Tag: overmanwarrior

Dueling Needs to Make a Comeback: The American tiger in a cage being poked by “social justice warriors”

Anyone can see what the root cause of the problem witnessed in the following Alex Jones video was.  In it there was a group of people that we might call, “social justice warriors” who have grown up in a society deliberately softened to allow for their rise by a political class hell-bent on staying in power—no matter what.  These kids, and the adults that they will grow into, have been empowered by essentially removing the ramifications of their lunacy—the consequences of their personal assault against individual liberty.  The blame clearly falls on our global education system and the forces which gathered to perpetuate their stated curriculum. It has made me realize that a practice long forgotten for its perceived barbarity needs to be dusted off and inserted back into our American culture—the gentlemanly practice of dueling.  As radical as that may sound, we must find some version of it to emerge in this modern century otherwise we won’t make it into more advanced stages. To see why, watch this video then all of the following for substantiation.

A version of dueling still existed in the Old West as towns erupted across the vast frontier of North America guided by flimsy laws enforced by even flimsier sheriffs.  I practice that type of dueling nearly every day with a group I’m involved in called the Cowboy Fast Draw Association.  A friend of mine made a comment that I was thinking of while shooting that day and it was, “if dueling made a comeback, people these days would be a whole lot less offended.”  That’s when I thought of those snot-nosed, liberalized socialist losers in that Alex Jones video.  What was missing from their lives was the respect that comes from asserting an insult at individual integrity.  What those kids have been taught in that video—and anywhere these days that “socialist justice warriors” gather under storm clouds of collective effort—is ramifications for their individual mistakes.

The duel as it was inherited from Europe was widely practiced within the United States for quite a number of years by our early presidents and was a declaration of individual honor.  In that society from which our Constitution was written, an individual’s honor was required to have a civil society.  If some rogue threatened that sanctity then ramifications just outside the grip of the law were required to keep the peace and maintain an orderly society.  We all know about the famous Alexander Hamilton duel with Aaron Burr—which I think about quite a lot.  I was born in the Ohio city directly named after Hamilton who lost his duel with Burr and died.  I also think of President Jackson a lot when I think about duels and the kind of attitude which formed the country of America.  Dueling and honor went hand-in-hand which provided a foundation for our laws.

When I was growing up the Department of Education had just been enacted, so they didn’t have time to drive this trend out of our culture.  Even one hundred years after the Wild West, dueling was still a common practice among kids in my school of Lakota in Liberty Township, Ohio which was essentially settled by war heroes of the Revolutionary War.  When something which insulted individual honor fell outside the established law of the school or the society outside which controlled it, boys would settle the issue with a fight after school—which I found myself in a lot.  Failure to show up to one of these fights would lead to extreme scorn and a loss of respect up the pecking order of male influence among both sexes.  If you were challenged to one of these fights, you didn’t fail to show up.  I always did, and most of the time, just as it was when the dueling action was pistols—handshakes and respect were given out and sometimes friendships were forged.  People respect courage and when two people faced down each other over a dispute that couldn’t be legally worked out by putting a hand on the Bible and letting God sort through the details—individualized respect was the only real option which bound our society together.

Think about it, when you are in the grocery check-out, what keeps you from belting the person in front of you in the head and taking their place in line—is it fear of the law—of being arrested for assault?  Perhaps for most, that is their first reaction—but these days people have a lot less respect for the law as police officers and their methods of control have come into question.  So what is the next layer of defense which prevents you from acting—you look the person over and decide that you could physically overpower them and take their place in line.  What keeps you from doing it?  Essentially, fear…………….fear of what that person might do if you challenged them in some way.  If you push them they might turn around and clobber you, or they might have a gun and shoot you.  That threat forces you to respect their individual boundaries at a primal level which then paves the way for respect at the legal level.  Without a foundation of respect for individual integrity, no laws in any land can have real influence.

And that is the primary issue, public schools are in the business now of teaching collective rights, not individual ones.  As seen in that video, the Donald Trump supporters represented individual values whereas the social justice warriors represented collective values—and our society has put its priorities on the collective effort over the individual ones and that’s how we find ourselves in this current mess.  Those social justice warriors have no fear of individual retribution so they are free to attack anything, anywhere over anything.  They have grown up lacking respect for individual property or sanctity and are acting on behalf of collective efforts for achievements which extend beyond their personal gains.  The way to fix that whole problem is by empowering the individuals to defend their positions with actual respect–and unfortunately that means with all human beings—an imminent fear of being removed from the face of the earth so that a proper dialogue between two parties can emerge.

Years ago I was with a group that was buying a mechanical bull for a nightclub I was involved with and we were at one of those honkytonks to see it in action.  I had on my customary cowboy hat as I have since I was a little kid and I was standing in front of a couple of guys at the bar who were obviously drunk and looking for a quick ego boost to their reputations.  As I watched people ride the bull in question I felt something rub against the brim of my hat from behind, so I turned quickly and saw the hand of some sappy looking bastard removing his hand quickly hoping that he wouldn’t be caught.  Of course I confronted him angrily and I told him that if he did it again I’d beat the rat piss out of him.  He and his friend were two tobacco chewing rednecks who thought they were more authentic than me, and they didn’t need to wear hats to country bars—which essentially was what they told me.  My response was to take them outside and show them that they weren’t “shit,” both of them.  Of course they headed for the door to protect their honor as they were with women who were both at the bar urging them not to fight.  When we got outside they saw the anger on my face and realized that the fight was not going to go well for either of them.  A bouncer stood on the porch and watched, letting things play out respectfully.  Suddenly the two guys apologized for touching my hat and they were quick to want to make friends.  I accepted and we returned inside where they bought me a beer and were nice to me for the rest of the evening.  Their dates were grateful and everyone had a pretty good time the rest of the night.  When I left they even went out of their way to say goodbye and shake my hand.

Protests are getting out of control in our country as socialists, communists, and various anarchists raised in our public education system to not respect private property, personal integrity, or any level of valor have no fear of the law or the individual integrity for which laws were written to protect—and honestly, they need their asses kicked.  They are the result of what happens when you don’t retaliate for someone touching your hat, or insulting your personal name in a newspaper.  Without that basic respect for other human beings, there is no society to build from and everything plunges into chaos, which is exactly the goal of liberalized social justice warriors.  They aren’t warriors at all, only instigators who don’t expect to be punched back in the mouth once they’ve leveled their insults.  We live in a society now where they can touch my hat yet don’t expect to be punched in the mouth for it.  Once you do, they want to retreat to the law to settle their honor—which is essentially what has been happening at Trump rallies.  The society which created these losers doesn’t want to acknowledge that individual liberty is the key to holding all of society together.  They want to believe that it is the acceptance that the tapestry of a global society brings that will garner respect for each other—and they are miserably failing in their psychological assessment.  Just because they have de-clawed a tiger and removed its teeth, and even castrated it of its aggression, a tiger is still a tiger.  You can’t put a bunch of snot-nosed communists into a cage with it and let them poke it with a stick and not expect the tiger to attack those idiots.  At some point the individual temper of the tiger will break through the social constraints placed upon it.  And in many ways, there are a lot of people in this country who have been treated as such, castrated intellectually, and tied up individually to make the collective masses feel equal.  This has given rise to a period in our history where just about everyone is offended at something that somebody else says and that is leading us to a disaster—legally.  But, if the practice of dueling were to make an official comeback, and even become legalized again as it once was—then people these days would be a whole lot less offended, so easily.  And then, we might just find a way to work together toward achievements that require teamwork. First however, a respect for other individuals must be established, and that only occurs when acknowledgement of those other people is based on a foundation of integrity.  That is what the old duels established and that necessity is every bit as strong today as it was 300 years ago.  Only now we see what happens when we outlaw the mechanisms for achieving that respect—we have a mad, runaway society full of losers, imbeciles, and malcontents.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Thank You Merle Haggard: Saving lives with the wisdom of lyrics learned from hard living

I have a lot to thank Merle Haggard for and I’ve been thinking about them all since his death on April 6th 2016.  He had a lot of great songs, but for me the most important and my personal favorite was ‘Misery and Gin.’  I was 12 years old when I saw the movie Bronco Billy by Clint Eastwood for the first time.  It was and still is one of my favorite movies.  It hit me at just the right time in my life.  Like the Clint Eastwood character in that movie, I was socially awkward up to that point, so I could easily relate to his quirkiness.  But the tenacity for which the Bronco Billy’s character stuck to his beliefs even in spite of a changing world held a lot of appeal to me—so I watched it often.  One particular time was as a late teenager, I had just been in a serious car accident running around with friends.  The driver crashed in a manner that should have killed everyone.  I had blood running down every part of my body, and every bone hurt.  It was probably the most fun I had ever had watching a movie was that particular time.  I had taped Bronco Billy on a new VHS tape off television and enjoyed watching it when I needed a lift—and as I  breathed a sigh of relief at still being alive, the Bronco Billy message resonated intensely with me at that particular time.  And of all the good songs in that movie it was ‘Misery and Gin’ which had taught me the most about life.  Clint Eastwood wisely allowed Merle Haggard to have an extended section of the movie to sing his new song and rolled it nicely into the events of the movie—and I never forgot it.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-merle-haggard-appreciation-20160407-story.html

‘Misery and Gin’ was everything that I didn’t want to be in life. It was a parody of itself, a country song that espoused all the misery that drinking, picking up loose women, and bars filled with cigarette smoke entailed.   It was an extremely honest song and was one that I decided very early on that I wanted nothing to do with relating to lifestyle choices.  It reminded me of several uncles I had who lived that life, and I thought they were losers.  It gave me more conviction to turn away from that kind of life well before I was deep into puberty—and I am thankful for it.  Regarding the night of the car accident, I was with a friend in a hot rod car after a Christmas party for the place we worked.  That friend and I had a rival relationship; we would continually outdo each other on daring deeds.  We took outlandish risks to satisfy the inner daredevil in us—such as playing high-speed chicken with cop cars, fighting the biggest bullies in whatever number they presented themselves and performing any risk of physical manner that opportunity allowed like jumping across high-rise roof tops.  We did some really crazy things that should have killed us several hundred times over—and neither of us ever backed down from anything.  But you can only push things so far.  We both had a knack for coming out on top no matter how deep in trouble we got ourselves.  I think I was around 17 at the time.

One thing I had on this friend is that he had difficulty with talking to girls and women.  I was never afraid to talk to any girl anywhere about anything.  It was very easy for me, but for him it was extremely difficult.  He could never find the right words for the right girl.  So I’d hang that over his head whenever I could.  He’d respond by showing off more to compensate for his inequity.  I had arranged for three very attractive girls to race us back to his house after this Christmas party so he was showing off in his hot rod car to do his part in impressing them.  He let them get on the highway in front of us by nearly a mile and his plan was to blow by them at over 150 MPH—to show them how fearless and how powerful his car was—because we all know that girls like that kind of thing—the naughty side of them anyway.  That’s when his angle was wrong and there was too much traffic on the road and his Chevy, Nova had too short of a wheel base to maneuver quickly in any kind of evasive action so he fishtailed wildly into a retaining wall after blowing by the girls and the car spun endlessly through the heavy traffic before going airborne then flipping end over end down the highway.  Of course we didn’t wear seat belts in those days.

Miraculously we landed with the car pinned up against a retaining wall, nose down and pieces of the car strewn all over the highway.  We were both alive and hadn’t hit any other cars somehow.  But we were all sliced up from broken glass and the violence of the impacts.  The police came and arrested my friend for reckless operation, endangerment and a whole host of other violations.  I was free to go to the hospital.  Instead, the three girls took me home and helped me get all patched up.  I put duck tape on the deep cuts to hold the skin together and applied maple syrup to clot up the blood that was still dripping everywhere.  After all that was over, I watched Bronco Billy after popping some popcorn and having a nice cold Coke.  That is when I realized that life didn’t get any better than that.  A good movie, a nice drink, and the thrill of being alive—all I needed was a nice woman to share that kind of thing with. I met my wife about 9 months later—and obviously now I live a lot like Bronco Billy did in that movie—by choice largely because I decided to after that night.  It was a little more complicated than that, but looking back, it’s pretty easy to see.

Of that movie it was actually Merle Haggard’s song ‘Misery and Gin’ which communicated strongest to me.  I decided I wanted no part of living anything like that life.  While most everyone I have known before and since find appeal to that lifestyle—it doesn’t have to be a country honky-tonk, it could be a BW3s or a nightclub—drinking and hanging out with women who have made bad decisions in their lives and living a life of perpetual misery just wasn’t something I was going to do—and I never have.  Even that night in the car, it was my love of life which was the secret ingredient that the girls liked so much and why it was so easy to get them to come along and do whatever I wanted—including patching me up.  Of course nobody understood that—but I knew it was the promise of getting away from the misery and gin lifestyle that the girls had been trained which was their ultimate fate by a society stuck to that fate by their own bad decisions.  I offered a release from that, something of a lottery ticket.  It was very appealing to both the opposite sex, and the guy friends I had who clearly wanted to be a part of it whenever possible.

I used Bronco Billy to bond with my wife.  We watched it several times a month during our early marriage and she came to understand the words of Merle Haggard very well.  Without Bronco Billy, it might have been too difficult to convey to her what kind of life I intended to live.  She wouldn’t have understood.   But the mood of the entire movie was captured so nicely in that old Merle Haggard song and I have to thank him for it.  It put my life in a positive direction very early.  Without it, I probably would have still found a way, but it might have taken me a decade or two more to figure it all out.  Because of his song, I was able to accelerate the process and apply it much more quickly than if it hadn’t of ever been made.  So I’ll miss Merle Haggard. He made my life better in a lot of ways. He was certainly one of the greats and I’ll always be thankful.  Listen to the words and maybe it will help you too.IMG_0193

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Ending the Republican Party: The “stuffed” elephant in the room

The answer to the elephant in the room is that it is dead—and has been so for some time.  It is time to acknowledge it and move on to something else.  The Republican Party, which was created to end slavery, for which Abraham Lincoln was its best spokesman—died a long time ago—and is no longer effective.  If you put Karl Rove, John Kasich, Mitt Romney and me in a room together all three of them added up would not even come close to me as far as conservatism—so they do not represent me as a political party.  They have lost their war with the left and become too much like the enemy—the political left in America.  They are useless to me in a representative republic.  I have voted for them over and over again for several decades, but they have always been ineffective and the reason was that we were voting for a taxidermy version of an elephant, instead of a real creature full of vigor.

That nagging prospect has been on my mind for quite a long time, but it was never clearer than on the night Ted Cruz won the Wisconsin primary.  Cruz has no shot of winning the nomination, yet the party, the media, and all the #NEVERTRUMP fans worshiping the dead and deceased Republican Party behaved as though a New Year had dawned on them and life had been returned to their caricature.  Only Donald Trump has a mathematical path of achieving the Republican nomination at the Convention in July.  Nobody else does—yet the party is willing to use anybody and anything to delay Trump so that they could hold onto their grip of party control and what they believe are conservative values. Yet studying the voting patterns of Wisconsin, it was only in the heavily populated areas—particularly those most affected by the major talk radio stations which espoused the #NEVERTRUMP mantra loudest that Cruz won.  All of the surrounding, rural counties went for Trump.  It was almost a carbon copy of the type of voting pattern seen when Democrats compete against Republicans.  Country people were having their voices drowned out by the more heavily populated urban areas—and they were not happy about it.  The Republican Party wanting any good news that it could get was willing to accept any information that stopped Trump from becoming head of the party—even to the point of self-destruction.  The short-sightedness was grossly obvious.

But the glee that emerged from their mouths was rather pathetic.  It signified a political party at the Alamo not acting heroically in one last stand, but of a bunch of soldiers out of bullets knowing that the end was coming then seeing that the encroaching army was short on ammunition themselves and was awaiting supplies—they were able to live for five more minutes and were happy about it—even boastful.  They were so happy that they denied Trump of roughly 40 little delegates that they missed the point of what the supporters of the GOP frontrunner were espousing.  They were just happy that they had a better chance of getting the nomination process to a convention so that they could insert somebody they were more comfortable with—as if the public would put up with it.  It was a pretty disgusting display.

My first thoughts and those which stayed with me after considerable contemplation were that the Republican Party just needed to be put to rest.  A new party needed to be created, one that better represented conservatives and rural voters much more accurately.  I think Trump should make a point and win his remaining primary victories, but that he should then just start his own party—likely a continuation of the Reform Party for which he, Pat Buchannan and Ross Perot were a part of in the past.  Even Rob Portman was a part of the Reform Party when he ran for the congressional seat he took over in 1993—I know that because he was going to the same meetings I was—I knew him back then.  It’s time for a fresh start and a completely new political philosophy not rooted in the failures of the past.  A return to the Party of Reagan is not enough for me. I want something better than what Abraham Lincoln was the head of.

Regardless of how many delegates Trump has, the #NEVERTRUMP people have shown that they will not behave themselves and unite behind him—which they should do.  So they need to be destroyed as a movement.  We need to have a head to head election with Hillary, Paul Ryan, and Donald Trump.  Trump as everyone knows by now has a solid 30% support base no matter what.  In a three-way race, that almost gets him an assured victory.  I don’t believe Hillary will be able to get 50% of a vote in any election—especially with the troubles she has, and there is no way Ryan beats Trump.  I think it’s obvious that given a choice in a three-way race it’s not Republicans that will be split.  Kasich as it stands now is similar to Hillary in politics, Cruz with Ryan, and then there is Trump who is about 7 to 8% ahead of everyone else routinely.  That is the number nobody is talking about, and it would give Trump a victory in a three-way race without question.  So why not?  If we don’t have this showdown now—voters will continue to be tricked into voting for the stuffed caricature of an elephant—and that’s just not fair to them.

The only advantage for Trump to win the nomination from the Republican Party is to tap into the funds to run a national campaign.  However, Bernie Sanders has shown what people are willing to do to fund a campaign, and Trump has more access to funds from his fans than any political candidate has in the history of politics.  I wouldn’t fault Trump for taking $10 million dollar donations from his friends—like Carl Icahn and others to win a general election.  I think he has a better chance of winning as a third-party candidate than as head of the Republican Party with all the inner back stabbing that will take place even if he wins the nomination outright.  So he should just leave and let them flail on the vine rudderless.   The Republican Party doesn’t deserve Trump and they certainly don’t deserve me and the many voters who are sick and tired of the establishment passivity toward Democrats.

To all the #NEVERTRUMPS, I don’t want to be in a political party with you people. I want nothing to do with your stupidity.  I’m happy to have it out in a general election in a three-way race and see what happens after the smoke clears.  What has to happen is a major philosophic shift in political philosophy—the standard mode of operation just won’t be acceptable.  I have always supported the Reform Party, I did when Ross Perot ran in 1992 and in 1996, and I supported Trump and Buchannan when they toyed with the idea in 1999.  The reason that the election between Bush and Gore was so close in 2000 was literally that people had to pick between one piece of shit and another.  Which one was better—nobody knew and the country was split right down the middle.  Bush was not a good president, and then the GOP thought to offer us John McCain, and Mitt Romney. 

They are just stupid—rooting for the GOP is like cheering on the Cincinnati Bengals to win a Super Bowl.  They just don’t have the ability to get to the big game—let alone win.  So let’s just drop them once and for all.  Even if Trump secures the nomination with a win in California—he should still go third-party so that the Republicans can be put in a museum with all the other stuffed animals.  They are guaranteed losers who will continue down that path until they are taken out of the game.  And the time to do that is now-before they do any more damage.  Basically, either the GOP brings in fresh blood, or we dump the party, change the name, and have something else to represent conservative values.  Not “progressive” conservative values like many of these #NEVERTRUMPs believe (Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, John McCain, ETC.)  But something all together different and more representative of the rural inhabitants of this country—I’m at the point in 2016 of its either Trump for president or nothing for me.  Hillary is not even a factor.  She can’t even beat an old communist lover.  She is not as formidable as the media wants you to believe.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

God Bless Dolly Parton: Send this to all the socialists, cross-dressers and detriments of liberty

Sometimes it can feel pretty overwhelming what’s against us.  So for a little refreshment watch this from Dolly Parton.  God love her.

Do us all a favor and send this to your favorite socialist loser and cross dressing bastard.  They have a right to live, but not to change our nation from what it was, to what it’s becoming.https://soundcloud.com/clarkcast/obama-on-socialism-vs-capitalism-just-choose-what-works

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Chicago Teacher Union Protest–AGAIN: How George Lucas has failed by adopting socialism as an ideal society mechanism

It was just a few years ago that the Chicago Teacher’s Union had a strike that lasted for quite a while and now those radical, socialist, ungrateful, overly paid baby sitters are at it again walking off the job completely for one day to protest state funding—which does not exist—and giving 400,000 students no place to go but libraries, churches and other “contingency sites,” while their parents slaved away at a job to pay for college which is often the intellectual final nail in their youthful coffins.  Sadly, as much as teachers—especially those protesting in the streets of Chicago stopping traffic and being an extreme nuisance and burden on society—the kids were let down by every adult in their lives.  Their teachers were socialist activists, their parents too busy to stay home and care for them, and the media missed the entire point of the whole matter.  People wonder why kids grow up so stupid, why they become activists themselves for Bernie Sanders socialism—well, they learned it in their public schools—socialist brothels of intellectual destruction and left-winged propaganda.  The March 2016 one day strike by the teacher’s union in Chicago was one of the most disgusting things I’ve seen this year—and it should be a lesson to all what we’ve allowed to happen.

 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CHICAGO_SCHOOLS_WALKOUT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-04-01-08-35-26

I say it quite a lot and have for quite a number of years—children would be far better off if parents just left them alone at home playing Playstation or Xbox all day instead of going to the socialist oriented public schools that our nation has given us.  It’s a hard reality most people can’t get their minds around—because it’s such an inconvenient truth—but we should have always known what was coming, as the whole operation was ran by a giant public sector labor union.  The only real goal of the teacher’s union has been to make students into left-winged radicals.  Luckily, not everyone grows up to become a socialist, and not all teachers individually are bad people.  There are many in that Chicago protest crowd who likely have no idea what socialism is, or understand what their role in this whole debacle has been—but history defines it for us and shows the direction we are all headed.

As this protest raged there were some startling statistics about the demographic nature of a future America by 2050 which came out.  Leftists are absolutely addicted to diversity implementation—mixing different cultures together to change the nature of constitutional law within the United States which is how labor unions and other progressive groups always intended to overthrow America without firing a single shot in a second, un-named revolution.  So their emphasis has been on skin color, sex, sexual preference and lots of other superficial aspects not even encompassing the essence of what makes a human being human.  They see public schools as melting pots of diversity raising children to have no barriers to sexual attitudes, acceptance of those who “look” different than they are, and completely ignoring actual behavioral characteristics because they have misidentified the key ingredients of a successful society.

Even though I have said many good things about the filmmaker George Lucas he obviously has lost his way over the years—probably because he attended too many democratic fundraisers and the politics of San Francisco liberalized him over time—but the “bearded one” has called Chicago his adopted second home.  He loves the progressive nature of the city which he considers doing important work toward achieving a more “fair” society.  This is one of the main reasons I no longer like Star Wars.  When Lucas made the first films—back in the 80s, they were quite good and had characters that would have been most at home in an Ayn Rand novel.  This is partly because Lucas believed much about the world at the time that I do now—best exemplified by his truly great film, THX-1138.  But after a divorce that he never really got over, hanging around democratic socialists within the Hollywood community that finally embraced him after many years of trying, then biologically changing in his later years becoming increasingly liberal as his testosterone levels dropped off—he is unrecognizable now and his films reflect his mental status.  Now Star Wars is about “diversity” more than it is about throwing off a tyrannical regime hell-bent on destroying individualism.  As great as Lucas was as a businessman and filmmaker, he now fails to identify attributes that have contributed to the complete failure of Chicago to operate as a responsible city.  As a city it is unofficially bankrupt, living off tremendous debt.  When the current mayor finally leaves—who has been extremely progressive all along—the next person will have a huge mess to clean up and that will likely lead to a similar fate as has been witnessed in Detroit.  The lines between a capitalist society and a socialist one have been blurred to the point that nobody any longer understands—even our most “educated” and most artistic—like Lucas.

What’s the point of teaching children anything if what they are learning in public school is socialism?  The argument is from the left that compassion for others is the most important thing in a human society.  They believe as many of those Chicago protesting teachers do, that social equality is more important than individual gains—which is why the teachers are protesting the state to bestow upon them more tax money extracted from private property and thrown in their direction.  They have become happy little socialists in the same way that Bernie Sanders has gained in popularity.  Kids supporting the socialist presidential candidate will tell you that their reasons are to gain access or debt relief from their college tuitions—which they have been told will be free.  Yet the teachers and professors within those professions often push up and over the six figure salary territory after obtaining tenure.  The left-leaning advocates for public schools, including college, have signed up their lives to the cause of socialism because the pay was so extraordinarily good.  Average people like these teachers couldn’t hope to make so much money anywhere else than they do in the teaching profession.  Yet the debate against my position has always been that teachers are valuable people giving wisdom to the next generation and that without them society crumbles.  Well, I’d say with them society is guaranteed to fail—without teachers—strictly on their own—kids have a better chance of succeeding in life.  That is how destructive socialism is to individual minds.

The belief in public schools is that individual achievement is vile and that group associations are vastly more important because equality between all parties is utilized—and taught.  The position of the “left” is that individual conquest is only for the physically, and intellectually strong and that it is a “caveman” mentality which society should overcome.  What they forget is that advancements in society are not induced by “fairness” but by hunger.  For instance, with as much money as our American civilization has poured into public schools and colleges, kids have not statistically become more intelligent.  If you talk to anybody under 30 years old today—you’ll see quickly what I’m talking about.  Most young people have been deliberately intellectually handicapped by the public school system to make the best and brightest no better than the sluggish and stupid.  When you build your society around the weakest links, you obviously will get a weak society—which is why socialism is so detrimental to any civilization.  Teachers have been unable to increase their effectiveness around the world no matter how much money has been spent on them essentially because their emphasis is on “equality and group assimilation” as opposed to individual achievement.  In a capitalist society, not everyone can be rich, smart, and powerful—but everyone has a chance to if they work at it.  The net result of that effort and success then benefits all of society.  There is no way to blend the two together.  George Lucas tried with his Jedi concept in the Star Wars films—but had to rely on mythical superpowers to blur the lines of what any human could possibly achieve.  Essentially Lucas like most on the political left turned toward Plato’s Republic as justification for their philosophic society—in the case of Star Wars, the Jedi are the council of wisdom that governs society without any individual desire.  If a Jedi does let personal desires drive their needs, then their superpower attributes become dangerous to society at large and the organized mass of collective consciousness will desire to have a rebellious overthrow of the renegade individual—that is essentially the message of the movies without the Han Solo element added to the plot.  I always liked Han Solo because he was an Ayn Rand conservative that functioned so well to keep saving everyone and advancing the Star Wars story. But without Han Solo, Star Wars is just another examination into Plato’s Republic—which is the opposite side of the coin of Aristotelian logic for which Ayn Rand associated and evolved her thoughts on the matter.

All this contemplation about how we arrived at National Socialism without realizing it is good for understanding how a bunch of overpaid and ungrateful teachers from Chicago ended up in the streets demanding even more money than they are already being paid to essentially destroy the lives of the students they were supposed to be teaching.  Politicians looked at that protest and shuddered at all the voters who had nowhere to take their children because nobody does the job of parenting anymore—leaving the task of raising children to the state.  So when the teachers wanted to protest to show the world how much power they had through “collective bargaining” they had a monopoly on the children and used them as extortion pieces.  That is the “compassionate” side of George Lucas’ ideal society, and the ultimate failure of the entire political left—especially those who have bankrupted the once great city of Chicago.  I’d encourage you dear reader to watch all the videos shown above for more information and proof.  It’s not an easy admission, but it’s one that we all need to grapple with.  Public schools are not good for our children.  They might someday become that way if the right market forces were applied, but in the state they are now, they are detrimental to our children.  Kids would be safer and their minds kept more intact if we left them alone at home with just a T.V. and a video game system.  They’d learn more about capitalism there than in school, and in American society—that is what they should have always been striving towards.  These problems will continue until our society recognizes the source of the problem—that it is socialism that drives these large teacher unions and they do not have our national sovereignty or our American economy in high regard.  By contrast they wish to continue to extract wealth from the haves, and redistribute them to the have-nots as if the mechanisms of productivity were a finite resource not driven by capitalist invention.

To prove it, each one of those teachers should have been fired from their jobs and replaced.  Children would not notice, and the parents would see no drop in scholastic performance, and that is the big secret that the teacher unions are terrified of.  It’s only a matter of time before we have to call their bluff—because the money isn’t there for them.  Chicago isn’t alone in their debts—most of America is going through the same crises.  Only when we finally do—and break the back of the teacher’s  union and get their left-leaning political influence out of our schools and the Department of Education can we hope to reverse the trends we are seeing today—a nation slipping into socialism at an alarming rate.  Personally, I’m not willing to fund our own destruction.  How about you?

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The World War Against Donald Trump: What we can learn from Ferris Bueller

It is quite stunning that more people don’t understand what Donald Trump is to the Republican nomination for President of the United States.  Some of what I am about to say will require some additional information and review, so CLICK HERE for the start of that understanding, as well as all of the following hotlinks for further substantiation.  The typical run for POTUS has established in the American electorate certain memorized hot points largely shaped by the media and the political class to always protect themselves from outside insurgents.  Was I concerned that Donald Trump didn’t know the three primary functions of government with an answer “security, security, security” then further created a problem for himself by declaring that healthcare and education were the next priorities?  No, I wasn’t.  He gave a typical response of the everyday American who really hasn’t been a part of the political establishment—and has thrown money at politicians his whole life to purchase what he needs to get done to ensure his success.  He gave a slightly better answer than the average businessman hanging out on a golf course.  Does that make him out-of-touch?  To people who spend their whole lives studying constitutional law, worshipping the integrity of past presidents like a king, and insisting on having a POTUS that rivals some European royalty—Donald Trump is a nightmare of bumbling irrational statements.  But what I see is a down to earth guy who gets most of his information about the world the way the average cab driver does—and he’s clearly grounded—remarkably, untouched by pretension by being a “political insider.” To me, the weaknesses he is coming under fire for are his strengths. I want to see someone totally different in the POTUS role—and I want private sector influence instead of political experience. I want competent people managing the government, not a political class.

What Trump has that nobody else does is the ability to hire better people than him for a job, which is how he’s made most of his money.  He has raw instincts about people who gives him tremendous leverage over someone like Ted Cruz.  Cruz would be someone who Trump would hire for a staff position, but Cruz would never be in a position to identify and establish a similar criterion.  Trump hires people, listens to them, and then formulates his objectives—so he doesn’t need to know all the details. He pays other people to do that.  His job at the front of the train is to make important decisions at the proper time with the courage to actually do it.  The current political order is stuck in a “static pattern” of what is considered normal behavior whereas Trump is mostly a “dynamic influence.”  His very presence is changing the entire way that politics is run and those profiting off that “static pattern” are justifiably terrified of it—so they are throwing everything they have at Trump trying to drag him into their “static pattern” value system.  Those static patterns consist of very rigid party guidelines on both sides—for Republicans, a calculated approach to abortion, a party established position on Israel, taxation, and healthcare.  Essentially, the beliefs of the typical Republican candidate are formulated by the party instead of the actual beliefs of the candidate.  Trump jumps into things, tests the water, listens to people then figures out what will work without thinking about any group affiliation.  He is not prone to group assimilation which makes him far superior to any other offering.

The political establishment expects its presidential candidates to adopt a “static” position that they can then build a party around.  Trump is so “dynamic” that things could change in a moment’s notice.  Anybody who has witnessed any success in their life understands that one of the biggest attributes of success is a dynamic presence that can adapt quickly to changing circumstances and formulate them toward the original objectives.  Politicians often can recite all the party positions but are statically welded to Capitol Hill politics and can seldom ever do anything that they promised on a campaign trail.  So Trump figures, why waste time on things that might change completely within a year from now.  It’s a pointless exercise.  He knows what we need to do, and he has a track record of success—and he will find the right combination of resources to implement it.  Genius can’t yet be plotted on a chart and no college has figured out how to teach it—so Donald Trump is something completely outside of their static understanding.  That certainly isn’t his fault—it is the failure of the static system that we have all become addicted to.

That static system now to protect itself is looking at the statistics and noticing that there are a lot of people lacking a college degree that support Donald Trump and those same stats are not prevalent with other candidates.    College trained people have a tendency to support static patterns because after four critical years in college learning what those patterns are right after high school, from the ages of 18 to 22—the final nail in the coffin for a lot of people is placed toward all future dynamic influences.  I have been to college, my wife has to—I even spent a few years living on a college campus—and let me tell you dear reader, I hated it—because I am by nature a very dynamic personality.  I relate to Trump because of that dynamism.  To put it in terms that average people can understand think of the movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, which is a popular 80s film featuring Mathew Broderick, that most everyone understands.  Ferris was an example of an extremely “dynamic” personality and he would likely grow up to become like a real life Donald Trump if he were allowed to be free enough to survive the static systems  that imposed its will upon him.  When I was a teenager, I was very much like the character of Ferris Bueller in that movie and I did impulsive things like he did all the time—and I always managed to come out on top no matter how dire the situation.  People loved and hated Ferris Bueller for all the reasons that they love and hate Donald Trump.  He doesn’t always know how or why something will work, Trump simply wakes up in the morning meaning to achieve success in whatever it is and he uses his dynamic personality to overtake whatever static imposition is in front of him.

So the reason that the people who lack college degrees—or those who live in rural areas support Trump is because they have not been conquered yet by the static pattern progressivism that has been imposed on college graduates and the urban settings which often force people to concede their natural desire for individual integrity.  Nothing about Trump fits well into a debate format or the media driven talking points.  He is best when he is clashing with static patterns with great dynamic authority and bravado.  Trump has slipped a bit lately in the polling because he was trying to fit his personality to the static pattern of the Republican Party—as the head of it.  He backed off the thrusters to show that he can be more “conciliatory.” But he shouldn’t, he needs to just do his thing and stay as dynamic and unpredictable as possible.  If Cruz wants a debate, Trump should accept the challenge but to demand that it be done on ground he controls, such as Trump Tower’s lobby in New York.  That way Cruz couldn’t say that Trump is chicken when in fact all Trump is concerned with is being pulled into the senseless static pattern of Cruz and the Republican Party which has actually given us all these problems. Cruz is a great debater, but his key weakness is that if he can be taken off his “Holy Roller” persona and beaten into submission with sheer force—especially in the surroundings of a person who has had actual success in life–Cruz could be embarrassed beyond recovery.  The press conference with Carly and Cruz over the sex scandal showed a major weakness in the Cruz façade which will be exploited sooner or later.

But the trouble between Trump and everyone else is not that the billionaire is “stupid” or his supporters.  It’s just that we know that Trump is a needed injection of dynamic persona that is desperately needed in our political system.  Just as I’m hoping that Warren Davidson, my new congressman holds to his values when he gets to Capitol Hill, I have watched all this before and am always disappointed by the results.  I stood shoulder to shoulder as a major supporter of Rob Portman when he ran for office.   I knew him as a normal guy that would go out to eat with me after a debate.  He blew it after years in Washington.  And John Kasich went from a Tea Party darling to a softer version of Hillary Clinton.  He is a major letdown.  Actually, I could go on and on for quite some time naming politicians just like Ted Cruz that showed lots of promise when they were running—memorized all the things that the media wanted to hear, then turned around and was just a terrible representative.  I don’t so much blame them as people—I blame the static nature of politics.  It needs a major infusion of dynamism to change it forever.

Now that Trump has shown what’s possible, every celebrity who thinks they can will try running for president in the future.  The party system is essentially over—and that is a good thing.  Within the decade we will likely get stars like The Rock running for president and major rap artists who have the money and celebrity to gain media attraction on a daily basis.  Four years ago Mitt Romney wouldn’t hardly go on any talk radio shows or cable shows—not even Bill O’Reilly—because he feared being knocked off message.  He certainly wouldn’t do Chris Mathews—who is a flaming progressive.  The whole abortion topic is something Romney and every other presidential candidate for the republicans would have avoided with diversionary tactics.  Trump has forced all these candidates to do these shows to compete—because he is so confident himself—even when he steps in it—that he can find a way to come out smelling wonderful.  That is why all these static pattern addicts hate Trump so much, but also why he has such strong support from an electorate that recognizes that the static system of politics that has nearly destroyed our country needs a major infusion of dynamic influence.  Now that the dynamic influence has wrecked the previous static patterns—for both parties really—there is no going back.  The Republicans either embrace Trump or they will get worse in 2020 and 2024.  Celebrity will be the new criteria for better or worse.

The old methods of electing a POTUS have not been effective and America needs to develop something dynamically different.  I’m not looking for a George Washington to lead me to some salvation.  I don’t need an authority figure of any kind.  All I need out of government is to manage the resources it takes to keep the country running and to stay the hell out of my way.  I don’t need the government for much.  I don’t even need their protection.  Them standing between me and villains likely makes for a more civil society—which is good for most people, but I personally don’t need them—and I certainly don’t need a “leader.”  I want a more dynamic government that isn’t afraid to sell capitalism to the world.  Trump is the best candidate I have ever seen or heard of for that very dynamic job. Like Ferris Bueller, I know that Trump can wing his way through anything—and I want someone representing our Republic to the world who has that ability for a change.  And I certainly don’t want a political party in charge behind the scenes.  I’m ready for a major change, and for me Trump is it.  Whether he makes it or not, politics is changed forever.  So Republicans if they want to survive might as well embrace it.  Failure to do so or to stick to the old static patterns will lead to their self-destruction.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Transsexual Wal-Mart Cashier at Bridgewater Falls: The audacity of progressive activists attacking family integrity

I’m not a big fan because often degenerates, welfare recipients, and the type of people who are most at home on the Jerry Springer Show populate the premises—but Wal-Mart in Fairfield, Ohio off Princeton Rd by Bridgewater Falls is finding itself the victim of progressive attack.  In spite of my feelings about the place and the people it attracts, I think what Wal-Mart does is wonderful as a retail outlet.  There are many more good things than bad; I’m just not a fan of the place because of the people who are often there.  Take them all away, and I enjoy going there.  Put me at Wal-Mart on a crowded Saturday to pick up mulch, and I’m not a happy person.  But my wife is, she has shopped there for the entire time it has been in that location and it helped raise our family with food options that made it much easier for her to be a stay-at-home mom.  One thing about my wife, she is intensely loyal, so she loves that particular Wal-Mart because it has been good for helping her raise her family with low-cost options over the many years.  She likes the people who work there and finds their company refreshing—mostly because many of them are older people—whom she typically gets along well with.  Since she is a housewife, she is able to go to Wal-Mart during the day when most people are working—and typically has a good experience.

But on March 29th, 2016 the foundations of her reality were shaken to her very core.  She had been there to spend quite a lot of money, she bought most of our food for the week, some other items and had picked up a $300 pair of glasses from the optometrist.  It was a hefty bill to pay and she was enjoying spending the money at a store she believed in—to her Wal-Mart represents raw American value—red, white, and blue patriotism—getting the most products for the lowest cost—lack of unionized labor and goods and services all under one roof.  You can get your eyes checked, a pharmaceutical order fulfilled and have your tires changed all while you shop for groceries, lawn supplies, and pick-up wonderful toys for the grandchildren.  But to her shock for the first time in nearly 15 years, she stepped up to the check-out and only one lane was open—because it was the middle of a weekday and there wasn’t a need for multiple lanes to be open—and what she found was a transsexual kid dressed in blue lipstick, short black hair, a push-up bra, and a black skirt working the cash register.  She had no choice but to go through his lane and she was very pissed off about it.

For context, we choose to live in an area of the country where we don’t have to deal with derelicts like this.   As a couple, we don’t go to areas of the city where gay bars are prominent; we don’t hang out on college campuses, and we don’t go to music concerts where these kinds of people are increasingly commonplace.  Even though I like Key West, we don’t hang out on Duval Street late at night where transsexuals, homosexuals, and transvestites are populating every street corner on the south end.  We don’t go to Fantasy Fest there—where middle-aged repressed sociopaths with above average incomes can frolic in the decadence of a Romanian orgy.  We don’t watch television shows that embrace those types of progressive attributes outside of male and female monogamous relationships.  We don’t want that kind of crap in our life, and we make choices to avoid it.  So it was quite a shock to my wife to have to deal one on one with such a progressive disaster—a full-fledged transsexual that was so flamboyant about his imposition in our community, that he was audaciously challenging anybody to “judge” him incorrectly—because he was protected by law to be an imbecile.  It wasn’t alright with her.

She endured the experience while transacting with the boy but shortly before leaving she just felt disgusted.  So she proceeded to the customer service area to take back all her items and get her money back because she didn’t want to give money to a company that supported such behavior.  She was appalled utterly.  Of course the manager spoke to her and he basically stated that legally they were paralyzed from discriminating against the kid and that if they did, they feared a lawsuit—which I understand is exactly the case.  The law handed down by Supreme courts both state and federal have given us these impositions and my wife was furious about it because now it was in her own back yard.  The kid knew he was protected by law to harass the sensibilities of normal, average, good-hearted American morality, and she was fuming with anger over it.  She gathered up the contact information to speak to corporate headquarters to complain then she headed to the optometrist to take back her very nice new glasses.

Luckily, the lady working the counter was a levelheaded older person who calmed her down.  I won’t go  into the details of what the lady told my wife—because I don’t want to get her into legal trouble—but the short story is this—the other employees working that day agreed with my wife—only they weren’t allowed to say anything about the kid.  They were forced to put up with the little scum bag.  By law, they have had their First Amendment rights taken away from them—the transsexual was allowed to harass everyone else, but nobody was allowed to harass him—by law.  And Wal-Mart’s hands were tied behind their back while progressive attacks of middle-America punched them square in the face.

In the future, my wife simply won’t buy anything if she has to deal with people like that kid.  He shouldn’t be anywhere that customers have to interact with him.  This whole episode reminded me of a trip my family took to the Mellow Mushroom in West Chester.  I like the pizza there, but often find the environment too progressive for my tastes.  Now since Pies and Pints has opened at Liberty Center we choose to go there for fresh pizza instead of the Mellow Mushroom just because that Liberty Center environment is much more conservative.  To be honest, when I am spending $70 to $100 dollars on food I expect an attractive waitress—and by attractive, I’d like her to be a young college girl with good hygiene, speaks in complete sentences, isn’t covered in tattoos and body piercings and is well within the appropriate weight for her height.  If I end up with a guy, he needs to look well-groomed, have short hair without dandruff, and speak respectively.  Usually it’s not a problem, and it’s certainly not sexual—it’s just that beat up old wrecks are not pleasant to be around.  Younger people are like new cars off the assembly line, and when you are going out to eat, you want to see new cars, not vehicles ready for the junk yard.  If we wanted to see that, we’d just stay home.   Chili’s is particularly good about having a nice mix of such people—their recruiting is obviously successful.  They can’t discriminate, but they manage to create a competitive environment to weed out the undesirables. But at the Mellow Mushroom of course they get progressive kids applying because the environment attracts those types of people—and that is the biggest turn-off for me.  On one occasion, we had an openly gay waiter and he drove me nuts.  He was so flamboyant that I almost left—he was really pushing the whole gay thing commenting on my daughter’s clothing along with sucking up to my wife.  Of course, by reading this, you can get a sense of her state of mind.  She hasn’t wanted to go back there since.  I have under professional circumstances, but she hasn’t.  We tend to vote with our feet, so these progressive trends have an impact on a company’s bottom-line.  I considered the $150 dollars we spent there that day to be completely wasted money.  We would have had much more fun popping in a frozen pizza into the oven at home—because at least then we wouldn’t have some gay guy hitting on us and doing who-knows-what to our food between the kitchen and our table.

That is precisely why progressive activists have pushed to have protected legislation allowing kids like that Wal-Mart transsexual to come into our neighborhoods and assault our sensibilities, but they expect not to receive any fire back in return.  They—being the progressive activists deliberately dressing up in blue lipstick and a skirt with a push-up bra to work as cashier at Wal-Mart—intend harm to the lifestyle my wife and I have chosen for ourselves.  They will of course say that we are being “judgmental” and are advocating “hate speech” because the law has empowered them with such beliefs.  What the legal system and the politics that has shaped it neglect is that being “judgmental” is one of the greatest attributes of living as a human being.  Progressive activists and the legal system are demanding that we stop thinking and just accept these incursions against tradition, and in my family, that is not acceptable.  Not at all.  If scum bags like this transsexual kid want to flaunt themselves in front of our faces, there will be consequences.  They don’t have a right to impose themselves on our sensibilities.  If they want to do what they do, they have a right—but through competition, we must have options to avoid them.  I suggested to my wife that she not shop at Wal-Mart, that she stay in places where the prices are higher and along with them, the expectations of the clientele.  But honestly, the Kroger Marketplace in Liberty Township has more than its share of these degenerates shopping there—the situation is endemic to the progressive incursion cast upon us by a political class that wishes to destroy the American family.  She loves that particular Wal-Mart, so she wasn’t open to that idea.  In the future if she doesn’t have options to avoid people like that transsexual employee, she just won’t shop that day.  And that’s the way it’s going to be.  When we go out to dinner, we don’t want a bunch of silly boys prancing around like girls expecting a 17% tip with their hands all over our food—and we don’t want to exchange money with people who look like their hands are disgusting—because if they dress that way—god only knows where their hands have been.  We don’t claim to be modern or hip, we don’t like these changes to the family structure of American society and short of invoking an Amish privilege toward tradition—we certainly won’t be endorsing such lifestyles under any circumstances—especially, with our hard-won money.  It is a shame that companies like Wal-Mart are so terrified of the legal implications of such justified discrimination based on sound judgment.  Because if there were any justice in this world—those types of things wouldn’t happen in our town.  I can see them happening in places writhe with filth, like Las Vegas, Key West, and the various swingers clubs around the world—but not in a family rich environment like Butler County.  The legislators who allowed such things to happen should be ashamed of themselves for not having more courage to stand against progressive activists.  Because that leaves the dirty work to people like me—which is not what we hired you politicians to do in the first place—cave to the worst among us, so that the good would have to just endure the folly.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article69265187.html

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Paradox of Metrosexual Conservatism: Traditional roles between men and women mean more than historic reference

I know this may not sound very enlightened based on the progressive atmosphere of today’s “man,” but I am substantially sick of friends of mine—who are like Ted Cruz—and have adopted a metrosexual lifestyle–then declared that Donald Trump and his supporters are not “conservative.”  To my view—and this is fine if someone so chooses–I have many family members who fall in this category that I like a lot, but in our family my wife and I are very traditional, and we made a conscious decision to be that way—if the man shares in the domestic duties like cooking, laundry, diaper changing and other tasks of a similar nature—I would not call those people conservative.  I would call them modern, and diminished as to their masculinity. (For context to this viewpoint, CLICK HERE to read a more scientific explanation to the biological roles that the sexes play with each other within a household.)  Participants to this “modern” view of household roles certainly isn’t to my mind conservative.  A lot of women don’t have a choice but to do everything in this modern world—that is because men have become so terribly lazy and lackluster.  It’s not the fault of women.  But nevertheless, men who call themselves “conservative” while they ride the coat-tails of their wives careers are not caretakers of conservatism by my definition.  Modern politics may give them a free pass—but I don’t.

I say that knowing such viewpoints are considered outdated these days. Believe me, my regard for the household chores that are burdened by a man gives them far more personal weight to carry than women should have to endure—it’s not like men should sit around being couch potatoes being served by the women like maids.  I expect men to be gentlemen, to help hold the door open for women wherever they are, to treat them with the utmost respect like the vessels of life that they are—and to put their lives and importance before any man’s personal comfort.  Progressives would call that view “old fashioned.” I would say that they are idiots to criticize that formula which evolved out of biological and psychological necessity.

In that context, and I’m not going to embarrass him with calling him out, because he’s certainly not alone in this thinking, but one of the most national critics that I know of Donald Trump who is on the radio broadcasting support for Ted Cruz is a guy who has a wife with a far more prestigious job than he has, makes a lot more money, and she relies on him to share many of the household chores so they are done when she gets home from work.  I know this because he’s a friend of mine.  Just like Ted Cruz—that friend is failing in his conservatism because he has adopted in his life a progressive metrosexual lifestyle that is not becoming of tradition.  He has no right to point to Donald Trump—who does have similar views about conservatism and family life as I do—and says that he as a candidate is not a conservative.  In his family life, Donald Trump is far more conservative than Ted Cruz—if we are basing conservatism on traditional values—not progressive manipulation of family lifestyles.

I do not fault people who make these types of arrangements within their marriages—it’s their choice.  But I do judge them as lacking conservatism.  There was a lot about the old stereotypes about breadwinners and domestic tasks for women that helped tag team successful family growth that has been thrown out due to progressive marketing within our country, which should be revisited regarding conservative philosophy.  I’ve been married for over a quarter century and honestly I don’t think marriages can last without a proper division of labor specified toward the roles of the sexes.  Women are built through estrogen to project a certain level of sign stimuli to be appealing to the opposite sex, and domestic tasks achieved are part of that femininity. Men are built through testosterone to endure physical challenges that don’t always require great intellect, but will make them sweat and project masculinity—which females are biologically inclined to find appealing.  It is quite natural for a woman to watch a man chopping wood in the yard from the kitchen window then desire to take him a cool refreshment to get a whiff of his sweaty masculinity.  Men find such odors disgusting, but women enjoy them for reasons of mating customs.  When we change those rhythms with the family unit we change the nature of philosophy for which human society is built.  That is not a good thing when what did work produced many of the positive gains our culture has enjoyed for the last several thousand years.

Of course there is a reason that progressives advocate homosexual rights, just as they have attached themselves to the feminist movement.   They have always been after the destruction of the family unit—by feminizing men and encouraging masculine women so that the barriers to primal mating customs could be destroyed and conservative traditions eradicated.  The strategic necessity in this endeavor has of course been to turn family control over to the state and pave the way for National Socialism.  Given the popularity of the presidential candidate Bernie Sanders—we can see how effective that marketing has been.

When men try to tell me that my ideas about families and the relationship between men and women is outdated—I feel sorry for them, because they are in denial.  They will point at their successful dual income lives and declare themselves victors of economic achievement.  But they often lack the types of deep love and understanding that our grandparents knew when men were men, women were women, and everyone knew what their family and social roles were—before progressive tampering with biological natures.  A lot of the mess we see today can be directly attributed to this condition. Women have been told that they have to be everything to everyone—but most of all, that they must make personal sacrifices for the good of all women and their social obligations as a village.  That is why so many women are willing to vote for Hillary Clinton in spite of her terrible record and obvious dishonesty.  This is also why Donald Trump’s numbers are so low among women—because instinctively they come to each other’s collective aid when they sense another is in trouble—like the banter between Trump and Cruz over who was more attractive, Heidi Cruz or Melania Trump.  When that didn’t work out so well for Cruz, he proclaimed that Trump didn’t like “strong” women—which he insinuated means a career driven maniac who has put her career before her family for the benefit of what she believes is important.  The insinuation also was that Melania Trump was a bimbo of some sort because she’s pretty and has decided to be a happy housewife—and to withdraw from collective feminism.  Melania in her own right had a successful modeling career and she had done well with a jewelry line as an entrepreneur.  But when given an option to have a life for “herself” or to stay home with her son Barron and raise him properly, she picked service to her family over service to collective society—and that is looked down upon by most women who have been trained to think that these feminist arguments about “self reliance” from a “man” was actually good for them.  And to the men who have married such women and taken a “progressive” role in their own families—they often find themelves miserable or divorced before it’s all said and done.

I often love talking to old people, because to the 70-year-old couple who have survived a 50 year marriage and has 20 grandchildren and 5 or 6 great-grandchildren, they have lost their estrogen and their testosterone and are as equal within the sexes that human beings can truly be.  But they still play out their roles within the family for the psychological maintenance of their children and grandchildren.  The man might work out in a tool shed carving wood while the woman works at being experts in the kitchen.  Of course the man could learn to cook and could rival any woman, and the woman could learn to carve wood and mow the grass.   But successful marriages learn what works and how they can use their sexual roles to bond their families to an idea of conservatism for which the family can last through the ages.

So I find it preposterous that Ted Cruz feels inclined to lecture Donald Trump on the family roles of his wife—because Trump does not have“enlightened” outlook feminism.  Cruz obviously does, and so do many men that I know who have confused themselves by thinking that mixing up the sexual roles of family business is somehow considered “conservative.”  I can think of about ten men right now who are either national figures speaking out against Trump in favor of Cruz or they are just local business associates who share with their wives the tasks of cooking, cleaning and bread winning—and they are all either divorced at some point in their lives, or they are miserable and secretly hate their wives. The wives secretly know this so to keep the marriage together for their children they occasionally let their men go to Vegas to blow off some steam and make fools of themselves.  The women giggle at Pure Romance parties and watch chick flicks together and these idiots think that behavior is rooted in conservatism and will produce a successful family existence.  They are mistaken.

Trump is the first presidential candidate in my lifetime that has not backed down from this issue.  If he thinks someone looks like a radicalized feminist—he chews into them the same way as he would a man—and that is equal treatment.  If women want to play with the boys, that’s the way it goes.  But in his family life, he is very traditional—at least by today’s standards.  I would argue that Trump is much, much more conservative than Glenn Beck, Ted Cruz and all the writers at the Weekly Standard, The Wall Street Journal, and at Fox News.  The men who have given in to this progressive feminist push for equality without the consequences of being dominated by an A Type male—have to justify their failure somehow.  These metrosexual conservatives play the same games feminists do, they say that Trump is not a conservative in the way that women have been told that they need to have an “independent” life by service to collectivism.  And that just isn’t how the situation is in actuality.  Ted Cruz and his supporters have become feminized and tricked into thinking they are still conservatives.  But they are not.  Sometimes being “enlightened” isn’t a great.  Tell that to the bug that reached for the light only to be incinerated by a bug zapper.  The human race is doing the same thing to itself—and it’s not very becoming.  Putting up with people who have consciously made all the wrong decisions in their life is one thing—but being lectured by them is something else.   And I really don’t want to hear Ted Cruz with his little Kermit the Frog voice lecture me about “strong women” when he obviously has issues in his marriage.  Save it for counseling—but don’t pretend that the insane behavior is a pinnacle of conservatism.  All it really is, is embarrassing.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Photos of a Modern Gunfighter: The many benefits of a healthy passion

 

IMG_0159You might have noticed dear reader that I have some different pictures on my websites.  It has been a long time since I’ve updated any profile pictures and it was appropriate to reflect my new stage in life.  So my daughter at Brooke Townsend Photography.com set up a time to do a photo shoot with me and the result was some of these pictures that you are now seeing.  I have a complete life, I do a lot of things—I’ve been all over the world and done a lot of important tasks that people think are important.  I’ve raised children that I’m very proud of and I’ve been married to the same woman for over a quarter century.  By all accounts I am a very successful person bulging with skills and accomplishments that many would be envious of.  I don’t say all that to brag, but I work hard every day to be the best that I can be, and I have certainly done that.  So my daughter and I were talking about what kind of pictures to take of me—how to sum up my world views and essence into a simple photograph.  It’s not just my opinion, but those of her clients, my daughter has emerged on the world stage as a highly sought out photographer and her rates reflect the quality and uniqueness of her work, so I trust her professional recommendations.  She and I set out on an early spring morning recently to capture my essence that best represented this stage of my life and the result is what follows.IMG_0217

Of course I can pretty much buy whatever I want these days so it should say a lot that the possession I most love is my fast draw holster rig for my .45 Vaquero.  It is specially made and is my single most cherished item that I currently have.  With that said we focused on it for these photographs because as I said some time ago, I consider my new career to be that of a gunfighter.  Standing up for the Second Amendment, taking constitutional positions that are regarded legally as Anti-Federalist instead of Federalist—and my love of history really prevents me from any other type of career.  I like to stand up against bullies, at every level of the social spectrum—in manners of career, politics, and private life—that life as a gunfighter is really my only choice.IMG_0303

Being a gunfighter to me isn’t what it was during the period of the Old West.  It’s not about killing other people—it’s more of a sport, like being a basketball player, or a football star.  Being a gunfighter is what I enjoy most in this case within the sport of Cowboy Fast Draw which I practice at every day in some fashion or another.  A lot of men my age get heavy into golf—and I can see the appeal.  It can be magical to go to Dick’s sporting goods and pick out top-of-the-line golf clubs and spend many afternoons playing rounds of golf with the material acquisitions acquired through financial success.  But that is too stereotypical for me to really enjoy because so many people do it.  I need something that represents my unique life, and a gunfighter embodies my decisions much better—to the level I am quite excited about it.IMG_0254

My daughter did a wonderful job of capturing the light in a way that embodied how I feel about this stage.  If I look proud wearing the gun and holster rig from Mernickle it’s because I am.  For one reason or another I spent ten years planning on how I could incorporate these things in my life.  Most of the reason was that I worked too much so I didn’t have time for a hobby, or career as a gunfighter—because it takes a lot of work to do it right.  It’s the same situation with my .500 Magnum from Smith & Wesson.  I thought about those guns for a very long time and finally picked them up when I was able to make a clear decision to commit some time to caring for them as a sport.  I’m not the kind of person who just buys things to have them, then puts them on display in my home for other to look at.  I actually have to make them a part of my life.  The Mernickle holster rig is something that I plan to make a part of my daily life, so it is now a constant companion to me.  I thought about it so long that of course finally wearing it made me proud.IMG_0283 (2)

I think it’s a shame that firearms in general have such a negative stigma applied to them.  To me guns are all about great precision machining, and science—the combustible elements of lead projectiles mixed with gunpowder in closed dimensional quarters guided by human skill toward an intended target are the keys to their utilization.  To get an idea of what I’m talking about click the picture on the sidebar next to this article, the one where the gun is pointed toward the camera.  That is a reaction timer test that records your ability to identify a target and react to it within thousands of a second. A good time is anything in the .100 range, from the time you see the light to when you click the mouse button.  Mastering those types of skills don’t just help you in shooting sports, but in all aspects of life—because it forces your brain to think faster and to work more efficiently.  The difference between a time in the .300s and .100s is barely perceptible to human measurement—but by practicing, you can begin to feel it when you get a good time and when you don’t.  For instance, it might be remembered that I survived a very serious motorcycle crash last year.  It was only because of lightning reflexes that I managed to walk away with all my body parts and only a few cracked bones.  My $12,000 motorcycle was totaled, but I still made it to a very important business meeting an hour later because of how I develop myself though my hobbies—with an emphasis on speed and accuracy through working with bull whips for so many years.IMG_0248

Dedicating time toward the skills it takes to be a gunfighter has a spillover effect into all aspects of life, so I see it as a tremendous benefit.  While it might be out-of-step with mainstream thought, my gun rig with my Vaquero is my most prized worldly possession and my daughter did a good job of capturing it in our photo shoot.  I wear it all the time at home and whenever I’m in my garage, it has become mandated to always be at my side while on my property.  Whether I’m in my shop reloading ammunition, or target shooting for hours on end, my new Mernickle holster rig has become emblematic with my personality, so we are making it an important part of my life going forward—which is reflected in the pictures that will be taken of me in the future.  Guns have always been a part of my life, but they’ve always been in the background.  Now they will be very much more a part of the foreground.  As society has become more progressive, those of us who love traditional American concepts should stand up proudly on its behalf.  And that is what I intend to do with each year that emerges hereafter.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Why You Should Not Vote For Ted Cruz: “Take over the world, rich, powerful, that sort of stuff” while building a North American “community”

Up until really the National Enquirer article I was not adamant that Ted Cruz should not be the presidential nominee.  But after hearing him get the endorsements of people like Lindsey Graham, Jeb Bush, and after Cruz actually hired a Bush to work in his campaign, then witnessing all the dirty tricks that Ted played before Donald Trump hit back—like the hit piece on Melania—I have decided that under no circumstances am I going to support any sitting politicians for President. If someone holds a political position now or ever—I will not vote for them in the upcoming election.  The political establishment is doing everything it can to protect itself from a rebellion they created because of their mass incompetence and dysfunction—and watching their behavior has made me sick of the process.  I don’t believe any of them.   It is obvious to me, and I’m hardly one who falls for disillusion and fantasy.  Yet I have many friends, several who make livings thinking about this kind of stuff—some who actually work for Glenn Beck—who say they won’t vote for Donald Trump because he’s not a conservative.  Well, I think Trump is a conservative in a very liberal part of the country.  He may not be Montana conservative, but he is certainly bold enough to call himself a Republican in the very blue state of New York.  People can argue and debate all they want, but Trump has a wealth building track record that you can see and touch.  Cruz does not.  Instead you get conspiratorial information about Ted Cruz when you do a little digging—and it’s not good—like the following videos. Watch them all then decide if you really believe that Ted Cruz is what he says he is.

If there was anything I liked about Ted Cruz it was during his filibuster speech in front of the Senate where he mentioned Ayn Rand.  Like Paul Ryan he claims to be a fan—which gave me hope for both of them really.  But then again, so was Glenn Beck—and all those people have missed the point she was trying to make.  Ted Cruz is no closer to living in the world of Galt’s Gulch than Jessie Jackson and now that he is being pressed as one of two front runners—his story is breaking down.  This is why we have a long primary season and why running for president is so difficult.  Everyone has to be vetted and we need to see how these people act when they start sweating.  Cruz has not done well.  Even if he didn’t cheat on his wife with five women—he didn’t do a very good job of stepping out in front of the story.  His body language was obviously implicating him behind the tough talk.  He came across to me like the kid seen in the below video who blamed Donald Trump for putting teeth marks in a chair.  Trump because he is the political outsider—is a convenient punching bag—and Cruz’s team uses dirty tricks too much against him in a passive aggressive manner.  They played dirty with Ben Carson, and several others as well.  Then when they tried to appeal to Mormons in Utah with Holy-roller ads using a naked Melania to smear Trump, it was obvious to me that when pressed as a possible president, Cruz would behave in the same fashion.

Of course Cruz wants to debate Trump one on one—it is his strongest aptitude.  Trump would be crazy to fall for the invite—to give a competitor a chance by playing to his strength.  That is not how you win competitions conservatives—you must exploit the weaknesses of your rival—you don’t prop them up.  Cruz is a great debater on policy and all the things that politicians talk about.  But what has he done in his life that says he could do anything but talk?  We’ve heard the talk before and look where it’s gotten us.  No, we need now a man of action and I don’t think there is a single one in public office these days within the Washington D.C. culture who can do the job of president.  There are a few here and there around the country that gives me hope for the republic, but not enough to matter at the federal level yet.  We are in a gunless rebellion right now.  Instead of casualties and collateral damage we are seeing people lose or gain their careers.  That you could say is a more humane way of dealing with insurgents who have failed at their jobs of running the country—and they neurotically respond as if they’d rather die than just lose a social status.  But this rebellion has to happen.  We either take back our country through an election or we do it with some militia organized force—but things cannot continue as they have.  And what I’ve seen out of Ted Cruz is that he’s part of the system—not fighting against it.  Even if Cruz did love the novel Atlas Shrugged—being married to the spouse that he has now would prevent him from acting philosophically from it—which makes him no more effective in government than one of the Bush presidents or the worthless senators like Graham.

Then there was Cruz’s little speech about strong women as he defended his wife Heidi from the wrath of Donald Trump after Ted threw the first punch.    Not that women have to be barefoot and pregnant, and must spend all their time in the kitchen caring for their families to have value, but Cruz did not sound very conservative to me.  There is this whole metrosexual revolution of men who do cooking for their wives and share in the domestic tasks like doing laundry that are derived from the whole progressive push to make everyone equal, and Cruz like a lot of men are a part of it.  In human society the only real differences between men and women are those regarding the sexual roles—that really is it.  If we all placed our brains on a table and took away all the physicality, only then would we truly be equal.  But with physical bodies, we have roles on earth that point straight into the bedroom.  For instance, most women like to take the submissive role in sex, and therefore, they like to pamper their men with domestic obligations—but only if that man has went out into the world and conquered it in some fashion—with either a big paycheck, or in protecting the family from some disturbance.  Men and women must respect each other, but the roles they play in their family life are like foreplay to what happens in the bedroom.  In the most biologically primal fashion that directly leads to a happy sex life, women like to know that a man is changing the tire on the family car and the man likes to see his woman cooking the dinner he worked so hard to put on the table.  That respect leads to a healthy sex life of mutual fulfillment.  In this modern age of high divorce rates and mousey men who share all the cooking and laundry duties with their wives—they don’t understand why the women in their lives don’t want to plop up on the hood of their car in their garage and have spontaneous sex.  It is because the women don’t respect men who endorse all those beta male attributes.  Of course there are exceptions—and some people make it work through sheer will—but biologically we are all wired the same way through our physical bodies—and so long as we live on earth together—those rules apply to everything we do.  Trump understands those rules—Cruz certainly doesn’t and you can see it on Heidi’s face—she is suffering.  Most women in Heidi’s position use career to substitute the closeness they lack with their husbands.  These days’ women have been taught from little girls that this progressive method is the way they must conduct their lives—so they usually enter marriage confused as to their roles within the family.  But just a note to men in general, if you have to get your wife drunk to want to have sex, you are screwing up your romantic life with her.  Men in that situation need to change things for the benefit of the woman.  Society won’t acknowledge this problem, but it’s quite obvious—and it is destroying an entire generation of relationships.  Ted Cruz came out in his chastisement of Donald Trump sounding like a silly soccer dad justifying his own personal failures—and it was certainly pathetic.  It wasn’t presidential, and it certainly wasn’t “conservative.”

That of course brings us back to Donald Trump and the Cruz supporters who declare that the New York billionaire isn’t a conservative.  Trump is rich and he didn’t get that way giving away money.  He has a happy housewife at home taking care of his family.  Trump is pro gun, pro border security, against Common Core, and favors lowering taxes with an aggressive plan that might actually work.  He is decisive and a natural leader and never backs down from a fight.  What’s not to like?  And he has a track record of accomplishment both good and bad–we can see what we are buying with him.  With Cruz, who says he’s the ultimate conservative—what do we really know?  Because when you peek under the hood there is a lot not to like—he’s underpowered, feminized, and all talk.  The holes in Cruz are showing.  If he’s a true conservative then we are in a lot of trouble.  Because he does a lot of things and holds positions that are quite contrary to true conservatism—and you can see that in his campaign.  And now that too much has been said, there is no going back for me.  If the Republican Party does not embrace Donald Trump I’m done with them.  If there is anybody but a pure independent from the political establishment in the White House—then I’m done with the process and will turn from elections into Sam Adams.  Look people, I’m not a Constitutionalist—I think the Hamilton version of the founding documents was entirely too liberal.  I’m an Anti-Federalist by that old definition and if there is movement in the Constitution—it won’t be more toward a socialist state like Obama presents as an option—it will be further to the right—the way that Thomas Jefferson always intended.  Because only in that manner can we get to what we were supposed to always be in America—and Trump is the means to get there.  Cruz is just more of the same.  We don’t need another scandalous preacher from the White House.  We need someone who knows how to manage others—something no politician has shown me they are able to do—because they just don’t have the skill set to accomplish the task.  Ted Cruz has been nothing but a public servant his whole life.  He’s hardly an outsider.  He’s simply sold himself that way—and I’m not buying—under any condition.  The Glenn Beck types are wrong.  They need to go back and re-read Atlas Shrugged.  Cruz isn’t any of the characters in Atlantis.  He’s at the table with Wesley Mouch.  Actually, Ted’s wife is—while the presidential candidate is doing the dishes.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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