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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Kind of People Public Education Makes: Reasons not to fund government school

Every now and again I get a very revealing comment from some dissident who expects the collective hive of humanity to finance their personal whims. Such a comment can be seen below which has three main topics contained within it worth note regarding my video on the upcoming 2017 Lakota levy proposal. The commenter makes some very concise progressive arguments that require extensive examination, but first, let’s have a look at their opinion not just for its entertainment value, but for its essential argument.

Sean Robinson

7 hours ago

 

I know you thrive on people like me commenting, but if you are that miserable living in this district find somewhere else to go. Or run for the school board. Your consistent attack on schools shows you didn’t have a good time in school growing up. That isn’t the case for everybody. Being this negative all the time has got to feel miserable for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZR0ob708q8&feature=youtu.be

The first assumption is that as a long time resident in the Lakota district that I should be willing to move just because a bunch of tax increase supporters moved in from progressive regions of the country—like the East Coast, and brought with them the mentality of their homeland. The same flood of ideology is actually behind the argument of amnesty where Democrats support bringing in voters from south of the border in socialist and communist countries so that they will vote in favor of measures that favor progressive advancements. The same happens with housing developments. Government schools see alliances with increased housing development as a change agent for community relations. I liked my community before those people showed up. I put up with them when I have to see them around town. But I find it intolerable that their lifestyle choices dictate that I pay them more money. There isn’t anywhere on earth where you can run from these second-hander type people, because they seek to consume everything and everyone in their path as they must consume the essence of others to sustain themselves—like any typical parasite. There is a reason that most levy supporters have in their ranks a host of real estate agents who use school levies to make easy sales to cultural dissidents looking for the latest and greatest new thing. Currently my community is that latest and greatest thing. In two decades people like that commenter will be off to the next place leaving the Lakota district an empty husk like a plate after a meal. They will have consumed everything they could and moved on to something else leaving someone else to clean up the mess. At that time, I will likely still be involved in the area and that will be people like me. They’ll be long gone and their kids will be saying the same stupid stuff to somebody else who moved deep into the country to get away from idiots like that, only to have a new generation of saps sucking off the efforts of others.

The next question is that if I know so much about education management of resources then why don’t I run for school board and solve the problem from the inside. Well, I have been approached about this before and many thought that during the Lakota campaigns in the past that my eventual angle was to be a school board member. Actually, I just didn’t want to pay higher taxes for something I think is inefficient and in desperate need of a reboot. Public education to me is one of the dumbest and most out-dated concepts in our modern society. I don’t think there’s anything effective on a substantive level, about public education let alone enough to support justification of the money forced from property owners to continue financing. My management method as a school board member would be to shut the whole thing down, not to find a way to preserve it. If pretentious people like that commenter want a free baby sitting service for their children, then they should pay for it. There are much, much better ways of getting an education in modern America and if parents really cared about their children, they’d pull them out of a public class and teach them in a private school or at home with the vast resources available today. Loving a kid does not mean sending them to school. It requires a lot more than that. Supporting children in educational opportunities is important, but restricting children to a government education system that is obviously not working is not the answer.

One of the things that Scott Sloan from 700 WLW wanted me to do during the Lakota campaign was to join with the pro levy people to argue at the state level a proper allocation of state funding, which is currently considered unconstitutional. His wife is a real estate agent and put up with our school levy rants only so long, until it became problematic and evident that I wasn’t buying into the state funding solution. I wasn’t going to argue toward the state to send more money to Lakota because the money would just be lost in inflated wages driven too high by collective bargaining agreements. So long as there is a labor union in charge of Lakota or any public education institution, management is not possible. My answer is to just de-fund it, shut it down, make the labor unions illegal, then and only then can there be some measure of management and reform of public education. Otherwise, it’s a waste of time. Any discussion of money, funding, or taxes to support failure is just stupid.

I have said recently in another article, which is probably why this guy brought it up, that I didn’t enjoy my school years. I thought of it as a waste of time. I was ready to graduate in the third grade and was miserable every single year thereafter until I graduated. I looked at the school as a prison and on my graduation day, I was released and I never looked back. I had lots of friends and I still do. I’m far from an anti-social hermit. In fact, I have so many people who I correspond with that I don’t have hours in a given day to spend with all of them. I couldn’t in a hundred lifetimes. My school years were not as this commenter alluded, miserable because of some social status whereas people like them had fun in school—within the social structure of a government backed entity. Some people love that kind of structure and I see those people as huge contributors to many of the modern problems facing our world today. It is not my job to fund people’s good experiences, which is what the commenter expects. Because they are the feeble type that like functioning within the structure of government schools they expect everyone to pay for their sustenance. I think government schools make people like that commenter worse and more neurotic as people, so paying them more money to create more of that behavior makes no sense to me. I couldn’t wait to leave school. I sure as hell don’t want to spend the rest of my life paying for other people to attend such a place. That is also just stupid.

As to being a miserable person or feeling miserable because of always thinking about such negativity—nothing could be further from the truth. Naturally, I’m a positive person—actually excessively so. I can endure large amounts of negativity without being encumbered by misery. I am also self-sustaining meaning that I don’t live through other people the way a lot have been taught to. So there is a spill over effect to my optimism which many enjoy, and depend on. It is no problem for me to deal with really complex and sorrowful issues without personally becoming miserable as a result. I can write long articles like this one every day for the rest of my life and then immediately turn around and do something fun with my wife and kids at the drop of a hat. Life is something meant to be approached the way children play. You have to extract some level of joy out of all situations otherwise you are doing something wrong. The mere fact that this commenter brought this issue up dictates that they are subject to misery, depression, and other forms of mental illness derived from living an incorrect life lacking intellectual mechanism for navigation through day-to-day activity. That is not a problem for me and it never will be. That is why I take these issues on, because other people seem to have trouble staying on course and still maintain their sanity. The utterance of a miserable condition is not applicable. Public school helps create neurosis which leads to mental illness of various degrees, and it would appear the commenter is prone to such things based on their perceptual reality. They shouldn’t assume that everyone in the world is prone to the same weaknesses.

You can learn a lot from the type of comments that people make, and over time you can build up quite a data base of behavioral conditions which invoke them. When it comes to public education the most successful products of government seem to be the greatest menaces to modern freedom and righteous thinking. The obvious conclusion is to eliminate that corrosive element which is my position on public education. As a government backed entity its exclusive product is to create second-handers–people who live through others for their personal sustenance. The commenter is clearly one of those types of people and he assumes that the entire world should think the way he does. And his ultimate presumption to the comment provided is that if you don’t like the way he thinks, then it is your obligation to leave. That is not how the world works. The fault is his in allowing himself to think incorrectly about things and to be taught such ridiculous concepts that are completely stupid, and irrelevant to logic.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

The Blaze Radio: An evolution of thought and freedom

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Current Lineup

Weekdays

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

Saturdays

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

Sundays

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

Fire Across the Galaxy: A wonderful first season of ‘Rebels’

Star Wars is about substance. The stories and my love for them trace back to my Joseph Campbell Foundation days where George Lucas was one of the original board of directors. I understand and appreciate what he has been trying to do, which I have talked about extensively in other articles. To that effect, the first season of Star Wars: Rebels is about to air as of this writing and my reason for this article is to remind you to tune into Disney XD at 9 PM Eastern time to watch it. Here is a preview of what you will see.

If you think about the themes of that episode, the Empire torturing Kanan for information about the increasing resistance from the Rebellion is a theme that harkens directly back to the end of the great Ayn Rand novel, Atlas Shrugged. In that work John Galt was tortured into compliance for his help in assisting the collective whole of civilization. It’s a mature theme intended for adults in a very grown-up story. Star Wars is obviously for kids. George Lucas is an open supporter of Barack Obama and even has his hands in Chicago politics in paving the way for his Star Wars museum on the shores of Lake Michigan. But, the content of his intentions with the expansion of Star Wars through first the San Francisco operation expansion into the Presidio, then the sale to Disney and the upcoming films is a strategy through myth that I think is excessively important.   Lucas has always been the best articulator of modern philosophy that our world currently knows. He will be remembered at the level of a Socrates, or Plato in bringing mythology, religion, and global cultural understanding to humanity in an excessively positive way. I doubt Lucas would see himself that way—but I do. History will prove me right.

Star Wars: Rebels is one of the best and most important programs on television currently. The season started off slow as it was obvious that the creative people behind the series were getting their feet wet with Star Wars without the hand of Lucas directly guiding them.   But as they completed a few episodes, it is clear that they are off to a roaring beginning to a very dramatic series. I love the show and my wife and I watch it every week. I don’t know that I’m all that excited about the new movies because I have a feeling my favorite character isn’t going to be around much longer, but I love the overall world of Star Wars because of the power it has of harnessing myth in a positive way. Star Wars: Rebels is special because it has captured that power in a way that is appealing to adults and children—it is a truly family oriented show about values.

The depth of ability that Star Wars has to reach into the nature of politics is truly amazing. The range of characters and how they interconnect allows stories to truly explore human nature from the motives of a galactic empire hell-bent on power, to a common smuggler straddling the cracks of the law to make a living the best way possible without squandering away their integrity. It’s a very dramatic portrait of competing ideas that goes well beyond the simplicity of a child’s tale.

For those who know Star Wars, which is most everyone, Darth Vader will be in tonight’s episode. If you are reading this after the date of March 2nd 2015, then this episode will be available at Star Wars.com. Vader is from the original trilogy and is actually the main character through the first six films and the entire Clone Wars animated series that went on for six seasons. Vader will be there to torture Kanan and it will be intriguing. The point of the torture is of course to coerce Kanan into revealing the location of his friends and the greater threat of a larger rebellion emerging from the senate. In a lot of ways the story lines look to be peeled away from the pages of our current history. But what’s important is that they often deal with difficult issues of extreme complexity with a joy that is openly supportive of living life as joyfully as possible.

In the episode leading up to Fire Across the Galaxy the Rebels even under great duress, managed to have a good time finding out information on where their friend and leader is being held—which is on Mustafar—which those who know Revenge of the Sith will know as the planet that made Darth Vader into who he is. Also, Bail Organa makes another appearance revealing that he has all along been the contact the Rebels have been using to get information. So there are some critical plot points that will be revealed in this episode that will serve as a nice cliffhanger to the new season that will begin in the upcoming fall of 2015.

Prior to the release of this episode my wife and I discussed my upcoming birthday and in having some fun with it this year. We spent much of the weekend playing our new favorite game Star Wars: Commander and making plans for the birthday at Dave and Busters having a Star Wars theme party centered on their new arcade game Battle Pod. Star Wars never gets tired to me; it is fun, exciting and full of interesting things to think about if the conflict at large is considered. But more than any of that, the technical achievements to tell those stories never gets old. For instance, it’s been thirty years since the film Return of the Jedi, but in Battle Pod game players gain the opportunity to fly into the second Death Star and blow it up flying the Millennium Falcon which is something I’ve always wanted to do. Battle Pod allows for that kind of experience, which is exactly how I’d want to spend my birthday with my family. I wouldn’t want to go to Dave and Busters really for anything else, but that they have a Battle Pod machine there.

Star Wars is fun, and special, so it is quite a treat to having something as unique as the episode Fire Across the Galaxy coming up on television tonight at 9 PM. If you can make time, be sure to watch it. It’s about a lot of things, but more than anything, it’s about substance. By far, it’s the best kids show on the air. But, because of the serious content underlying the story lines, and the philosophy emerging from them, it’s the best adult show also. It’s just a matter of time before the full impact will be felt. But, tonight’s episode for the uninitiated would be a great place to start. Enjoy!

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

Labor Unions are a form of Terrorism: Scott Walker was right

The scum bag old hippies from the labor movement sent me one of their propaganda pieces over the weekend still upset at Scott Walker for successfully making Wisconsin a right-to-work state. Their argument was an implied insult made by Walker during a speech poising himself for a presidential run saying, “If I can take on 100,000 protestors, I can do the same with Islamic terrorists.”  The labor unions of Wisconsin and within the Democratic Party felt that the comparison of labor union workers protesting the reforms that Walker was implementing were inaccurately being compared to terrorists as if such a thing was a radical departure from reality. But the truth is, any labor union that uses force, coercion, or fear of any kind to make their point is an act of terror. They may not go to the extra level of killing people to make their point, but they certainly did try to damage Walker politically and personally on several occasions and their motives were to invoke terror upon the governor with the same tactical aims in mind as the terrorists of Islam are seeking to achieve through their actions.

Just because the terrorists in this case aren’t wearing towels on their heads and cutting the throat of so-called infidels on a beach in the Mediterranean, if the intention is to make a point against a rival position by using fear instead of logic—the action is one of terrorism. The labor unions have been conducting themselves in such a manner for years, and they don’t get a free pass just because they are American citizens, or members of the Democratic Party backed by laws created by the Department of Labor. Terrorism is anything that invokes fear to accelerate acceptance of the perpetrator’s point of view.

And while we’re at clarifying definitions, let’s also look at the type of language used by labor unions to describe themselves. In the propaganda piece the labor union described their position as such, “Scott Walker compared Wisconsin workers to terrorists. He wants to be president, STOP HIM.” From there they have a little link you can click that takes you to a petition page so you can sign your name to their plight as if some collective mass of ignorance could stop the reality of their foolishness. Workers in the way that labor unions and members of the Democratic Party machine use it, is a term utilized by the philosophy of Karl Marx in his various articulations on the merits of communism, such as in the Communist Manifesto where he ends the book “workers of the world unite.” In the manner that Marx indicated he was calling for an act of terrorism against the management of labor in capitalist enterprises. When “workers” strike and don’t perform tasks of labor, they are no longer “working” they are denying labor to an employer—so they require a different technical classification. A worker in a capitalist country is someone who conducts productive enterprise. A worker in communist and socialist endeavors is a protestor who uses terrorism to extort money they did not earn through collective bargaining agreements by threatening to destroy productivity or the profit margins of their employer through a strike.

Recently the labor unions of the west coast port workers managed to wrestle a contract negotiation settlement for themselves by slowing down work for a number of months costing many millions of dollars in profit. That was economic terrorism where the employers were forced to take the lesser of two evils, they could not operate their business due to the back log in work the labor union “workers” were imposing on them, or they could agree to the labor demands of their protestors and at least collect enough money to stay in business. With average wages of $147,000 per year the ILWU union deliberately brought the management of the west coast ports to their knees with drag-assing techniques designed to hurt their employer so to wrestle away more money from them. That was and is an act of terrorism.

In my home school district of Lakota in 2013 when they wanted to pass a tax increase which they had been unsuccessful three prior times due to arguments that I posed to the public which they could not overcome, they resorted to terrorism through labor union radicalism. The district wanted to give overpaid government employees more money so they needed a tax increase on property values to do it. They used the recent school shooting at Sandy Hook to swing voters about 5% into their direction as they promised to spend the money on “safety and security.” Lakota as a district was doing what public schools do all across the nation when they want more money for their teacher unions—they make parents afraid that something might happen to their children if something isn’t done in their favor. To help drive the point home just a few days before the election a death threat was found in the girls bathroom promising a shooting spree which of course made all the papers and news outlets. Enough parents were scared to vote in favor of the tax increase and Lakota received their money. They didn’t get the money in a straight up and down vote on logic. Lakota had to utilize some form of terror to provoke people into voting for their cause making it an act of terrorism. Of course they didn’t cross the line to become actual killers like the ISIS terrorists have, but they did use fear to achieve their objectives.

And in Wisconsin, against Scott Walker, there were death threats, political maneuvers designed to invoke fear in the population, threats that the economy of the state would be wrecked if Walker got his way—none of which actually happened. The labor unions were using fear to preserve their grip on the state’s economy and under Walker’s leadership, they failed. So out of all the presidential candidates seeking a run for the office in 2016, Walker is the most experienced in dealing with terrorism. He did successfully battle it among the various labor unions in his state. Those labor unions did sometimes threaten to kill him, but unlike ISIS, they didn’t actually try to carry it out. But the threats were made—and those threats are considered to be terrorism with the same intentions as the ISIS terrorist—to achieve a tactical objective through the means of inflicting some form of terror to move an opponent off their position.

The word “worker” is not sacred in American politics. To people who create work the term indicates the potential for some radicalized protest that will cost money and a huge amount of damage to the public relations of any endeavor. Labor unions don’t get to live under different rules by the shadows of reality just because they are Americans. If they desire to inflict fear because they can’t win an argument through logic, they are in fact a form of terrorist. Any time coercion is utilized to achieve a political objective; it is an act of terrorism.   Obama conducted himself as a terrorist when he sent a picture to congress with his pen promising executive orders if they did not do as he demanded. When they refused, such as in the amnesty issue, Obama signed an executive order that ended up as a rider to the Department of Homeland Security bill which is presently being voted upon in the House. Those against the DHS funding bill are upset at Obama’s executive order for amnesty which is really just another way for Democrats to buy votes for future elections. They make up lots of fancy terms for things, but at the heart of the reality, they are behaving as terrorists, because they use fear to drive policy implementation. And of the potential candidates in 2016, Scott Walker has the right kind of mind to deal with the type of domestic terrorism that has so crippled the American economy for years in the labor unions. It’s quite clear that he has the ability to deal with terrorists who don’t even try to hide their actions behind suits and ties—and Washington lobbyists. Walker’s track record and statement was correct. And the labor unions know it—that’s why they’re afraid of him.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

Ending the IRS: Arguments for a “Flat Tax” and sending Lois Lerner to jail

It’s always fun to make controversial yet very forward viewing statements that everyone thinks is crazy only to be clarified as truth later. Glenn Beck is going through a bit of that now as part of his downfall at Fox News was over the conspiratorial controversy of his caliphate proclamations. Well, guess what—he was right about every bit of it. ISIS is now raping the world with the full intention of complete destruction of Western Civilization and Beck was the first to call it. So he is presently going through the kind of validation that is satisfying, yet at the same time mind-boggling agonizing—because if people only listened…………………………………..so much could have been avoided. Well, I made similar statements about the IRS well before the corruption scandal broke out centering on Lois Lerner and her antics against conservative groups. When she was caught lying and took the fifth to avoid testimony I along with many others smelled the smoke and knew there was a larger fire concealed out of sight and we called for prosecution and jail time. Boehner talked tough about it, but dropped the issue in favor of more investigation. Well, after a few years of such analysis it has been discovered that the IRS did attempt to conceal evidence of their conspiracy against conservative oriented groups and the contents of their attempts has been uncovered.

The IRS will never regain any form of respect from the American people. They are permanently a damaged and perceptually corrupt organization. There is no way to clean up the mess now with fancy press releases and a feel good campaign. They are a thug oriented organization under the best of circumstances that takes money from people and puts them in jail if they fail to pay. So there is no sympathy for them when they are caught being every bit as bad as the people they have sent to jail due to their mechanisms of deception. The IRS with the same swagger of the typical tax dodger trying to hide their funds to prevent paying them away to the IRS has shown the same level of criminal activity in using the tax enforcement agency to conduct illegal actions against people they personally don’t like. And one of them was a personal friend of mine—Justine Binik Thomas.

Now it’s been discovered that within the last two weeks investigators were able to recover 424 backup tapes that were previously claimed by the IRS to be irretrievable. On those backup tapes was an email from Lerner saying, “No one will ever believe that both your hard drive and mine crashed within a week of each other.” IRS Deputy Inspector General Timothy P. Camus told The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that they are investigating “potential criminal activity” surrounding the case and of course Lerner is at the center of the storm. But it also means that IRS Commissioner John Koskinen is involved as well because he arrogantly provided congressional testimony that the IRS had done everything it could to provide evidence. At a minimum the he is guilty of an obstruction of justice, and perjury—but it looks like the situation is much, much more systematic. These people are just the tip of a very corrupt organization.

The IRS obviously has become an arrogant, union driven organization that has lost its moral compass. If there is such a willingness to lie under oath by people like Lerner and Koskinen—or are willing to just take the fifth and deny everything without providing any testimony hoping that the cover-up they were involved in will be sufficient to keep them from prosecution—then there is equal, or even greater detriment at all levels of the organization. The IRS reputation will never be recoverable.

The only way I see out of the situation is that the IRS has to be eliminated and replaced by something much simpler so that enforcement and collection can be greatly consolidated. Interpretation of the tax laws needs to go away as well, which is bad news for all the lawyers, accountants, and government employees sucking off the system presently—but it’s the only way out.   What comes to my mind is the Forbes plan of a flat tax which is based on a standard that would likely create more federal revenue than less. But the progressive system that we currently have is just garbage. It allows the economically poor to not have any skin in the game—so to abuse the system of wealth redistribution, and it penalizes the rich—and it just needs to be wiped away completely along with every federal job out there. Hey, McDonald’s is hiring—there are jobs out there for people who want to work. The unionized IRS employees make too much money as it stands and their jobs aren’t in service of the American people—but are against it. Their entire function at this point is to serve a criminal organization no different from the mob.

Steve Forbes has tried to propose such a flat tax for years, and it never gets any traction because he’s a wealthy guy, and in American schools led by the same corrupt labor unions that drive the IRS employees is a hatred for the rich with the hope that the IRS can continue stealing from them to give to the poor and unproductive. Nobody is saying that people should be doomed to life as a poor person—but in America poor conditions are a decision, not a fate. We don’t live in Europe where a family name gets people access to upward mobility. There are even those presently in America who still believe such things and they act as gate keepers to success—but they can easily be outmaneuvered and out-worked. In America if you want money—you can get it if you are willing to work for it.

In my life I have worked several full-time jobs and part-time jobs in tandem to get what I needed and it galls me every year to pay taxes to the IRS—especially when you see what they do with it. I’ve seen first hand the dependency culture they have created by taking my money by force and giving it to a bunch of lazy slugs’ content to be victims all their lives because they were taught to be that way by their government education systems. The IRS not only has created a culture of lazy good for nothing, docile, parasites, in America, but they seek to exploit them more for the power it gives them.

After Lois Lerner took the fall for the IRS and retired using the “fifth” to avoid providing testimony as to her guilt, she was paid $129,300 as a bonus to her already six figure salary. But she wasn’t alone, as of June 2013 according to Forbes magazine; the IRS paid $70 million in bonuses to their employees—and for what? They certainly didn’t earn them for performance, not in the way normal people think of performance. Rather the money is hush money to keep their employees quiet and compliant because there is no place else anywhere that worthless people like the government dregs at the IRS could work that would pay them that kind of money for containing lies and stealing money from people. The progressive tax culture established at the start of the 20th century was a mistake and it has lasted now for a hundred years, and its time to redesign it with something more representative of the capitalist economy that we have in America instead of copying off socialist Europe—which was all the rage in 1862 when Lincoln signed the Revenue Act of 1862 into law repealing the previous flat tax which had allowed capitalism in America to give rise quickly to the fastest growing economy on earth. But the Civil War needed money to fight with, so a progressive tax was introduced and never again relinquished gradually increasing to the levels it is today.

The purpose of a progressive tax was to reduce income inequality, but that has been a miserable failure because it ignored the psychological prognosis which made people poor to begin with—it’s called laziness. The result of a progressive tax system was the Robin Hood Effect—the taking from the rich and giving to the poor without making the poor do anything to earn it. Because the money was just dropped into their lap, the poor didn’t feel they needed to do anything productive to earn it—so they never learned any value for the money that was represented by the exchange of someone’s productivity. The typical poor person sees a dollar bill and thinks of what they can buy with it. But the dollar bill is only a representation of some value created by a productive enterprise. That value was created by someone for some reason and that reason is lost in the wealth redistribution schemes of the IRS. So poor people take the money, and spend it not having any idea how the dollar was made or possessing an appreciation for the value of the energy expended to make that dollar. The person who made the dollar in the first place is tasked to keep doing what they did before to make more and the IRS then sweeps in to take more away as more dollars are made-and what they take, they keep some for themselves to give to people like Lois Lerner, then they give it to people like the crack addict on a slum street corner, or the typical buffet attendee at the Golden Corral.

The madness needs to come to an end. There needs to be people who go to jail over this latest IRS scandal. And the progressive tax collector itself needs to be abolished with something fairer to the people who make money—instead of skewing the system toward those who simply take the money and spend it. By continuing the current system we are all forced to support a corrupt organization in the IRS who is obviously involved in illegal activity that is politically motivated. And closing our eyes to it will only make it worse. Failure to punish those involved with this current scandal will be judged by history as a turning point if a failure to respond is not heeded. The best way to create income equality is to make everyone work for their money. It is OK to show compassion to those who have been taught to be lazy and are naturally un-ambitious if the plan is to yield from them more work as they are taught that the way to upward mobility isn’t by popping out more children so they can claim them on welfare benefits, but in working hard, and intelligently and saving some of the money they make to build assets in their life that leads to productivity. But before any of that happens, Lois Lerner and her buddy John Koskinen need a miserable prosecution that will teach others like them not to act in a corrupt way as a public employee. Before any proper decision can be made as to what to do with the IRS, that first prosecution must occur—because the evidence is overwhelming now. It’s beyond redemptive speculation on my part—its now part of our history, and we will be measured by how we conduct ourselves in the face of it.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

 

The FCC Internet Takeover: Why America doesn’t have flying cars, cures for cancer and a functioning government

Now that the FCC has inserted itself intrusively into the Internet let’s analyze the final effect of this travesty—shall we? As many who read here know, I have been a fan of the Amazon proposal of 30 minute or less delivery using drones. Just a few days prior to the FCC vote, the FAA created a number of guidelines directly targeting the Amazon proposal by ridiculously proposing that drone operation of commercial types must keep the devices in their eyesight and not fly over crowds of people, according to the FAA proposals. The archaic nature of the FAA is to assume that drone flight would always be flown like a model airplane, and not become something of an A.I. addition to the human skyline. The restriction deliberately prevents innovation from Amazon to compete with traditional delivery methods like trucks, and vans. The FAA is voting to preserve the status quo and to reject the innovations coming out of the tech sector with the kind of nonsense so prevalent with the federal government.  While members of the FAA may believe they are protecting people from falling drones, or congested air traffic, the real intention of their proposal was control—control of an emerging market to protect traditional, and accepted forms of product delivery.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/faa-drone-regulations-blow-amazon/story?id=28997803

In its most elementary form, the FCC is trying to do the same thing.   Their aim is to slow down emerging Internet markets, and get control of the kind of information reported there. It is about stopping innovation, not protecting its continuation. The federal government wants to tax trade over the Internet and to infuse the pure market capitalism of current online activity with the socialism normally associated with all government infusion.

Tech companies like Amazon became great because of the Internet—because government was out of their way. I use Amazon all the time—mostly to find books that are rare and out-of-print. When I was a little kid I used to get a publication in the mail showing me rare books and prints available throughout the country—and I’d usually have to pay several hundred dollars for such prints. One of those books was a hard to find copy of the Egyptian Book of the Dead which I considered a real treasure at the time. But along came Amazon, and virtually any book I have needed over the last decade has been found and purchased through Amazon.com. I consider them an amazing delivery service and they became that way without an ounce of government involvement.

But now they’ve hit a government regulatory wall—actually two. First the FAA shut down their delivery proposal. Pinheads in the government likely can’t foresee why anybody would want under 30 minute delivery service—but I can report that I’d personally use it several times a year. It would be very useful for me to buy a book without having to leave my house that I would want to start reading that same afternoon once a number of other tasks had been completed for the day. Traveling about takes time, and if I could save that hour of transportation time, I could gain one hour of productive time out of a 24 hour day by ordering a book from Amazon and having it delivered 30 minutes later. That would be extremely valuable to me.

Government workers don’t understand the value of such time—because they spend most of their days wasting it. They are timid creatures—those who work in government. They are afraid of every little thing falling out of the sky and hitting them in the head, and fear dramatically a free Internet without government’s grubby paws within it. So they get into the business of making rules that they can deal with so to limit the rest of the world to their weaknesses. That is what the FCC is doing with Net Neutrality. A branch of government guided by the Obama White House sought to take control of the Internet because in this case, his political party can’t compete with the flow of information that is coming out against his progressive way of thinking—so he brought in Tom Wheeler at the FCC and created an insurrection without any public comment or scope of intrusion—and just like that—the Internet is no longer a free place. Government regulation is coming and soon those who were in favor of Net Neutrality will realize why people like me were against it. The rules that are coming will be noticed, and intrusive.

Of course my interest in this is the obvious impact that a loss of drones will have on the potential skycar market. I am a big supporter of the M400 Skycar which is essentially a large-sized drone that people can ride in. I have been looking to drones to solve the complicated levitation problems that will face that industry. The M400 Skycar works right now, it could fly from one point to another today if there were some support from the American government. But, there are entirely too many hurdles to jump through to allow for such an invention to hit the un-tethered civilian market. Drone delivery services would allow for the human race to accept such things as a potentiality—whereas currently it seems like science fiction. Human beings could right at this moment have a Skycar in their driveway and could fly to their job 50 miles away as the Skycar flies itself using a form of GPS—all the while browsing their smart phones on the Internet in transit. But, due to unnecessary regulation protecting the current automobile, and aviation industry—American regulations are keeping the Skycar grounded.

The Skycar would of course be the next step beyond drone delivery. Once people realized that the drones were reasonably safe, they’d accept that personal delivery using Skycars was entirely possible. Instead of a UPS or FedEx truck driving from one point through countless steams of ground traffic, the vehicle would take off from a distribution center and land at a residence within 10 to 15 minutes avoiding traffic all together. It would be an advance guidance system that would keep track of all the sky traffic without human error contributing to any danger. However, if the FAA won’t allow a small little drone to fly through the air without a human being guiding it by line of sight, they surely will not allow large vehicles transporting human beings around in the sky controlled by Google Earth navigational systems.

The only real restriction is the federal government, and now thanks to America’s first openly socialist president, the only place where explosive innovation actually takes place through unfettered capitalism is the Internet which the FCC just voted itself to control under the careful guidance of the White House.   There are hundreds of wonderful ideas just waiting to be nurtured into existence right now, but the government is impeding them with a mask of safety—and security—yet with a reality of protection of existing, ancient technology.

Imagine if the federal government had prevented the Wright Brothers from taking aviation to the sky so to protect the union workers who made roads back at the turn of the 20th century. Or imagine that a horse breeder was afraid that the invention of the automobile would destroy their way of life, so they lobbied the federal government to make automobiles so controlled by regulation that it wouldn’t be worth building cars—which actually happened. After all, imagine the arguments of giving human beings a guided missile to drive around possibly running into countless other human beings on a massive scale. It would be impossible to develop the automotive industry in modern America—because regulators would snuff it out of existence before it ever got off the ground. That is the cost of the FCC intrusion of the Internet—a government takeover of the freest place on earth that will limit innovation from now on. History will prove it so.

As I’ve said before, there is technology right now that could cure cancer, stop the aging process, and solve world hunger—but because of government regulation—misery, innovation stagnation, and human complacency is sending America backwards instead of toward a promising future. The federal government is against innovation in every aspect of it—and seeks to use their cumbersome management models of extreme simplicity and timidity to squash innovation before the world advances beyond their grasp to emotionally cope. The typical government supporter is content to sip wine against a big city skyline and talk about social nonsense letting rules and regulations guide their non-thinking minds from one moment to the next surrendering thought to the complacency of a bureaucrat. They make fun of the innovator who wants to cure cancer, or send a car into the air to alleviate traffic—or the delivery service who wants to perform the task in less than 30 minutes with an air drone. They pull together like Google, Free Press and New America’s Open Technology Institute did prior to the FCC vote and direct Wheeler how to change his net neutrality plan to better accommodate them, and then wonder why a decade from now the government is looking to use those same rules to shut down their businesses. They thought they were cute and slick in 2015. They’ll beg for mercy in 2025 and the innovation they tampered with and thought they were championing will end up regressing back into the Stone Age.

Yet what few people asked was how those companies, Google, the Free Press and New America’s Open Technology Institute had access to the net neutrality report before any voting American. Now you know dear reader why we still have clunky cars, cancer, and cumbersome delivery systems—because the government picks winners and losers based on their personal preference and comfort level. And that is why the FCC takeover of the Internet is one of the greatest tragedies in our lifetime. It’s equal to the government taking over the aviation industry before Boeing built their first airplane.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT