Tag: Stupid in America

Thank God for Wayne LaPierre: Charles Bronson’s words of American wisdom

What kind of world do I want to live in?  Well, let me provide the example Charles Bronson provided at the end of the great western The Magnificent Seven.  In the clip below, Bronson lectures three children who idolize him because he’s a gunfighter on the merits of parental responsibility.  Why can’t Hollywood make movies that good now?

The answer is that our country has been invaded by diabolical scum bags who use the Democratic Party to destroy all that is good in the world—and they are on a global crusade to literally ruin the lives of everything that calls itself human through their mass collectivist philosophies.  They are horrible people and it was great to hear the individual speech of Wayne LaPierre at the NRA meetings in Louisville, Kentucky.

The type of America that Charles Bronson and Wayne LaPierre stand for is the only kind of country I am interested in living in.  I’m fine if people from other countries want to come to the United States and enjoy our freedoms.  But they are not allowed to come to our county and make in it into the garbage they left behind.  They have to respect our culture and at the heart is our love of guns.  Listening to LaPierre speak makes me very proud to be a member of the NRA.  Those values which Charles Bronson represented so well in that great movie classic are not dead.  They are alive and well within the type of people who belong to the NRA.  But they should be present in every American.  So if you are not an NRA member and worse yet—you vote for Democrats—you are on the wrong side of history.  And like those spoiled kids in that movie—you need a spanking.  Too bad that Charles is no longer with us.

But some of us are keeping the fires of freedom burning—and LaPierre is certainly one of them!

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The End of a Beginning: A great American novel emerging

I think it was way back in August of 2015 that I said I’d considered not contributing articles everyday like I do presently if Donald Trump were elected president—mainly because his presence in the race for the White House, or from the White House does much of what I have been doing with all this work.  Well, after tonight’s performance in the East and the strong showing once again in five more states with clear indications of a strong finish in the biggest of all, California—it is clear that Donald Trump should be the Republican nominee for POTUS in 2016.  Even with the silly little Kasich/Cruz alliance, the only hope they have is to get to a floor fight at the convention to be president—which won’t go over well as it goes against the popular vote.  A lot of people never got over the Bush/Gore tie in 2000 where technically Gore won the popular vote, but Bush won the electoral votes.  This Trump situation is much more flammable than even that, so I don’t see anybody but Trump running as a Republican against Hillary Clinton.  And as for Hillary, she barely beat Bernie Sanders.  She won’t be able to withstand a focused attack by Donald Trump every day.  He will simply outwork her, and she won’t win a general election.  So for all practical purposes, Donald Trump will be the next President of the United States.

I am an excellent judge of character and it may take five or six years for others within the Republican ranks to see what I do in Trump, but history will agree with me.  Conservatives are not going to win major elections trying to shift the country radically back to the political right after 100 years of liberal erosion—so you have to pick your battles.  Trump is all about the economy, border security, and trade negotiations—which is an excellent place to begin.  Real conservatives need to keep their eye on 2024 for all the social issues.  You have to fix the economy first and sustain the integrity of our sovereignty before we worry about guys wanting to use the restrooms of girls.  These are all big issues but moral depravity escalates when people don’t have money in their pockets.  Morality is a lot easier to sell when people have something of value that they appreciate—and right now—we just don’t have that type of society.

Trump from the White House will utilize the power of positive thinking to unlock America’s potential.  It won’t be Trump’s policies that do it—it will be his mouth and charisma, and I see a path where he can do a lot more from the White House than the slow trickle that I perform with all my articles trying to teach people to do the same thing in their private lives.  The next four to eight years will be a whirlwind and situations will change—and a chapter of our lives will close as a new one begins. That means I need to shift my personal role as well.

I have talked prior about a rather epic novel that I’m working on and I have been flushing out the ideas for quite some time.  The articles on this site have played a part of that.  But now it’s time to put pen to paper and to pound out the manuscripts.  Rather than write the 1200 to 1500 words each day that I do here, my efforts need to go into that commercial work.  It’s not the writing itself that is the challenge, it’s the editing and working out the details that takes all the time and that is where I’m going to put my focus at this point   That’s not to say that I won’t make any more contributions—I certainly will.  But as for the daily articles, it is time to let the chain reaction that many of us in this marketplace have set forth to do their thing and to move to the next phase as we see it.

My path is clear and it will take everything I have to get there.  It’s certainly time for me to make this decision.  I’ve delayed my indulgence for about a year because of all the volatility at the presidential level.  It is hard for people to imagine that one guy like Donald Trump might have such a large impact on our culture but I’d ask those who can remember to recollect the difference between 1979 and 1980.  I think the switch from 2016 to 2017 will be much greater and there will be so much news flashing by in such a whirlwind that nobody will be able to keep up.  Meanwhile, I have quite an encyclopedia of articles here to help people through that phase and to guide them into making the correct decisions.  My next role will be context through art—not in the definition of interpretation—which is what I’ve been doing.  Now we need the artistic effort to expand culture and that will be my new focus.   For me the work will be similar, I will write everyday toward a known objective—only people won’t see it as they do now.  They’ll see it in bulk when the projects are released.  For me it is the work of the Great American Novel, something I have been thinking about for quite a long time.  How that novel gets published I’m not sure at this time—because that industry has changed so much.  But first, you just have to write it then measure how best to distribute it.

As for Donald Trump, I know his people have read here and I hope this site continues to be a source of inspiration.  But it’s time for the student to leave the classroom and to utilize what they’ve learned—and I expect that to be the case for everybody—even those silent lurkers who depend heavily on my written words.  I’m not going away—I’m just turning inward so that I can build up to the next great phase which we will see a few years from now.  When we get there—we all need to be ready and I need to focus on getting it right.  I am proud to have played my part in all the multiple fissures that are emerging along the front of establishment debacles.  I consider all this a major mission concluded even if people aren’t aware of the explosions and dawn has not yet revealed all the damage.

Trump winning against the establishment—and I consider Cruz part of the establishment—the church wielding branch—I see an open window for a reiteration of the American idea in much the way that Henry Morgan led the pirates of the Caribbean toward the first free establishment of a constitutional republic without the influence of a king.  I’m not saying that it will be a moral quest, but it will get us where we want to go as a country among the world.  The situation is complicated beyond measure, but ultimately the power of positive thinking will go a long way to getting us there.  So enjoy the victory for those riding the Trump train.  For those not yet there, see you when you arrive. It might take a while but I trust that you’ll arrive in your own way in your own time.  And as for this site, this won’t be the last article.  But they won’t come as often as my focus will be on more commercial material—because that’s what’s needed at this point in time. When the smoke clears—all this will make a lot more sense.

Here is just a sample:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/26/us-unions-donald-trump-us-election-2016

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Rich Hoffman Hosting WAAM Radio: Most of our problems summed up in an hour

Matt Clark needed to head out-of-town so he asked me to host his WAAM radio show at 1 PM on Saturday, which I accepted.  For just such occasions I now have a home studio to broadcast from since with my busy schedule, it is nearly impossible for me to actually do so from a fixed location.  It had been a very busy Saturday morning—so busy that there wasn’t even time to eat breakfast, so as I was doing show prep about a half hour before going on the air my wife brought me some Chick-fil-A to eat.  While I ate I was watching the news on a studio monitor.  This is what I saw:

WASHINGTON — Saudi Arabia has told the Obama administration and members of Congress that it will sell off hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of American assets held by the kingdom if Congress passes a bill that would allow the Saudi government to be held responsible in American courts for any role in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Once I got on the air I unloaded all the connecting events that had happened just during that particular news week and finished off with the conclusion that America was at the end of its rope.  We needed to take action right now to correct our treacherous conditions otherwise we wouldn’t get a second chance.  This is what it sounded like.  Click the link, sit back and listen—then share it with a friend.https://soundcloud.com/clarkcast/april-16-2016-guest-hosted-by-rich-hoffman-4-16-16-podcast

First I spoke about the Russian jets buzzing American ships in the Baltic.  Putin has been openly challenging American interests around the globe.  He calculated that under the Obama presidency that the military would not fire on his pilots and that he could flex his muscle in the Baltic region.  He was right much to all of our embarrassments.  America should have shot down those Russian jets.  It is hard to take the life of other people, but the Russians shouldn’t have provoked our military.

Donald Trump is about to win New York big, which shouldn’t be a surprise.  Running a populist campaign Trump is at a severe disadvantage to other political candidates who know the system better than him, because they helped create the rules.  Trump needs a very dominating victory in New York otherwise this whole election process will linger on needlessly.  Kasich is going nowhere, and neither is Cruz.  For the sake of the Republican Party, it needs to get behind Trump.  Otherwise Trump will need to start his own party so that the focus can shift to a general election victory instead of all the party oriented politics.

Hillary Clinton is running for president even though she’s under investigation by the FBI.  Think about how amazing that is—we actually have the first woman running for president with a barrage of scandals on her coat tails—and she’s the expected front-runner.  This would have been the story of the decade in the 80s or 90s, but with all the topics of our day, it’s just one element that is almost background noise.

We have over 19 trillion dollars in national debt which to me is the biggest story of all.  We are actually talking about 21 trillion dollars within a few years of now, and that is unfathomable.  On the radio show I proceeded to talk about all the regions of the country planning to file for bankruptcy to get out from under all this massive debt—but there is nowhere to run.  At the current 19 trillion-dollar deficit it exceeds our national GDP and is big trouble for having any hope at actually paying it off in our lifetimes.  This is the clear exhibition of incompetent management of our government and it demands immediate action to avoid default.  The only way out is massive economic expansion of 7% to 10%–to have a chance at surviving with our national sovereignty.

The NFL player Will Smith was shot in New Orleans and his coach Sean Payton used the tragedy to call out for gun control.  This infuriated me greatly, CLICK TO REVIEW.  Payton ran his Saints organization under a bounty system the year they won a Super Bowl in 2010 and Will Smith was one of his star players doing his part.  Smith obviously thought that he was above the law as he was dining out with members of law enforcement then had a small wreck on his way home.  Instead of stopping to exchange insurance information, Smith ran off and the victim hunted him down a few blocks down the road and shot him dead.  I put the blame on the kind of system that Sean Payton has created with his football players which spilled over onto the streets of New Orleans.  So it was disgusting that Payton sought to deflect blame away from himself and blame guns taking a very progressive position against them.  It was pathetic to use the murder of his friend to advance a political cause that deflected away from his own bad behavior.

Socialists around the country are demanding $15 dollars an hour for minimum wage which is insane.  Money is a measurement of value—if money is just handed out indiscriminately, it loses its value and inflation is invoked.  It is truly pathetic that more people do not understand basic economic concepts.  Fast-food workers are not worth $15 dollars an hour by market measurement.  The government backed increase will only cost jobs because it will force companies to automate their processes to cover their margins.  To the socialists that are causing all these problems globally, they just don’t understand that money is a measurement of values which they don’t see or understand because their emphasis is on equality—which essentially is a unit of measure that throws out all judgment.  You can’t have any kind of functional society without human judgment.  One thing I do on this site is write abundant articles on archaeology, as I am pretty obsessed with the causes of demise regarding ancient cultures.  I would attribute this tendency of demise to the Vico cycle which is a recurring theme given to human inclination hard-wired into our brains.  It is up to us to rewire ourselves to think differently and to make a conscious decision to step away from that destructive cycle.  The $15 dollar an hour minimum wage proposal is a promise to destroy our economy—which has always been the goal of socialists.

John Kasich is an unmitigated, delusional idiot totally out of touch from reality.  Watching him run for president makes you wonder if that guy has actually retained his sanity.  I think he has lost it somewhere over the last few years—he is certainly not the same person I knew back in 2010.  He sounds like a babbling fool and he’s just embarrassing.  He has no moral platform to even consider being nominated for president and he’s functioning under the assessment that he does.  I get messages from his campaign every day talking about how he’s the only guy who can beat Hillary in a head to head election.  Give me a break.  I don’t think he could win at anything against anybody.  He’s a buffoon obviously surrounded by complete idiots.  His type of politician is exactly what has screwed up our government in the first place.  It’s hard to believe that people like him are out there until you hear him talk and realize that he has so much support from the establishment.  No wonder we are in so much trouble.

Bernie Sanders is actually beating Hillary head to head as a socialist—and that points to a radical shift in our country.  Young people like Sanders, they are ready to embrace socialism because we’ve allowed the concept to be taught in our public schools and colleges, and now they are voters.  As of now there is a strong chance that he could be the Democratic nominee and he has half the country at his back.  Remember when Mitt Romney received all types of flack, which probably alone destroyed his 2012 campaign for president when he made the 47% comment?  What he said was true and now just four years later those 47% are looking at an open socialist like Bernie Sanders and thinking hard about voting for him just so they can get free stuff.  That is a serious problem—economically, and ethically.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg asked his employees this week if they should publicly denounce Donald Trump. I see Zuckerberg as just a stupid kid—a little midget boy who is about the same age as my kids who got lucky with some code that he wrote.  His politics are consistent with other Millennials taught progressive ideology in public schools and George Soros activism from publications like MoveOn.org and Think Progress.  Those publications then inspire more mainstream outlets like Rolling Stone and The Huffington Post.  Zuckerberg even though he’s a billionaire is an open border socialist and he is the next great threat to our American Republican after George Soros finally dies off.   The problem with Zuckerberg is that he has name recognition and a product that most everyone in America is using and loves.  He is the Lex Luther of our real world—and he has to be stopped.  For that reason, I am not on Facebook.  As I explained on the radio, the people helping me with my book projects created Facebook accounts for those novels, but I personally don’t have anything to do with them because I reject Mark Zuckerberg in every way shape and form.  He is an American villain.

The Ohio legislature is ready to throw in the towel to pro marijuana activists early in the fight to legalize medical pot before there is a vote in November.  Again, as I explained on the radio, I am against pot in every way shape and form.  I don’t take drugs, not even aspirin, so I’m dead-set against more drug legalization—especially medical marijuana.  In Ohio, the legislators want to get their hands on the tax money that pot could bring to the state, because they are so miserably hungry for another revenue stream which will allow them to redistribute more tax payer money to people who don’t deserve it—that they’ll do and say anything—even create a marijuana bill avoiding tax payers at the ballot box in November.  They are all villains as well, and they are selling out their state because they are lazy fools guilty of mismanaging our government.

And finally Puerto Rico wants to file for bankruptcy, it is $70 billion in debt and there is no hope of coming out of it.  Democrats are against the proposed bill which is in front of Paul Ryan because it prevents a raise of the minimum wage in that territory as they push for socialist increases across America.  If Puerto Rico is granted bankruptcy protection then following will be states like California and cities like Chicago who are all on unsustainable economic paths.  So house Republicans have a major problem on their hands far worse than whether or not Donald Trump is their nominee.  We have major, major, major problems and nobody is talking about it—because the consideration is so unpleasant.

So it was a busy one hour broadcast that rivals anything that you can hear on talk radio.  Since Matt gave me an open opportunity on WAAM’s airwaves and I already had the hour blocked off, I took the time to make the case in a way that connects the dots for everyone listening not only to the live broadcast, but the podcast later.  It’s valuable information that nobody in the mainstream news is able to provide to their supporters, because the complex nature prevents a correct understanding.  But I have a unique background and an ability to tie it all together so I did.  Hopefully you will enjoy the broadcast and will take the time to share it with someone you care about.  Because we all have some hard decisions to make and we need good information to help us make them.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Guilt of Sean Payton: Murder, bounties, and the NFL hiding behind gun control

I don’t like Sean Payton, the head coach of the New Orleans Saints football team, mostly because I’m a Tampa Bay Buccaneer fan. I think he runs a dirty organization as was the evidence of his one year suspension a few seasons ago, and I think he leads a team of thugs.  That could be said of many NFL teams, but when a coach like Payton exploits that thug culture to squeeze out a few more wins for his own personal advancement I think he opens himself up to an extra level of scrutiny when something goes wrong.  And when an ex-star player of his, Will Smith was gunned down in the street on April 9th 2016 Payton didn’t blame the football players involved for their very bad behavior leading up to the tragedy—he blamed guns and took a progressive position socially to camouflage the failure of a culture which he has helped create—and that makes him a scum bag.

Former Saints DE Will Smith and his wife were out for a night dining with friends.  One of those friends just happened to be a cop who was involved in a shooting of the father of Smith’s future murderer—later that evening—ironically.    Smith had friends in law enforcement and he was a star football player and Super Bowl champion—so he had a sense of entitlement based on his behavior.  He was doing good things with his life and looked to be a good family man.  He had celebrity friends and was the star of whatever event he attended.  All was well until he started driving home and accidentally bumped into the very expensive Hummer driven by Cardell Hayes.

After Cardell Hayes lost his father to a police shooting the city of New Orleans paid the minor league football player a hefty sum of money for which he purchased a bright red Hummer.  It didn’t sit well with the football player to be rear ended on a late night Saturday while stopped in the road.  Hayes moved toward the sidewalk to get out of the way of traffic and settle the matter with the driver who hit him.  But instead of pulling up behind to exchange insurance information, like what was supposed to happen by law, and call the police to file a report, the car driven by Smith ran off invoking a hit and run incident.  Well, being a young football player who has had to scrap for everything on every play to get what he needs in life, watching that car run from the scene of the accident was apparently too much for Hayes who gunned off in pursuit of the fleeing vehicle.  It was unlikely known at the time that it was the famous Will Smith who had hit him and whom Hayes was chasing.  All Hayes knew was that someone had committed a crime against him and he was going to get the guy.  What Hayes should have done was write down the license plate number.  He would have had his justice and everyone would still be alive.  But instead Hayes torpedoed his car into Smith at a traffic light several blocks up the road and the two drivers met on the street for an angry brawl. One thing led to another and before anybody realized how serious the situation was, Hayes shot Smith in the chest six times killing the New Orleans football star.

Hayes stayed on the scene and admitted what he had done to police and everything was cleaned up and looked to be a pretty straight forward case of road rage. But it was in the aftermath that Sean Payton obviously missing his friend and speaking with a heart rooted in tragedy said that he hated guns, and that New Orleans was like the wild, wild, west.  Payton used the death of his friend to advance a progressive anti-gun stance without addressing the behavior that actually caused the violence in the first place, and that was disgraceful.  It made Payton an even worse person than I already thought he was and he appeared to think as Smith did that his level of celebrity could free him of the burden of judgment.  For instance, if Smith was as smart as news reports obviously wanted to portray him in this tragedy, why did he participate in a hit and run?  Was he counting on making a call to his friends on the police force to resolve the issue and to ensure that he was above justice because of his celebrity?  It certainly looked that way.  Payton seems to think that he can make reckless progressive statements because the people of Louisiana want another Super Bowl win so he calculated that they would just put up with his banter without question.

Most of the people I know in my neighborhood have guns and they often carry them.  Yet we never shoot each other—even when we get into traffic accidents.  It was only a few months ago that a lady hit me on my motorcycle nearly injuring me badly.  I was literally a half-inch away from losing my right leg.  We were both armed with guys, yet even in such a crises it never occurred to either one of us to shoot each other.  I simply yelled at her, and then once I saw how sorry she was, we quickly went to the business of settling the accident.  It was a very civil way to settle a tragedy.  It certainly didn’t devolve into the kind of violence that killed Will Smith.  That is because the problem isn’t guns, its behavioral science.  The football culture that Will Smith and Cardell Hayes lived within is built on primal valor and coaches like Sean Payton exploit that pent-up energy to win football games. For young people like Smith and Hayes—who often grow up fatherless, but find social redemption in popular gladiator sports the ethics on a football field often depend on an eye for an eye mentality.  There is a lot that goes on during a football game psychologically that never shows up on a television screen for which Smith and Hayes have made their livings and it’s not easy to turn all that off for civilian life.  Many football players have a hard time with that adjustment.  Will Smith was apparently attempting to do that and he was mostly successful.  But when you play a game where the alpha male rules the field and that an entire team depends on your ability to assert that dominance over other alpha males—the nature of the game doesn’t just leave the mind on the football field.  It sometimes carries over into the streets of whatever communities they live in.

Will Smith abused his rights as a private citizen when he attempted to roll away from the accident.  When he was challenged by another alpha male for attempting to flee likely they said things to each other that required in their minds an ultimate statement on who was the alpha male.  Hayes not having any other intellectual resources to guide his actions went for his gun and the rest his history.  But it wasn’t the gun that was the problem or that people carry them.  It is that we have a society that doesn’t understand how important alpha males are and how hungry young people are to either become them, or yield to them.  And for coaches like Payton who build alpha males for the benefit of football victories so that the people of New Orleans can feel good about themselves on a Sunday afternoon—he should have known better than to say the stupid things he did about guns.  In a lot of ways Payton was just as guilty of what happened in that murder as the gun was.  He breed and exploited the circumstances for which the violence was provoked in a road rage incident and like a coward—he deflected the blame to an inanimate object—instead of the behavior of the participants.  For a coach that paid players on his defensive teams, which Smith was a part from 2009 to 2011—to physically harm other players to take them out of a game, the morality of gun violence doesn’t hold much water when Payton helped create a culture that inspired violence against others.   

How guilty was Payton, well, for the NFL they came down on him hard—a $500,000 fine and a year suspension.  Considering the problems the NFL has had and how much they’ve let go over the years—Payton must have been pretty guilty.  If Payton had been a better coach and mentor, it is highly unlikely that Will Smith would have run away from a hit and run accident, or ran his mouth when cornered down the road by the victim.  We are all products of our environment and in the world of professional football; the head coach is the judge, jury and executioner of environmental influence.  Will Smith was a product of Sean Payton’s professional football teams and that product showed itself most when he crashed into Cardell Hayes then left the accident scene expecting to be relieved of the guilt.  Why shouldn’t Smith have expected to not be punished when he watched so many of his friends and fans forgive his head coach and push behind justice just so they could witness one more win in New Orleans on any given Sunday? The answer is, Smith didn’t know better and that was the fault of a culture who made him that way—and the guilt for most of what shaped that culture for Will Smith led right into the office of Sean Payton.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2012/03/sean-peyton-suspended-saints-fined-for-bounty-program/1#.Vw-3Wo-cHIU

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/new-details-from-police-help-shed-light-on-smiths-shooting/ar-BBrHtMU?ocid=ansmsnsports11

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

The Good Women That Support Donald Trump: Who said that Ted Cruz didn’t have “game?”

These are my kind of girls.  Who said Donald Trump didn’t do well with women?  Ted Cruz does well with women, but not in the right way—sounds like he has serious problems—which Diamond and Silk do a wonderful service to break down for their viewers. 

What was that Glenn Beck said about Ted Cruz—he’d drop him in a minute if any of these sex stories was true—but that he didn’t believe Ted had any “game” with women?  Hmmmmm, sounds like Ted has more game than he let on.  What are you gonna’ do now Beck?

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Bill O’Reilly’s Question about Donald Trump: Defining a divided party and why Glenn Beck has lost his mind

Bill O’Reilly asked an important question when he wondered why members of his network, Fox News were so divided over Donald Trump.  The same could be said about the different between Donald Trump and Ted Cruz—who are the clear front-runners in the 2016 presidential race. The divide is unusually deep because the two candidates properly represent the philosophic divisions that are taking place within the Republican Party.  As much as hard-core establishment supporters would hate to admit it, Ted Cruz represents what they seek in a president, someone from within their political ranks that is a person of faith who gets their guidance from prayer and deity submission—religiously pious.  They also hold that the presidency is America’s version of royalty, and they that take that oath of office very seriously.  Trump on the other hand represents the fighters, the businessmen who have bent over backwards to one too many regulations–the financially independent—the self starters.  Trump appeals to people who turn toward themselves first for an answer before soliciting government help or prayer to a deity whom has never physically manifested in a logical way.  That last type of conservative has never really had a candidate—they have held their nose and hoped that they might get lucky because options were limited—which is often not how they do most things in their life.  But with Trump, they finally have someone running for the White House who thinks like them for a change.  To confirm my statement just read the linked article from Glenn Beck about why no Christian should vote for Donald Trump, and you’ll get the gist.  Glenn Beck whom I used to like—has lost his mind.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274267-glenn-beck-no-real-christian-supports-trump

Personally I liked that Thomas Jefferson answered the door to the White House in his night robe.  I liked that Teddy Roosevelt skinny dipped in the Potomac River—just a century ago.  I liked that Andrew Jackson would target shoot from the White House grounds.   I’m not big on formalities and in regard to the President of the United States—I feel as Jefferson did, as an Anti-Federalist, such tokens of ordainment should be cast away in America and dropped from assumption.  We should go out of our way to strip away formality anywhere we can in regard to the White House, not increase it.  We don’t elect a king, we elect a public servant—and we should treat them that way.

We also need a president who makes decisions based on their life experiences and the use of cold hard logic.  I don’t want a president who gets his decisions from “praying.”  For instance, let’s look at the reasons that John Kasich decided to expand Medicaid—which he did in Ohio against an amendment to the Constitution passed to protect residence from the grips of Obamacare.  Kasich claimed when he went against voters and the Ohio legislature that God told him to expand government so dramatically when pressed by reporters.  Well, screw that.  We didn’t elect “God” to run our public offices.  With all the bad dreams and insanity that goes on in any civilization it is difficult to tell God’s providence from the claws of insanity.  While I can claim many similar stories of providence—as miraculous as Andrew Jackson’s assassination attempt by the unemployed painter who tried to kill him with two guns—that both misfired—I don’t make decisions based on providence or the hope of it.  You can only make decisions based on what you know or see.  If God decides to help out, that’s fine.  But such an ill-defined character cannot be a part of any strategic plan—because there isn’t enough evidence to count on such things.  You don’t think with your heart—you do with your head—and having faith that things will just work out is not enough.  When faced with a problem I want a president who works through it, not one that sits at the side of their bed and “prays.”  I don’t care what George Washington did—if he prayed less and acted more—he probably would have won more often.  If you want to pray, be a preacher or volunteer at church.  If you want to lead a nation—come to the table with self-reliance.

http://www.redstate.com/diary/jasonahart/2013/06/19/gov-kasich-god-wants-ohio-to-expand-medicaid/

Kasich, the closet liberal that he turned out to be could have misread his inclinations.  We as a voting public have no way to know if what Kasich said about God’s desire is true or not.  God did not have a press conference with us and tell us to expand Medicaid.  And we didn’t elect a “leader” to be some ancient go-between between God and man in the form of a priest holding some kingship based on the merits of “godly access.”  This is exactly why we were supposed to have a separation between church and state—not one where the church runs the state.  If people want the church to run the state—as Glenn Beck seems to—you might as well sign up for communism.  Capitalism requires self-reliance and logical thought—not altruistic sacrifice to divine will.   The worst time to make a decision of any kind is after a bad dream where some figure speaks to you in the form of some disembodied spirit.  The even dumber thing to do is to assume that the voice is “God.”  It in all actuality could be anything—some ghost from the past, some vengeful demon, some inter-dimensional terrorist—or it could be the lingering effects of an emerging insanity where deep-seated insecurities manifest into a mythological story played out among the brain’s neurons.  You never know.  When we elect a president, we elect a manager and we expect that person to make hard decisions based on reality as we can observe it.  That is the best that we can do given the limited scope of our human senses.

Then there is this ridiculous notion that the presidency should be beneath earthly squabbles.  I watched Republicans for well over thirty years play the moral high ground game and lose every time—especially George W. Bush.  He thought the office of the president was so elevated that he could not, or should not answer his many critics.  Well, that was the old alcoholic coming out of him, and the kid who was in the Skull and Bones society who participated in embarrassing hazing rituals.  When you are elected by the people for the people—you don’t surrender yourself to the political left by becoming a punching bag—using the “high office” excuse to mask internal fears.  You don’t sit in the White House on my behalf and make yourself a “pussy.”  You are expected to fight when attacked and to represent the constituency that elected you into office.  The office is not a higher authority than the people who put you there.  That kind of thinking leads to kingship—and we should not think of an American President as a king or as royalty.  He’s just a manager.

Just a few weeks ago I had an opportunity to shake Donald Trump’s hand.  I could have certainly had him sign any of my books–easily.  But I didn’t do either—even though I love the guy for president.  He’s on a job interview as far as I’m concerned and I’m the boss.  The boss doesn’t seek autographs and tokens of friendship from the people they employ.  Given that, if President Obama broke down in front of my house and needed to use my car jack or even the phone—I would tell that bastard to get off my lawn.  I wouldn’t shake his hand; I wouldn’t be getting a selfie to show that I had managed to get my picture next to a “powerful” person.  To me he’s just another person and in the case of his actions—he’s conducted his presidency as a domestic enemy that any constitutionally minded person is sworn to protect the nation from.  Needless to say, I will never shake the hand of president Obama under any circumstances.  He doesn’t rule over me, he doesn’t make decisions on my behalf, and he is a proven incompetent that has not earned the right to shake my hand.  And to be fair, I feel the same way about George W. Bush—he blew it.  I don’t care that he made some mistakes—but he was a lot like Glenn Beck—a former alcoholic who turned to “God” to straighten out their weak lives. I don’t fault them for their mistakes but they are smoking crack if they want to tell a person like me—who has never been addicted to anything, who doesn’t drink, has never smoked, has never done any drugs of any kind—who even avoids pain killers for surgery or at the dentist—and assumes that they have some place between me and the everlasting.  Give me a break!  They are not qualified to be in that position, and really, I can’t think of a single person on earth that is—even religious leaders.  If they have my high standards on personal living, I might listen to them—but short of that—forget about it.

Ted Cruz is way too much of a “god boy” to me.  I don’t want someone in the White House praying for answers.  I want someone who can extract answers from reality by sheer will.  I don’t want someone who will only enter the Oval Office with a jacket and tie on.  I want someone who will work there for 14 to 16 hours straight if needed to accomplish whatever task is on the table.  And I certainly don’t want a king—but I equally don’t want a self-sacrificial lamb that is willing to be plucked apart by the political opposition.  So to answer Bill O’Reilly’s question about Donald Trump there are still too many Republicans who want a president for all the wrong reasons—all the types of things that George W. Bush represented—meekness, sacrifice, divine providence-and policy concocted by voices from God which in all actuality were their addictive pasts calling out to them to return to the bottle.  For all those reasons I support Donald Trump—he’s a self-starter, he’s never been addicted to drugs or alcohol, and while he’s respectful of religion—he tends to guide himself before seeking the council of some otherworldly creature.  That’s good because I don’t have to worry about him waking up and starting wars based on dreams he’s had about “weapons of mass destruction,” or expanding Medicaid because God told him in a dream to help people.  I just want someone to do the job as president for the first time in the modern era.  I don’t want a king—I want someone to do the job—and I certainly don’t want a politician with ties to any lobbyist.  The deep divide over Donald Trump within Republican ranks is that not all conservatives quite understand what they want out of a public servant.  They know what they’ve had and are basing everyone on those examples.  But to me, what we’ve had was never good enough.  And the answer is not in more of the same—but in an entirely new direction.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Lyin’ Ted’s Sex Scandal: The fire behind the smoke of Super PAC investment–spilling the beans

Let me say this, I don’t like Heidi Cruz.  I felt that way before the Cruz Super PAC went after Melania Trump recently.  From what I’ve seen about Heidi she reminds me of all the school levy supporters that I have called latté sipping prostitutes in the past.  I tend not to trust people who are too religious because to my experience there are skeletons in their closet that they use religion to conceal.  I also don’t trust people who hide behind children.  However, when Roger Stone was talking about the percolating sex scandal on the Alex Jones Show a few weeks ago concerning Ted Cruz, I wasn’t all that surprised.

  When a man or woman has power, members of the opposite sex do try to seduce them as a lottery ticket toward advantage.  When you are a senator and working with a lot of young people—and you are middle-aged on top of the normal temptations, it is not hard to imagine how something scandalous might happen to Ted Cruz.   But when the National Enquirer came out with a major five woman scandal in their latest issue they either put themselves in a serious libel situation, or there is fire behind the smoke.  Given where things are in the presidential race and the premise of the Cruz candidacy—the pure-hearted Christian conservative that is Glenn Beck’s second coming—this revelation provides insight that needs to be explored further. 

http://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/blogs/news/94574273-8-things-you-need-to-know-about-ted-cruzs-sex-scandal

I wasn’t going to say anything, but what the Cruz people did—in a roundabout way with the Super PAC in Utah made me mad.  It was a holier than thou presumption that either means Cruz is pure as snow—which part of me has hoped that he was—or he was using religion in the same fashion as so many ministers have–to hide their sexual antics.  And all this would point to Heidi Cruz—there is something not quite right about her.  I don’t want her as a first lady.  Ted Cruz has seemed too good to be true, which usually means he isn’t.  So it will be interesting to see how this story plays out.  I don’t put a lot of trust in the National Enquirer, but apparently this story has been on ice for several months by multiple sources and it was only the Enquirer who took the first step to break it.  Given that the information was first discussed by Roger Stone over a week ahead of this announcement and that one of the women is Katrina Pierson—who is a Trump spokesman, it looks clear that Donald was willing to be a gentleman about the issue until the line was crossed with Melania.  And I don’t blame him a bit. 

I had been watching the Netflix show House of Cards and was enjoying it, except for the sex.  There was just too much sex in it for me.  I finally turned it off when Frank Underwood played by Kevin Spacey and his wife had three-way sex with their treasured Secret Service agent.  It wasn’t just two guys on a girl, it was guy on guy sex and that is something I won’t support.  However, the sex in the show is there for a reason.  People want to see it, it reflects their desires, and is very much indicative of Washington D.C. culture.  There is a part of me that hopes that this Ted Cruz sex scandal is all smoke, and if it is—I hope he sues the Enquirer into oblivion.  But there is something about Heidi Cruz which tells me that it isn’t—and that Trump was alluding to that when he defended his own wife against the Super PAC ads about Melania. 

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/ted-cruz-sex-scandal-mistresses-cheating-claims/

Further angering me was the finger waving Ted Cruz calling Trump a sniveling coward for attacking Heidi.  There are obvious problems with the Cruz marriage and that does not give Ted the authority to preach to Trump or anybody else what’s right.  His campaign continues to have these kinds of scandals, where third-party participants do hit pieces on his behalf that have been downright dirty.  At least with Trump, he’s out in the open about the things he does.  Ted hides and now it looks like we all know why.  If he can’t keep things cleaner than this during a campaign just think what he and his wife would be like in the White House.  Even after Cruz’s little public refute of Donald Trump—the presidential front-runner was extremely quite on Twitter not posting  anything for over 20 hours as this story developed.  That tells me everything I want to know because that hasn’t happened over the entire six month history of Trump’s run.  Why tick off all of the Cruz supporters when Ted let them down himself?  The reason is that this is more than smoke.

After hour 20, this is what Donald Trump said about this issue, written 34 minutes prior to this writing:

I have no idea whether or not the cover story about Ted Cruz in this week’s issue of the National Enquirer is true or not, but I had absolutely nothing to do with it, did not know about it, and have not, as yet, read it.

Likewise, I have nothing to do with the National Enquirer and unlike Lyin’ Ted Cruz I do not surround myself with political hacks and henchman and then pretend total innocence. Ted Cruz’s problem with the National Enquirer is his and his alone, and while they were right about O.J. Simpson, John Edwards, and many others, I certainly hope they are not right about Lyin’ Ted Cruz.

I look forward to spending the week in Wisconsin, winning the Republican nomination and ultimately the Presidency in order to Make America Great Again.

– Donald J. Trump

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Superman, Batman, Zach Snyder and ‘The Fountainhead’: How to define a Trump supporter

With all the press over the new Batman vs Superman movie the director, Zach Snyder told The Hollywood Reporter that one of the next projects he’s working on is an updated version of The Fountainhead.  The faces of nearly everyone in the liberal community of media and entertainment nearly melted off.  Snyder is a highly respected film director and is at the top of his game.  But it doesn’t surprise me that he and a growing contingent of Warner Bros. directors and screen writers are showing themselves as Objectivists—Ayn Rand’s philosophic dispute against Kantian collectivism.  It’s no secret that I was very supportive of the film makers of Atlas Shrugged, which I thought was a successful cliff note to the great American novel—Atlas Shrugged.  That book is what America is all about and could have only been written here by our culture.  Ayn Rand was onto something with her work and I personally think The Fountainhead is one of the greatest novels ever written and I’ve read Finnegan’s Wake—and I understand it—just for reference.  Finnegan’s Wake to me is probably the greatest novel in the history of mankind as far as its scope—but within it there are way too many Kantian limits.  Ayn Rand takes away those limits and delivers us to a time before Plato and Aristotle’s great debate—to a time when mankind was contemplating that it was not the gods of Mt. Olympus who ruled the universe, it was the minds of mankind.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/batman-v-superman-married-creative-874799?utm_source=twitter

This is extremely important to understand because the candidacy and potential presidency of Donald Trump is the kind of story which might be a sequel to one of those Ayn Rand classics—he is a clear combination of characters from both The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged.  Trump’s popularity is very similar to the popularity of Ayn Rand’s novels even to this day nearly 60 and 70 years after their release.  Atlas Shrugged is the most reviewed book in the Library of Congress behind only the Bible for a reason—people are curious—but the life around them built largely in the summation of Kantian philosophy doesn’t assimilate well to what they feel in their heart and souls.

I know people from every side of the argument regarding Donald Trump.  I know the Glenn Beck Tea Party types, I know hard-core Objectivists, and I know traditional Republicans and I see their difficulty in understanding Donald Trump and his supporters.  Some of them like Glenn Beck and even Ted Cruz are staunch Atlas Shrugged supporters—they love Ayn Rand—yet they don’t understand her—because religion clouds their thinking on the philosophy of the matter.  Ironically, that is their same aversion to Donald Trump—that he’s a godless heathen who lives for himself counseling only himself not seeking the advice of God in times of crises.  Trump declares that he relies on his own mind to make decisions—which is a very Ayn Rand type of thing to say—and Beck along with Cruz followed by a contingent of Tea Party supporters are frazzled by such a proclamation.  Establishment Republicans hate Trump because he isn’t Kantian enough—meaning he doesn’t think in a Platonic fashion deep enough for them.  (If you don’t know what I’m talking about CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES)  Then of course Objectivists aren’t sure what to think.

Not long ago I compared Donald Trump to Howard Roark from The Fountainhead and Objectivists sent me private messages concerned about my sanity.  They declared that Trump was not ideologically pure enough to be an “Objectivist,” and he certainly wasn’t the hero Howard Roark.  But a real life examination into the way that Trump has lived proposes a direct comparison.  Trump has always had a very Roark-like certainty about hm.  I don’t claim to be an Objectivist.  Personally, I think mankind is at a stage where we need to deep dive Rand’s thoughts expanding on Aristotle’s original concepts—but perhaps either going back to a time well before Greek philosophy or into a new period that mankind has never been before.  I am personally concerned with flushing out these kinds of thoughts over my years.  I see Objectivism as a first step in that process and Ayn Rand was certainly onto the scent.  However, Rand’s books were relatively simple-because they are exploring complex concepts and needed a host of adult characters to drape those concepts off of—for instance, there are no children in Rand’s books, The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged—which makes it easy for the characters to act on their authentic natures.  The world is neatly aligned in a way that represented Ayn Rand’s time period and her personal decisions which was to not have children with her husband and to carry on lavish affairs of her own with other men and force her husband to watch essentially.  In the end Rand was a bit broken-hearted with some of her decisions and it hurt her following regarding Objectivism.  That doesn’t mean she was wrong—it just means she wasn’t completely right.

I think the life of Donald Trump would be a sequel to Ayn Rand’s classics—and I think his third wife Melania is the key to his present success.  I think Donald Trump fits right into the pages of Rand’s heroes with John Galt and Howard Roark and that is essentially why people are so bothered with his presidential candidacy.  Objectivists would obviously disagree, but they share with most religions an almost sanctimonious relationship with the purity of Ayn Rand’s characters that they have become Holy figures to them similar to religious fanatics who insist that the life of Jesus Christ as it was written in a book 1700 years ago is testament to the precise way that we must all live today—and that the interpretation provided over the years and nurtured along by Immanuel Kant followed by many others—like Karl Marx would formulate political philosophy around the values of altruism.  Donald Trump was a great person before he met Melania—but after she became his Lady of Tubber Tintye.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.  She was his hero’s journey much the way Dagney was brought to such a figure in John Galt in Atlas Shrugged.  In that case Galt was the type of treasure found in the classic story of The King of Erin and the Queen of the Lonesome Island.  In real life, Melania was the treasure that Donald Trump found and what we have today is a presidential candidate who has successfully completed a hero’s journey equivalent to a classic novel and he is here to bestow upon mankind the boons of his adventure.

While many people think their version of reality is the correct one, the established political people have their Kant, while Glenn Beck, Ted Cruz and their Tea Party followers have their Bibles and the Ayn Rand at war within their very souls trying to fit a square peg into a circular entrance.  Conservatism to many of these people means “obedience to God.” The education class has their Marxism—which was formed by Kant to proclaim that Trump is too stupid for the right to “rule” because that is how archaic they still think of mankind—as a species that needs to be ruled over by an aristocratic elite.  And Objectivists hate all of the above, but they don’t think of Trump as equivalent to John Galt or Howard Roark.  Yet to know Trump through his many years of work, he is clearly willing to stand his ground for the authenticity of his creations, like Roark did at the end of The Fountainhead.  There aren’t any other people on earth in any positions of authority or wealth that have ever done as Trump is doing now—and that is to risk it all for a chance to fix everything for the sake of American authenticity.  He’s not retreating from the world the way that John Galt did to let the system collapse on itself the way that Ayn Rand suggested.  His stand is a much more masculine one—and one not yet defined by any art or literature—at least those known in establishment circles.  Donald Trump is the next step in that eventual evolution.

Trump supporters have been lied to and manipulated by all the groups mentioned above, religious groups, political groups, activism groups—everyone, and they still see things sliding into an abyss.  They have been told that they are bad because they are a particular color, that they are bad if they think well of American sovereignty, and that they are bad if they aren’t willing to give the skin off their very backs to those too lazy to make their own way in life—and they are the majority.  People like Trump were allowed to the table of power so long as they brought their check book, but they weren’t invited to help fix anything.  For Donald Trump I think love brought him full circle and into this political theater and the instincts of the American people understand it in spite of what everyone is telling them.  Trump has great love for his wife, his children, and of course himself.  People don’t comprehend it yet, but they know to trust it because literally everyone else has let them down.

From what I know of the new Superman movie with Batman, the debate is going to be precisely what I have been talking about.  Superman represents the type of Ayn Rand hero that evolved under American philosophy—essentially Objectivism.  Batman represents the law and order of a Platonic society—which migrated from Kant to Marxism riding on the back of organized religion—all denominations.  Can Batman simply let society fall in line behind a man who is superior in every fashion—and could destroy the world if he cared to in a moment?  That is the theme of the new Zach Snyder version of Batman vs. Superman—arriving in theaters soon as of this writing.  But filmmakers must make their livings looking five years into the future to anticipate the trends of that future time.  Given Trump’s impact on the world of politics it does not surprise me that Warner Brothers is looking to Snyder to provide an update to The Fountainhead.  Even though many might fight the words I’m saying about Trump today, our civilization will be looking for answers in the years to come and only Ayn Rand has offered a plausible explanation into the nature of Donald Trump so far in the entire history of the world. 

 Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A Book for All and None by Friedrich Nietzsche before Ayn Rand likely started the chain reaction—but prior to them in all of known history only gods of some mystic realm held such power of mankind.  It was the job of human beings to appeal to the egos of their deities.  Trump is not that kind of offering.  He is something else that nobody has ever seen before in politics—or philosophy—and Trump supporters feel innately that they can trust it—because they still hope that its possible in America to step beyond the shackles of Immanuel Kant—even if they’ve never heard the name before—and live their lives as free people for the purposes ascribed in Ayn Rand’s classic American novels.  Zach Snyder as a filmmaker has his hands on that pulse—and is working on The Fountainhead to show it to us for later analysis.  For decades in the future we will still be coming to terms with this time period—and it will be through our art that we understand what has happened.  In hindsight, we’ll be glad that it did.  But we will rely on art—as we always do—to define it in our lives—even if the Trump train is moving too fast now to do anything but vote in favor of that gut we have in our stomachs.  That is the very definition of a Trump supporter.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

Thomas Dimassimo’s Terrorist Intentions: Meet the radical who attacked Donald Trump in Dayton, Ohio

Who was the guy who attacked Donald Trump in Dayton, Ohio on March 12th 2016?  Well, he was a saggy assed-communist inspired, Black Lives Matter, anti-American radical who desires to fundamentally change the nation into an extremely progressive—open border utopia of socialist extremity.  His name is Thomas Dimassimo and he was and is an extreme radical who went to that rally with terrorist intentions—because he forecasted those plans on Twitter ahead of time.  Here is the video proof of the radical along with information provided about him which the media needs to cover.  The link below goes into much more elaboration.  The great thing about Donald Trump’s campaign is that he is forcing these scum bags out of their hiding places and pushing the media to cover them.  Watch these videos of the attack and antics of this socialist loving Bernie Sanders supporter and get a taste of the kind of revolution that modern colleges like Wright State University is promoting—and consider why we give these education institutions any money at all for producing the kind of hatred that make young people like Tom Dimassimo so dangerous.  Take special note of the video shown below that Dimassimo directed of the torture of a man of color.  Interesting where his mind is—his art reveals his menace to society.

A protester has been arrested after he tried to rush the stage while Donald Trump was speaking during a rally Saturday morning, authorities say.

Thomas Dimassimo was charged with disorderly conduct and inducing panic, according to Montgomery County Jail records.

Dimassimo was released from custody and is due in court on Monday. His age is listed as 32, but it is not clear if that is correct. His social media pages and public records indicate he was born in 1993, not 1983.

Video, which you can watch above, show a man being taken down by Secret Service agents as Trump spoke at Dayton International Airport.

The incident came a day after protesters caused Trump to cancel a rally in Chicago.

Here’s what you need to know:

http://heavy.com/news/2016/03/thomas-tom-tommy-dimassimo-donald-trump-rally-rush-stage-secret-service-protester-twitter-younglionking7-photos-video/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HeavyTV+%28Heavy.com+%C2%BB+TV%29

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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