Tag: Rich Hoffman

What Carlos Todd and Donald Trump Had in Common: Eminent domain and the opening of Liberty Center

The Donald Trump speech from Norcross, Georgia at the North Atlanta Trade Center on Saturday October 10, 2015 was particularly telling of American politics. It was a great speech and it should be watched—seen below. Just a day later after the Sunday morning talk shows Trump continued to beat on the same kind of drum. Trump’s accusations were confirmed when Obama appeared on 60 Minutes later that same day after the football games and was grilled by Steve Kroft over the destabilization of the Middle East, also shown below. In that 60 Minutes segment was discussion over the upheavals in the Republican Party after a week of nobody wanting to be Speaker of the House—because of the Freedom Caucus. There is a lot going on, and it’s very clear that only someone like Donald Trump is equipped to handle the very volatile situation. Obama clearly is not privy to the current trends—he’s in extreme denial—as is most of the Beltway.

On issues regarding the Second Amendment, trade, immigration and economic growth, Trump is a far right conservative—so much so that Republicans should be drooling within the party at his intentions. He has the ability to market the Party in a new way they haven’t enjoyed since Ronald Reagan and they’d do well to embrace him. On the other hand, he is rather liberal regarding taxes, healthcare, and eminent domain. I could argue all day long with Trump on those issues—but they are his thoughts and he couldn’t do any worse than what we’ve had so far. I am willing to take what’s right with Trump metaphorically, and literally and offset the negatives because he is the kind of person who can get things done—and things need to get done. The Party bosses may not like Trump, but they’d be stupid to pass up on the chance of a lifetime. Trump would build a wall on the southern border, he’d expand the military, and he’d restructure the tax system all while stimulating the economy which are all things he’s capable as president to have a direct influence on, and at 70 years old, Trump has enough gas in the tank for one last spectacular decade of his life and America should give him a shot to go out with a bang. Obama has already embarrassed America—stepped all over the Constitution, and caused irreparable damage on Capital Hill. Only extreme success can fix the situation now.

As the Liberty Center shopping complex begins to open in my hometown it is ironic that one of the biggest Republican Party bosses in Butler County’s history was laid to rest. Essentially the Liberty Center shopping complex was made possible because of eminent domain. I was always against the Butler County Regional Highway construction which ran right through all the areas I used to play as a kid. Carlos Todd was a developer who built the Republican Party base in Butler County to essentially use crony capitalism to complete his building projects. Our political system is so dysfunctional that the only way to get projects done on a massive scale is to purchase politicians with money and loyalty—and Carlos Todd was one of the masters. He died at 77 eventually to his battle with cancer leaving quite a power vacuum in his wake.

I was in firm opposition to Todd and his Butler County associates Michael Fox and Bob Shelly as the Butler County Regional Highway used largely eminent domain to destroy my childhood home, a cemetery that had Revolutionary War soldiers in it, and several Indian Mounds that populated the area destroying a lot of potential archaeology. I thought of Todd as evil incarnate on the face of the earth because the Republican Party led by him was buying up property to develop for their projects stepping all over the rights of private citizens in the process. It was incredibly wrong and I was made even more furious when they took my father to a baseball game where the developers had a nice private box and convinced him to sell to Todd all in the name of progress. Their basic sales pitch was, sell and profit, or fight and be destroyed. They had the power of government to destroy, so he should take the money. I had been willing to fight them to the ends of the earth with any means necessary, but it was my father’s property—and his right to do with it whatever he wanted. So the developers got their way.

Well, Michael Fox eventually went to jail, Bob Shelley got into sexual harassment troubles and was pushed out of his trustee seat, and Todd drifted off into the shadows as his grandson took over the family business. There has been a lot of change and upheaval since then as the Regional Highway was built and slowly development began to appear around it. Bridgewater Falls is just such a development, which I have slowly come to enjoy over the years. Liberty Center is the latest, and most spectacular, but was it worth all the pain it caused people to run all over their property rights to build it?

When I started No Lakota Levy all the characters from those eminent domain fights joined together with me to fight the Lakota levy because the local public school was blocking out some of those developers from further work and the district had reached a saturation point. Developers had built all the buildings they could hope to ever construct leaving the taxes enormously high on all future development tipping the balance away from everything that had been built by them. I had always been against the explosive growth because of the sustainability of it, so now I was on the same side as people like Carlos Todd and the developers he largely controlled. It was strange to get to know all of them from a perspective on the other side of the fence. Most of the emails I sent or received had Carlos Todd copied on them so he was well aware of what we were doing and it threw me back to when I was in opposition with him and I was able to map out how he controlled things from a distance. My hatred subsided toward him because I saw what he was doing—he used government—which had stuck itself in every crevice it could over a long period of time—to hedge the bets for his projects in his favor. I couldn’t argue his method or reasoning. The developers were productive people making things that didn’t exist previously—and that was a good thing. Some of them I liked quite a lot, some I didn’t. I worked with them and just did my thing eventually doing as I always do—just sort of taking over. When the heat got too hot for them they checked out and we parted ways. Every time we’d meet toward the end they’d try to poke me into running for office, so I deliberately sabotaged the relationship with them to get out of that circle not because I disliked them, but because I needed to maintain my own course.

I’m sure Todd would have liked to see the Liberty Center open, but he didn’t quite make it. I am proud that its there, and of all the hard work many people endeavored to construct it. I think it’s a miracle of economic activity and the best minds of architecture. But was it worth it? Was it worth the building of the Butler County Regional Highway? The destroyed lives, the destroyed history and the integrity of Butler County politics? The answer is yes—even though it cost me personally. True, the world would have been better if everything had been left alone, but there’s a lot to be said about creating something from nothing and I appreciate that more than stagnation for the benefit of sentimentality.

The reason I told that story is that establishment Republicans, many of which were put in place because of people like Carlos Todd have mostly committed vast amounts of evil using eminent domain to destroy the lives of many. Donald Trump is not alone in that effort and he shares a lot in common with Carlos Todd, a developer who used politics to get what he needed to accomplish done. Getting to know Todd and his troops well from the other side of the fence I was able to see what was really in their heart. Sure, some people were bad, and they went to jail, lost their seats or ended up wiped from the face of the earth one way or another. But the good ones endured because through competition there really is no other way to sustain your essence, but through authenticity, and Carlos Todd was authentic—just as Donald Trump is. No question when you do things that relate to other people, they will have an opinion one way or the other. The judgment of a person’s character is determined by how they act under pressure. What people do under pressure validates their worth—and Todd showed that he had a lot. I might not always like what he planned to do, but his effort had purity to it. But within that purity there were many people who were trampled on and were smacked around quite a lot.

The real answer is to get politics out of development and remove many of the regulations that cause all this evil. Until that happens people like Carlos Todd and Donald Trump will work the system to their advantage. That is why I feel that Trump—after a lifetime of making deals and running over people can actually straighten out the mess of politics and its terrible relationship to business. Ideological people who have not built things themselves but were relegated to just giving their opinions about things do not have the benefit of my life where I’ve been very active on both sides and know clearly where the line is drawn. I can only treasure that opportunity because it gave me the philosophic foundations to understand all these complexities without losing sight of the real objective—economic growth, the sanctity of private property, and the evil of a system that the most clever among us learn to use to get things done—in spite of the desire of that system to destroy all thought and action. Donald Trump is an insider, and I would love to see what someone like him—who likely hates the system as much as I do, would commit himself to if given a chance to right the ship in ways that Carlos Todd never came close to achieving. But for Republicans to turn on Trump as a radical maniac who would wreck the party—they are in denial at what put them in office in the first place. They’d be wise to get behind Trump for the strength he provides and for giving them an opportunity to have their office seats. Because without people like Carlos Todd, Donald Trump and eminent domain—most of them would still be small time hacks looking for an opportunity that would never come otherwise.

The only way to change the system is from the inside by someone who knows it better than anybody. That’s why I’m voting for Trump. His use of eminent domain and the guilt I’m sure he feels about it I think would make a person determined to correct that situation for the benefit of economic wonder which everyone would eventually enjoy. Trump is in a position to morally build a philosophy of growth by utilizing the lessons learned from crony capitalism into a more laissez-faire system perhaps for the first time since the first few decades of America’s creation. And that would be wonderful.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Needs of Men and Women: Why it’s cowardly not to throw oneself into a hail of bullets–if needed

It really is shocking sometimes to read what those on the political left think these days when pressed against times of circumstance. These school shootings recently are bringing out all the failures in political thought starting with education and shining a light on them that obviously Salon magazine can’t face. The common ingredient between the Oregon shooter, the recent Arizona University shooting, and even the fight that left French train hero Spencer Stone stabbed after a bar altercation, is that they all feature young males trying desperately to assert themselves in a confusing world. Progressives have spent so much time trying to make women equal to men, all colors of skin to integrate, and sexual orientation to feel comfortable operating without secrecy in society—that they forgot that one of the most intense needs young men have of all shapes, sizes and backgrounds is the need to determine their place in the pecking order of their existence. There is a real science behind these crises that is obviously completely missing from an article by Heather Digby Parton at Salon trying to piece together why both Donald Trump and Ben Carson—leading the GOP pack of presidential candidates have exhibited themselves as so “pro gun.” Read that article at the link below, it is rather funny.

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/07/they_think_theyre_all_clint_eastwood_donald_trump_ben_carson_the_rights_demented_gun_fantasies/

I’m sure Heather is a nice girl. In fact I had dinner with a whole room full of Heather types recently at a winery where the premier topic among them was the movie Magic Mike, and reruns of Friends. Their dates—if you could call them that sat patiently by them as the women knocked wine glasses together and giggled like school girls over topics like six-pack abs and lesbian fantasies of accidentally putting on the other person’s underwear the next morning before leaving for the office. The men looked rather lost, not really knowing when to laugh or when to look emotionally invested. They all looked like men who had missed the train at the station and had to wait until the next day to catch the next one. It was an upscale place, but the game was obvious. Even through I’ve never met Heather Digby Parton from Salon—her kind was clearly present at the dinner engagement and guns were a taboo subject.

I was walking back to my seat after getting up to view the wine cellar and a young man actually engaged me in conversation—which I really didn’t have time for, but could tell he was desperately seeking some testosterone driven guidance. I told him what I usually do under such circumstances—that he needed to take his date to the back seat of whatever car they arrived in and give her what she’s really looking for instead of another two hours of all that hen cackling for which he and she were suffering. She’d stay on his arm for the rest of the evening and drop all the contemporary drama of not being able to find soap at Bed Bath and Beyond. About that time I received a message that the longtime leader of the Republican Party of Butler County had died. Carlos Todd was a significant figure in shaping the Republican Party nationwide as John Boehner, George Bush in 2004, and many others have cut their teeth in politics in his wake. Butler County is largely extremely conservative because of him and now he was dead at the fairly young age of 77. That left me thinking about modern girls who joke about lesbian acts in front of their male dates, Donald Trump and guns, and some of the fights I personally had with Carlos Todd over the years where I didn’t think he was conservative enough for my taste. Even though he and I disagreed about a lot of things, we did join together on some fights. Where our disagreements often flowed over it was on the Republican strategy of appealing to these modern types taught in the manner of progressivism to adhere to a new code of conduct that ignored the male need for boldness by instead encouraging them to sissy slap each other and join the ladies in mixing up their underwear with their fellow male counterparts in the morning. Not a good idea on any scale.

The Republican Party has suffered because it moved off its macho base and tried to appeal to what they thought was a changing demographic. The demographic needs did not change, young men still desire to prove to young women how tough they are and when their rope runs out, they sometimes turn to violence to display their last act of courage—from their point of view. And women as much as they think it’s stylish to hyphenate their last names to show that they are not assimilated to a man by way of marriage really just want a determined man who can make them feel like a woman while engaged in sexual mating customs. And that’s why I actually feel bad for Heather Digby Parton and those who read her Salon magazine article and actually understood her point of view.

Every human being should know that if bullets are flying that in that moment acts of heroism are mandated. It’s OK to be shot, or to be stabbed several times like Spencer Stone was during his recent bar fight. For a man it feels good to collect new scars even if it means you die in the process. It feels good to be heroic. I can say what I’d do if under the threat of gun fire honestly because I’ve been in those situations. Let me say, I’ve never put my hands up and turned over my wallet, or allowed my woman to be insulted, or my personal integrity—gun or not. So I completely understand Donald Trump’s comments in the wake of the Oregon shooting where he resurrected images of great vigilante films like Death Wish by making guns out of his hand in front of the audience pretending to quick draw. Yes it is cowardly Heather Digby Parton to not throw yourself into a hail of bullets if there is danger present. It is worse to cower like a baby pleading for your life than in dying through the act of heroics. Because our current society is so obsessed with homosexual acts and equality blending the hard-working with the lazy it has missed the deep need humans have for heroes even if that act costs them their life. Clicking wine glasses together and joking about overly estrogen necessities at the expense of masculinity won’t make a more peaceful world—it makes it more dangerous—which should be obvious after the recent school shootings. Donald Trump is proving what I have been trying to convince Carlos Todd Republicans for a number of years—that if you really want to expand the Republican Party you don’t do it by feminizing the candidates. You put up bold heroes to represent conservativism.

Young men need danger and to overcome it to prove to themselves and their potential mates that they have the potential to act heroically. Progressivism seeks to remove that desire from the human mind—which is impossible without thousands of years of evolution. Women in their sexual roles are built biologically to crave a bloody, sweaty man—and men are programmed to save damsels in distress properly perfumed and highlighted with all the latest supernormal sign stimuli (eye shadow, lipstick, blush, high heels, etc). Most women when pressed will say that the two things they are most attracted to with men are their smell and their confidence. Women are not so interested in visual attributes like six-pack abs and the strippers in Magic Mike—they actually want a deeply confident male to sweep them off their feet—even after all the decades of progressive education attempts to equalize the sexes by ignoring the strength of one and artificially propping up the other. Both have suffered and the males are lashing out in ways that are proving detrimental to the safety of our nation.

So guys, if you have an opportunity to stop a robbery, fight a bully who is picking on other people, or just standing up for an idea that you believe in, you will do better with the ladies than if you try to appease them by watching chick flicks and giggling like an idiot at their estrogen based diatribes. Women don’t really want you to giggle at that stuff either, and they really don’t care if you pretty yourself up with cologne, hairspray and well-pressed cloths. Like the girls I mentioned joking about getting their underwear mixed up after a rough night in the sheets—girls can get that kind of stuff with each other—they truly don’t need a man for that. But, people in general do recognize that it is cowardly to hide when the bullets fly and danger is at its peak. Donald Trump clearly knows that. Carlos Todd never really accepted it. But the Republican Party is deciding, just as millions of human beings are turning against the teachings of progressivism represented by Salon writers like Heather, that they don’t want to live in a world run by cowards. So in these changing times, those who invoke the gun know what they are doing. Those who hide from it just sip wine and make jokes as the times leave them behind just as masculinity was deliberately left standing at the loading deck as the train of modernism pulled away only to break down a few miles down the track—because there wasn’t anybody around who knew how to fix it. There are worse things than death, and being a coward is one of them.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

My New Ruger Vaquero: A best friend that brings out the best in humanity

There is nothing about my new Ruger Vaquero .45 that speaks of violence to me. Looking at it all I think about is cowboy trick shooting and stunts that can be performed with it. It is to me equivalent to a nicely made basketball intended to be thrown into a net by a good athlete, or a wonderful pair of golf clubs meant to drive a ball across a vast green into a hole 400 yards away in increments.   Shooting with the Vaquero shown in the picture is essentially a sport where science and skill combine into hitting a target under timed circumstances. There is nothing violent about the act whatsoever. Guns might have been invented out of war like necessity and the sport of shooting to practice for that eventuality—but the sport of shooting is just another human endeavor intended to test skill against adversity with the drama of competition to drive image

What struck me on this particular gun—as they all do these days is the nice messaging that often comes with them. Ruger in this case was grateful for my purchase and the supplied literature made it clear. It showed to me a serious interest by the Ruger Company to build a solid base of customer support for a product unquestionably made in America by good, hard working people. The gun feels like a well-crafted work of art, its machining is immaculate, the tolerances on its critical junctures well inspected, and it feels incredibly competent. This is not a company that should be targeted by liberal hate groups. Ruger is not a company making death—it makes life, and tradition. There is nothing about my Ruger Vaquero that speaks of violence if a person really understands what shooting is all about in the world of sport. It’s a fine tool to me for exhibiting traditional American art forms, and it’s a miracle of modern science—more sophisticated than driving a golf ball into a hole, or throwing a football 50 yards down field into the arms of a waiting receiver. To me the Vaquero by Ruger is the ultimate individual sport where great power is incorporated into the mechanisms of great engineering and it deserves to be respected as such.

But it’s not lost to me how grateful the Ruger Company is with each purchase made of their firearms. It is because of their attitude toward their customers that I get a special feeling whenever I see the emblem blazed across a t-shirt of hat, or on a banner at a competition. I know they care about their customers in spite of a world led by liberals that wants to eradicate them from the face of the planet because those political minds want to make the company into a representation of hate and violence. Football is a violent sport, golf clubs are sometimes used as weapons of hate when they are slammed over the head of a victim, but political advocates don’t seek to ban golf courses or the sport of golf. The gun has a special hatred aimed at it because liberals have no idea or desire to understand that guns like the Vaquero are designed for much more than hunting or self defense—they are built for the sport of the Cowboy Fast Draw.

In such groups as those in the preservation of the Wild West arts are some of the best people I have ever met. The world would be a whole lot better off if more people interacted with these great Americans. And on the hips of most of them are often Vaqueros by Ruger. They wear them openly in public often and nobody ever gets shot, and there are seldom ever hard words spoken to others. There is almost always respect for their fellow shooters. Within that alliance of sportsman they revere each other with camaraderie that is exceptionally healthy and overwhelmingly positive.

When I picked up my Vaquero at Right 2 Arms it was the owner’s parents who were working the store and were armed behind the counter. There was no reason to feel apprehension at that visible support of what looked like a Glock holstered on the father. We proceeded to have a very nice conversation about Gatlinburg, Tennessee while the background check came through for me. They were good people and I looked over my Vaquero as they spoke about their upcoming vacation plans. It was good, healthy conversation among highly armed people who invoked no danger whatsoever. Instead, the presence of guns elevated our interaction to something of respectful banter united under support for the 2nd Amendment.

Just two days prior I had a wonderful lunch with some VIP’s within the shooting world. We talked about gun ranges, plans for helping the youth through learning marksmanship, and the bad rap that guns were getting in the wake of the Oregon shooting.   I enjoyed the company more than I would if the conversation were a usual business lunch where all the things that people really like are talked around because of political correctness. With these guys, we could all just be ourselves which was refreshing. It was much better to talk about things that really interested us instead of sports scores and the season trajectory of our favorite football teams. There always is a solid foundation of realness that comes from those types of lunches as opposed to others that feel like a clip on tie at a wedding. It confirmed much of what I have been feeling lately about firearms and their role behind the American experience. We need to be more proud of that heritage, not less so.

I mentioned to the guys at the power lunch that we needed to market firearms differently as a public perception—that as shooters we needed to stop riding the ropes of the obvious political fights we are without question in. We need to get into the center of the ring and control the fight from that position instead of just taking the shots to the face and hoping to outlast our opponents—the gun grabbers, the liberal radicals teaching in our public schools, and the political class that wants to turn America back into an aristocracy similar to Europe—instead of one founded on independence from gun possession.

The reason my Vaquero as opposed to other guns I have bought is so special is that its purpose is exclusively for use as a cowboy shooter for the sport of Western Arts. It is the type of single action that won the West in America and that means a lot to me symbolically, and the sports that have risen up in the wake of that historical memory is not much different from the battlefield strategies of football. The games might have been invented by inclinations of war, but they evolve into camaraderie and tradition that brings out the best that a society has to offer. The gun in America exhibits the best of this example.

The summation of my contacts the week that I picked up my Vaquero at Right 2 Arms is guns make people better—not worse as progressive politics suggests. The political left had misdiagnosed the root cause of human evil and sold it back to society in a package of deceit. When that deceit is removed and Americans are allowed to wear their firearms on their hips, and discuss them as extensions of themselves, a higher quality in people emerges built out of respect. The knowledge that domination of the another person is not possible—so a respectful exchange emerges between human beings when both have guns. The trouble emerges when that relationship is lopsided, where a maniac is armed and a peaceful person is not—that’s where abuse happens. But Ruger is not about feeding that fear—they are about making America a better place and that sentiment begins with the simple thank you note that they package with their guns. I felt honored to open up my new Vaquero. It’s an honor to have such a fine gun from such a quality company. As is typical of most gun manufacturers, they are examples of what’s best about American manufacturing and that is certainly the case with Ruger. They are one of the very best, and every time I look at my Ruger Vaquero, I will think of what’s best about America and the culture that should otherwise thrive in a society open to gun use for the skills that emerge from them in sports.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Stop Being Afraid of Guns: Matt Clark and Rich Hoffman talk about gun free zones on WAAM radio

Matt Clark had me on his WAAM radio show in Ann Arbor, Michigan recently to discuss some of the hot stories of October 2015. There was enough to cover to last a lifetime of live radio—the stories and their frequency are exponentially increasing by the moment, and it’s a lot to keep track of. Without talk radio, it would be nearly impossible for the average person to follow everything. That’s why I’ve always been a fan of talk radio, because you can get a lot of news provided to you as other tasks are done, such as driving, changing the oil, and installing new hot water heaters. Talk radio is miraculous in its ability to cover a lot of ground quickly, and on Matt’s show, he is one of the best. Typically in a short hour, he can hit a lot of topics in a very fluid manner—and when he has me on with him—we really hit the topics in a furious fashion. That broadcast can be heard below.

Toward the end of the broadcast there were a couple of callers that Matt wanted to get on the air. I am typically sympathetic to callers because it takes a lot of guts to call into a radio show, to sit on hold for up to an hour not knowing when the host will put you on the air to millions of potential listeners.   If the callers are respectful I typically don’t interrupt them because it’s important to get their view points out on the table. A police offer took issue with my proposal that regarding gun control, my more guns are best approach was something he had a problem with. Matt and I let him talk which directed him to the real point he was trying to make—but it was near the end of the show, and we didn’t have time to expand down that line of thought. The cop of course felt that civilians were not as equipped to handle a crises situation as compared to law enforcement. As Matt and I had been talking about gun free zones needing more independently armed citizens to keep things in check, the officer wanted more police on staff to protect schools from violence.

Well, more cops won’t work because they are too expensive. There is a cost for safety and security, and if it does incur too much of a burden, there needs to be other alternatives. The solution to gun violence is not more gun control laws, or more cops patrolling the streets and schools—its more armed citizens who will do the work for free not in a reactionary way, but a proactive way. A cop in the school in Oregon would not have stopped that violence. A well armed student could have. More cops working off tax payer funds are not the answer in almost every situation. We do need the police, but more for the report that happens when violence occurs so that courts have evidence to look at. So I don’t agree with the nice guy who called into Matt’s show. From his point of view, more cops in schools make sense—because he doesn’t care how much police cost an area in increased taxes. To his mind taxes can be perpetually raised so long as safety is the focus. But that’s just stupid.

There is always a danger when tragedies occur for the timid minded to seek out more government to provide security. More cops in schools are an expansion of government. Whereas a more open gun carrying society would provoke cheaper and more direct security in a laissez-faire kind of way which big government types simply don’t understand. If progressive minded people are not tampering with the lives of other people, they don’t feel secure themselves, so my typical laissez-faire style of security is something that drives them crazy. Gun laws in America should essentially be the same as the laws that govern business and commerce. Less laws and more responsibility invoked at the point of contact driven by self-preservation.

There was a lot right that occurred during the “Wild West” period in America of which guns were such a part of the mythology of western expansion. To consider the effort it took for Americans to load up in covered wagons and head west for up to a year of travel at roughly 20 miles per day with all the dangers that such a journey provoked, and that within 100 years of that type of settlement, there were railroads, cars and airplanes invented that could connect all that open space seamlessly is quite a miracle. Forget about who the Native Americans were—whether they were caretakers of Mother Earth’s land, migrant Chinese people, left-over Viking warriors, or a lost tribe from Israel, the effort of frontiersman is one of the great stories of human innovation and tenacity ever conducted by free people. Guns evolved from muzzle loaders at the start of western expansion and ended as a pretty significant technological innovation resulting in lever-action repeaters and the Colt .45s that tamed the West into one of the freest land masses on the face of the planet. Progressives hated the Wild West because it was a period of history where laissez-faire lifestyles provoked hopes through capitalism and innovation that has never been repeated at any other time in known history. For all the barbarity of frontier life, it paved the way for a wonderful country that exploded upon the world an immense economy. Without the gun, none of that would have happened.

I am of a mind that Americans shouldn’t even have concealed carry anymore; they should make guns a part of their fashion. It should be as common to see a gun on the hip of a person as it is to see a business suit now. The American gun is a tribute to our heritage and a reminder of what a laissez-faire approach to legislation, and justice can provide a free people. As a society, we have to get away from this crap of being afraid of guns. We have to stop putting orange indicators on toy guns at Wal-Mart so not to scare some pansy police officer with a happy trigger finger willing to shoot anything that they might consider a threat. It ruins the experience for a kid of pretending that guns are real when they play with those toys. Schools need to stop trying to keep kids from playing shoot-em-up at recess by making fake guns out of their hands. Playing with guns is good for kids—they should do a lot more of it—especially boys. Avoiding guns is making our society into a bunch of wimps and it’s getting worse year by year. That’s what happens when you take advice from people like that caller into Matt’s show. More government employees and more gun laws turn our society into a much more regressive one. Aside from the obvious expensive nature of continuing to add government employees at tax payer expense, micromanaging society is an even more cost incursion that has detrimental effects on social responsibility. The 100 years where America operated as a much more laissez-faire society between the War of 1812 and the rise of the progressive era with Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 America became a global superpower. Under progressive influence, America has regressed steadily from 1912 to 2012.

2012 will be viewed as a pivotal year in American politics. Obama won a second term, Ohio’s governor Kasich lost his battle with the unions, and many of those who refused to hold their nose and vote for Mitt Romney as a Republican presidential nominee decided they had enough of politics as usual. Since 2012 the American people have started to turn more toward a desire for a laissez-faire approach to all things related to government which will increase as millenials realize that most of their educations during the first twenty years of their lives were a complete farce—they learned all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons. It is among them that they watch the big government reaction to all these failed progressive problems and are starting to consider other options. Of those options I believe we will see a new trend that guns will become more open and accepted. They should be, they are an important aspect of American culture.

As Matt and I closed out his show it was obvious that the government has well overplayed its hand in this card game called politics, and police officers have seen the last of the days where panicked parents and squishy minded voters just increased taxes and threw more bodies at every danger that presented itself. We are dealing with a whole new age in a new century, and if America is to survive, it will only do so with an overall political approach that is laissez-faire toward everything—starting with guns. Once more guns are injected into our society with more frequency, and openness–then all things related to our commerce will reflect that less restricted approach. It’s a mentality that we are missing in America that goes or comes based on how our society maintains its relationship to the gun. A laissez-faire approach to firearms is not an extreme position with equal measure against the gun grabbing liberals on the opposite side of some political spectrum. It’s not up for debate with a high low bar between positions where left and right politics meet in the middle. Guns are a part of America and there should be no apology in wanting them, carrying them, or using them. If America had that attitude presently, a lot fewer people would be dying in these mass shootings. The shootings themselves are caused by failed policies and an overly cautions society that is so afraid of guns that they can’t even allow a child to have a toy unless it’s colored in some way so not to scare other people into believing its real. Nobody should be such a bunch of wimps as to be scared of guns. Our education system has made our society that way—to our own detriment. And now its time to stop being afraid.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

ISIS Guilt in Chris Harper Mercer’s Violence: What Obama didn’t say caused the Oregon shootings–but he should have

There is certainly enough smoke to point toward an inconceivable fire if its proved to be true, that the Oregon shooter, Chris Harper Mercer wasn’t just the usual loner, the poor boy who couldn’t get a date and sought to put himself into history’s remembrances even as a villain after committing overwhelming violence. He appears to be more ideologically motivated. There are three things that give away the real story, and it’s likely that all three are connected. But if any of them were to hold up to the truth of proper investigating by real journalists, then there are a lot of people who should be immediately fired for the cover-up—because if these mass shootings really are to be stopped, the correct cause must be identified, not just the effect. Death was the effect, but guns were not the cause. Behavior was, and what motivated that behavior is the point of this discussion.

Not long ago Alek Skarlatos and his friends coming back from some ruckus boyish festivities in Amsterdam put a stop to an Islamic radical who attempted to take over a train in Belgium on its way to Paris. Skarlatos led the effort and has been since touring the world as a hero for stopping the possible terrible crime. Skarlatos would have been at the Umpqua Community College the day that Mercer showed up armed to kill Christians specifically, but the young hero was training for Dancing with the Stars down in Hollywood for the television show, enjoying rightfully his new-found celebrity. Now there are a lot of community colleges in the United States, so it’s just a bit odd that this attack happened to occur at the exact college of Alek Skarlatos just a matter of weeks after stopping the Belgium shooter. Initially when the Belgium shooter was stopped, the radical ties to Islam acquired during a time that the attempted murderer was in Spain had been suppressed with a cover story that the violence was not related to religious motivations. Remember that.

Apparently the FSB, (Federal Security Services in Russia) tried to warn the American CIA that a black-Islamist terror suspect had tried to gain passage to Syria through Turkey during the first week of September in 2015. That terrorist suspect was listed as Chris Harper Mercer and was on a list of 87,000 people they were watching, and was identified as being an Islamic State adherent after the attempt to get into Syria—all this flagged by the Foreign Intelligence Service, (SVR). Now, it’s possible that these agencies were just trying to make a name for themselves in the wake of the Oregon shooting, but what this congers up for remembrance is the Boston Marathon bombing by the radicalized Islamic terrorists there tipped off to us again by foreign intelligence agencies as our own Homeland Security failed to notice. Even with all the intrusions that the NSA is conducting on Americans they have shown themselves to be utterly incompetent so far in stopping terror from occurring—because the evidence is certainly present that these young kids—such as Mercer—where behaving in a way that indicating coming violence.

Third, just as in Benghazi where Chris Stevens was killed by a September 11th plot to sack the American embassy there, just a few months before President Obama’s re-election—were overeager reports that the violence had been caused by an anti-Islamic video. This time Obama himself took to the podium immediately after the incident in Oregon to call for more gun control. Even Chris Harper Mercer’s own father jumped on the train of anti-gun sentiment to show his shock that his son had owned 13 guns and declared that if his boy had not had the guns, the murders never would have happened. Everyone connected to the story was way too quick to blame the gun instead of the behaviors leading to Mercer wanting to kill specifically Christian people. For instance, Chris was coming from broken home, the father did not live with the mother—which is likely a much more telling tale of why the shooter had emotional problems and was unadjusted to social life. The root cause of young Mercer’s issues likely would reside between the dad and the mom because they did a bad job raising their son. Blaming guns is easy for the father, but the real cause of the Oregon deaths was that as a father he failed to give his son proper values to live life by. That left the young kid to bounce around aimlessly for several years before befriending some people on an online site called the “beta boys.” I have written extensively about the problems associated with “beta males” so the irony is not lost. Mercer had problems likely caused by his parents which should have been investigated before any press conference was conducted about the cause of the violence.

Even worse than all this—and at this point there is no way to really know—but there are several reports that the same agency that tipped off the CIA leaked information into the Russian publication Reedus indicating that Mercer’s online profile in The Red Room was changed from his original identify as an ISIS terror supporter to being a “white conservative Republican” immediately after the Oregon mass shooting. It was there that Mercer (supposedly) had warned the people he liked in that online forum to stay away from colleges in the Northwest because something was going to happen. Again, it’s possible that Russian intelligence agencies were just trying to make America look bad in a public relations battle taking place around the globe presently. So if it’s all untrue, Obama just has to say it—or perhaps his various security experts. Just give a press conference telling us that all this information is bogus and that there isn’t a grain of truth to it. That would put the issue to rest—because if any of this is true, there is some serious explaining to do—like why wasn’t it immediately revealed to the public that just like the shooter in Belgium, Mercer was motivated by Islamic radicalism—which would explain why he asked if potential victims were Christians. We don’t yet know what happened if potential victims indicated that they were Muslim. Apparently the father didn’t know Chris enough to understand if he had lost his son to radical Islamists—he didn’t even know he had guns. Unfortunately much of this information is coming from independent journalists and blog sites. More can be read at the following link, but much of the information could be cleared up by CNN, Fox and many other outlets if they would do a little digging and either shoot down the theories, or support them with hard evidence. But a failure to address these issues indicates more guilt, not less.

http://truthuncensored.net/guess-which-mass-murderer-was-on-a-terrorist-list-that-obama-refused-to-accept/#sthash.I66uFVvc.dpbs

Then of course is the mysterious push for this shooter to remain anonymous, as if by not applying a name to Mercer will prevent other screw-balls like him from doing something similar. The parts of the story that backed this line of thought have conveniently been released while other aspects were completely ignored and this behavior was done in odd choreography with local and national law enforcement. The decision to put a lid on the kid’s story was made within hours of the shooting with unusual clarity by law enforcement. There is just way too much that doesn’t add up.

Literally on the other side of the world relative to the Oregon shooting a Moroccan nationalist on the radar screen by counterterrorism agencies for his radical jhadist views tried to kill people on a speeding train about a 100 miles north of Paris. Apparently young Chris Harper Mercer admired people like that shooter because they gained instant celebrity through the acts of violence. ISIS as a terrorist group has seen a lot of disjointed young people trying to join their cause. Most of them come from broken homes and are awkward socially for one reason or another and are attracted to the power of terrorism advanced by the terrorist group. There are always people out there who love the villains in a story—because the bad guys often have power that is envied by those who inwardly feel most powerless to express themselves against a tapestry of social orthodox. You don’t see otherwise nice young girls leaving comfortable middle-class homes in Britain to join the UAE or the Israeli army. They are fleeing toward ISIS and radical Islam because at least there they can see a structure that their lives are lacking. Weak people like the bad guys, because it gives them an association with instant strength that they don’t inwardly have. Whether Chris Harper Mercer was one of these types remains to be seen. Much of what I have written here was provided to me by readers of Overmanwarrrior’s Wisdom and I have spent the last 24 hours doing what research was possible at this early stage.

There is certainly more to the story than what we have so far been told. But the root cause of the violence was not the gun. It started with bad parenting followed up by a failed education system. Then the community failed to turn that “beta boy” into an alpha by placing an incorrect emphasis on masculine necessity that is crucial to the biological urges that young men need to build their self-identity with. And to correct all that, it is likely that Chris Harper Mercer was attracted to the violence of ISIS and that his actions were more influenced by them, than by the convenience of a gun. That is the real story and is the reason that the Obama administration was so fervent to get out in front of this story. Because Chris Harper Mercer was and is a product of the failures of Obama’s terms as president—Obama gave rise to ISIS through his passivity, he has advanced the failures of progressive educations and social engineering and he has mastered the art of laying blame everywhere but at the true source. So when it is asked why there are so many people like Chris Harper Mercer emerging these days to create mass terror—all Obama needs to do is look in the mirror. Under his leadership, the situation has exploded, and it has nothing to do with guns.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Trump Offers Himself as a Superman President: A curious query into meekness and the assumption that its good

One thing that really disgusts me is when I’m around other men who make the statement, “I’m not superman” as a way to let themselves off the hook for underachieving. The statement usually comes when there is great pressure to do everything and be everything to all the needs of all who require solutions. The chicken thing to do is to declare—I’m not superman, “I’m not perfect,” “I’m just a man.” I don’t think there has ever been a single day in my life from a young boy until the present where I’ve just wanted to be “just a man.” Considering the name of this site is “overmanwarrior” that should be a pretty good indication of where my sentiments reside in the context of personal expectation. So when presented with problems, no matter how many or how difficult, I always lean in to solve them all and carry whatever burdens there are—no matter what the odds. To my mind that is what is expected out of men—all men of all races and ages. It is their job and if they fall short of that attempt—I don’t think much of them. That is why I am so interested in the Donald Trump campaign. He says and expects of himself much of what I do—which is the type of person I want for president. That was never more obvious than in an early October weekend interview with Trump by CNBC’s John Harwood who declared to the presidential candidate, that America doesn’t have “superman” presidents. Trump’s response was that “You will if you have Trump for president.” Watch for yourself.

What John Harwood said was actually a mouthful—it had meanings at many levels. But most obvious is that American presidents should be expected to be supermen—otherwise no nation can expect to maintain such an exclusive status as a dominating superpower. Ordinary men with their petty weaknesses have caused enough trouble over the years, from John Kennedy’s affairs, to LBJ’s womanizing, Bill Clinton’s obsession with sexual relationships, and the Bush family meekness, if the problems in our country were to really be traced back to an origin, it comes from human beings—especially people who are supposed to be leaders, lowering the bar of their own expectations to be viewed as simple men with humble origins. Society might teach that meekness is a positive trait in Sunday school, but in reality that just gets your ass kicked intellectually and physically. Meekness invites some dominating personality—or county to step in and push you around and that mentality needs to change if America is going to survive.

Men should expect themselves to be supermen. Teddy Roosevelt with all his faults pushed himself toward greatness nearly with every breath he took, daily. One of his life goals was to kill a man which he did on San Jaun Hill with his Rough Riders. He overcame illnesses, great opposition, and even finished a speech he was giving while he was shot. He was campaigning when an assassin’s bullet penetrated his body—he knew it—yet he finished his campaign speech anyway just to show how tough he was. That was not a guy who allowed himself to be “meek.” Andrew Jackson was another such personality. Over his lifetime he survived many duels and carried with him all his life an expectation toward a rough and ready approach to just about everything. It was because of Jackson that the United States currently has Florida, Texas and had a paid off debt during his time in office. Thomas Jefferson was another personality who expected of himself not great physical strength, but incredible intellectual strength. It was because of him that we have the Marines when he put together a force to go and fight the Barbary Pirates. I would expect every American president to exhibit similar behavior. Even though those presidents were far from perfect, they at least made attempts during their lives to be more than ordinary. They certainly tried and had personal expectations of greatness.

During westward expansion many men challenged themselves against fate for the potential of fortune. Most failed, but a few rose to the top and became larger than life characters largely on the backs of their personal bravado. Doc Holiday was one of those gun fighting characters that took a debilitating illness and pushed himself beyond the limits of fear to something he otherwise would not otherwise become as a gentleman gambler. Many don’t know it but likely the real inspiration for the Lone Ranger western character was a man named Bass Reeves. He was a black lawman who was obsessed with living with honor and a sense of justice for the innocent. The westward expansion period was an exciting time because there did emerge strong personalities that pushed themselves toward superhuman expectations, Jessie James was one, Wild Bill Hickok was another. After World War II many westerns were made in the movie business and on television that embodied something of an overman mindset, where men tried to live under a system of honor to protect their families and friends with a superhuman courage. John Wayne and Clint Eastwood built their careers around embodying those traits to the movie going public. For a lot of years there was an expectation among other males that they were expected to act whenever possible as something beyond mortal when pressed.

Most males today make me sick at their lack of bravado, and now we live in a time where such superhuman expectations have been abandoned. Even among our celebrities there are no longer many who even attempt to portray a larger-than-life personality. Yet John Harwood says it so easily that we don’t elect superman presidents. When have we decided not to? What ridiculous imposition of assumption dictated that we vote for the meek, week, losers of low self-confidence emitting from the “everyman” like sweat running through the crack of a gorilla’s ass? When did weakness become such a noble quality—because at such a point the instigator should be wrung up and cast through the folds of time into a boundless existence where they can do no further harm toward the fate of humanity. No wonder so many people dislike Trump’s boastfulness. Donald Trump doesn’t sit around crying like some modern man that his goldfish died. Trump doesn’t politely pretend to be stupid so some losers can feel like they belong at the tables of greatness. Over the last few weeks there have been several examples given of past Mit Romney campaigns along with John McCain as if they were the types of presidential candidates the Republicans were looking for in 2016.   Are you kidding me? Both of those idiots lost—because they took the advice of marketers and allowed themselves to be seen as “everyman” instead of “overman.” There is nothing noble or good about the belching, farting, insecure everyman. There is nothing endearing about such a creature. The universe is laughing at them daily—we don’t want them in the White House.

Trump has no trouble sticking up his hand and declaring he’s not an “everyman.” He states emphatically without apology, that he is and would be, a superman. That’s who I want at the wheel of a “superpower” that America is supposed to be under the capitalist style of government that we have. We don’t need another meek statesman who believes himself to be just another guy in a field of team players unimportant on the cosmic stage. We’ve had plenty of presidents like that—and they haven’t done us a good job. As a result, there are not enough men in the world willing to be a superman within the sphere of their personal contacts. Ask a wife who she’d rather sleep with, a crying fool ready to throw himself at the feet of a community and sacrifice himself to their qualms, or an unapologetic superman who always has the answers and is ready in a fraction of a second at all hours of the day to take her where she wants to go? What about the child who looks up at a father and wants someone who knows best 100% of the time, or the wavering reed of indecision who declares that they are just men among men—and nothing particularly special. Then who would that kid listen to when they ask what would happen if it were discovered they smoked pot for the first time. Typically the meek dad would say, “well son, I’ve smoked it and it wasn’t very smart, but you’ll have to make up your own mind. Who am I to judge or tell you anything, I’m just a man?” Compare that to the dad who tells the kid, “if I catch you smoking pot I’ll kick your ass off this fu**ing planet you little bitch. I’ve never smoked it and only pussies smoke it because they can’t handle the pressure of this life and seek to numb their minds from the pain of reality. That makes them weak and you don’t want to be weak.” Which is the correct answer dear reader? That is why the world needs more supermen. The meek types have done enough damage to last many lifetimes—and its time to change our approach. The world needs more supermen. Wives want them in their beds, kids want them as fathers, and nations need something to encourage them to be better people. So especially in the White House, we had better learn to elect such people. Because we all need to face a high bar and stop using humanity as a crutch for laziness, and cowardly dispositions. We have tried that and it doesn’t work.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

An Oregon Tragedy: Why America needs more Second Call Defense and the NRA

Nearly on time with the shots fired from a gunman at Umpqua Community College in Oregon the White House was blaming Congress for not passing more gun control legislation. As usual, the progressive types—the muddy minded know nothings of academia uttered an emotional reaction to a crisis. As stated often at this site and elsewhere, more guns lead to less violence, not the other way around. Especially in liberal regions where there are large conglomerations of people—like schools where students are nearly 99.999999% unarmed 100% of the time—when some frustrated loser wants to take out their anxieties through actions of cowardly behavior from a gun that gives them a significant advantage over the masses—the call for solutions is in actuality the opposite of what the White House advocated. But before describing why, this is how the AP reported the story as it broke across the wire.

ROSEBURG, Ore. (AP) — A gunman opened fire at an Oregon community college Thursday, killing at least seven people and wounding 20, authorities said.

The shooting happened at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, about 180 miles south of Portland. The local fire district advised people via Twitter to stay away from the school. It later tweeted that there were “multiple casualties” but did not elaborate.

State police Lt. Bill Fugate told KATU-TV that seven to 10 people were dead and at least 20 others hurt. A photographer for the Roseburg News-Review newspaper said he saw people being loaded into multiple ambulances and taken to the local hospital.

Andrea Zielinski, a spokeswoman for Douglas County Sheriff’s office, told The Associated Press: “There’s no more threat.”

Zielinski would not say whether a suspect was apprehended or dead.

Sheriff’s Office did not immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking details.

The sheriff’s office reported on Twitter that it received a call about the shooting at 10:38 a.m.

Students and faculty members were being bused to the Douglas County Fairgrounds, the sheriff’s office said.

A spokeswoman for the Oregon department that oversees community colleges in the state said she had not received any detailed information about the shooting.

“It’s extremely concerning and sad,” said Endi Hartigan, spokeswoman for the Oregon Higher Education Coordinating Commission.

The rural town of Roseburg lies west of the Cascade Mountains in an area where the timber industry has struggled. In recent years, officials have tried to promote the region as a tourist destination for vineyards and outdoor activities.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gunman-opens-fire-at-oregon-community-college-killing-7/ar-AAf0Xnl?li=AAa0dzB&ocid=LENDHP

In each of those classes there should have been at least 10 or more armed students trained to use a gun and equipped enough to stop the carnage. There is a reason these acts of violence occur in places where liberals are generally in charge. You don’t see mass shootings in areas where lots of gun owners are carrying—especially gun and knife shows. Do you know why dear reader—because people shoot back. Scum bags like this crazed gunman want to inflict as much harm as necessary before they end up dead—which if such a person is at the end of their rope—are dangerous with or without guns. If there are people present who shoot back, their chance for carnage goes from many people to just a few just because other people are armed at the scene and can stop the intentions.

I normally don’t back products or services—especially during a tragedy, but these shootings and the way liberals attempt to capitalize on them forces the issue to the forefront, so in this case I will. I’m a member of Second Call Defense which you can also become a member of by clicking on the link to the right of this page. Just type in Overmanwarrior in the redemption code and you will get your first month of Second Call Defense coverage for free. Several people at that community college even though many are under the age of 18 should have been armed with a personal firearm, they should have been members of the NRA, and they absolutely should have been members of Second Call Defense. As members they could have shot that gunman on site as soon as a threat assessment was asserted and many lives would have been saved. There is nothing worse than sitting at a desk and being trapped unarmed by an aggressor who wants to take away everything you’ve ever worked to be in an instant. It is far better to reach under a jacket and pull out a firearm so you can shoot back and save people from further carnage. If the self-defense shooter was a member of Second Call Defense they could have taken down the attacker then called the hot line to let the dedicated attorneys handle the rest of the case legally. Second Call Defense makes those types of self-defense shootings much easier.

In the case of this Oregon shooter, again it’s another kid—26 years old—with a hyphenated name. There is something to be said about the reason so many of these young kids are feeling desperate enough to end their own lives and to kill as many people as possible. Causes for the failed behavior would be progressive educations, changing masculine roles socially, video game desensitization, even copy-cat crimes. There are many causes for the violence, but the gun is just a tool in the killings. So long as society imposes progressive beliefs upon young minds in conflict with their natural inclinations, there will be occasional clashes with elements of our society who crack mentally under pressure.   Progressives point to the gun and hope that the public won’t notice that the real cause of these modern shooting sprees are their policies, which ironically have increased dramatically since the recession of 2008 and the rise of Barack Obama. A simple investigation into a chart on the matter will show what I mean.

But violence is here to stay, and it’s likely to get worse. The only way to deal with violent people is with the promise of the type of violence they fear. That’s why more guns are needed, not less. Gun laws need to be loosened, not tightened. And more people need to protect themselves with programs like Second Call Defense so that when they do find themselves in a self-defense shooting, that a legal team will fight on their behalf against the laws created by liberals to punish gun ownership and make examples out of people who use the Second Amendment for the purpose it was designed for. Progressives don’t see value in individuals, unless they can exploit them after some tragedy. So they really don’t care about the cause of the behavior that inspires these young kids to shoot other people in schools. But they do want to get rid of guns, and the more people who lose their life in violent upheavals the better for progressives and their mission. That mission was nearly dripping from the mouths of the president’s people at the White House directly after the shooting—they saw another reason immediately to attack the American gun culture. What they failed to mention is that guns protect innocent people not only from over reaching government, but from distraught young punks with nothing else in their life to do but harm others—just because they can.

Remember if you get into a self-defense gunfight with a scumbag, a diabolical menace, or a withering spirit on its last leg of emphasis, be sure to first call 911 to report what happened. Then, call Second Call Defense to keep liberals from ruining your life with litigation, character assassination and personal hatred because you stand between them and the eradication of guns from a culture that desires to be free.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Communist Dreams: Shutting down the government over guns

When the anti-gun forces point to the far-right as their primary opposition to the national banning of weapons their perspective is relative to their current political positions which are essentially the type of communists that founded the U.S.S.R. They call themselves progressives now instead of communists but their message and strategy are extremely similar to the turn-of-the-century communists that seized Europe prior to World War II. In America to avoid the communist stigma they changed their name to progressive and are seeking to implement the type of centralized control that is common under communist regimes. So let’s get that little disclaimer out-of-the-way before proceeding.   When they speak with hatred at the “far right” they mean capitalists, traditionalists and religious conservatives—essentially the majority of the American nation. They speak the name with a bit of scorn hoping to push people down into shells of security from speaking publicly and affirming that the progressives are in fact the majority hoping to transform the nation into the semblance of a communist state. To accomplish that task the must remove guns from American culture.

In delivering the eulogy Saturday for an aide killed by a stray bullet on a New York City street, Gov. Andrew Cuomo stepped up his calls for national gun control toward the progressive aim of accomplishing that task by saying:

“If the far right is willing to shut down the government because they don’t get a tax cut for the rich, then our people should have the same resolve and threaten to shut down the government if they don’t get a real gun control law to stop killing of their innocents,” he said.

http://www.guns.com/2015/09/28/cuomo-calls-for-government-shut-down-over-gun-control/

You see how this works dear reader. If Republicans were not trying to do the responsible thing and shut down the government because of extremely irresponsible spending at the federal level, by both sides of the House and Senate, then progressives would be shutting it down for the same radicalism only from the political left’s position. Aside from the threat of shutting down the portions of the government because the bill for it is simply too high amok with inefficiencies, the services rendered are constantly and forever going to be used to extort action from one side or the other. So it would be best to get used to not wanting those services so that they can’t be used to force action upon the voting public. Government shut downs are a responsible action. It is irresponsible of the government to use National Parks as extortion pieces to hurt travelers from visiting national treasures and refusing local law enforcement help to keep those parks open, as they did during the last government shut down—of which the Republicans were supposedly blamed, but still managed to take control of the House and Senate. The American public supported Republican efforts in spite of what progressives said of the action in the media.

And now here is Andrew Cuomo attempting to use tragedy to advance a progressive agenda obsessed with gun control—and thereby control over the public at large as a centralized authority. The purpose of guns in America is to protect private property either from individual theft, or governments out of control if the terrible should ever take place and the courts fail completely—as they presently are near in status. There are occasionally tests by the government of their authority against people they consider radical gun-nuts, and gun fights do sometimes erupt—but the threat of violence currently keeps government at bay in all but the most extreme cases. To put things simply, guns are intended to keep activist progressives like Andrew Cuomo from spreading like a disease across the nation as an activist politician allowing government to seize private property for the purpose of extorting its use back to us—such as what happens when there is government shut downs. The National Parks are shut down to hurt the people who want to use them.   The federal government is essentially fighting for the right to purposely mismanage their assignments for the sole propose of maintaining control to advance progressive strategies which almost always involve over spending on federal budgets for causes that are anti-traditional in American value.

There are many of us on the “far right” who are looking around and wondering where our country went—and we don’t like it. Every day there is more legislation created by nut-cases like Andrew Cuomo for the purpose of advancing progressive strategies—and there is always money attached to them. For Cuomo and his kind, removing guns from society is the ultimate dream because they would no longer have to fear imposing their desires as a collective parasite upon the free people of America. They don’t think anything of using every tragedy from lives lost toward that objective because they don’t see value in individuals—but only if they can use them to build a collective sentiment toward mass disregard for a particular topic they are against—in this case guns.

These same tricksters will give a eulogy for a fallen victim on one afternoon then turn right around and defend the mass murder of millions of babies to abortion under the same breath. Their purpose is the spread of evil upon the earth as communists—their brethren from the past. And to continue that spread, they require the removal of guns from society so that there is no defense to protect that majority “far right” within America from the aggressive intentions of the typical progressive. The undercurrent of Andrew Cuomo is aggression through the disguise of peace. Progressives have no problem assaulting individuals so long as the can bring peace to the “greater good” as defined by them. Pacifists who surrender to the authority of the state, in the mind of the progressive, are the ways forward to a society’s desire for justice. But that definition is strictly one from the “far left.” The “far right” and the “far left” are a long way off. Andrew Cuomo is a long way away from someone like me in regard to political philosophy. One philosophy is built by the values of something like the Rocky Horror Picture Show, while mine might be built by years of John Wayne movies. The values are not compatible and it is not going to be possible to convince me to surrender my sanctity to the big government efforts of the Andrew Cuomo’s progressive mentality. Frustrations will abound. When the government shuts down due to political battles—I’m happy because I don’t want to pay for a lot of the offerings that the government provides. I don’t want them in charge of National Parks; I don’t want them in our schools, or in the typical government positions that are so common in the Beltway culture.   However, when those methods of politics fail and progressives still haven’t obtained their true objective, they must turn to force as the last resort. And when they do, they have to know and respect that the American guns of private ownership are there to meet their insurrection.   That is what the real issue behind Cuomo’s utterance. If Republicans didn’t threaten to shut down the government Democrats would try the same but for different reasons. That is a fact we all better get used to because government spending is too high and there is no way to slow it down now without pain. When politicians realize that they can’t live with that pain they will turn to force—and when they do, we better have plenty of guns in as many homes as possible. Because there is no other recourse when legislative justice breaks down due to political idealism—the only way to stay free is through gun ownership. It is the key to American civilization, and it needs to be less stringent instead of more so.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

Sticking to our Guns: Why you should join the NRA today

Over the weekend Dana Loesch stirred up controversy against the anti-gun progressive insurgents with a controversial new ad. It was quite effective prompting a Twitter war with radical anti-Second Amendment nut cases. And to her credit for every negative Tweet she received, she donated to the NRA in that person’s name and bought herself a box of ammunition. Her spunk should be greatly admired because besides the national debt, protecting the Second Amendment is the key strategic objective of all right thinking Americans in eroding away the terrible damage to our country that progressives have invoked presently.

If you are not a member of the NRA dear reader—what’s stopping you? In a town of lobbyists in Washington, the NRA is probably the only one that I support—and you have to. Without them, the Second Amendment would have been gone a long time ago by progressive, communist sympathizers who want to disarm society and put the government in charge of everything. What they don’t tell you about their gun grabbing tendencies is that their ultimate objective besides wealth redistribution is the eradication of private property. They do this through many progressive taxes—especially property taxes which are of course directly attached to public schools using our community’s children as hostages toward that objective. The gun in America through the Second Amendment is established to protect private property from enemies foreign and domestic and to uphold the Constitution with something besides a sling shot. Governments cannot be trusted, so the only way that progressives can implement their strategic objectives is by removing guns from society.

Guns are the key to a free society and the rest of the world would be a lot better off if they’d learn that very simple truth. Every single human being on planet earth, man, woman and child under parental supervision should possess a gun. There would be a lot less violence in the world if guns were more readily available than there are now. ISIS would have far less control over the Middle East, Islamic radicals in Africa would quickly loose their ability to terrorize innocent people—the communist governments in China, North Korea and elsewhere would lose their ability to abuse their own citizens and it would keep everyone honest. The only reason government doesn’t fly out of complete control in America is because of the ever-present knowledge that Americans are heavily armed and if government steps out of line, there will be trouble. So let’s get that straight before we discuss anything more. Any liberal who stands against the Second Amendment, any religious figure, and any body of government whatsoever is essentially attacking the American way of life and should be considered an insurgent against the Constitution. There is no debate with some “other side.” There is no touchy feely testimony about some terrible crime that occurs which should move America off defending the Second Amendment that justifies any such proposal. Bad things happen—nothing is perfect, but guns for the essence of individual freedom in the modern world are essential to our survival as a country. The rest of the world should copy the American way of life for their own betterment and the sooner they get that through their thick skulls, the better.

I have written many millions of words and conducted many speeches against public education. It is proven that government schools are liberal recruiting centers designed to undo private property through progressive taxation—and the whole system needs to be scrapped and redone. I have been very passionate about the issue. But there comes a time when you’ve made your point and the new strategy of the day needs to be addressed, because when it comes to liberalism they provide moving targets. I will always cover education issues, but I am going to shift my passion toward defending the Second Amendment with my considerable talents being put to full use. The reason is that it’s time now for those voices to add to what’s always been out there—which is the NRA. They have held down the fort for a long time, and its time they get some reinforcements because the progressive aspects of society are shifting their depleting resources into that direction for one last ridiculous push toward communism—their secret dreams which sing them to sleep at night often under the influence of drugs, and alcohol while listening to Miley Cyrus grind her crotch against a Teddy bear.   Liberals are parasitic animals and their attempts at attacking the Second Amendment need to be met for the intentions always established by the political left.

Of those new voices Dana Loesch is one of those great new talents who are helping the NRA change-up their marketing, which is essential to their continued success. I plan to add to those voices for the strategic implementation of that task with my own talents-which will of course be unique. I wouldn’t have it any other way. Because the time is now to expand the reach of the NRA’s base of support to the new markets of the Millennials and other middle-grounders that have been on the fence and only know about guns from television shows like CSI. Hollywood used to help spread the message of the NRA, but since that valley town of entertainment is nearly all liberalized these days, the marketing efforts that have been needed to keep the NRA expanding require more creative voices from unlikely sources—of which Dana is one.

Largely I have left many of the efforts toward defending the Second Amendment to the committed voices that have been out there. But over the last few years a few things have changed for me. First, I watched how much radicalism there was toward the two Discovery Channel shows, Son’s of Guns and American Gun, which I liked quite a lot. Both were pulled off the air and the main male leads in both were put under scrutiny legally. Some was justified; some was due to their cable reality shows featuring guns. Another change for me was that I had grand children. When I first did the YouTube video A Whip Trick to Save America some of the negative feedback toward me was to discredit my love of traditional western arts. They called me a “hillbilly” and “trailer trash” because I wore a cowboy hat in the video. Their assertion was that anything less than New York fashion would do—but to me that fashion was heavily progressive. I love old westerns and the values they exhibited. For myself I can live among progressives and not have my position challenged, but I worry about my grandchildren. They deserve to have the kind of America I grew up with and as I look around at the possible male role-models, I’m really the only one who has held firm to those traditions. So I’m not going to let that progressive America ruin my grandchildren. It’s not going to happen, let me put it that way. Because of the negative feedback I received about my whip work during the education reform debates, I took note and decided to make some adjustments for the present crusades.

Additionally, at the time a few years ago I had a publisher and some novels that I was planning to promote in the traditional way—through New York—which is heavily anti-gun. My thoughts were that since my character of Cliffhanger used bullwhips instead of guns that it might be more acceptable to them for mass market reasons. However, it wasn’t. Cliffhanger was far too traditional for publisher heads, so it didn’t really matter. My decision since has been to just do what I feel like doing and let the chips fall where they may. I have given up on the New York and Santa Monica creative class in working with them to produce content that America is looking for—they aren’t interested, even if they make a lot of money in the effort. They are far too radicalized politically for that collaboration so I’m at a point in my life where I no longer care. Those who support the Second Amendment in America need to be proud of their position. They shouldn’t feel like they have to hide their love of guns underground—which is what has been happening. Guns should be main stream, so anything I can do to help that I’m going to. It’s just that simple. I do not support the present direction of the country. So why avoid promoting gun ownership just to appease a few publishers? To hell with them.

I know that if I felt that pressure to not flamboyantly advance the gun culture in America, then it’s probably twenty times worse for the average person, so its time to change that—and to stop apologizing. It was only a few years ago when westerns were just about all that was on television which entertained the Greatest Generation after World War II with the first programming provided to the new television format. While I’m looking forward to Tarentino’s new western The Hateful Eight I don’t have a lot of faith that it will have a lot of the traditional values shown in westerns, but will just be a bloody gun fight typical of the new age director. The production company putting out the film is hopelessly progressive, so I can only look forward to it so much—but in the realm of westerns, that’s all there is. Star Wars is a modern western replacing spaceships for horses, but the values are very similar. Other than those influences however there’s not much for the modern gun lover to get their heels into. Progressives are waiting for the old timers who were raised on westerns to die off so the modern progressive kids brainwashed against guns in public school can become the dominate voting class—and when that happens even the NRA will be overwhelmed. So the good ol’ NRA needs a little help. I plan to help them and obviously Dana Loesch is doing her part. And if we all do, we can help shape the future in the proper way. A conservative future must have at the center of it a love for the gun, because everything else emerges from it—primarily economic freedom and personal liberty.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

 

 

 

Being a Big Fish in a Small Pond: Sheriff Richard K. Jones running for congress

It was spring of 2015 and I was at the Brazenhead in Mason, Ohio having a beer with some heavily connected conspirators fresh off the ear rings of Judy Shelton, the local Republican protector of John Boehner within the ranks of the Central Committee where I first learned that the Speaker of the House in Washington D.C. was planning to step down. It was also there that I learned that Sheriff Richard K. Jones was eyeing Boehner’s congressional seat which evoked some interesting thoughts which had been percolating for quite some time. At times I have liked Sheriff Jones. He once gave me a well done portrait sketch drawn in a way that made him look like a Wild West superstar—which I liked. But he lost me when he supported the union position against Governor Kasich’s Issue 2 in 2012, and the Lakota levy in 2013. As larger than life and John Wayne-like that Sheriff Jones wanted to be, he was a strictly local hometown celebrity who would be like a tropical goldfish cast into the frozen waters of the Artic Ocean if he were to go to Washington where much bigger fish than he experienced in Butler County, Ohio were there to eat him quickly—so I thought it odd that he’d even consider risking his reputation at his age to such a politically dangerous enterprise. After all, in Hamilton, he was a big fish in a small pond—but in Washington, where the GOP is changing rapidly under Tea Party influence—the game had changed in front of his face not in his favor.

I get the opportunity to work with lots of people from other parts of the country. In my work with bullwhips locally I was always well-known to be the best that anybody had ever seen. I grew up with that designation where literally everyone I met had never witnessed a person who could crack a cigarette out of the mouth of a willing participant with a bullwhip. For me it was not enough to be a big fish in a small pond, I had to know that I could be a big fish in a big ocean too—so I pushed myself to get better and compete against people from all over the world. Competition after all makes everyone better, even if you don’t like the results. I knew as a bullwhip artist that I could never truly consider myself one of the best in the world if I didn’t challenge myself against people who also considered themselves the best at the craft.

My journey took me to many competitive events; winning several trophies competing with the best that are out there. I even have had some stints in Hollywood dazzling celebrities with my whip work. I know what it feels like to stand in the middle of the road on Brand Blvd in Glendale California where television producers and movie stars were gathered around stopped traffic to watch me perform because they had never seen what I was doing before—and were fascinated. For me personally, it was then that I deserved to call myself a big fish in a big ocean. I had challenged myself and I had to. My life goal was to write stories about the pulp hero Cliffhanger and as the author; I had to know that I could have the swagger in real life of the character I had created. As a writer I had to know that I could do what I demanded my character to do. I never wanted to be one of those sickly writers who live through their art. Rather, my art had to reflect my reality—so I demanded of myself to be really good at the things I wrote about. Yet prior to the year 2000 few people knew about me outside of my hometown. I was a big fish then too, but the pond was small and easy to win in. Outside of my town the water was much larger and there is always the theory that there is somebody better than you. Until you test yourself against them, you don’t have a right to consider yourself the best—and if that’s your goal, you have to step out of the small pond and into the big one and compete.

Between 2005 and 2008 I had satisfied my goal. I had met and worked with some of the best bullwhip artists in the world. There were a few I didn’t get to meet, but at a high level, everyone is pretty even, so you get a good idea of where you stand among them. And it was very satisfying to realize that with all the hard work, that I could swim with the biggest fish in the biggest water possible and hold my own. I didn’t do such a thing to fulfill my personal ego, but to satisfy my literary needs for my own personal work of philosophy. After I achieved that goal I was ready to move on to the next thing and was quite secure in my place in the universe. Those who watched me and competed against me who worked hard to get better and better, I am happy for. I never felt a need to keep up with them or to outdo their efforts—because I know what they are trying to do—which was the same thing that I was—they need to know that they can swim with the biggest of fish. And I respect people who strive to do that. There is lots of room for big fish to swim in a big ocean. There are plenty of little fish to eat, so there is no reason not to cheer on other big fish to grow even larger—and impressive.

When Sheriff Jones first gave me the poster of himself I thought of him as a big fish. The day he gave it to me Fox News was going to have him on that night to talk about immigration issues on the border of Arizona. And during the Issue 2 union debates he and I were frequent guests on 700 WLW radio—so I thought of him initially as a big fish in a big ocean. But over time it was obvious that he was happy to be the big fish in the small pond, because the ocean out there was a bit too threatening. He’s a local boy who will always be the hometown hero, the public servant who marches in parades and made good by the area he grew up in. But going to Washington D.C.—that’s a big ocean that requires more than just tough talk—you have to actually be tough.

Jones showed what kind of person he was during the Issue 2 debates where he thought he was a conservative Republican who attended Tea Party events and was fighting to preserve American tradition. But his view of that tradition was much like John Boehner’s, a progressive touchy, feely, sentiment about conservatism that belonged more in a Sunday school class than in the halls of Congress. As the government in Washington started changing slowly under the Tea Party influences, Jones stood against that tide attempting to preserve the Republican standard nurtured by crony capitalists and pink middle-grounders just a few steps away from socialism on the scales of political philosophy. Issue 2 exposed him as a labor union supporter who refused to see the damage collective bargaining was doing to local budgets. He certainly lost my support, and many others like me who are looking for a purer version of a constitutional republic than we presently have.

When I heard that he wanted Boehner’s seat the first thought I had was that he’d be reluctant to test himself against the big fish of Washington. I remembered my first bullwhip competition against some really talented people—particularly Chris Camp who had won about everything there was to win in the bullwhip arts. He was a star in Vegas, had several world records and was the bench mark of a really good professional bullwhip artist. I worried for days before the competition about having a respectable showing against him. That was nearly 15 years ago, but I remember well how nervous I was about it. It was a bone chilling paralysis that sucked the life right out of you. The reason I was so nervous was that I thought I was pretty good with the bullwhip, but if I couldn’t hold a candle to Chris, I would know that I didn’t have what it took to be the best. Since the bullwhip was one of my signature attributes it was very important to me to be one of the best, so I pressed on. In 2005 after working very hard, I won every event there was against the best competition that the nation provided. I earned their respect and I earned the right to consider myself one of the big fish—and it was one of the proudest days of my life. In the scheme of things, it was a pretty minor deal—a competition at a regional festival. But, in the world of bullwhip work, it was a big deal to me because I had a lot to lose in the attempt.

In the world of politics becoming a congressman at the federal level is like winning that bullwhip contest against a really skilled group of guys. And Sheriff Jones I knew when I heard the story from the political insiders at Brazenhead that the local sheriff wouldn’t risk the disgrace. It’s not that he’d lose the race. I believe he would be elected if he ran for the seat. Butler County is the most populated area of Boehner’s district, which runs all the way up to Greenville, Ohio. Jones could run and win I think pretty easily. I share with him a passion for two big platform issues, his stance against drugs and illegal immigration. But on most other issues, he is as soft as Boehner was, and the now former Speaker of the House was just chewed up and spit out of Washington by a Tea Party wing of the Republican Party that is fast emerging to dominate the party. Those like the local apologist Judy Shelton who have fought so hard to keep Boehner in power all this time are well behind the political current of the times. Conservatives are demanding to move back to the right, they don’t like the left, or even centralist’s positions. And that is where the big fish swim these days. And in that pond, Sheriff Jones is a little fish who will have to scramble for his very life. That’s not a risk I think he is willing to make at this stage of his life. The time for him to test himself with such a feat would have been twenty years ago. The insurrection that is currently happening on Capital Hill for which Donald Trump and several other outsiders are a part are going to change politics from now on. Boehner saw that he was not equipped to handle the hard decisions that are ahead for a Speaker of the House, or even a congressman. So he jumped off the train singing songs. Sheriff Jones is of the same mind. If Sheriff Jones wants to be remembered as a big fish—he better stay in the small pond, because if he goes to Washington, he’ll be eaten rather quickly.

The talk went on that evening and I listened casually while looking at all the magnificent cannons decorating the Irish Pub. It was an appropriate setting for political intrigue and maniacal subterfuge among the socially manipulative. And that made the beer taste better. But I only half believed those sources when they said that Boehner was going to step down. So I have to also believe that Sheriff Jones is going to climb out on that limb and try to take Boehner’s seat. My advice to him would be to keep his image of a big fish alive for the sake of his grandchildren. An embarrassing experience in Washington would be hard to recover from unless he thinks he’s savvy enough to take on the candidates coming out of FreedomWorks. Because they are the future—the past is John Boehner and progressive radio hosts like Bill Cunningham. Sheriff Jones has more in common with them than the candidates nurtured along through FreedomWorks. Getting elected is only half the battle. Getting trampled as a RINO on the house floor is far more embarrassing.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.