Tag: Hollywood insight

The Cincinnati Tablet: B.L. Freeborn’s answer in mathmatics

One of the great miracles of our day, as I have stated often is the decentralization of intellectual aptitude. Although it’s nice if sound science comes from some intellectual at Harvard or Oxford, it’s no longer necessary. In fact, most of the time it’s a handicap because most colleges teach to an agenda shaped by the political currents of our day—which is not the way college was ever envisioned. It is however a grim reality. So not having to move through gate keepers in the industry any longer–adventurers, scientists and armchair archaeologists are now able to behave as fortune hunters did at the turn of the last century—with open ability not limited by anything but their personal dedication and imagination. On the downside the quality of presentations and research typically go down, but on the upside, the proposals of theory driven by imagination have increased dramatically. This is certainly the case for B.L. Freeborn who wrote a very interesting book, The Deep Mystery: The Day the Pole Moved.

Even though the book has the obvious sign of self-publishing—lacking the fine finish of a good editor, there is a genius to it that is worth noting. I would say that B.L. Freeborn is functioning from intelligence that few have the sentiment for— brilliance in the beauty and patterns of numbers. Freeborn sees patterns in numbers that might be purely speculative, or formed around a mythology of his choosing just because of his sheer mastery of them. It is probable that some of his assumptions are incorrect. Likely, with some of his proposals, perhaps only 15 to 20% could be assumed as a likely theory backed by scientific evidence. That does not mean that everything he says should be discounted just because his average is not 100%. Unfortunately, his competition, the orthodox science of the university system is reluctant to discuss 15% of a truth surrounding a theory because they are not motivated to extend themselves beyond the previous claims of the establishment without 100% of the truth being confirmed. Because of the way science is often funded—through grants and donations—it is unlikely that any university would desire to reverse a previous opinion such as what is demanded by the obscure relic found in Cincinnati, Ohio called The Cincinnati Tablet—which is on display at the Museum Center just a few miles to the west of its discovery location.

Few know it today but in the location of the current Fountain Square area within the city was a gigantic burial mound common to Ohio. It was part of the massive and mysterious mound building culture so prominent in the area typically attributed to the Adena Indians. Before one building was ever erected upon the founding of the Queen City, the mound was there and excavated around the middle of the 1800s and within it was found parts of a skeleton and The Cincinnati Tablet. The Tablet was very intricate for a hunter and gatherer culture leaving many to speculate that it was a hoax. However, time has declared that there is something more to it, and if it is added to the many other discoveries from the Mound Builders emerging it appears that the culture that made The Cincinnati Tablet was part of a vast society with very intricate and advanced mathematics. B.L. Freeborn is one of many new age archaeology enthusiasts who commit vast amounts of time and energy to uncovering the past with new tools available to them. They often don’t get paid, they occasionally write a few self-published books that sell a copy or two, and spend most of their time in obscurity digesting vast amounts of information trying to puzzle through the mysteries left behind by a historical record that was carelessly erased through institutional arrogance. At first cities were built and archaeology was destroyed without any real desire to understand the cultures that came before—because that was the way that things were done prior to the 20th century—mainly for religious preservation. The religions of previous cultures were destroyed to enable a new cult to hold the minds of their societies—sort of like what ISIS is currently doing with Christianity. When a city like Cincinnati was erected, or Lexington for that matter—which has been built on the remains of an entire ancient city—settlers didn’t look at relics like The Cincinnati Tablet and declare themselves to solving the riddles of the forgotten culture. Typically they donated the findings to a museum or historic society for others to figure out—and if the relics were really, really lucky—like The Cincinnati Tablet is, it ended up in the dark corner of a nice museum like the one at Union Terminal. Typical professionals in academia would take such a find and attribute it to their published findings on the Adena culture. In the case of The Cincinnati Tablet, mounds had been associated as strictly burial mounds built by the Adena and Hopewll Indians and any further inquiry might cost grant money for further research. So it was much easier for archaeologists and anthropologists to consider the case closed, and head to the next charity event sponsored by their funding structure.

People like B.L. Freeborn aren’t motivated by any of those concerns so most of their energy goes directly into solving the puzzles. And one thing is clear about Freeborn, he has put a lot of thought into The Cincinnati Tablet—and similar archaeological discoveries. His theories are as good as anybody’s and in my opinion better. Much of what he declares below I would consider a reach—but he presents a strong enough case to indicate that he’s on the right path. The only way to really understand history when so much of it has been erased and destroyed by politics and religion is to turn toward mythology and decode what the past has to tell us. And with that, B.L. Freeborn has a marvelous theory that deserves attention. As a reminder, this tablet can be seen in the Cincinnati Museum Center currently and indicates that there was much more to the people who lived in North America than anyone previous accepted.

  1. L. Freeborn’s report on The Cincinnati Tablet and understanding the forgotten culture that made it—click the link at the end to learn more.

If they understood longitude and latitude they should have understood where they were. The longitude and latitude of Cincinnati at the location where the tablet was found is North 39 degrees 6′, West 84 degrees 32′. The sum 39 + 84 is 123. The sum of 32 + 6 = 38. Twice 38 is 76. The sum of the longitude and latitude values of nearby Milford where several complex mounds were built is 123.45. The sum at Fort Ancient is 123.5. The location of the Great Serpent Mound is 83 degrees 25′ 48″ W, 39 degrees 1’31” N and the location of the Newark Earthworks is 82 degrees 25′ 50″ W, 40 degrees 2′ 26″. This is exactly one degree of longitude apart. The location of the Seip Mounds is 83 degrees and zero minutes west and 39 degrees 22′ N. The sum of these two numbers is 122 and 22. Beyond coincidence?

Since we have begun counting we shall continue. Prominently at the top 7 spaces are marked out (or 8 lines). At the bottom there are 6 spaces (or 7 lines). This creates the number 76 and as noted in previous posts, it suggests the period of Halley’s Comet which is 76 to 77 years. This confirms the topic is about comets. Combine the numbers as 77 and obtain another reference to the comet. Combine them as 86 and obtain a reference to the diameter of the Sun (864,000 miles). Combine them as 78 and obtain the diameter of Earth through the pole (7899 miles). Sum the 6, 7, 7 and 8 and obtain 28 or half of 56.

Even more eloquent, notice that there are actually 9 spaces at the top but only 7 within the hash marks and 2 outside. Create 792 easily from them and compare this to the diameter of the planet at 7920 miles. Similarly, count the bottom as 8, 6 and 2 or create 862 which reminds one of the diameter of the Sun

The very edge of the top and bottom are scored with small marks. J. Ralston Skinner counted the marks and reported them in his 1885-1886 report on this stone. He noted 24 spaces/ 25 hash marks on the top and 23 spaces/ 24 hash marks on the bottom. The sum of these numbers is 96 and the average is 24. There are 24 hours in a day. The top has 23 spaces. There are 23.934 hours in a sidereal day. Combining 23 and 96 obtain 23.96 or very nearly this number.

 

Count out the dots. There are 16. The Earth travels 1.6 million miles in a day. There are 2 bars. The 2 and 16 combined creates 216. The diameter of the Moon is 2160 miles.

There are 8 dots in the upper third. There are 6 dots in the middle third. There are 4 dots in the center. There are 2 dots at the bottom. This creates the series 8642 or it refers to the diameter of the Sun at 864,336 miles.

The upper third has 3 dots left and right and 2 in the center. From the center out then is found 23. Reversing it is 32. The Arctic Circle ends at 23 degrees and 30 seconds. The tilt of the planet is this same value. The square of 5.65 is 32.

The center third provides 222. A square of sides 2222 has a diagonal equal to the constant pi (3.14) times 1000. The sum of 22 and 22 is 44. Divide the circumference of the planet by 44 and obtain 565 miles. Forty-four is found in the center bar as well. Count the 4 dots and notice there are 4 bump outs. Recall also a square with sides of 4 has a diagonal of 5.65.

The dots on each side number 6 which creates 66. The velocity of the planet is 66,600 miles per hour. In the center there are 4 dots. Below this is the one dot in the negative. This creates the number 5. Combine this with the 6 on each side and obtain 56 once again. Or count it out as 1 and 4 which reminds us of the fingers in the Gaitskill Clay Tablet. Combine them and create 14 and then recall there are 4 bumps in the center. 4 x 14 is 56.

The exterior dimensions of the stone and its shape provide numbers that appear familiar. It was measured in 1885 by Skinner to be 3.00″ x 5.00″ x 5/8 inch thick. The width of the narrow middle is 2.5 inches. The sum of these three numbers is 3 + 5 + .625 or 8.625 which recalls the diameter of the Sun. The diagonal of the piece is 5.831 inches. The distance Earth travels in a year is 584 million miles. The thickness expressed as 5/8 repeats this value. The circumference of the piece is 16. The Earth travels 1.6 million miles in a day.

The curved portion on each side recalls the idea of a crater. They are 4.5 inches across and .25 inches deep. The area of the curve on each side is .563 inches. The ratio of the narrow width to the length is 2.5 to 5 or .5. The ratio of the width to the length is 3 to 5 or .6. The ratios are .5 and .6 or a reminder of 56 once again.

 

2014 B. L. Freeborn

 

http://noahsage.com/2015/01/17/the-adena-tablets-of-ancient-ohio-the-cincinnati-tablet/

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

 

Why America is Split Down the Middle: What the election of Bibi means world wide

I have learned more about Israeli politics over the last couple of weeks than I had learned in the years prior combined. It started with the Netanyahu speech in front of the United States Congress and ended with the historic elections of this week. The great mystery for me was why Obama was so concerned about the Israeli elections, and why he was so insulted that Bibi was coming to America just a few weeks prior to the election. The revelation was that Obama was working against Netanyahu all along trying to remove him from power with the support of a leftist labor party influence. Now that Netanyahu is back in power, the two state solution in Israel is off the table. Obama and his supporters openly support the Arab Palestinians whereas Netanyahu and his conservative Likud Party are refusing to be divided up as a country. This explains a lot about Obama’s actions. Here is how Fox News reported the situation:

(Josh) Earnest acknowledged Wednesday that the U.S. would have to “re-evaluate” its position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in light of those comments. But he stressed that Obama believes a two-state solution is best. And State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki clarified that the administration “absolutely” will continue to push for this.

Further, Earnest chided Netanyahu’s Likud Party on Wednesday, saying the White House was “deeply concerned” about divisive language emanating from Likud. He said the party had sought to marginalize Israel’s minority Arabs, an apparent reference to social media posts the Likud distributed that warned Israelis about the danger of high turnout by Arab voters.

“These are views the administration intends to convey directly to the Israelis,” Earnest said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/19/israeli-election-means-obama-likely-stuck-with-netanyahu/

Even worse, like a little baby, Obama refused to call Netanyahu and congratulate him on his election victory. His behavior is really unprecedented and reveals to what extent Obama and his army of progressives wish to change the world into something else. Netanyahu certainly didn’t refuse Obama because of the rhetoric the President uttered in his previous elections—the divisiveness and anger incited by the former community advocate and Saul Alinsky student. Much of the divisiveness in America currently is a direct fault of Obama—yet Netanyahu spoke well of the American president in public when he clearly didn’t need to.

The actions of Obama and the media in the wake of the Netanyahu election point directly to the greater strategy of modern progressives throwing their influence behind the two state solution of a perceived peace in the Middle East. They wish to carry the Middle East into the world before the Sykes-Picot agreement where their president of Woodrow failed epically in the region through the Treaty of Versailles. Now they wish to erase that error as if it never happened—and that means in this case the destruction of a Jewish nation bit by bit.

Ideologically driven, Obama can think of nothing but the aims of progressive influence. Using the same storm the border tactics happening right now in America where foreign influence and money shape American politics for the worse—the same has been going on in Israel with a quiet insurrection by progressives against conservatives like Netanyahu. Obama placed his bets against the Prime Minister. And he lost—and he’s upset about it—enough to make a national incident out of protest. That’s how radical and the media that supports Obama—truly are. They are radical to the point of meanness, and then they wonder why America is a divided nation.

The difference between us in America now are that some of us refuse to be lied to, and others go to the Obama lies like moths to a flame—hell-bent on their own destruction. So the nation is split down the middle between the lazy and stupid and the righteous and wise. Obama likes the stupid and hates the intelligent—because the later sees through his schemes. And it appears that the very same divisions are happening right now in Israel over an election that most Americans thought was inconsequential—but it wasn’t—was it?

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Hillary Clinton’s Love of Titles: Why she’s unqualified for President

I want to see the presidency of Hillary Clinton explode right out of the gate. I can’t stand her, I am certain she is a crook and a criminal—and she is an embarrassment. I want nothing to do with her or her sex addict husband. I don’t like her life choices, I don’t like or respect her family, and I don’t want her sitting in my White House embarrassing the United States more than it already has been under President Obama. Hillary is a liar and a hypocrite and shouldn’t be elected to a pooper scooper position because she would screw that up. She is an idiot.

However, many hearing my utterings would accuse me of being a sexist. After all, they have accused me of things like that before when progressive types found they couldn’t win an argument laced with facts against me, which is the usual playbook for liberals. When they can’t win, they just call names that have no reflection in reality. Because in actuality, I have no problem voting for minorities or women into the presidency—as long as they are smart. And such an example of one such person is Carly Fiorina. I’d vote for her in a New York second. Why you might ask dear reader—well because of positions like this one:

 Hillary Clinton is a hypocrite on women’s rights,” says Carly Fiorina, a possible candidate for the Republican nomination for president. “I must say as a woman, I find it offensive that Hillary Clinton travels the Silicon Valley, a place where I worked for a long time, and lectures Silicon Valley companies on women’s rights in technology, and yet sees nothing wrong with taking money from the Algerian government, which really denies women the most basic human rights,” Fiorina said Tuesday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity.” 

“What counts is, what have you done? What have you accomplished?” she said. “And in particular, what have you, Mrs. Clinton, accomplished on behalf of the American people? Have you kept us safer? No. What have you accomplished, honestly, on behalf of women and girls — which she talks a lot about.”

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Hillary-Clinton-Carly-Fiorina-hypocrite-womens-rights/2015/03/17/id/630786/

I am glad that Fiorina said what she did about Hillary because if a man had said something to that effect in today’s progressively politically correct world, it wouldn’t have had the same impact. I’m not a big guy on titles. Even when I hold important titles, I often deliberately downplay them—because I honestly hate them. If I were president, I’d be much more like Jefferson than any other—I’d have a tendency to wear a robe and slippers to the front door of the White House just to show that I don’t care about the “power of the position.” That holds true for every situation unless I’m dealing with a culture that expects titles as a means for communicating with them. Personally I hate titles, and I hate people who think they’re important.

At the core of the problems with Hillary Clinton is her love of titles—thus the reason I hate her. It’s also why I truly admire Carly Fiorina. People like Fiorina should be president. People like Clinton should be condemned. Hillary Clinton has done nothing in her life but brown nose and hook herself to the stars of others as a second-hander  collecting titles along the way that she could pad a resume with. Yet all along, she never learned anything except to deceive and fluff her own pillow with perception instead of substance.

The very reason I hate Hillary Clinton is because she wishes to inject herself into my life, into my politics, and into my country’s reputation without offering anything substantive as far as a qualification than a parade of titles in her wake. And that doesn’t impress me. It’s good to hear smart women like Fiorina calling out stupid for a change. Just for that—I’d happily vote for Fiorina if she finds herself as one of the leading candidates for the Republican nomination. I wouldn’t do so because she’s a woman either—I’d do it because she’s more qualified—and that’s the only criteria that matters.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Jeb Bush and Common Core: Why public education is the wrong way to instruct children

Jeb Bush has doubled down on his position regarding Common Core obviously because he’s been with the program from the beginning and truly believes that government is capable of educating the population. However, the results have proven the opposite—government education has been devastating to the American public and is something that needs to be completely overhauled. To understand a bit of the conflict the following videos one by Jeb Bush being interviewed by Sean Hannity at CPAC shows how deeply Bush believes in government education. Then the second video of Michelle Malkin shows the reality of government education and how far left of the correct position Jeb Bush really is.

Jeb’s mistake is in his belief in government solutions to what should be free market competition. Education needs an infusion of competition instead of a standard for everyone. The belief that Bush has that a high standard set by government will provoke quality in education is a false one—it only plays into the mundane complacency of the labor unions behind education and their desire for a comfortable standard that the weakest links of their collective bargaining agreements can sustain. The government model allows the weak to rule the strong and that will never create an environment where the best of anything is brought forth.

It is time to have that hard discussion about education. It has been for a while, but the evidence is just so obvious, even more so than when I so adamantly pointed out this inconvenient truth a decade ago. The more I learned about public education the more convinced I was that it was the wrong thing to do, and was completely wrong for children as a learning tool. Public schools are no different from public housing projects—the intention was good, but they quickly become a cease pool of bad behavior and crime. Test scores and the general wherewithal of today’s youth shows the devastation. Public education with years of Common Core like practices have destroyed the minds of the youth—it has left them ill prepared for even basic tasks in life and certainly isn’t worth all the tax money stolen from property owners to pay for.

Education can only work if there is investment of some respectable level by the students and their parents. Parents can’t just drop off a child to a government professional and expect magic, and in today’s public education environment—that is precisely the expectation. Public education is a baby sitting service at best followed closely by a social experiment.

When my wife and I home schooled our children for a period of time there was serious blow-back from family and friends. Some of those people we no longer speak to as a result of the things that were said back then. The great fear was that my children would not be “socially adjusted” and would become social malcontents. The trouble is that social malcontents was a definition that was created and defined by government schools over the last 100 years, and has largely become a topic of falsehood over the last decade due to the instant rise of social media and technology which connects people in ways they never could before. The rules of conduct established by public education were created during a time when the AM radio was a new invention and telephones were beginning to show up in personal residences. It really hasn’t changed since—due to the labor union resistance to change and their desire to lobby political waves to maintain a status quo. But kids have changed and their needs are different from they were a century ago.

Jeb Bush is caught in that old century long belief that government schools can teach children to be great innovators and there just isn’t any evidence which produces such a conclusion after all this time. The opposite is true. Public schools are more concerned with integrating individuals into a collective mass than in nurturing the thoughts of gifted minds into unleashing new thoughts and concepts. If government schools were removed from children’s lives it is a safe assumption that creativity and individual happiness would increase greatly throughout society. Home schooled children are obvious examples—they statistically out perform government taught children in most categories—so the evidence should be easy to contemplate. But it is scary for old politicians to admit to themselves that government schools are utterly incompetent to the task of their intentions. A brand new means of instruction is needed.

This requires a complete deregulation of public education into a system that is owned and is individually profit driven both at the student level, and the level of the institution itself. They cannot be tied to state and federal money, or grants—but must rely on individual contributions from a student population that values what they offer. Then and only then can bad ideas be tossed out, and good ideas expanded upon. There is no motivation otherwise. Politicians need to get out of the education business—completely. They have trouble building roads—let alone teaching generations of youth. It’s just a stupid outdated model that is in serious need of an overhaul.

Public schools will become more and more irrelevant year by year until eventually people arrive at the same conclusions I have just expressed. It is doomed and over—which I declared nearly 5 years ago. It’s a thing of the past even now in the present. It only exists to keep government employees in a job, and politicians to say they did something positive. But those efforts are destroying minds, and that just can’t be allowed to happen without contemplation. And upon that contemplation, Jeb Bush is entirely wrong whereas Michelle Malkin represents the mode of behavior that will gradually pick up steam until public education is abandoned in favor of something that works.   The periods between now and then is something that will be painful, but will quickly sort out the righteous from the malcontent. On the issue of public education Jeb Bush falls on the side of the malcontent. He only knows to throw more federal money at something that is destroying our nation believing that it’s crucial to success.   And that just makes him out-of-touch, and unqualified to be a president for the age that is coming. The curb of politics is ahead of him, and he is incapable of catching up to it.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Cliffhanger’s Morality on Capitalism” Elon Musk and Han Solo–the unseen value

A few years ago I spent a good part of a summer vacation on the balcony of a condominium reading the Ayn Rand books that my son-in-law had recently bought for me—particularly her collection of essays on capitalism. For as long as I had been alive capitalism was always portrayed as evil, which I never bought into. Yet nobody ever offered any competing theory. Even my favorite character from Star Wars, Han Solo was an unfettered capitalist without any apologies provided. George Lucas by the end of the original trilogy wanted to make Han into a more compassionate person who saw the errors of his ways—and thought about others more than himself—but I never personally bought into that theory. I’ve always seen capitalism as the way to making better things from nothing and had a far superior moral platform to project goodness than the altruistic sacrificial victim of yesteryear. After all if people are asked who they like more in Star Wars, Han Solo or Luke Skywalker who do you think they’ll pick? The results are well documented—just Google it.

I spent much of that summer thinking about those books as they provided a support that was found no place else in favor of capitalism. People like Milton Freeman were before my time, Walt Disney died when I was a little kid, and John Wayne was only fondly remembered in old movies. Reagan pretended to embrace capitalism as a continuation of his spokesman job he had at GE—but there really wasn’t anybody openly defending the morality of capitalism—and there needed to be. After all, from the world that I know people like Elon Musk, Richard Branson, Steve Jobs, and many others like them are doing far more for people than the person who sacrifices their time and energy at a soup kitchen helping the poor. While donating time is a nice thing to do for people down and out—the cause of why people are down and out in the first place is the real issue that needs to be explored—not the result. Capitalism has in it a morality which deserves a hero so that people can understand the value.

Even stories I really like, such as Robin Hood, and Zorro have in their underlying value a kind of socialism—the villains are the rich, the protagonists are the poor. Batman who is a direct evolutionary character of Zorro was like Don Diego a wealthy man who took his gained assets acquired through his family’s success and did good to fight crime.   But what always bothered me about Zorro and Batman is that they inherited their wealth; they didn’t do as Elon Musk did and make it from nothing into becoming one of the most influential people on planet earth. Without Elon Musk and Richard Branson where would the world really be? The wealth they create for the overall economy makes it even possible for people to donate their time to a soup kitchen for the poor. The inventions of the wealthy create spare time and resources so that something can be given back. Without that infusion of wealth, Harrison Ford wouldn’t be able to donate his time to left leaning causes.

Harrison Ford is my favorite actor—maybe just a bit ahead of Clint Eastwood. Ford made a lot of money as an actor because American capitalist culture had expendable income to go see his movies in a darkened theater. He has turned around and done a lot of great things with that money. Individually he became a private pilot most notably crash landing his crippled vintage craft into a golf course saving the craft, people and even himself in a way that defies the actions of most Hollywood actors. But Ford is also a very giving person to the poor, to environmental causes, and to virtually everyone in his life. He is a person who is easy to respect. But what would he be without George Lucas creating the Star Wars and Indiana Jones films? He would have been just another actor jumping from job to job. Lucas used capitalism to create wealth not just in monetary value, but in philosophy. Without the creation of capitalism all the good things that Ford does in his private life would go nowhere. If he didn’t have excess as a result of his success, he’d have nothing to give away to others by his own volition.

That is why capitalism needs a real hero—and unapologetic champion. I had started formulating that champion years ago in my own character of Cliffhanger. In my novel The Symposium of Justice it is eluded that the protagonist made all his wealth by winning a lottery ticket. However, this is a falsehood created by his political enemies who are protecting their old money political connections from the reality of what Cliffhanger represents—creation and justice. Most people who win the lottery are broke within a few years because they lack the internal value as people to support the sudden infusion of wealth. Unlike people like Elon Musk, most people lack the ability to create wealth, so they assume that it’s a finite resource open for equal distribution discussion. But they are dreadfully wrong. As the Cliffhanger series The Curse of Fort Seven Mile continues to evolve over the coming installments it becomes quite clear who and what Cliffhanger is and why people who can perform such creation are so important to society.

When I was in high school I was the only kid who actually wore a t-shirt featuring Howard Hughes on it. I’ve always liked Hughes and Harrison Ford’s recent plane crash reminded me a lot of a similar incident that Hughes had, in the same area years ago. Hughes was extremely rich, and did a lot of really good things with his money—particularly advancements in aviation that simply would not have happened without his actions. He was an eccentric whose mind ended up collapsing on itself, but the world is much better off because of his life than without it. Yet thousands, even millions of people flash upon the earth in a lifetime and disappear just the same and nobody notices. Is that fair? Aren’t they equal to Howard Hughes? The answer is no. The ability to create something from nothing is more important than equal distribution of fairness.

This brings us back to that summer in Florida with the Ayn Rand books. She was on to something and to my mind she broke through the first layer of an important revelation. In philosophy this is called the creation of Objectivism. I agree with most of the tenants of Objectivism. However Ayn Rand was a lot more socially liberal than I am. She was much more permissive on drugs and sex which hurts her position on capitalism. It allowed liberals to attack her as a product of excess greed and selfishness, which is an inaccurate assessment. The books of hers that I read were very valuable because what she was doing was on the cutting edge of a new way of thinking, so context is needed. Capitalism needed champions, and she officered them particularly in her novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Other than those characters there really aren’t any other champions of capitalism in novels or movies—with the rare exception of Harrison Ford’s film characters particularly Han Solo. In almost every other circumstance, most notably the man everyone loved to hate in the 80s television show Dallas—in JR, or Boss Hogg from the Dukes of Hazzard, rich people are evil and need to have something taken from them and given to people supposedly repressed and in need of equality.

The truth of the matter is that people who don’t have things are in that condition by choice most of the time. The big difference between people like Elon Musk and the typical volunteer at a local soup kitchen is that one creates wealth that enriches our entire culture and the other just does good deeds. Both are important, both may be good men, but only one makes something from nothing which leads to good options for everyone. The creation of Space X is more important than a local charity asking people to throw money into a hat for the needy. Space X creates expendable income to toss into the hat. Without it, there is nothing to donate to the needy.

The efforts of my new Cliffhanger installments are to further this exploration into the morality of capitalism in a way that has been utterly ignored. Ayn Rand started the process and did a lot of great work along that line of thought, but there is much, much more to do. This Cliffhanger project will likely go on for many years but already the stories feel like a continuation of the type of material I wanted to read more of after that summer vacation in Florida. After I ran out of those Ayn Rand books I wanted more, but since she died in the early 80s, there was nothing more to read. But there needed to be. So it is up to us in this new generation to expand on those arguments and further peel back the mysterious goodness of capitalism and to properly define why collectivism is a vile evil—even when its been told to us for centuries that it’s the only path to redemption. These are difficult subjects, but they need to be explored—and through Cliffhanger—they will be.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Miracles of Silicone Valley: Why labor union employees will be part of the 50% unemployment rate

It is well worth your time to listen the Glenn Beck podcast from Friday, March 6th 2015 shown below.   He just returned from a trip to a speaking engagement in Silicone Valley and reported a bit of what is coming from their perspective. The technical innovations coming online in just the next couple of years will revolutionize the world with invention that is inconceivable to the rest of society—and it will be stunning. But, with change comes a falling away of the old way to make way for the new, and it is what that new looks like that is of concern—and why you should listen closely. Please do so now.

The most stunning portion of the radio commentary was the report that it is likely there will be periods of unemployment up over 50% in our various market sectors coming soon—which is often the by-product of technological breakthroughs. Jobs that serviced the old world will be eliminated as new technologies emerge and hire. The gap in that process is something that government fantasizes it can control and manage. However, all they can do is drag out the process with protections from the Department of Labor to hold on to the old ways with mandatory union protections for government workers. Even as the innovators in Silicone Valley are building the technology that will shape the future the National Labor Relations Board on April 14 will begin to require businesses to surrender lists of their employees’ phone numbers and personal email addresses to union organizers in an attempt to spread the cancer of collective bargaining and lack-luster productive effort. It will be those kinds of jobs that will be in that 50% reduction as technology will eliminate their need.

As a matter of fact, much of the technology coming out of the “Valley” now has done nothing but destroy the old means of control. For instance, I spent a good deal of my weekend listening to various lectures on the Biblical Nephilim which would have not been possible a decade ago. Of course not all the information is correct, but it allows me to hear what underground science is trying to present beyond the controls of the mainstream attempting to protect their federal grants. Technology has given many aspiring scholars and adventurers a platform to launch their own investigations deregulating the gate-keepers who used to hold back such information. The Tea Party movement and current pressure on government spending is a direct result of this technological frontier that we are currently riding. Much of what we do as a society now by-passes completely the needs we have for government, especially in Congress and the Senate. The President any more is becoming more of a useless spokesman position from what it once was because news and reaction is available to the world at lightening speed, and it just takes government too long to react to it.

Dynamic presidential candidates now have traction where they wouldn’t have been given a seat at the table in a previous time. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Scott Walker can get coverage because they can sidestep the party bosses for really the first time in history. It is the government losing its control which provoked them to support Net Neutrality—so they could get their foot in the door. But even with that, the door is changing around their foot so rapidly that their cumbersome union driven reaction cannot meet the speed of business, and they are finding themselves drastically left behind.

Much of the trouble of our current age is the remnant mentality of the old hippie world. The next America and its leaders will be my age—they grew up listening to Bon Jovi, Van Halen and Judas Priest and they are impatient. They grew up in the Reagan years with the illusion of unfettered capitalism and expect immediate gratifications. What Glenn Beck reported from Silicone Valley is that those innovators are not crazy liberals, they are something else completely. They aren’t the stuffy old GOP either. They are capitalists, and they expect quick results—they do not have the temperament to deal with a sluggish government and the process of protecting jobs just to keep jobs at the cost of innovation.

My age bracket is coming into leadership. Thus far they have mostly gone along to get along, but now that they are about to be in charge, the old way of the hippie won’t stand much of a chance in this new world of innovation. Americans from my age on down to the modern youth may lack the morality of old, which I value—but they do things fast, and expect instant satisfaction. Companies that survive will have to be light on their feet and quick to respond to market trends—they won’t have the ability to drag out processes infinitely just to keep butts in seats of employment. If a president like Rand Paul or Scott Walker makes it through, it’s likely that entire departments of the government will be eliminated and the current deficit spending that is going on will stop—immediately. Revenue gains in GDP won’t be measured in unemployment numbers; it will be in actual cash, and profit. Riding the wave of next generation of technology with tax cuts and incentives to get government out-of-the-way of innovators is the way of the future—and people better get ready for it.

So there is a lot to be excited about, but there is also a lot to be scared of. The world will change—but in the end, it will be for the better. The bad news for liberals is that their grip on politics is dying quickly. Scott Walker just signed into place a law that makes Wisconsin a right-to-work state—which opens the door for technology and fast-moving companies to move into the Midwest. Michigan is already a right-to-work state, and now the heart of the progressive movement Wisconsin is moving in that direction. It’s only a matter of time before the rest of the country follows—because they’ll have to.

It was great to hear that Glenn Beck has more in common with Silicone Valley than they do with some old politician like Barack Obama. That is something I wasn’t sure about, but hearing from them through Beck means there is some serious hope for the future. They know what that future is, and Glenn Beck had a bit of a preview. That future doesn’t come without pain, but it will be better for us all in the end. And we have a generation presently from a new age that likes to fight, and they will fight for freedom once they understand the argument. The old world has distorted that argument. But once that ruse is discovered thoroughly through technology, they will lean toward Silicone Valley instead of the old politics of the Belt Way. That will be a change dramatically needed, and welcomed by a new age of wonderful innovation.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Obama’s .223 Ammunition Ban: Why the world needs more guns

To understand the extent of radicalism and activism coming out of the Obama White House littered with vast contradictions which gives away their intentions all one need to do is look at their recent move to ban .223 ammunition by calling it armor-piercing. Yes, the same administration that showed open disdain for the police in Ferguson, Missouri and most recently in Staton Island outside of New York is suddenly concerned about police officers and wants to protect them from bullets that haven’t been used in such a case in over 10 years. Now isn’t that proactive of them?

Opposition to the Obama administration’s proposal to ban a popular bullet is gaining steam in the House of Representatives, where more than half of the lawmakers have signed a letter opposing the move.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives says it wants to ban popular .223 M855 “green tip” ammunition because the bullets can pierce bulletproof vests used by law enforcement. Although the ATF previously approved it in 1986, the agency now says that because handguns have now been designed that can also fire the bullets, police officers are now more likely to encounter them. Some 239 members of the House have now put their names to the letter opposing the ban, which they say would interfere with Americans’ Constitutional rights.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/06/majority-house-members-sign-letter-blasting-obama-bullet-ban-proposal/

Again Obama as a member of the pin headed intelligentsia movement believes that government is the answer to everything. The only real resistance that people have to stand up against an encroaching out of control government with an entire military at its beck and call is the Second Amendment. There is a reason that it’s the very next thing behind free speech created on the Bill of Rights so to ensure a free society. While I hope it never happens, I would never want to be vulnerable to a dictator like Obama who wants to treat the White House like a king’s throne and issue dictates while sucking on grapes with one leg tossed over a chair like a Sports Illustrated swimsuit model. Property owners have to maintain the ability to protect their private property from invaders both foreign and domestic and that’s pretty much the end of the debate.

After the Obama administration used its Department of Justice to fuel the communist backed insurgency in Ferguson against the police, they don’t get a free pass to suddenly declare that they want to protect them from armor-piercing bullets. It is now well beyond refute that Obama’s White House has been the most anti-police administration ever to be president—so its not even believable that they are concerned about the lives of police when they’ve fueled the flames of anger that have actually killed police in places like New York after the Staten Island debacle and openly injected themselves into the Trayvon Martin case in Florida.

I live in an area of the country where the crime rate is extremely low. Now why do you think that is dear reader? It’s not because of the police, because we don’t even have a police department—it’s because nearly every home within ten miles of my home, which houses over 100,000 people—has an AR-15 or some variation of firearm—just in case they should need it. If there was a need a small well-equipped army could be gathered together in a day and cast upon insurgents, whoever they might be—and that is the key to the Second Amendment. Yes, we have the military, yes we have the police, but if they fail—because they are government employees after all, there is nothing left to protect people from aggression. The reason crime is low in my neighborhood is because everyone respects each other and no group of thugs can terrorize normal people because the guns make them the great equalizer. Only in places where guns are banned does violence increase and people live in terror. Places where there are lots of guns tend to be peaceful, their governments run better knowing they can’t gain leverage over the population through force, and economic activity can umbrella under such stable conditions.

But if there was in the future an even more radical president than Obama, such as the return of the Clintons or some other dynasty driven radical who decided they wanted to kill off their political rivals—which there is history of such activity, and those killers show up with armaments to perform the task under government backing—you can’t engage them with a cap gun. You need to have equal or superior firepower over your potential enemies to equalize the playing field.

To demonstrate the task lets study the behavior of a typical male 27-year-old police officer working traffic. He pulls over a car load of football players all in excess of 6 foot 3 out celebrating a recent victory. They have been drinking a bit, but nothing too crazy and speak coherently to the officer. The officer will treat the guys with respect because if he startles them into violence, it might get ugly, so he says sir a lot, and thank you for their cooperation, and the traffic stop will usually end with a warning and possibly an exchange of Facebook account information. The cop will go home that night with four new friends that just might get him into the next big game for free. Believe me, I know how the system works, as of this writing I’m almost 47 years old and I have still been pulled over more times by the police than there are years on my life. I’ve even been an employer to cops who thought they were really cool and actually left me to perform my next example. Say the same cop pulls over four girls coming back from the same game. The cop sees the girls have been drinking so they are a little flirtatious hoping to get out of a potential ticket. The cop knows that he has complete command of them backed by the law so if he wants to accuse them of some danger, he can pull all of them out of the car and frisk them to his heart’s content. Under the law, he knows the girls must do as he commands or they will be subject to resistance. So he threatens them with arrest which scares them and being girls obviously overpowered by a larger police officer with a gun, they submit, which feeds the ego of the cop. He then makes a deal to have the girls perform oral sex on him so they can get out of the ticket—which they do. After the cop goes back home drunk on power, the girls find some way to hide the information from their boyfriends and parents giving them a shameful secret they will have to suppress for the rest of their lives. What was the difference in the two cases? The football players would have likely beat the hell out of the cop if they detected they were being abused. The girls obviously wouldn’t stand a chance giving power completely to the cop.

Governments are always on the outlook for power. They want to be in control, which is why they are in government to begin with. The personality type who ventures into government employment tends to enjoy some variation of this control behavior over others. The ATF is certainly prone to such stories as the provided example, and they are prone to influence from radical presidents. The ATF has been involved many times in presidential invoked terrorism, Ruby Ridge comes to mind, the Waco incident, and obviously under Obama, Fast and Furious. It is nothing for some politician like Obama to designate someone, or a group of people as a threat to their careers and to send in a government agency like the ATF to remove that threat. It’s happened before, and it will happen again. And when it does, the target will want their .223 ammunition.

There is no such thing as a free and peaceful society without guns. Look at the rest of the world and that becomes very evident. Where guns are banned, violence is up, where there are the most guns, economic activity and personal living conditions are greatly improved. Those who want to impose gun control want to control the population at large by taking away the tools that make people equal to the potential insurgents. And the Obama administration so far is the worst that America has seen in this regard. But imagine a worse regime. I thought Bill Clinton’s presidency was bad. Obama has moved the needle much further to the political left. But imagine a world where Obama looks like a conservative? It is for them that something even more powerful than the .223 ammunition will be needed, because they will send their government agents to enforce their will. And all that stands between tyranny and freedom is a gun rack and a lot of ammunition.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

“Dad, It’s Only ISIS,”: SNL’s controversy cuts to a deeper issue about raising girls

A lot has been said over the first week of March 2015 about the Saturday Night Live skit that divided the Internet over the controversial Dakota Johnson short involving ISIS taking her away from her father. When I first saw it, I laughed hard, not because of the ISIS reference which seemed to soak up all the attention, but for another reason. In the skit Dakota Johnson speaks to her father played by Taran Killam as if she were being dropped off at college. It was a touching kind of thing that we have seen before in so many romantic comedies. But just as the young daughter leaves her teary eyed father for what looks like the last time she says, “Dad, it’s only ISIS.” That’s when the audience realizes that the father’s little girl is not going off to college, or moving out on her own, she’s joining the high-profile terrorist organization which is actually happening to some families.

Many thought that ISIS reference wasn’t a joking matter; others defended the skit as a bold act of defiance. That’s not what I saw.

I have raised two daughters and had to marry both of them into families of their own. I know what it feels like to let a daughter leave your care. For me, it was much harder because I was excessively close with my daughters. I was not a “hands off” dad, we always did a lot as a family together so we were unusually close. The biggest rage of my life was in watching young boys come to my house to take my kids on a date. I tried really hard to understand that the process was a natural part of children growing up, so I internalized a lot of it for the sake of everyone. One time though I nearly killed a whole car load of those little scum bags when they picked up one of my kids at 11 PM for a date, one of the boys with their shirt off. It was not the kind of courtship I had spent many hours of my life preparing my daughter for. It wasn’t necessarily her fault; it was the culture at large. The young boys she had to pick from were just so terrible that if she spent her whole life looking for just the right guy that her daddy would approve of, she’d be an old spinster to this day. But from my perspective nothing good happens to a girl past 12 AM especially in a car load of guys on the prowl. So I have had my experiences and they were miserable at best. My kids were good, so there wasn’t much of that. If they had been bad kids its highly likely I’d be in prison over some anger management issue now.

I know it’s unfair so I try to be sympathetic to the young boys who weren’t raised by me. They didn’t know why I was so mad, or what I expected because they were raised with far different backgrounds—so I kept my self from being overly intrusive—largely because that dating phase is the last step in raising children—and at that point you better be ready to trust your children. For insecure parents not confident in the tools of intellectual aptitude they have given their children they must worry about their kids doing something stupid. I never felt that way; my issue was always that the boys tended to have a biological interest in my daughters as opposed to a genuine respect for their cerebral matter. Those boys wanted to satisfy themselves at the expense of my many years of hard work, so I took it as a personal insult that they’d show up at my house treating my girls like a piece of meat to be conquered. One little slug actually had the gall to argue with me in my living room about Chick-fil-A and its position on gay rights. Well, Chick-fil-A in my house is sacred, so I didn’t need some little progressive snot-ball ignorant to the ways of the world telling me anything. To this day the Xbox he was playing when we had this discussion is something I still hold a grudge against. We still have the old unit because it has a lot of treasured games on it, but I no longer like it, because it reminds me of that kid.

Daughters never really get over their relationships with their dads. They may go for great periods of time without talking, but if they have strong fathers who spent time teaching them things, there is a bond there that lasts entire lifetimes. I know very hard-core women in their declining years who still love their dads who have long since died. I know even more women who had bad relationships with their fathers who turned out to be screwed up messes. A father is a very important job to a daughter and it is one that I always took very serious. Never too intrusive, but protective to their very souls—not in the type of neurotic fashion so prevalent in modern comedies, but in ways that only literature has managed to even remotely deal with.

So watching Dakota Johnson step into the back of an ISIS truck is exactly the way I felt every time my daughters left the house with a pack of boys destined for trouble. And the nonchalant manner that the skit ended, “Don’t worry dad, we’ll take it from here,” is precisely the way modern males see such daughters—as objects of possession and conquest destined for their penises—and it angers every cell in my body. Every young man felt just as the Saturday Night Live skit showed as my daughters dated. They were all terrorists to the hopes and dreams I had for my kids and were dangerous.

The SNL skit would have had to go to some common extreme such as ISIS to paint the feelings that most dads who really care about their daughters feel when their children leave home. For boys, it’s different. You smack the young tike in the back of the head and congratulate him for having a woman or two on his arm throwing themselves aimlessly at his whims. Boys get congratulated for winning races, and throwing touchdown passes in games of conquest which girls are just one part of. So raising boys is easier.

Girls are the most precious creatures on earth and the world needs many more of them who are good, and it takes good dads to help make good girls—and it’s a hard job. So I laughed at the skit not for the controversy, but for the potent exposure it had of such a raw truth. For me, every young boy who wanted to date my daughters might as well have been a member of ISIS—an aimless terrorist hell-bent on ideological destruction laughing at me and damning death to America. That is exactly how it feels. But the story doesn’t end there. There is much more that comes after and for that, dads are still needed—probably more so than less. And it takes a lot of personal understanding and confidence to embrace that role when there isn’t any glamour or glitz to the job of being a good dad.

That brought up another question I had for which there is no answer. I grew up loving Don Johnson, Dakota’s real dad in the television show Miami Vice. I always liked him as an actor. So I was curious how he could attend the Saturday Night Live broadcast and actually make fun of the fact that his little girl had just made Fifty Shades of Grey showing herself completely nude to the world. She was so naked in the movie that they had to have a makeup person insert public hair on Dakota Johnson to be true to the spirit of the best-selling novel. How could Don Johnson perform that skit and even make fun of it? Even in jest? I suppose some people play good dads, and some people just aren’t. And that’s also why I’m not an actor. I couldn’t do that for all the gold in the world. You can’t grow up loving and caring for a young daughter all your life then revel in her public exposure and dissemination all the while casting jokes. There was a lot wrong about the SNL evening staring Dakota Johnson, but it wasn’t the ISIS skit itself. It was the theme of dads and how they are a dying breed in our culture disrespected and ridiculed by a progressive society. And I’m not OK with that.

 

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Why Obama and the Democrats Protested Netanyahu: The real source of hatred in the Middle East

 

If Obama wanted to dispel the belief that he was not a closet advocate in favor of ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and a radical communist insurgent from Indonesia aligned with domestic terrorists to undo America—he certainly didn’t help his case when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Congress on March 3, 2015. Democrats at large boycotted the speech, which is strange onto itself, but even VP Biden gave up his seat as a leader of the Senate to protest the speech by the Israeli leader. Why? I can understand that Obama thinks he’s the leader of the free world and is something of a king, but to take matters to this extent is fishy—to say the least.

Netanyahu doesn’t want to get blown up by Iran. Given the radicalism present in the Middle East and considering that he is in a position to know specifically where the threats come from in that region, America should listen to Bibi if the concern was truly peace in the Middle East. But, witnessing the inaction against Syria, the troop withdrawals in Iraq, the continued soft policy regarding ISIS, the support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Benghazi scandal—the strangely aggressive objective of killing Muammar Gaddafi without congressional approval, there is something very radical about the Obama White House that is beyond refute—and now when the most peaceful country of the region is begging for our help—the President and his Democrats are taking a position much more akin to the Palestinians as opposed to the Israelis. Obama’s relationship with Netanyahu has always been strained in the same manner that Obama utters the word “Christian” as if it pains him—which his actions seem to confirm. Why?

Before the speech Netanyahu explained his reason for the visit, “I plan to speak about an Iranian regime that is threatening to destroy Israel, that’s devouring country after country in the Middle East, that’s exporting terror throughout the world and that is developing, as we speak, the capacity to make nuclear weapons – lots of them.” Sounds reasonable enough–as a world leader, America should be concerned about a country that wants to blow everyone up from with a warning from the mouth of a direct ally.   Where’s the controversy? Why would Democrats not show up to listen to such a warning—even if they thought it was overstated? By attending, they’d be in a position to give press interviews later criticizing Netanyahu. But by refusing to attend they discount themselves from the debate since as representatives, that was their exclusive reason for being in government. Even if they don’t like the direction of the discussion they still have an obligation to participate. That’s what they’re paid for. As public servants, that is their obligation. But they boycotted which indicates an open disdain for Netanyahu himself and a support of Iran’s position.

During the speech Netanyahu stated toward the Obama administration knowing they were watching on television, “When it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy – is our enemy.” Meaning, no matter what kind of games Obama and his people think they can play to align good Muslims with bad Muslims who share in common a hatred for capitalism, or even peace on earth because they have their focus on the everlasting damnation of death—they are all enemies if logic is used to determine value. The battle lines between one culture and another demands that a choice be made—that there is no middle ground on the matter. Boycotting a meeting because Obama wants Netanyahu to lose the next election in Israel won’t make the boogiemen go away in the Middle East—it will simply empower them.

My in-laws recently returned from a trip to Israel and the Sea of Galilee region. It was clear to them where the boundaries between the two countries were and the religions in general. The Muslim based Palestinians were living a massively impoverished collectivist existence, the Jew based Israelis were living a largely capitalist lifestyle complete with irrigation and plentiful measures to obtain food. It was clear to my in-laws and the pictures they showed to us during a family gathering just how different the two cultures were—and that was at the heart of the modern trouble. The Old Testament and the Quran have similar beliefs and characters from their religious doctrines which should be a uniting factor among those people in the Middle East. But the hatred that the two sides have for each other has roots that extend into essential philosophy as opposed to religious belief. That much was clear from the values exhibited by the two cultures shown in the personal documentation of the region by my family members. Israel is prosperous, whereas the rest of the Middle East not associated with sales of oil to the West is essentially an armpit of intellectual decrepitude and they are prone toward economic and political socialism—as opposed to capitalism.

I wouldn’t call Israel a capitalist country, they have labor unions, social discrimination that leads to success or failure, and a government that holds way too much property in its possession. But, they do embrace much more capitalism than anywhere else in the Middle East except for maybe the United Arab Emitras. The rest of the entire Middle East is suffocating under socialism and hard-core communism and it uses the religion of Islam to mask that reality. This causes an income inequality readily apparent between Palestine which feeds the anger of the aggressors against Israel with jealousy instead of actual religious differences. If the root cause of the hatred is sought after honestly, the big hatred for Israel, America, and the West in general is that their economies are driven more by capitalism as opposed to socialism, not that Christians believe in the Old Testament over the Quran.

Thus, the same could be said for Democrats and Republicans in American politics, the Democrats identify with their collectivist brothers and sisters in the Palestinian movement, and Republicans identify with those in Israel because the country’s general economic philosophy is more aligned with the GOP. The protest by so many Democrats toward the Benjamin Netanyahu has a lot more to do than hurt feelings, or even fears that it will violate their arms negotiations with Iran—it’s a fundamental philosophy over socialism and capitalism and to them—Israel represents a love of money and the value it represents which they despise—personally.

There is no other explanation for Obama and his Democrats for their desire to protest the Netanyahu speech than to illustrate their innate hatred for capitalism. There is no other rational explanation for the amount of hatred aimed at Israel in general in the modern world. Arabs see the creation of Israel by a deal made by the French and English after World War I as a western intrusion of their homeland, and I can understand anxiety over it, but not the hatred so prevalent today which provokes a sitting president and his political party to boycott such an important event. Even now, England and France are so openly socialist that they are no longer the countries that they once were—as imperialists global empire builders—so the Arabs have largely forgotten about them. There are currently large sectors of both societies in both England and France who will support the caliphate that is brewing around the Mediterranean and support terrorist activity on behalf of ISIS—so it is Israel and America that holds the most attractive targets for their hatred, not because of a deal made during World War I, but because one side of the Gaza Strip leans toward capitalism and has vibrant gardens and a flourishing economy, and the other side is a dirt pit of impoverished conditions and backwards thinking. It is in that understanding where the whole picture suddenly becomes very clear—Obama and his Democrats have in common with ISIS, HAMAS, and the radical Muslim Brotherhood a hatred of capitalism and money in general—and lean toward the theocracy of belief as opposed to the facts of value. And that is the primary reason for their hatred of the visit by Benjamin Netanyahu.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

The Blaze Radio: An evolution of thought and freedom

I have raved before about how much I enjoy The Blaze Radio Network when my friend Doc Thompson acquired a job with them. As a long time AM radio listener going back several decades now, I enjoy news stations and talk radio the way an air traffic controller might enjoy monitoring sky traffic through radio chatter. It is assuring to me to hear intellectual activity from minds talking over the radio about their thoughts and opinions on given matters. Formally it was the local Cincinnati station of 700 WLW, which is how I came to know Doc, that I most listened to sometimes 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. But not anymore.

The trouble with WLW and stations like it is that they have way too much sports broadcasting and in Cincinnati where the teams are often a disappointment, I get sick of hearing about things that are not important. But in the old days I had to put up with it to get to the good stuff, the news at the top and bottom of every hour and the talk radio programs that discussed the news of the day. But when Glenn Beck created The Blaze Radio Network he basically took the best of what made stations like WLW so appealing, and turned them into a full-time broadcast. Now after a few years under their belt, The Blaze Radio has become my new favorite friend providing information and content at all hours of the day all through the week. It is excellent broadcasting designed by a long time radio guy and my friend Doc starts the day off each day with hard news, humorous opinion and high quality research that comes from hours of tireless investigating.

The Blaze Radio Network is a conservative libertarian American radio network programmed by The Blaze and available via Internet streaming on SiriusXM channel 796, The Blaze’s website, its iOS app, or ClearChannel‘s iHeartRadio Website, app on iOS or Android devices, or Roku channel. It is one of the most listened to internet streams in the United States.[1]

The network also produces and operates The Blaze Radio News, the exclusive provider of news updates at the top of every programming hour on SiriusXM Patriot.

All episodes from shows on The Blaze Radio Network (with the exception of The Weekend With Joe Pags and all of the shows on Sunday) are available on-demand to listen or download at Stitcher Radio, SoundCloud, and iTunes.

On October 28, 2013, The Blaze Radio Network launched a localized radio station broadcasting The Blaze Radio Network content augmented by Philadelphia local updates like weather and traffic several times an hour. The Blaze Radio/Philly is available on the same apps mentioned above. Additionally, to promote the launch, The Blaze Radio Network was broadcast on WWIQ-FM 106.9 for the week of October 28-November 3, 2013, prior to its format change to WKVP.

The Glenn Beck Radio Program simulcasts on The Blaze Radio and many Premiere Networks affiliates. The Morning Blaze with Doc Thompson and Skip Lacombe is also syndicated to terrestrial radio on a few affiliates, mainly on the West Coast.

 

Current Lineup

Weekdays
ET End Program Host Notes Original Run
6 a.m. 9 a.m. The Morning Blaze with Doc Thompson Doc Thompson Skip LaCombe Live 2012–present
9 a.m. noon The Glenn Beck Radio Program Glenn Beck Pat Gray Stu Burguiere Live 2000–present
noon 2 p.m. The Buck Sexton Show Buck Sexton Live 2013–present
2 p.m. 5 p.m. The Jay Severin Show Jay Severin Live 2012–present
5 p.m. 7 p.m. Pat & Stu Pat Gray Stu Burguiere Pre-recorded (audio rebroadcast of Noon – 2 P.M. TV show) 2012–present

Saturdays
6 a.m. 8 a.m. The Jeff Fisher Show Jeff Fisher Live 2014–present
8 a.m. 9 a.m. Pure Opelka Mike Opelka Live 2014–present
9 a.m. noon The Glenn Beck Weekend Glenn Beck Pat Gray Stu Burguiere Pre-recorded 2014–present
noon 3 p.m. The Chris Salcedo Show Chris Salcedo Live 2013–present
3 p.m. 6 p.m. The Mike Slater Show Mike Slater Live 2014–present
6 p.m. 9 p.m. The Weekend with Joe Pags Joe “Pags” Pagliarulo Pre-recorded 2013–present

Sundays
10 a.m. 1 p.m. Wallbuilders David Barton Pre-recorded 2013–present
1 p.m. 2 p.m. Handel On The Law Bill Handel Pre-recorded 2014–present
2 p.m. 4 p.m. The Jacki Daily Show Jacki Daily Live 2015-present
4 p.m. 7 p.m. Gun Talk Radio Tom Gresham Pre-recorded 2014–present
7 p.m. 10 p.m. Hollywood 360 Carl Amari Pre-recorded 2014–present
10 p.m. 12 a.m. The Jeff Fisher Show Jeff Fisher Pre-recorded 2014–present

 

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

The magic for me of late has come from my T-Mobile account where they provide free data to my iPhone over iHeart Radio. That has turned out to be one of the greatest gifts of this modern age, because it allows me to essentially monitor The Blaze Radio all hours of the day without worrying about consuming my data. That’s important because on most days through the week I bike for about three hours a day—(bicycle). Often I am in complete dead zones in the middle of nowhere and just a few years ago there was no Internet coverage in these zones. But, T-Mobile now covers those areas so I can essentially leave my driveway and go to all the places I do for exercise listening to The Blaze Radio without a signal drop—really for the first time.

When I was a little kid I used to sit in my bunk bed and listen to the Voice of America radio all night for much the same reason—I liked hearing the thoughts of people across the world and my clunky 1970s AM radio allowed me that freedom—which has never become old to me. But now, I get the same impact off a simple miniature computer that fits in my pocket not much bigger than a credit card. So the miracle of the iPhone is not lost to me and I keep it always turned to The Blaze. I had one of those special moments the other day during sunrise. I was in the middle of a vast field of wetlands as the hint of spring was emerging from the 25 degree air with snow heavily coating the ground. A train was roaring across the plain as some ducks took to the sky in fear of the roar and I just stopped my bike to take it all in. On The Blaze Doc and his partner Skip were doing a new segment of weekly news updates and it was very funny, and informative. At that moment I took a minute to marvel at all those elements. When The Blaze Radio is playing, I feel the world is not lost off its rocker, because it connects those still having a mind with others who feel the same way and it bypasses all that ridiculous nonsense so common on other mainstream news outlets. It was a real pleasure to listen to Doc Thompson’s radio broadcast to the entire world from my bicycle in the middle of a wetland as a train roared through the early spring countryside from my iPhone. There are so many inventions that it took to make that moment possible and I thanked them all in that moment.

I am so happy to have The Blaze Radio as an option. It has become my best news friend because no matter how bad things get, they have a way of delivering the news in a way that makes nothing seem impossible. They are a beacon in the darkness where thought is still appreciated. Buck Sexton is a gift to have someone like that on the radio everyday at noon. Jay Severin comes on after Buck and he’s great too. Then of course there’s Pat and Stu who are really truly funny while at the same time being extremely informative from a critical thinking point of view. They are quite good at what they do and they can only be heard on The Blaze Radio. Everyone who loves conservative talk radio should have this station tuned in at all times. With the Internet and satellite radio options now available, there is no reason not to tune in to them. I think they are the best available now, and it is simply an amazing time that we live in where every individual no matter where they are can now have access to that station at all times.

In just 35 or so years radio technology has went from a young boy trying to angle his antenna to capture a strong signal complete with static on a battery operated AM radio to a mini computer that can pick up a broadcast from anywhere in the world in real-time without a drop in coverage and with a crisp clarity that seems even today, unfathomable. The Blaze Radio may be one of the most listened to Internet streams available, but it’s so new that its full impact has not yet been realized. It was only a few years ago that I was driving a delivery truck through the mountains of the South trying to get WLW radio in Cincinnati on the peeks—just for news updates. Now, I can just listen to The Blaze Radio and there is never a loss in broadcast quality no matter where I am on a mountain, or in the valley of a deep canyon. If you have a smart phone and access to iHeart Radio, you can get The Blaze anywhere, anytime you wish. And that is a gift unto itself that the new radio station is poised to uniquely deliver.   If I didn’t know better I would declare that the new Net Neutrality grabs from the FCC were specifically targeted at outlets like The Blaze Radio. After all, Voice of America brought down communism by broadcasting American goodness across the oceans into poor countries hampered by communism. Now, with a much smaller network The Blaze Radio is able to pipe in that same goodness over the current federal government hell-bent on liberalism and collectivist objectives. For the young minds out there still hungry to think, The Blaze Radio is food for their thoughts and is a miracle of modern science, and a necessary ingredient for the perpetuation of freedom—which starts with questions and answers contemplated over conservative talk radio the world over.

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT