Tag: Illegal Immigration

Ayn Rand’s 1961 Capitalist and Communist Warning: Why Apple is successful and everyone else copies

The Ayn Rand Institute recently posted the below video from 1961 by Ayn Rand herself about capitalism and communism. At the time there was a lot of debate about which was better for society. The political class and intelligentsia decided they liked communism whereas the American people still in love with their John Wayne westerns and old-fashioned ideas of westward expansion loved their capitalism. Democrats and labor unions in a partnership with each other decided that they would avoid the name of communism in much the same way that Fidel Castro did during the period that he was trying to convince Cuba to turn toward Marxism by denying that his proposed dictatorship was a party of communists. Of course we know by history that it was a complete lie, just as history will show that in America public schools, colleges, and the federal government itself has fully embraced communism all along—and sought to teach children those “communal” concepts from before even kindergarten. Visit any daycare facility and you will see communism being taught to 3 and 4 year olds in great abundance. In 1961 Ayn Rand was despondent as to how the great America could even conceive of making the mistakes she had just escaped from in her mother Russia. So she made the below recording to the Presidents Club of the American Management Association to contemplate why.

Speaking of management associations and the innovations available to America it is an aspect to my life that I know first hand. I came to know Ayn Rand and the ARI work because I share with them very similar ideals about how business should be conducted and why capitalism is such a vastly superior mechanism in any global marketplace. I never read Ayn Rand until just a few years ago, yet I lived my life nearly in parallel with her character Howard Roark from the great novel The Fountainhead. When I finally did read it I wondered how I had traveled through life for over 40 years without running across it—and once I did I understood completely the intentions of the novel.

For me the most powerful part of the book was when Roark refused to be a member of the architectural board for the World’s Fair exhibit because of his strict personal revulsion toward collectivism. I too have been invited and had to decline many such associations and it has cost me likely millions in so doing. For thirty years I have been given many, many, many opportunities to do just as what was offered to Roark in The Fountainhead and I declined for the same reasons so to keep my own integrity intact. I had never heard of anybody doing the things I had been doing and taking the social positions I had until I read The Fountainhead, which was really the first time I had a measure that I was actually right in my instincts—and it was good to hear Ayn Rand from beyond the grave tell me she understood.

I had for years been struggling with the communism so present in American business—everything from Six Sigma concepts to Jack Welch management methods. I was sent to many classes over a great deal of time and on day one I lost interest because essentially what they were teaching was classic communism—not capitalism. It was no wonder that companies struggled with profits and innovation and I had no desire to learn such a stupid thing. I often refer to my years at Cincinnati Milacron as one of those pinnacle moments of understanding. I was sent to a Lean Manufacturing seminar as a hand-picked bright spot in their future only to discover that the company was dying on the first day of class. I lost interest in that company once I realized that they were has-beens and would soon go out of business more or less—which of course they did. My views at the time I couldn’t articulate against the current because everyone essentially thought I was nuts—since I was the lone voice against “consensus” and other focus group derivatives. I knew from experience that I wanted to maintain my individuality because it was within that element that true innovation in thought was brought forth.

I still run into the same opposition—actually every day. But I now have a track record to beat over people’s heads which quiets them. When I was in my 20s and 30s everyone just thought I’d grow out of such thoughts of independence—but instead I just got worse over time the more I saw that my methods worked as opposed to other studies. During the 90s I likely read every management book there was in Barnes and Nobel over a ten-year period, and most of them were so wrong, that they might as well be the equivalent to the latest “quick diet” fad because the methods were built around the same mysticism. Most corporations, and most businesses function like a communist dictatorship which quickly saps the strength of an organization of its most valuable resource—the individuals who actually work for the institution. It isn’t long that a company dies on the vine once a few decades of communist dictatorship ruins them for life. Cincinnati Milacron died in this fashion—as did General Motors. The later was only saved by government bail-outs.

Banking institutions, corporations, political structures—everywhere that there is a hierarchy of a few nameplate administrators who have power over others just by title, communism is found to be at the core philosophy of the leaders within the institution. Many of those tuning in to listen to Ayn Ran only cared about what she had to say about profit—not about the means of obtaining it. Most American businesses in 1961 were already infiltrated with communist ideals through their education institutions. They were already thinking in the wrong manner and were mapping out their own personal destructions even as the leaders built their careers and retirement pensions. Those same individuals might have been paid good money for their leadership—but what they often left in their wake was a declining business, not a flourishing one. I simply refused to play along—and over time it has benefited me and many others because when fresh ideals are needed, they are available because I have not destroyed the means of obtaining them.

As Ayn Rand said, it wasn’t communism that proved to be superior to capitalism. It was that in America capitalism committed suicide because businessmen and women discovered that to be good at capitalism they actually had to be good people to the very core of their being and could not have their egos uselessly massaged by corporate structure. The ability to dictate the lives of others because they held power over their employees’ financial purse strings proved too tempting and they fell in love with the power of communism—the ability to be the center of control of all things distributed to others according to their need. For men, the best way to test this morality is in placing a beautiful young secretary outside of their offices. If they contemplate using their power and influence to bed her—they are not moral enough men for capitalism. For women, if they use their power and position to decorate themselves with excessive sign stimuli and tales of oversea travel not out of necessity—but grandeur for the sake of it—as if to exemplify that they hold a higher title than others and therefore hold the fate of so many in their hands—then they are not moral enough for capitalism and will become seduced by the profiteer communism eventually. Once they do, you can hear the term, “team” uttered from their mouths more and more often as they are always on the search for “communal” exercises intended to achieve consensus. A typical episode of The Office is a good place to start to see this withering, pathetic diatribe of failure manifested through comic relief.

As I write this article my wife and I just bought iPhone 6 mobile devices—which to me is one of the most innovative items on planet earth presently. The company itself is nearly at a $1 trillion market cap valuation, and they’ve done it their way. They are very much as a company the way Howard Roarke conducted his business—vastly independent of other companies. They make the market come to them instead of forming themselves to the market. Many analysts college trained to think like nice little communists wonder why the market evaluation of Apple isn’t already over $1.26 trillion—after all it could be. But Apple does things their way for their own reasons and they are driving the market according to their creative input as a company driven by individuals. Steve Jobs after all was a very informal businessman who didn’t have a college degree, and was actually fired from the company he created. But in the end it was Jobs who made Apple what it is and paved the way for creative minds through an excessive commitment to a capitalism loving culture that made Apple such a successful company. Jobs was one of the first to introduce casual wear to the business place just to break down the top down communist culture of rigid dress codes and oppressive company reminders that the employees served the institution—not the other way around. What Jobs did at Apple he was able to perform because he wasn’t taught in college to hate it capitalism—but to use it to be a creative human being. He was essentially a modern real-life Howard Roarke.

Apple isn’t the only company out there who understands that communism has no place in American business. There are others, but they are definitely on the fringe. I am one of those proud fringe people and I know of several others because like-minded people tend to know each other. But what Ayn Rand said in her lecture to the Presidents Club of the American Management Association was completely accurate. It’s not that communism is superior, or had even won. Communism has seeped into our culture as a profiteer while those who were supposed to protect capitalism were too busy thinking about how powerful they are over their employees, or in banging their secretaries. Instead of conducting themselves in a moral way, they have instead turned toward Apple and tried to copy everything about the company hoping that they will strike gold in the same manner. But they can dress in jeans and follow other similar attributes of Apple, but if they don’t develop a creative—capitalist environment for their employees to prosper in—they will fail leaving the default mode of operation to the mindless communists who will sweep in to save the day with bail-outs, focus groups and the constant reminder that institutions are all about “consensus” building. But they were, and will always be wrong. Successful companies are built by individuals for the sake of creative enterprise and it is there that capitalism shines best and brightest—and for the most people’s benefit. It is what’s missing from our present culture and why everything taught counter to that basic ideal is a waste of time.  American business knows how to get there, but they are not willing to act morally to achieve it—which is why Ayn Rand in 1961 was so baffled by the American approach to the long-standing debate. There just weren’t enough defenders of capitalism out there because too many executives were staring at the boobies of their secretaries—instead of on the next great idea and how to free the minds of mankind to unleash the power of capitalism and the ideals that spring forth from such a culture.

Rich Hoffman

CLIIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

Dana Loesch and the New Counter-Culture: Superbowl and American football

I was never a fan of the first major counter-culture movement in the United States. You might say I hated it with every cell in my body. Even as a little kid I despised the dirty, smelly, tattooed hippies with their long air, and smoke smelly cloths. I’ve never liked what they stood for, and I have never thought for one half of a second that there was something that might come out of their brains that might have value. Ever. So it should be assumed that I am a big fan of the new counter-culture movement that has risen up to undo all the terrible impositions induced by the old scum bag hippies. It brings great pleasure to my mind to watch exchanges like the one below with Glenn Beck and his very articulate news personality on The Blaze TV, Dana Loesch who quite successfully punches all kinds of holes into the Washington Redskins debate below. I was thinking of this interview during the recent Superbowl as the game of capitalism played out on such a vast national stage. The game was complete with all the wonderful commercials displaying American products arriving to a marketplace thriving with freedom and unapologetic profit. So I thought it was time to revisit this clip and share it in mind for the wave of counter-culture behavior that I know is coming.

My friend Doc Thompson and his producer Skip LeCombe are part of this counter-culture of goodness that is spreading rapidly. If you haven’t listened to their radio show in the morning from 6 AM to 9 AM on The Blaze Radio network you are missing a rare treat. You can get them on satellite radio and is one of the best morning shows in America presently, and is a force behind this new counter-culture movement hell-bent on destroying the one created by the vile old hippies. Their show is extremely funny, and informative in a way that talk radio has not been able to produce since its inception. It’s a little Rush Limbaugh, a little bit of The Daily Show, and a good ol’ fashioned variety show that might have been heard at the start of radio. But better yet, Doc produces the kind of material that makes the faces of progressives melt clean off—which I find delightful.

Yet Dana Loesch is unique as shown in her above video with Beck. She is uniquely qualified to make arguments against progressives; she is very pro-gun, very pro constitution, and extremely liberty minded and knowledgeable about history. She is the exact opposite of the kind of losers who found themselves attracted to Charlie Manson’s family of communists and dope smoking losers. Dana is a counter-culture to the counter culture-movement. She’s young, attractive, and smart and she can argue with anybody leaving all the duds from the hippie generation in intellectual dust with obvious superiority. To say the least, I’m a fan of Dana.

Progressives have intended from the beginning to “progress” beyond American pride. They have attacked American football because they know it’s a game unique to the United States and the most powerful economy in the world. They have attacked it to bring down the capitalism that drives that massive economy and to a large extent, for over thirty years, the erosion from the old hippie has moved unchecked against tradition. So to counter that erosion a new counter-culture movement is needed to push back against that social destruction. It has been emerging for a number of years, but Glenn Beck has managed to put a point on it that is directed in very positive ways. Doc Thompson found a home with The Blaze because of Beck, and so has Dana, along with a whole host of similar counter-culture stars in the stable of the creative studios now built in Dallas.

Progressives wanted to destroy the Star Spangled Banner sung at the Super Bowl just like they wanted to change the name of the Washington Redskins out of guilt for some perceived sins long ago committed. But they didn’t know all the history involved, just like they ignored that the Redskin name came from one of the first Native American coaches for the Washington-based NFL team. Progressives just wanted change and they attempted to use guilt to provoke that change, just as they have tried to use guilt about the economy to redistribute wealth to the far corners of the world to indirectly feed communism and its massive failure.

Every time I watch a Superbowl in America I am reminded of what a great country it is. I love the pageantry before the game of all the pre-event ceremonies during media week. I love the half time shows. I love the commercials. I love the violence and strategy of the game itself. I love the Superbowl parties, the chicken wings, the beer, I love all the gatherings of family and friends that often come with viewings. I love watching the game on big televisions and I love the commentary by the various media personalities before and during the game. I love everything about it—and much of that is what the first counter-culture movement sought to undo.

The NFL rose to prominence during the hippie movement of the 1960s, so it deserves credit for staving off the impact. Even hippies enjoy football in America, so the game itself has cast doubt upon the thoughts of even the most ambitious hippie. The Superbowl in 2015 cost over $4 million dollars to run a 30 second commercial during the broadcast. And it cost a minimum of $9,000 per ticket to attend the game in person. That value is a created exception to the tide of the rest of the world hoping to spread the message of the dirty hippie to the soccer stadiums and sports forums everywhere. In America they have failed.

As much was said about Marshawn Lynch’s bizarre interviews during media week, he really livened up when he did a commercial/interview for Skittles. It was another fine example of capitalism by a popular player who really increased his brand with controversy leading up to the Superbowl. Many throughout the world would find the behavior disgraceful in that it was an open example of American product placement. But I love it.

It’s good to see a counter-culture movement coming out in defense of capitalism for a change instead of standing against it. And of that counter-culture Dana Loesch is the new Oprah and Connie Chung. Those old names helped feed the previous counter-culture movement—the progressives and excessively liberal Democrats slowly eroded the value of American society with guilt and sappy old hippy dialogue against capitalism. But their time is waning to a new movement which is emerging preserved by American football and maturing under fine people like Dana Loesch. Because of people like her, the Superbowl this year was just a little bit sweeter—pointing to a future that should be much better than the present as the hippies whither away into dust and are replaced by people like Doc Thompson and Dana Loesch.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

Tayler Swift’s “Blank Space”: A society of “players” destroying the hopes of young women

I don’t often engage in cultural/social activities but when I do, I enjoy them for the observations. If left to my own devices I would happily shut myself up in my home and read books from now until the end of the universe several trillion years from now and I wouldn’t bore of that activity one minute during that entire duration. But occasions do arise where opportunities for observations across the fabric of civilization can be observed and I take them so not to become so absorbed in thought that sight of normalcy is lost—but retained for the benefit of intellectual exercise. On such occasions I typically drink Guinness beer specifically because it is well-known that it is the life blood of the giant Finn MacCool in one of my favorite novels Finnegan’s Wake. I’m not a beer drinker by any other indication other than it is a way to assimilate with the culture at large—so for me to make such a compromise there has to be roots into a mythology that means something to me—and in that great novel Finnegan and the events following in his wake were driven by the lifeblood of Dublin, Ireland itself—Guinness beer.

So I was having one of these cultural exercises in a very nice restaurant. The company was good, the events of the evening were stimulating and purposeful but my eyes and ears were fixed on a stunning blond woman playing the piano across the room at the bar. Males loomed near her as women feigned admiration. It was a catchy game that persisted most of the evening just under the silent roar of a thousand conversations. But I heard her music even from the distance of twenty-five table tops and the barrier of a private room with a stoic view out into the world of fine dining. With the life blood of Finn MacCool arriving routinely to my fingers I listened to this young women carefully to assess the tap-root she was cultivating—filling her tip jar with a lot of money.

So why didn’t many of the women around her rip her off her bar stool and hang her on a cross right there in front of everyone? Such a crucifixion would have been the dictates of their jealousy as their men were fixed on the starving artist dressed as a nymph from ancient Greece. It was because she was singing songs inspired by contemporary pop culture which spoke of a lot more than an attempt at eye candy. The images were contrasting—in one hand which spoke to the males in the room, the piano player was a sex symbol inviting herself to be planted with the DNA of the male on the highest peeking order rung—so the fantasy of the males was to be that one who would gain such an advantage and status. But to the females, the songs the young girl sang were about issues most of them were having at that very moment with their own efforts at love and everlasting matrimony—or the hope of securing a mate willing to turn over their life to the doormat of “WE.” One particular song uttered from the young girl’s vocal exchanges was a dedication to Taylor Swift’s “Blank Space.” The girl sang the song with such conviction that she actually dropped a tear off her high cheekbones to fall into the lap of a sparkly dress. I could see the shiny tear even from my great distance, and it was painful to watch.

Like beer I don’t participate much in regard to pop music. The only time I listen to an FM radio or new music CD is when I pass by someone who is thus listening. I never choose it on my own simply because there is no room for it in my very busy life. I don’t like to think about the kinds of things that musical artists want me to think about in their music because often it involves love lost, love desired, or in the case of minority music these days—whose hoe someone wishes to bitch slap back into the stone age. But when it comes to Tayler Swift, I do lend an ear because behind her work is a struggling young woman trying to find all the things that 99.999999999999999999999% of females universally want as 12-25 year old girls—love and respect. Yet, women like the protagonist in the Tayler Swift song “love the players, and you (men) love the game. It is impossible to not look at any mass collection of human beings and see this struggle playing out between men and women, where women believe they can make a bad guy good for a weekend only to find the “Starbucks” lovers of their boyfriend wanting secretly to be next in line to fix the bad boy yearnings within their own loins. So they call the old girl in line “insane” as if they could hope to do better. It’s the fantasy of most women, either redeeming a bad boy into a good boy, or stealing away one from another women—and its not always sex that they’re after–but the mind.

There are many men these days who don’t wish to grow up to be the hero of Gunsmoke, Little House on the Prairie, or the latest Clint Eastwood film—but just want to be “players” from the Grand Theft Auto video game franchise. Young men these days want to be players—those specifically who play the field of females teasing them with serious relationships to get access to their sexuality only to throw them into their reserves like a fish caught upon a lake to either be completely devoured, or thrown back into the lake after their sport is done complete with scars from the hooks torn out of the female’s mouths.

In the music video to “Blank Space” you can tell before the song turns south toward tragedy that it’s headed toward a cliff of just another broken relationship. Tayler Swift is in trouble because the man she wants to love is playing on his phone as her head is in his lap. I thought this was a particularly powerful metaphor to the modern problem of “players” playing women for the sport of ruining their lives. From my vantage point of hearing the Tayler Swift song “Blank Space” from the neophyte at the piano bar there were a lot of phones out even as a perked up goddess sat across from them at a dinner table with fine wine poured into glasses lit like glittering treasure discovered after centuries of concealment. For those pathetic men, there should have been nothing better or more interesting than the woman in front of them with their make-up put on just like a model from Nordies. Yet the phones were out texting nobody something of even smaller importance.   Perhaps the intended targets were a new would-be girlfriend, a secret homosexual yearning for their best bud, or even a mother who can’t surrender her bosom to the arms of another—younger woman.

Now that I thought about it, this whole cell phone deal is a major cultural problem. Nice young women who deserve the utmost respect from their potential mates should not have to put up with the shared attention of a douche-bag dude who won’t put their phones away long enough to spend time with their dates. If a man is texting someone else in the presence of a beautiful young woman who is interested in him—she’s wasting her time because the guy doesn’t want to be a husband, or even a dedicated lover. He just wants to be a player which is just a new kind a fishing that men have invented for themselves now that real fishing as a sport is losing its luster in the right of passage rituals often passed from one generation to another. Since most young men don’t even know who their dads are these days—they have no man to show them how to put a worm on a hook to participate in the game of catching fish—so they have turned the human need to their sexual outlet of snagging up females—playing—with them, then throwing them back.

The young girl singing was not crucified by the other females because she was singing about the pain most of the women were already feeling—but were politely covering up. It was easy for me to see since I have no desire to assimilate into that culture with any measure of approval—but always have an eager ear toward the next page of a book I’m reading comfortable from my favorite reading chair. I felt for the singer at the piano bar as well as the female listeners in the vast audience. But more than anything I felt for Tayler Swift who wrote and performed the song obviously from personal experience. Even with her fine looks, wealth, and talent—many of the men she is meeting as young saplings are nothing but players still addicted to their broken childhoods and their guardians of the breast milk waiting too long to pull the tit from the mouth of an insecure child. Abused from birth—those players have nothing to offer nice girls like Tayler Swift, or the girl singing one of Swift’s songs at a piano bar in Cincinnati on a cold weekend evening. By the appearance of the occupants at the many tables between my Guinness beer and the weary eyes of the singer were many players serving as nothing more than ornaments to their dates as their phones were out texting nobody about nothing as a would-be goddess stared at them broken-hearted across a table of immaculately prepared food and wine.

Even though I don’t do it often I enjoyed the blood of Finn McCool and like the wake from that great Irish novel by James Joyce—I sat there and watched a generation wash away before my eyes from the perennial uttering of a lounge singer. Sure it was sad, but then again, that’s why I don’t do that kind of thing very often. I wish young ladies like Tayler Swift had the opportunity to have something besides their latest mistake. But unfortunately society isn’t making anything but “players” these days.

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

Finding the Gold Within: What women who desire ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ and young black youth have in common

One of the reasons that I am most proud of the extremely good work that the Joseph Campbell Foundation has done over the years is in their continued innovations by members to open up the world properly to future generations. I was extremely pleased to learn from them that Karina Epperlein has produced and directed a new film showing the wonderful work being done at the Alchemy, Inc academy in Akron, Ohio which seeks to specifically help young black males with a treacherous crises facing virtually every young man in the world presently—that enormous gulf required to step from childhood into manhood. Karina’s film is titled, Finding the Gold Within and focuses on six young men as they enter their first year of college. Each has personal circumstances to overcome as he works to escape the straightjacket of contemporary stereotypes, and each has participated from sixth grade on in Alchemy, a myth-centered mentoring program that fosters refection, critical thinking, and living an authentic life.

The biggest crises of our modern-day is not in politics, it is not in economics, religion, scientific development or any other nightly crises espoused on the various news broadcasts, it comes from an emerging menace which seeks to wipe out mankind altogether—the destruction of the male. The social experiments have concluded and a 100 years of results are now pouring in.   Some of those results are women climbing over themselves with soiled panties to see the upcoming Fifty Shades of Grey movie largely because the men in their lives have been feminized and defanged to the point where females biologically, and intellectually just aren’t interested in them. This is bad because all young children crave the structure that a good solid father brings to a family as a pillar of reliability and strength. Kids who don’t have that fortunate situation in their lives suffer greatly until they find a replacement, or come to terms emotionally with their condition.

Of the worst of the social experiments were the various black communities where government tampering with the motivations of productive enterprise has most crippled enthusiasm for economic mobility. It has been more profitable for black households to produce children without fathers in the home, which has had a devastating effect on old and young males in minority neighborhoods. As the government has become the father figure in such homes—particularly under poor conditions, the real fathers and men of the community have turned to the bottle and drugs to compensate their failed family endeavors. There is a reason that a majority of state liquor licenses are issued to poor communities where a bar is open to wash away the broken dreams of the males while the women breed more fatherless children to qualify for more household government income. The intention was originally good, the by-product has been terrible. Black children as a result of this terrible social failure now are left with serious holes in their life which then gets filled with gangster behavior, drugs, illicit women, and years and years of alcohol. I have in the past tried to befriend these types of males and they all end up in the same place in spite of my optimistic attempts. Once they get to a certain point, there is no way to fix them. Alcohol and drugs literally destroy them, and they become hooked on those substances because of the mountains of guilt which follows them from their criminal past is impossible to escape.

The trick in the whole escapade is that young black males—all males for that matter—but particularly the ones in minority neighborhoods are looking desperately for that mysterious bridge from childhood, where they nurse close to their mother’s breast, into that void of master hunter and gatherer among their male peers. When young black kids do not have men in their lives to show them the path, they turn to gangs because males have a serious need to fill the role of a provider of some kind. Once they fall into the narco life, the money they make goes to cars, jewelry, and tattoos which indicate to females that they are a male worth mating with. But when the women aren’t interested in a family and the male has no goal to work toward because the females just want a sperm donor toward their next welfare check—the males by the time they hit their twenties flame out and end up as future alcoholics and drug addicts. If they live into their forties they are unlucky miserable specimens too far gone to properly help. The only answer that really works is to fix those young men before they become old broken heaps of social experimentation gone wrong at the local neighborhood bar going nowhere fast.

This is where Alchemy, Inc comes in. The use of myth has always functioned as a sociological and pedagogical tool with the goal of teaching people how to live in this world together while simultaneously providing examples of how to realize the personal gifts each individual brings to the stage play of life. Today this method closely resembles what is known as Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). The roles that we are all born with are meant to be fulfilled, not altered in some way that is not authentic to our individuality. To attempt otherwise is to declare that on the great stage play of life that we don’t want to play the role we are given—so we lobby for some other position. The transvestite community is good at this kind of second-guessing. They might have the role of the bold and gallant warrior in the great play of life, but decide that they actually want to play the princess. So they protest, yell and scream about the injustice of life, only to show up for the play in a dress. You can see why this causes a problem if the play was written by the god of your choice with the intention to see it play out on stage. Young males are brought into the world to become men and women will expect men in their beds, at their dinner tables, and helping to raise their children. But when young men don’t even get a chance out of the gate because nobody showed them the way, they fail. Alchemy, Inc is a group dedicated to teaching those young males how to find that path in their individual lives. Alchemy, Inc. according to their website shown below, provides a healthy masculine model and strategies that set youth on the right course to stay in school and become successful, responsible family men and professionals rather than being sidetracked by the false appeal of apathy, anger, drugs, violence and victimhood. Their program is embraced by young men because of its authenticity and realness. Young males who are alienated, disengaged, and cynical towards life are drawn to the program because Alchemy, Inc offers a way to answer their “call to manhood.” They are a program that does not question or criticize youthful masculinity but repositions its positive aspects to show the way from boyhood to manhood. The course values are steeped in the character traits of “The Hero.” The model of The Hero inspires youth to persevere, learn to make the necessary sacrifices, overcome obstacles, and serve their community. Alchemy, Inc is more about cultivating wisdom than teaching knowledge.

Alchemy, Inc. offers a safe group environment for youth to focus on topics directly related to their stage of development. Youth who have engaged our program:

  • Increased their Social and Emotional Learning (SEL)
  • Increased their school attendance
  • Increased their high Grade Point Averages
  • Increased high school graduation rates
  • Increased their college acceptance rates
  • Developed the character traits necessary to succeed in life

http://alchemyinc.net/

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alchemy-Inc/231344416972351

The beauty of Alchemy, Inc is that they do not seek to preach a particular set of values to young people; they instead turn to mythology to bring the kids to their own individual adventures with authenticity. The focus is on learning to think instead of being told what to think. The kids are shown the way to become the heroes of their own lives, so that they can aspire to become the hero of a family at some future time.

Alchemy, Inc is one of the best mentoring programs I have seen for young people, particularly minority kids. All young boys need atonement with their fathers and if they don’t have it, or get it, they are marked for life as lacking. They can overcome that drawback, but it is more difficult for them than it is with kids who have a stable father figure. The kids in the Alchemy program don’t have the advantage of fathers in their life. So they have myths to replace the emptiness, which is such a powerful tool. When there isn’t a father around to teach young boys how to be men, the job doesn’t get done. Myth is a worthy substitute. When it’s applied it does the same thing as a man who speaks to his sons about the mysteries of the universe and their role in it as men when they graduate to such a level. Mythology encourages young men to be heroes not villains in their own story, which a future family will need for their nurturing.

Before feminists declare that they don’t need men, think about what you’re saying. In just a few weeks from this writing Fifty Shades of Grey is about to hit theaters and women are salivating over it. Not all women but a large enough demographic sector to provide a scientific sampling. They are as excited for the movie as teenage males might be for Star Wars, or Avengers. But why? For the adolescent male Star Wars and comic book heroes are myths that instruct what our internal values are—authentically represented by the characters. The heroes in those stories are the men we all want to become—whether we do or not is up to our personal decisions and values. If we are given the myths to live by, we will likely follow the example into our own heroic story. But because too many men give up on their heroes, they do not arrive into their adulthoods properly equipped to take care of the needs of their women. So the women are left with a void to be filled by romance novels and the occasional movie like Fifty Shades of Grey. Men are scratching their heads wondering what all the fuss is just as most women wonder why Marvel comic films are so impressive to males.
The story of Fifty Shades of Grey is all about a powerful man who is redeemed through a hero journey through love into an awakening of a higher truth. The sadomasochism is reflective of all the repressed and social pressure for authority that is imposed on most people, so in mythology it is revealed through sexual fantasy. Just as most women are suffering from the condition of not having men in their lives that are strong enough to fill their yearnings; the children of minority neighborhoods do not have proper males to lead the young to their adulthoods. What’s missing in both cases are strong male characters. And in the absence of proper instruction from one generation into another, it is mythology that provides the path. For that, I am very proud and happy to see what they are doing at Alchemy, Inc.

If you happen to have the chance to see Karina Epperlein’s new movie, you should do so. More on it can be found at the following link:

http://www.karinafilms.us/index.html

Rich Hoffman

Visit Cliffhanger Research and Development

The Socialism of Liz Rogers: Why Mahogany’s failed in Cinncinnati

It was obvious that Liz Rogers was going to fail at Mahogany’s on the Banks when she gave the interview on the radio shown below. She stated that she was guided by faith, not sight and that she was destined to bring an African-American owned restaurant to the plush riverside development in Cincinnati. The city to encourage the endeavor threw a lot of money at her—which was unprecedented, because they wanted the politics of the deal. They wanted the feel good stories, progressive political support, and a success for minority owned businesses. Liz had a nice place in downtown Hamilton that was working, so developers wanted her to expand to a second location. But there was baggage with her from the start, which everyone ignored and the Mahogany’s deal turned out to be a disgrace. In the end the restaurant failed and Liz asked people not to judge her based on what she owed monetarily—but on her love for food. What?????????????????????

Liz Rogers lives in my community and I think is a nice lady. I think her intentions were good. But her business approach belongs in the Twilight Zone, expecting judgment based on her personal desires to cook food, and that she approaches the business with feelings—not thought. In other words her approach to the Banks deal was similar to saying standing before a tall wall, metaphorically, “I have faith that I will be lifted above and beyond that wall.” But the lift never comes leaving her standing in the same spot stuck with ineptitude. The proper approach would be to say, “I will construct a rope and climb over that wall.” That is a plan that can lead to a profitable enterprise. Having faith doesn’t do it. Faith can help you get up in the morning, but it won’t deliver tasks completed.

Now Liz is out of the Banks location and she is looking to make a deal with the city—which should have never been involved in the Rogers endeavor from the start. She is threatening to sue Cincinnati for her failure on the grounds that the types of development city government promised her would take place—which never quite manifested the way they proposed. What is unfathomably naive about her threat is that she actually believes that the fault of her business is the city’s problem. Her location was right next to The Holy Grail and was plugged numerous times on 700 WLW—most of the time in a favorable way regarding her food. She failed to retain the curiosity customers by making them into repeats. Good or bad press she has had loads and loads of free advertising—the name of Mahogany’s has been on every television station, radio station and received plenty of news print. She has had her chances to take a freak show and turn it into a legitimate business opportunity—which is much more opportunity than any other business have had in Cincinnati in years. Just getting the name out for a new enterprise is difficult at best.   If anything, the city gave her a golden opportunity to become gloriously rich—and she failed epically. The city responded to her threat with the following article:

The city of Cincinnati won’t take up Mahogany’s owner Liz Rogers‘ offer not to sue it in exchange for forgiving the balance of a $300,000 loan the city made for her to open the restaurant at the Banks.

“In a letter last week, the city expressed its position on this matter,” said Rocky Merz, a spokesman for City Manager Harry Black. “Due to the potential for litigation, we have nothing further to add. We wish Ms. Rogers all the best in her future endeavors.”

Rogers wrote a letter to the city offering not to sue it over promises she says were broken when she agreed to open a restaurant at the riverfront development, including that there would be a hotel and office workers there. She also proposed that for $12,000 the city would sell her the furniture and restaurant equipment the city’s $300,000 bought. Rogers, who said she would open another restaurant in Cincinnati, gave the city until Thursday to take the deal.

Mahogany’s closed last week after it was evicted by its landlord, NIC Riverbanks One. Rogers has denied allegations made in the eviction letter sent by the landlord.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/09/16/cincinnati-to-mahogany-s-owner-no-deal.html

It is obvious that Liz Rogers is a believer in socialism as she does not attribute her actions to success or failure of her business, but in the promises of government to provide or not provide. She brought with her business venture an obvious lack of embrace in capitalism which scared away her potential customers. She failed because of her philosophic position. She was the one given a gift, nearly a million dollars in opportunity—loads of free advertising and a site across from the Great American Ballpark and one of the hottest developments with residential living right over her head—nearly guaranteed customers if she produced a decent product. But, there was a lot of competition, and she couldn’t hack it—and due to her failure, she sought socialism and racism as the excuse. That is absolutely pathetic.

I didn’t write much about her at this site because part of me felt sorry for her, and I didn’t want to pile it on. I knew from the first time that I heard her speak that she would fail, so it didn’t come as a surprise to me when she did no matter how many opportunities were placed before her feet. But what did surprise me was that she actually believes she has the right to sue Cincinnati because of her failure. That is really astonishing and is a direct symptom of a very broken society that people actually believe such things. Liz Rogers failed because her product wasn’t very good. Her food may have been good, but the experience in dinning in her restaurant as opposed to other places did not have appeal to enough people. That is the whole issue. She was given an opportunity to give Cincinnati visitors at the Banks “soul food” and they rejected it. She may do better in Over-the-Rhine or even Forest Park, but at the Banks—people expect other options and they voted with their wallets. And she went out of business—and because she was not using her sight—she failed to make corrections to her presentation so to keep her customers and make them want to come back. Nobody wants to spend good money in a restaurant where the owner is a victim. They want to brush elbows with success—because it makes them feel good to do so. Instead of Mahogany’s Liz’s customers likely went on down to the Moerlein Brewhouse on the river and conducted their dining experience at that establishment for similar value for the dollar. It was up to Liz to figure out what they were doing and to adjust—but she didn’t. Instead she blamed everyone but herself for a failure that is in her sole possession. If the city government did anything wrong it was that they tried to help her in the first place giving false hope to a person who had not earned a chance that wasn’t theirs to give in the first place.

Rich Hoffman  

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Why There is Trouble in the Middle East: The whole issue explained–“one side wants the other side dead”

Many find the situation in the Middle East confusing, and have little ideal why there is any trouble there. The political left wishes to deny there is anything wrong at all, and sides with the Palestinian/Muslim factions, the political right with Israel along the typical Christian conservatives. Each side points to the other and says there is no evidence to support their theories of aggression and this is largely due to the fact that tyrants, thieves and cut throats in our modern age have destroyed evidence so that proper arguments against them can never be rooted. Common sense explanations about the Middle East seldom occur like they have in the video below—because few people are left in the world who can make value judgments based on observation—due to the evidence that is so cryptic as to who is the villains really are.

 

The video featured nationally syndicated radio talk show host Dennis Prager, who is known for his strong conservative views, the pro-Israel YouTube video aims to explain the Middle East conflict in under six minutes.

“The Middle East conflict is framed as one of the most complex problems in the world,” the video claims. “But, in reality, it’s very simple.”

“It may be the hardest to solve, but it is the easiest to explain,” Prager says. “In a nutshell, it’s this: one side wants the other side dead.”

According to Prager, the “simple” problem is difficult to solve because most Palestinians and Arabs “do not recognize the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist.”

To support his thesis, Prager briefly overviews several decades of history, contending Israel has always sought peace with its neighbors. The conservative talk show host concludes the video leaving viewers with one final thought.

“If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?” Prager asks. “In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and mass murder of its Jewish population. In the second case, there would be peace the next day.”

The video, officially titled “The Middle East Problem,” has amassed more than 3 million views since it was uploaded in late April. According to YouTube statistics, most of the views have poured in over the past couple weeks.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/04/some-are-calling-this-the-most-important-video-about-israel-ever-made-and-its-taking-the-internet-by-storm/

While that may seem simplistic, it is in fact the case, there is nothing that Palestinians will ever do to accept the 1947 creation of a Jewish state—erected out of the violence of World War II to attempt to bring peace to the Biblically driven people. Likely some of that decision by the members of the United Nations at the time believed that it was their earthly obligation to restore the nation of Israel to God’s chosen people.

Revelation 12:12-17 speaks of how the devil will make war against Israel, trying to destroy her (Satan knows his time is short– Revelation 20:1-3, 10). It also reveals that God will protect Israel in the wilderness. Revelation 12:14 says Israel will be protected from the devil for “a time, times, and half a time (“a time” = 1 year; “times” = 2 years; “half a time” = one-half year; in other words, 3 1/2 years). So if the root cause of the establishment of the Jewish state were analyzed, it is likely that religious superstition was at the heart of it more than compassion for a tortured people.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Revelation-chapter-12.html#ixzz39XFilWoN

On 2 April 1947, the United Kingdom delegation addressed a letter to the Acting Secretary-General of the United Nations requesting that the question of Palestine be placed on the agenda of the next regular session of the General Assembly.[88] On 15 May the General Assembly resolved (Resolution 106) that a committee, United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), be created “to prepare for consideration at the next regular session of the Assembly a report on the question of Palestine”.[89] In July 1947 the UNSCOP visited Palestine and met with Jewish and Zionist delegations. The Arab Higher Committee boycotted the meetings. At this time, there was further controversy when the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin ordered an illegal immigrant ship, the Exodus 1947, to be sent back to Europe. The migrants on the ship were forcibly removed by British troops at Hamburg after a long period in prison ships.

The principal non-Zionist Orthodox Jewish (or Haredi) party, Agudat Israel, recommended to UNSCOP that a Jewish state be set up after reaching a religious status quo agreement with Ben-Gurion regarding the future Jewish state. The agreement would grant exemption to a quota of yeshiva (religious seminary) students and to all orthodox women from military service, would make the Sabbath the national weekend, promised Kosher food in government institutions and would allow them to maintain a separate education system.[90]

In the Report of the Committee dated September 3, 1947 to the UN General Assembly,[91] the majority of the Committee in Chapter VI proposed a plan to replace the British Mandate with “an independent Arab State, an independent Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem” …, the last to be under “an International Trusteeship System”.[92] On November 29, 1947, in Resolution 181 (II), the General Assembly recommended to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations, the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out in the resolution.[93] The Plan was to replace the British Mandate with “Independent Arab and Jewish States” and a “Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem administered by the United Nations”. The Plan of Partition in Part 1 A. Clause 2 provided that Britain “should use its best endeavors to ensure than an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date and in any event not later than 1 February 1948”. Clause 3. provided that “Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem … shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948.”

Neither Britain nor the UN Security Council took any action to implement the resolution and Britain continued detaining Jews attempting to enter Palestine. Concerned that partition would severely damage Anglo-Arab relations, Britain denied UN representatives access to Palestine during the period between the adoption of Resolution 181 (II) and the termination of the British Mandate.[94] The British withdrawal was finally completed in May 1948. However, Britain continued to hold Jews of “fighting age” and their families on Cyprus until March 1949.[95]

In the immediate aftermath of the General Assembly’s vote on the Partition plan, the explosions of joy among the Jewish community were counterbalanced by the expression of discontent among the Arab community. Soon after, violence broke out and became more and more prevalent. Murders, reprisals, and counter-reprisals came fast on each other’s heels, resulting in dozens of victims killed on both sides in the process. The impasse persisted as no force intervened to put a stop to the escalating cycles of violence.[96][97][98][99] By the end of March, there was a total of 2,000 dead and 4,000 wounded.[100] These figures correspond to an average of more than 100 deaths and 200 casualties per week in a population of 2,000,000.

Shielded Jewish convoy during the blockade of Tel Aviv–Jerusalem road

From January onwards, operations became increasingly militarized, with the intervention of a number of Arab Liberation Army regiments inside Palestine, each active in a variety of distinct sectors around the different coastal towns. They consolidated their presence in Galilee and Samaria.[101] Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni came from Egypt with several hundred men of the Army of the Holy War. Having recruited a few thousand volunteers, he organized the blockade of the 100,000 Jewish residents of Jerusalem.[102] To counter this, the Yishuv authorities tried to supply the city with convoys of up to 100 armored vehicles, but the operation became more and more impractical as the number of casualties in the relief convoys surged. By March, Al-Hussayni’s tactic had paid off. Almost all of Haganah‘s armored vehicles had been destroyed, the blockade was in full operation, and hundreds of Haganah members who had tried to bring supplies into the city were killed.[103]

While the Jewish population had received strict orders requiring them to hold their ground everywhere at all costs,[104] the Arab population was more affected by the general conditions of insecurity to which the country was exposed. Up to 100,000 Arabs, from the urban upper and middle classes in Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem, or Jewish-dominated areas, evacuated abroad or to Arab centers eastwards.[105] This situation caused the US to withdraw their support for the Partition plan, thus encouraging the Arab League to believe that the Palestinian Arabs, reinforced by the Arab Liberation Army, could put an end to the plan for partition. The British, on the other hand, decided on February 7, 1948, to support the annexation of the Arab part of Palestine by Transjordan.[106]

Supply convoy on its way to besieged Jerusalem, April 1948 Although a certain level of doubt took hold among Yishuv supporters, their apparent defeats were due more to their wait-and-see policy than to weakness. David Ben-Gurion reorganized Haganah and made conscription obligatory. Every Jewish man and woman in the country had to receive military training. Thanks to funds raised by Golda Meir from sympathizers in the United States, and Stalin’s decision to support the Zionist cause, the Jewish representatives of Palestine were able to sign very important armament contracts in the East. Other Haganah agents recuperated stockpiles from the Second World War, which helped improve the army’s equipment and logistics. Operation Balak allowed arms and other equipment to be transported for the first time by the end of March.

Ben-Gurion invested Yigael Yadin with the responsibility to come up with a plan in preparation for the announced intervention of the Arab states. The result of his analysis was Plan Dalet, which was put in place from the start of April onwards. The adoption of Plan Dalet marked the second stage of the war, in which Haganah passed from the defensive to the offensive. Within the framework of the establishment of Jewish territorial continuity foreseen by Plan Dalet, the forces of Haganah, Palmach and Irgun intended to conquer mixed zones. Palestinian Arab society was shaken. Tiberias, Haifa, Safed, Beisan, Jaffa and Acre fell, resulting in the flight of more than 250,000 Palestinian Arabs.[107]

The British had, at that time, essentially withdrawn their troops. The situation pushed the leaders of the neighboring Arab states to intervene, but their preparation was not finalized, and they could not assemble sufficient forces to turn the tide of the war. Most Palestinian Arab hopes lay with the Arab Legion of Transjordan’s monarch, King Abdullah I, but he had no intention of creating a Palestinian Arab-run state since he hoped to annex as much of the territory of the British Mandate for Palestine as he could. He was playing a double game and was just as much in contact with the Jewish authorities as with the Arab League.

On May 14, 1948, on the day in which the British Mandate over Palestine expired, the Jewish People’s Council gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum and approved a proclamation declaring the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel.[108] The 1948 Palestine war entered its second phase with the intervention of the Arab state armies and the beginning of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

The Arab League members Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq refused to accept the UN partition plan and proclaimed the right of self-determination for the Arabs across the whole of Palestine. The Arab states marched their forces into what had, until the previous day, been the British Mandate for Palestine. The new state of Israel had an organized and efficient army, the Haganah, under the command of Israel Galili. The Arab forces were of varying quality, but Arab states had heavy military equipment at their disposal. The invading Arab armies were initially on the offensive but the Israelis soon recovered from the initial shock of being invaded on all sides. On May 29, 1948, the British initiated United Nations Security Council Resolution 50 and declared an arms embargo on the region. Czechoslovakia violated the resolution supplying the Jewish state with critical military hardware to match the (mainly British) heavy equipment and planes already owned by the invading Arab states. On June 11, a month-long UN truce was put into effect.

Following the announcement of independence, the Haganah became the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The Palmach, Etzel and Lehi were required to cease independent operations and join the IDF. During the ceasefire, Etzel attempted to bring in a private arms shipment aboard a ship called “Altalena“. When they refused to hand the arms to the government, Ben-Gurion ordered that the ship be sunk. Several Etzel members were killed in the fighting. Large numbers of Jewish immigrants, many of them World War II veterans and Holocaust survivors, now began arriving in the new state of Israel, and many joined the IDF.[110]

After an initial loss of territory by the Jewish state and occupation of Arab Palestine by the Arab armies, from July the tide gradually turned in the Israelis favor and they pushed the Arab armies out and conquered some of the territory which had been included in the proposed Arab state. At the end of November, tenuous local cease fires were arranged between the Israelis, Syrians and Lebanese. On December 1, King Abdullah announced the union of Transjordan with Arab Palestine west of the Jordan, the new state name being the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. He adopted the title “King of Arab Palestine”; only Britain recognized the annexation.

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

Many, including Christians have an untrustworthy eye toward Jews for a lot of reasons, the first of which was the assassination of their savor Jesus Christ by the Pharisees. The Pharisees didn’t want Jesus cutting in on their religious action in Jerusalem so they conspired to kill him. This has left a strange discombobulating effect between the Biblical New Testament and the Old—the two books are essentially different books of religion with the land of the Jews serving as the essential bridge. In the Old Testament, God is all about revenge, fire and brimstone, and conquest over oppressors, as the New Testament is about churchless religion which Jesus preached from hill tops—a religion of peace, pacifism, and love of life—except when Jesus got into that argument with the fig tree because it didn’t have any fruit.

What the Jews and Muslims have in common is that they both revere the same essential Biblical text—the Old Testament as their sacred document of religion.   The problem is that the Islamic states call their text the Koran, but the characters are essentially the same—only the viewpoint are changed. So there is no rectifying peace even between Christians and Jews where real trust takes place—let along two religions fighting over a version of the same characters from the same book, one called the Old Testament, the other called the Koran. Of course when faced with all this “evidence” and opinion—ideologues who wish to protect their point of view from reality—and facts—will declare that what has been presented here is too simplistic and that nobody understands their problems. But in essence, the Jews just want to live life and visit the temple of their King David. Muslims want to kill Jews. It really is that simple—and has been that way for many thousands of years—because both religions share the same Biblical stories, but one is a peaceful religion and the other is one of violence and conquest. So long as Jews live, Muslims will seek to destroy them and that is the essence of the trouble in the Middle East.

As a lesson to the United Nations, they never accomplished the micromanagement of the State of Israel correctly, so they should expect the same trouble everywhere they wish to tamper, whether it is the United States in pitting progressives from the coasts against the conservatives of the Heartland, or communists against capitalists, or dogs against cats. The United Nations has no ability to bring people together without antagonizing tensions. The only way for life to flourish and people to solve any problems is to change their foundation thoughts—and that cannot be done with silly laws or lines on a map. People have to change the way they think—and in that absence violence will dominate always.

Rich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Defiance is Key to American Success: Why history should remember Claire Lee Chennault

A few days ago I introduced you dear reader to a book that is very close to my heart, Way of the Fighter by Claire Lee Chennault, the famous World War II general and leader of the valiant Flying Tigers.  There are times when I go to Wright Patterson Airforce Base just to sit next to the P-40 on display there.  It reminds me of what America should be, instead of what it has become.  I am also glad to report that the Tri State Warbird Museum down the road from my house have successfully restored a P-40 from New Zealand.  They restored the P-40 to the paint scheme of the ace pilot that had flown it, which does not have the famous mouth on the front.  But that P-40 to me is special to behold.  Every morning that I ride my motorcycle in the cold putting on my U.S. Wings leather jacket to battle the elements it reminds me of the old fighter pilots from the early days of aviation, which was a specifically American invention.  The Germans, the Japanese, and the British copied off American designs and tried to improve upon them, but it was America that developed aviation, and pushed each new technical break-through.  The P-40 is a representation of this early period between the old bi-planes and the much faster and durable planes like the Mustang and Corsairs that would follow. 

On a previous article that I did on this topic there is video of the Tri-State Warbird Museum firing up its big Allison 1,12 hp 12 cylinder V-1710 engine.  My wife and I had the privilege of being inside this aircraft early in its restoration, and it is delightful to see it completed and functional.  Of the 13,738 P-40’s of all variants produced between 1938 and 1944 only around 85 exist today—one at Wright Patterson and one at the Tri-State Warbird Museum.  I am so proud to live within 40 minutes of those two famous planes.

The plane represents more than military service, reliability, and World War II patriotism.  It was how the plane came about, and how it was used in tactics developed by Claire Chennault which reached every corner of the world by 1942 that tell the largest story and point to a particular secret of American ingenuity and the benefits of capitalism.  Chennault as a military commander had in common a trait that I love in the NFL football coach Sam Wyche of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Bill Gates when he left college to start Microsoft, George Lucas when he moved out of Hollywood to create Star Wars, and Steve Jobs in pushing to create Apple—what they all have in common is that they got where they did not by complying to authority, but by challenging it—and often defying it.  The P-40 is more than just an airplane; it is a symbol of why America was so superior to other cultures, and why defiance is the American way over blind compliance to ridiculous authority.

When General Stilwell came to China where Claire Chennault was the proven authority—yet outranked the Flying Tiger leader, the expectation was one where Chennault was expected to bow to authority and respect the chain of command, which of course didn’t happen.  If Stilwell had his way America would have lost in China and Japan would have occupied and dominated Asia.  When Chennault was called from China at the end of the war it was then that communists overtook the country.  Chennault wanted to stay and fight the communists after the Japanese were defeated but American command wouldn’t allow it—and their folly cost America its soul from the Korean War to present.  Of course the Soviet Union was pushing the Vietnam War advancing communism which was overtaking all of Asia and was also feeding the counter-culture movement at American schools through KGB subversive penetration.  The “hippie” was a KGB creation and they are largely forming American foreign and domestic policy to this very day as they are now of age to be in senior management positions.  The pinnacle mistake that sent America on a downward spiral was when the defiance of Chennault was removed and the bureaucrats got their way.  That is when the problems started for The United States.  The key to American success is in defiance.  When that defiance is suppressed, America is just as worthless as every nation that does exactly what they are told by pinheaded fools and worthless politicians.

In the 1986 film Heartbreak Ridge by Clint Eastwood the film opens with his character in trouble with the law—particularly for urinating on a police car.  This is to establish that Eastwood’s character is defiant, and something that American movie audiences can relate with.  In that film, Eastwood was essentially playing a variation to the kind of leader the real life Claire Lee Chennault was.  For a long time I wanted to write a novel about The Flying Tigers and have Eastwood play the role, but he’s too old now, and I am still working out the story details.  I don’t want to just write another World War II novel, I want to explore this theme of American defiance as the most important ingredient.  I would say that defiance is as important to American success as sugar is to cookies—it is a must have.

The rest of the world struggles because they are too structured, too compliant, and too obedient to worthless bureaucrats.  The reason that communism, socialism and every big government attempt does not work, is because institutional systems produce too many people like General Stilwell and not enough like General Chennault.  If General Patton had done as his superiors had instructed him to do, World War II would have been lost in Europe.  Britain, France, and all of Africa would have been dominated by the Italians and Germans.   It was Patton’s defiance that made him great, not his ability to follow orders.

In American music we like our artists defiant to the rules—that is because it is deeply inherit to the American psyche.  We do not admire compliance.  American heroes are not good soldiers who go down with the ship of sacrifice—but the ones who bark back at their chain of command and do what they think is right as individuals, not cogs in the wheel of society.   There are a lot of competing ideals floating around which confuse the issue, but for me it is quite clear whenever I see a P-40 Curtiss-Wright airplane what the key to American success was, and continues to be.  It is defiance like that of the Flying Tigers who were terribly outnumbered, and up against superior airplanes to paint that gaping mouth on the front of their planes to represent the swagger of American ingenuity, and defiance.  The Japanese would have never done anything like that to the planes of the Emperor.  German pilots would have never conceived of defacing the planes of Das Führer.  And even American pilots under Stilwell would have been frowned upon if Chennault had not let his men express themselves creatively before his arrival.  Chennault had set a standard that carried over into just about every branch of service for the next 60 years, as orthodox military generals frowned upon it.

I have told many stories about the original Pirates of the Caribbean led by Henry Morgan, another personal favorite of mine.  The privateers in early Jamaica were really no different from the Flying Tigers of China, the Henry Morgan pirates were essentially hired guns by the English Crown to prevent Spain and France from acquiring too much Aztec gold.  Morgan let his men be as free as possible and the results were staggering.  America was born on Morgan pirate vessels as Thomas Paine observed the antics first-hand and how much gold the King of England received from Morgan’s adventures.  The key again was in defiance.  The real Pirates of the Caribbean were so bold, and able to win against impossible odds because they were fighting for profit, and spitting in the eye of compliance.

I love the Flying Tigers and specifically the P-40 airplanes they used, because it is the most obvious example of why capitalism, defiance and free thinking destroy the rigid chain of command adhered to by the rest of the world.  There have been other successes since—many, and they all share an element of pushing against authority, not yielding to it.  Statistically, there isn’t any real evidence that any other way of thinking but that of the American is successful time and time again.  It is the only proven method of achievement that has a real track record of success.  So the million dollar question, or otherwise, the $17 trillion, which is the current U.S. debt, is why would America copy off the rest of the  world’s stupid submission to authority—because time and time again those authorities are corrupted with human error and not qualified to make the best decisions at the best times?  Why do we teach our children to follow orders, when they should be taught to give them?

  Why would we teach blind submission to compliance when history proves that is the quickest way to personal and national destruction?  And why would we teach military generals to be more like Stilwell when they should be more like Patton and Chennault?  The answer is that we shouldn’t.  We need to rethink our entire thought process in America and start with following what works, while setting to drift that which doesn’t.  Compliance to authority will not take anybody where they need to go and this needs to be embraced openly for the first time in American history instead of around the edges of our movies and music.  It is time that our schools teach defiance, our colleges teach conservative capitalism, and our businesses seek the renegade manager who wears business suits without soaks and has no interest in being in charge—except for the freedom to execute their individual visions and follow their blissful passions to the ends of the earth running over all the opposition that gets in their way.  It is time to admit that this is what it means to be an American, and to embrace it fully for the first time without the shameful judgments by the idiots who run the rest of the world.

Rich Hoffman  www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

 

The Leather Jackets of U.S. Wings: Sgt. Hack’s curious case and exceptional quality

Too often there is very little to talk about but what we don’t like—and when you’re picky, or expect competency when dealing with people, all too often what we get is disappointment.  Every day for over 6 years now I have put on a leather flight jacket from US Wings.  I ride motorcycles all year, and there are maybe a handful of days over that span of time that I don’t have to go somewhere.  And when I do travel it is usually by motorcycle.  So my leather jacket has to be tough, withstand all the elements and be extremely functional.  Even on the hottest days of summer a leather jacket is needed—the mornings are often cool, too cool for naked skin and large bugs pelt you in the torso area while riding.  The leather is an offering of armor and is essential riding equipment.  Even during a motorcycle ride from Key West to the Everglades 50 miles west of Miami where the real temperature was 107 degrees the early dawn sun was pleasant to the naked skin, but once the day hit 10 AM, it was punishing.  The jacket was needed just to stay hydrated and prevent the skin from burning under the sun. Then from Miami to Orlando, afternoon thunderstorms are common, it may be intensely sunny and 15 minutes later a thunderstorm is upon you dropping rain the size of a small fist as hundreds begin hitting you by the minute.  Without the leather the pain would be intense, probably unbearable.  So because I ride a motorcycle every day of the year I wear a leather jacket every day as well.  I have an additional problem, I often meet people where my leather jacket has to go along with a suit and tie.  It would be disrespectful to the people I see to show up in a biker jacket with studs looking like I’m going to Sturgis—so I need my leather jacket to look as good as the cloth underneath it.  So with all that in mind I have only found one company in the entire world that made a jacket fitting for me and that is U.S. Wings outside of Cleveland, Ohio founded by Sgt. David D. Hack, the Purple Heart recipient and Nation’s #1 US Army recruiter from 69 to 73.  He’s been Chief of Police in Sebring, Ohio, and in his spare time founded U.S. Wings in 1986 to the present.  His company knows how to make cloths that fit my very intense lifestyle.  So you can imagine dear reader how disappointed I was when I went to zip up my well-worn flight jacket a few weeks ago and the teeth were so worn out from use that they no longer gripped each other.

I contacted U.S. Wings to price a new zipper and liner and they responded quickly.  The zipper replacement was $60 and the liner replacement was $90, plus shipping the jacket to the New Jersey plant where most of the construction takes place.   It was still winter where the nights are often in the mid 20s so I had to be able to zip up the jacket—it simply couldn’t wait.  But after careful consideration, even though the stitching all over the jacket was still very much intact it was decided that it was time to retire that jacket and buy a new one.  A new jacket from U.S. Wings costs about the same as a good firearm but considering my use, a new one was better than fixing the old one so I placed an order for one of their Signature Series flight jackets with nearly the exact specs.

The order was placed and a few days later the jacket arrived on my doorstep ready for battle.  I literally took it out of the box, tried it on for fitting and left the house on my motorcycle.  When you meet with people they can tell instantly whether the jacket is a cheap rip-off from some shopping mall vender selling “club” clothing or some piece of crap made for the herds at various coat suppliers destined to be sold in the future at a flea market.  It doesn’t matter so much if the jacket is stained from sweet, rain, bugs, or heat streaked, they can tell if it is of quality and if it’s not it won’t look right with a suit and a $500 dollar watch.  But U.S. Wing jackets are just fine for this kind of thing and suit both necessities perfectly.  The jackets are of a quality where their value never comes into question.

When I bought the first jacket six years ago Hack’s company sent with it some bonus items free of charge—a book about Hack’s life which was actually quite good and a free Moko Man hat which I wear often.  As this new jacket arrived I expected him to send something extra, but wasn’t all that shocked when only the jacket was inside.  The economy had been hard for everyone, so I figured that U.S. Wings had given up on those kinds of perks to save money.  Two days after the arrival of the jacket it was a Saturday and one of my nephews was at my house playing Star Wars: X Wing with myself and one of my son-in-laws as we noticed the mail man driving up our driveway.  He dropped off a package and neither my wife nor I expected to receive anything.  We took the usual protocols when examining something unusual which arrives at our home, but my concerns quickly alleviated once I saw the U.S. Wings logo on the box.

U.S. Wings had sent a special delivery of free items, a DVD music video titled “The Ballad of Sergeant Hack” by Erica Lane and a special single song CD by the same musical artist called “Believe in America.”  Inside also was a special bag designed to protect expensive garments while traveling, such as U.S. Wing jackets and tailored suits.  It was a cost that U.S. Wings did not have to incur, they could have just sent the jacket, but as usual they went above and beyond.

The song, “The Ballad of Sergeant Hack” can be heard on the first video on this article along with other videos which give an ideal who David Hack is, and why he is one of those unique people whose personality inevitably comes out in his company U.S. Wings.  Hack is a guy who personally wrote President Johnson complaining that he wanted to go to Ranger school.  He volunteered for Vietnam during a time when many people were dodging the draft and was a recruiter on the active front designated to reenlist soldiers who were set to rotate out of the combat zones.  Needless to say, Sergeant Hack is the real deal and that personality certainly comes out in the clothing line of U.S. Wings.

Hack’s patriotism is genuine.  He’s obviously not happy with the direction of the country currently—and his sentiments are much older than the Tea Party.  He’s not a “come lately” to the ideal of patriotism and is truly one of the unique people of American culture.  I purchase my leather jackets from U.S. Wings because there simply are not better jackets made by any other manufacturer in the world when it comes to military clothing and rugged apparel.  I would not trust my jackets to be made by a roving communist from the East or a socialist from Europe or a conquered soul in Russia.  U.S. Wing jackets are purely American and made for American lifestyles, and they are the only kind of jacket that I’ll wear.

As is often the case, the company U.S. Wings is the embodiment of its creator, Sergeant Hack and the quality he has directly infused into a great American company.  In a day where most things are imports from other countries done cheaply out of necessity, U.S. Wings jackets have an emblem inside all their garments which actually sends a chill up my spine every time I see it—which is every day because I put those jackets on every day.  U.S. Wings is a company that I trust because I trust Sergeant Hack and know that he puts a lot of extra effort into the reputation of his company.  Most companies that make coats, shoes, boots, or even farm equipment have fallen from grace because the personalities of their creators, the Chief Executive Officers who utilize capitalism to bring joy to the world lose touch with their initial passions.  When it comes to U.S. Wings, even after many years of existence, over a long-span of time, their quality and effort are matched by their past performance and it is one of the rare honors that I have had to open a package from them and see what’s inside.  Often it is the little things that matter, and when it comes to U.S. Wings a lot of little things add up to greatness, from the quality of their stitching to the measurements of their segments—to the quality of the actual leather.  And even when they don’t have to—because the product speaks for itself, David Hack wants his customers to know more about him, so that they know what they are getting is the real deal that won’t falter when they need it most.  And when it comes to leather jackets there aren’t any better made.

For me there are two essential ingredients to my daily life, my leather U.S. Wings jackets and Gargoyle Sunglasses.  Everything else is a variable.

Here is the U.S. Wings website:

 http://www.uswings.com/

And now that you’ve read all this, watch all the videos completely and know that what you are seeing is a deep tap-root into American exceptionalism and be damn proud of it.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Ayn Rand Versus James Joyce: The Divorce of America from Europe

I feel sorry for people who feel this way. The reviewer simply can’t relate. They have no concept of having the kind of passion for something where sleep, rest and comfort are secondary concerns. They don’t feel those kinds of things, so they think good characters are the type of people who strive to have faults, where they work simply to eat, drink, rest, and have sex. People like that are like monkeys at a zoo looking at human visitors across a gulf of intelligence, beyond the barriers of a cage, and can’t understand why zoo visitors have drinks, and strollers, and small humans in their arms with sunglasses shielding their eyes from the sun. They are primitives, sad and left behind lost forever to faulty thinking and stupidity.

Read more at http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/5e30cb6/atlas-shrugged-is-a-ridiculous-book~aanyvpt6qjgrvit7nk2b4wfioe#KbDwv05Roro8QBRx.99

That was a comment I made to an article published on Atlas Shrugged is a Ridiculous Book posted in the Galt’s Gulch site where I have quite a few friends.  I read the review linked below and thought that the author Robert Nielsen did a good job citing his opinions, that he did thoroughly read the book and made an effort to have pointed comments.  I thought the author was a generally curious person of above average intelligence.  However, I also thought that the author might be a radical left winged oriented socialist (Democrat) who was a staunch Keynesian and after looking into the guy a bit, that is exactly what he was.  He was a European born and raised amidst the socialism of Europe and simply had no mental mechanisms that could relate to the novel Atlas Shrugged and believed that through democratic consensus that just because a majority of the population on earth does not think like the characters in Atlas Shrugged, that the book is ridiculous and should not have an audience.  Nielsen had a number of opinionated passages in his article, but the one below struck me as being the most revealing.

http://robertnielsen21.wordpress.com/2014/03/14/atlas-shrugged-is-a-ridiculous-book/

 

“All of the heroes have this absurd element to them. They don’t stop to eat or rest a single time in the book and it is casually thrown in that they haven’t slept for two or three days as though that would have no effect on them. They have no hobbies or interested (sic) outside work. Even when they are bleeding they don’t feel any pain. In other words they are soulless robots, machines good for working and nothing else. Atlas Shrugged bears a strong resemblance to Fascist propaganda in its treatment of heroes.  There is a strong emphasis on the cult of personality, of worshipping men of action in contrast to the masses who are too stupid and cowardly to achieve greatness.  Democracy destroys accountability whereas dictatorship is the only system where anyone is responsible.  All of the best firms in the book are named after their owner and collapse without them.”

Nielsen says a lot here and represents a large portion of the world who have grown up for generations under kings, princes, fascist rulers, and tyrannical dictators who to them represent the “right” on a political spectrum and democratic socialists, communists, labor unions, and religious collectivists on the other representing the “left.”  Yet for me personally, I don’t even consider any of the categories on that scale relevant and long ago designated Europe and its history to be corrosive to the human experience.  My ideal of a good time is not sitting in a “pub” with my mates watching a socialist soccer game and thinking that James Joyce was an intellectual giant as the benchmark of good literature.  The guy could write complicated metaphors—but to what end—to be haunted by dreams of a fragmented past as in Finnegan’s Wake or to visit a brothel in Ulysses.  Nielsen is from Dublin, and so was Joyce and because of my experience with those works, I feel I have a pretty good feel for life in Ireland and what it represents—and none of those things are concepts that are attractive to me.

I find it utterly disgusting that so many Americans have been bred through the education system to believe that the cities of Europe are exotic destinations of culture and sophistication.  To me the entire land mass from the shores of France to the end of Russia protruding out into the Bering Strait is a corrupt embodiment and continuation of The Dark Ages.  The people from those lands have been conquered and beaten so many ways by so many tyrants that the only way out of the cycle was “democracy” through majority rule.  And if the majority are idiots, than so be it.  Visiting a BW3’s on a Friday night disgusts me as much as it would if I were in a Dublin Pub with a bunch of socialists banging mugs of beer together in communion around a soccer match—so my feelings are not specific to Europe.  And before I say any more, one of my son-in-laws is from England, just outside of London on the eastern side.  My other daughter dated a guy from the boarder of Scotland.  I have family members from Europe, and I deal with people almost every day in every time zone from London to New Zealand, so I have a very good understanding about the lifestyle of Europe which leaves me shaking my head when Americans seek to mimic that cold landmass with a history of oppression extending from here to the dawn of man shown in the Caves of Lascaux.  America was founded by people seeking freedom from Europe and they were willing to die to leave that place.  In a lot of ways the pilgrims were the original Gaultchers from Atlas Shrugged they were looking to be free of the religious and political persecution of Europe, which still exists to this very day in Keynesian economics.  The thought process moved from churches into the economy but the mentality is very much the same.

Once America was founded and Europe saw that they could visit without being killed by natives, they settled the New England area and brought their stupid European socialism with them in the form of “progressivism,” and started voting for Democrats while encourage America to give up football and making “soccer” the national game…………………………..NO.  In many ways Europe is still stuck under the veil of tyranny that they have been confined with since there was an Ice Age and it is utterly disgusting.  Atlas Shrugged is one of the first great American novels produced under a relatively new country with a new way of thinking.  Now of course the jealous European trained in the liberal schools of Ireland, England and France will scoff at the characters of Atlas Shrugged because they are clearly outside of the European experience.

In reference to many of the successful Americans that I know, it is true that if they do not come to work, or leave a company after they have led it, the company does collapse.  Making money is their hobby.  I remember a lunch meeting that I had in downtown Cincinnati with some very influential financiers and patent attorneys where the bill was $11,000.  These guys did this every day of the week.  They made their money under an American capitalist system and could not have done what they were doing in Europe because people like Robert Nielson would think that they had equal rights to that money just because their mothers gave birth to them in Dublin.  The people I had lunch with had a hobby that was “making money” which is why they had it.  The wealth they produced carried over into every aspect of society from the nice waitress who tended to them daily to the people who imported the food required to feed them.  If those types of people didn’t show up for work one day, or decided to go on a vacation, their businesses fell apart because “the people” working for them lost focus and drifted without proper leadership.  That is not fascism that is leadership.  Fascism is where such a human trait is taken advantage of.

America has created its own definitions and fascism is not even an option.  A business leader of an industry is not a fascist, they are a job creator.  People are free to leave that job if they discover they don’t like the direction of the company.  But to allow a fascist to rule over the entire nation of America—that simply isn’t going to happen.   Europeans can’t wrap their mind around that ideal; it doesn’t fit with their history and their foundations of education.  To them the political “right” is fascists like Mussolini and Hitler and the “left” are people like Lenin, Stalin, and Marx.  America rejected all those idiots because they are collectivists, and in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged she is introducing an entirely new way of looking at the old problems so that Americans can understand why their capitalist system is so superior to European socialism.  Those in love with “democracy” (majority rule, even if a majority are fools) is to commit a political and economic structure around collectivism.  In America where individualism is the foundation concept, collectivism is a curse.  It is a waste of time to achieve group consensus because not everyone is capable of making proper decisions.  The reason for this has been explored by Robert Pirsig in the book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, another revolutionary work of philosophy done specifically in America.  Slowly the old philosophers of Europe, people like Nietzsche, Marx, and Descartes are being replaced by Rand, Pirsig, and Adam Smith.

The characters of Atlas Shrugged are my kind of people.  They represent my daily life and I do feel sorry for those who can’t relate.  It must be terrible to wake up each morning in such a fog that human faults are the first area of focus.  It must be terrible to even consider if “group consensus” is something to measure before taking action.  I once went to Disney World with a large group and watched everyone standing in Tomorrow Land for an hour arguing about which thing to do first. Finally, I got sick of it and gathered up a crew who wanted to go with me and I left to explore the park.  We had a blast because most people just want to have someone give them direction in life.  They don’t want the burden of thinking, they just want to follow—and that’s fine so long as they don’t get in the way.  But if they try to hold things up with indecision and personal insecurities, then it is unacceptable to me.  The primary question explored in Atlas Shrugged is if the majority should be allowed to hold up the few, when it is the few who move the world, and the answer is no.

People like me do not reach out to the “democracies” of the world trying to sell Ayn Rand or Atlas Shrugged because I really don’t care if people like Robert Nielson accepts it or rejects it.  I just don’t want Nielson in a position through his Keynesian economics to hold me up when I want to do something.  If he wants to hang out in a Dublin pub watching soccer matches instead of being productive, that is his decision—but he does not have a right to hinder me.  The point of Atlas Shrugged is that when this process happens, people like Nielson do suffer.   Europe sucks…………..most everyone is stuck somewhere between fascism and communism.  The topless beaches of France and Spain do not give culture to a society—it does not make them enlightened.  French wine is not better than California wine and the Caves of Lascaux are representative of the same tribal collectivism as the Navajo of the American Southwest—both represent primitive collectivist cultures mired with a basic premise of tribal sacrifice.  The America that took Adam Smith’s lead, and John Locke and was first commented on by Ayn Rand, then Robert Pirsig is one that exists outside of European definitions for things.  It is not my task or those of my friends in Galt’s Gulch to “sell” Rand to anybody.  Her books have sold for decades quite well on their own—people come to her work in their own time in their own way.  The difference between a republic and a democracy is that a republic is supposed to represent different people as a representative as opposed to a democracy with majority rule.  America is a republic not a filthy democracy!  A group of thugs do not have a right to impose on me their beliefs just because they outnumber me.  The stupid will always outnumber the intelligent—so the stupid should not have power over the intelligent.  The intelligent should not be hampered by fools, lowlifes, and insecure collectivists.  That is what Atlas Shrugged is essentially about and why it offendshttp://youtu.be/bWebZ_OqU_c so many people.  I can understand that many people don’t like the book or the movies if they identify with the villains—nobody likes being called names.  But for years in every movie and book that has attacked capitalism, they have attacked my values, which is what the artists have done to people like me—so Atlas Shrugged is art that I can relate to.  I don’t expect the democratic masses to enjoy it—it wasn’t written for them.

It is sad that people like Robert Nielsen are stuck behind on an island of Keynesian economics, socialism, communism, and soccer matches over beer in 200-year-old pubs that smell like dirty feet and swamp ass stained to their wooden chairs after 50 years of use.  Like monkeys stuck on an island display at a zoo designed to contain them they can only look across the void at America and wonder why we have it so good, why we have so much money, so many tools at our disposal. But they never get to the answer of why because they are lacking the intellectual tools to step across the barriers which contain them.  If they knew how to swim or were not afraid of the water they could free themselves—but instead they spend their days grooming each other and beating on their chests in memory of their primitive ancestors and call those who have left them behind—cultists driven by “selfishness.”  I would love to help those people, but not by coming to Europe to copy off them, to play their stupid soccer matches where the game resembles socialism with their ridiculous off-sides rules—where a forward cannot be behind a defense—give me a break!  That makes for a boring game and a boring economy, and Europe has both.  Atlas Shrugged, an American story, is about productivity, individualism, innovation, and the corruption of the masses and their need for leadership.  John Galt is certainly not the next European fascists.  He is beyond that kind of thinking—he is all about total independence where individuals are not compelled into imprisonment by the weakest links of society—because those weak links chose to be stupid, perilous, or otherwise reckless with their lives—then expect others to shield them from reality through collectivism.  Atlas Shrugged philosophically is a divorce from Europe, and obviously in such divorces there are hard feelings and one side will always try to make the other look bad.  But in the end, Atlas Shrugged is a change in thinking that the spouse left behind resents and in this case it is Europe and all its faulty past.  Robert Nielsen might feel the chill of abandonment and call after their former lover with disdain and envy, but the merit is rooted in jealousy.  The proclamation that some people, some economies, and some ideals are better than others, and that people who love Atlas Shrugged are willing to go off and do their own thing is a reality that the European and the Americans who love the dank culture of that haze covered land is simply too much to comprehend.

Atlas Shrugged is about a new way of thinking where the roots of productivity are not explored through mystical hocus pocus balancing limited resources against equal distribution to the world.  It is about what makes resources in the first place so that new things can come to be which ultimately benefit everyone.  The question must first be asked, who is responsible for productivity—is it the democratic masses or the few who possess leadership and ability?  My trip to Disney World is confirmation that Atlas Shrugged is the only artistic work to properly identify the answer.  At the end of that day, a majority of the people in the argument of what to do were still there.  They had simply sat down at a few tables and ate food most of the day stuck in inaction driven by their indecisiveness.  Me and my group, we rode Pirates of the Carribean—5 times, road the Thunder Mountain Railroad, did the Swiss Family Robison Tree House, saw a number of shows including the Presidents Showcase, ran all over Tom Sawyer Island, did everything in Fantasy Land, shopped, road Space Mountain—3 times and still had time to do more.  The rest of the group had not even left Tomorrow Land except to get a place on Main Street to watch the fireworks.  That is what has happened to Europe and every single Keynesian economist and every political socialist.  They are still stuck in the politics of Europe and are chained to its dismal fate where America has moved on.  The philosophy of that “moving on” is chronicled in Atlas Shrugged and is only growing as more and more of those monkeys on the zoo island learn to swim and discover a big bright world outside of their intellectual confinement.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Obama The Dumbass: New Executive order against American productivity

Barack Obama has done a lot of really dumb things during his presidency and has shown himself to be a real novice when it comes to leadership.  Obama is the premier reason that an unproven senator rather than a vetted state governor or a military general should have nothing to do with The White House.  For those who foolishly voted for this fledgling idiot, the Percival of American politics, the video below is for you.  What they thought they were getting in 2008 when they cast their votes for the openly socialist community organizer from Chicago with direct ties to domestic terrorists, FBI tracked communists and a mother who slept her way around the world, was far from a savor.  The grim reality of their stupidity is self-evident.  Six years later, most of them are discovering what the woman in the following video have—which is reflected in the current poll numbers in 2014.

Now the idiot has really crossed the line and insulted me personally which is something that I must address directly.  If the dude wants to talk to me after reading this feel free……………he has my number.  This whole business of Barry Obama signing an executive order directed at the Labor Department requiring them to expand overtime pay requirements to include salary workers making under $50,000 per year for every hour worked over 40 per week is epically dim-witted.  This move is to equalize pay and distribution of wealth with yet another brainless attack on the supposed wealthy class of Americans to those in the mythical government created “middle-class.”  Obama stated on March 13th as he signed a memorandum to this effect that, “Our businesses have created more than 8 million new jobs over the last four years.  The unemployment rate is at the lowest it’s been in over five years, but, in many ways, the trend that have really battered middle-class families for decades have gotten worse, not better.  So we’ve got to reverse those trends.  We’ve got to build an economy that works for everybody, not just for a few.”  Obama’s dialogue of course is foolish, and might as well have been spoken by Vladimir Lenin in 1917 Russia.  Whether or not anybody likes the reality of President Obama, this move is rooted in communism—this ideal that all workers are equal and should share in the wealth of profit produced.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.

As I have documented I have been employed just about everywhere and done everything in virtually every capacity.  I have been at the very top and I have cleaned toilets—sometimes all at the same time.  I have worked on multiple occasions 24 straight hours and then some and done just about every kind of job that human beings have created.  At every place I have ever worked and all of the thousands of people I have worked with over the years, all of them with equal access to this site and the words I publish and can confirm if they wish to—because not a single one of them ever outworked me in all my years of productivity.  I have always been “that guy” who excelled and strove to do more, get more done, and outwit competitors with cleverness, aptitude, and sheer willpower.  What President Obama has declared with his diabolical executive order is that every other worker behind me has been equal to my efforts—the slug who sits in the break room too long, the imbecile who goofs off during the job too much, and the general bench warmer who can now sit at their computer while on salary and play on Facebook being unproductive during their normal work hours so they can milk the clock out and get paid for it by Uncle Government and pimp daddy Obama.

The primary reason an employer puts a worker who shows promise on salary is to avoid having to pay them overtime.  For the restaurant manager who might work 65 to 80 hours a week, the owner does not want to break their budget by racking up all the overtime hours incurred by a manager, so they are put on salary to fix the costs.  The motivation of the owner to the manager is to convince such people of responsibility to be more efficient with their time and to learn to delegate so that they don’t have to do all that work themselves.  But if they chose to work the extra hours they’ll do it at their cost.  For instance, if one of their restaurant employees calls off and there is nobody around to do the job, the manager is often stuck having to cover—and since they are on salary it will likely be free work to them.  This will cause the manager to hire better people so that they won’t have to do such things. With this new overtime rule by Obama and his gang of government thugs, the manager won’t want to hire another person to delegate to, because they will want to do the job themselves to milk out overtime.  Only idiots who have never managed anything at any point in their lives would think that such a communist concept could work in a productive society.

In my personal experience Obama has just declared with his ridiculous executive order that all the misfits, low-lifes, and lazy losers I have worked with in the past were equal to me—and that is just an insult.  Compared to me, nobody does equal work for equal pay, because nobody puts the same level of effort into a task.  Only a complete idiot with no work experience would believe such a thing, and this is confirmation that Obama and all the socialist knuckle draggers in Washington D.C. are clueless as to what makes an economy tick, and now they have increased the burden on American productivity, not lessened it.

Anyone who has had to manage hourly workers knows that because of the overtime laws created during the “Red Decade” where communism was being openly advocated by the high levels of society in The United States that the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 required most workers to be paid overtime in an effort to shuffle profits into the pockets of the common worker.  Salaried managers were tasked to combat the kind of waste this created by making sure that most of the work needed by a company was obtained within a 40 hour work week.  Without such management hourly workers typically stand at their jobs and string out their tasks so that they can obtain 5 to 15 hours of overtime a week supplementing their income.  In union shops this is an epidemic problem which has ultimately destroyed their competitive swagger in the world.  The federal government never had a right, or an obligation to determine what was “fair” for a worker in their relationship with an employer.  The cost of their intrusion has been productivity.

I have worked for employers who were idiots, and they sought to take advantage of me at every turn.  When I discovered this, I either moved on to someplace else, or I worked the situation to my advantage which is fair play.    Never have I turned to government to protect me from an employer.  It was always my task to handle that myself as it is for everyone.  While it’s true that not everybody is so ambitions, they should be……and they will never yearn to be so long as they are compensated by government for work that they aren’t doing in an attempt to equalize their pay and benefits.  This attempt at “fairness” by the Obama administration is one of the most obvious validations of their sheer ignorance and lack of worldly knowledge—at understanding what makes a person productive and what inspires them to sit on their ass.  This new executive order will encourage a lot more ass sitting and much, much less productivity because now those with management power on salary can milk out a clock too, and will be far less likely to manage hourly workers who desire at every turn to do the same.  This is the most foolish thing I have ever seen done by a politician……………which says a lot.

It is a personal insult to me to give workers who don’t put in the same effort that I do, equal pay.  It inspires me to work less, not more—and those like me who work hard will decide to shrug off that effort since the government has made inferior employees equal.  And that is the source of the problem because if the truly productive stop working hard, what is there that moves an economy……………….some proletariat worker?  Give me a break!

Obama, you are a dumbass.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com