the Deming addicts.  I think Deming’s work has been one of the great destroyers of capitalism instead of advancing quality, because quality is determined by a system of thought rather than a value judgment and this has afflicted perhaps 98% of the world into a sticky feet quandary of ineffectiveness.  I have been knocking on that Deming door for years looking for a way to break it down without destroying society, and I am presently undergoing that experiment.  The results will likely be reported in future books on the Metaphysics of Quality that I will write in my 50s an 60s that will be likely sequels Pirsig’s books only with an Aristotelian emphasis—instead of Plato.  Presently I am in the field with great opposition cast in my direction by those static pattern protectors of their own definitions of quality as defined by the statistician Deming.

Essentially the heart of Pirsig’s work is in his front of the train/back of the train analysis.  Deming is a back of the train guy, Pirsig is at the front.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW—otherwise you will be lost dear reader.  There is no reason to rehash all that now for the sake of review.  This is a rather advanced article so the foundation understanding of the subject should be either read for the first time, or reviewed before proceeding.  Back of the train people are slow to act and think in a sluggish manner because they wait for analysis of the contents of the entire train before acting.  This is why our political system is in such a disastrous condition, because all of the Beltway politics is built around this back of the train positioning, intellectually.  Nothing is done before Deming types look statistically at all the data collected in a train and a consensus of action is built so a decision can be made.   However, this is extremely problematic because the trains we all ride through life are always moving, and decisions must be made far in advance to keep the train moving in the direction we desire.  With a long train especially, the front of the train is far ahead of the back of the train so by the time that those in the back analyze their data the decision points for the fate of the train have come and gone.  The right place to make decisions is at the front of the train, not the back.  Those in the back serve a function—a kind of retrospect analysis that can help with future decision-making, but they will not put the train on the right track.  So I won’t say they are useless, just ineffective in providing leadership.  They can tell you the score but they can’t tell you how to score.

Most of the world is crippled by this relationship and we are raised from little children to think from the back of the train.  We wait for politicians who are always late to the conclusions—because they wait for analysis of the train’s contents before speaking—to tell us how to conduct our lives which is a mistake.  We wait for poplar social magazines like People, Time, and US to instruct us how to live—again this is after the back of the train has reported the latest fashion trends and social priorities.  So we blindly accept a quality definition determined by analysis of where the train has been, but not where it’s going—and that sums up best the problems of our age.

I have an obsession with the leading edge of the great train.  For instance, before a very important meeting recently with very important people I was riding my motorcycle like I have everyday for the last 7 years.  Another driver ran into me randomly while I was sitting in traffic totaling my precious motorcycle with $10,000 in damage.  That in itself broke my heart and I was thinking about that as I evaded danger.  I had been watching the driver as I watch everyone while driving assuming always the worst, so before the crash, I did a dive roll off the motorcycle and ended up well out of danger before the crash.  Many looking at the crash from the police, witnesses sitting around me in traffic, and the insurance people assumed that because of the speed of the crash and where it occurred on my motorcycle that I had lost a leg, or that I should have.  To move so quickly out-of-the-way was not something that anybody could attribute to any known evasive action option.  All that they could say was that I was lucky.  But I wasn’t lucky; I was living at the front of the train of decision-making, and was well aware of the dangers around me.  So well before the driver carelessly ran into me destroying my precious motorcycle I was out of danger’s grasp before the occurrence had a chance to claim a victim.  That is the difference between being at the front of the train with our daily lives and at the back.  The back of the train—the Deming approach would have been to sit there, get hit and study the data so that new rules and regulations could be created to prevent the accident in the future.  I would have lost my leg; probably my life and much more would have been lost because of my vacancy.  But, as it turned out, I walked away and still made it to my meeting and executed the tasks of that day the way I needed to, without any excuses.  That is because I live at the front of the train and I climb out on that leading edge as far as I can.

Most people by nature are back of the train types.  Those who aren’t that way naturally, become that way from improper instruction from their childhoods. When a child asks “why” and the instructor says, “because I say so,” the poor child is being put at the back of the train of thought.  By the time they get to 8 or 9 years of age, they will just accept the static patterns of their society as reported from the back of the train and trust that system even to their own demise.  It’s a very sad condition.  But if the child is taught to make decisions from the front of the train based on their observed reality, then the answer might be, “because you can see that there are rocks across the tracks ahead and that we have to switch lanes before getting there, otherwise we’ll crash.”

As I said, I put this up now as a way to maybe help one or two people improve their lives.  I’ll do more with it later after I prove out some more concepts against the theater of reality, but until then this will have to do.  If you want to improve your life immediately, get out of the back of the train and come up to the front.  There’s plenty of room, and it’s much more comfortable.  All decisions in life should be made in the front, not the back. Because by the time the information gets to those analysis driven Deming types, the danger is already history, and nobody did anything to avert from it.  Understanding that is the key to success in life in every field.  Master that, and you will master the universe.

I’m just saying…………………………………….

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.