Tag: Stupid in America

End of The Drudge Report: A calm before the next American Civil War

Well, the full court press by progressives is on and they have shown their cards. In the wake of another round of gun violence it is obvious what the strategy is. Matt Drudge gave a rare interview with Alex Jones predicting the end of his famous internet news site The Drudge Report because of something a Supreme Court Justice said to him. The next Civil War is well at hand—because of progressive intrusions, and while there is still civility the mechanisms for which they control is attempting to shape the battle ground. They want to control the media in all aspects so they can cut the lines of communication between free people. They want to disarm the public so that there is little resistance to their incursion. And they are selling all this effort with a perceived professionalism that is rather dangerous. Watch Matt’s interview here which sounds remarkably similar to the interview I gave to my friend Matt Clark recently. Click here to review that. Watch the Drudge interview here:

I agree with Wayne LaPierre, the head of the National Rifle Association (NRA), when he famously claimed that “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun.” There are a lot of bad guys out there, at all levels of the world. Some are thugs in the streets looking to steal from those who work; others just want to terrorize to satisfy their own infantile egos. Low level terrorists work through radical groups, or are individuals crazed with hate. More sophisticated terrorists hide their maliciousness behind orthodox behavior and reside within the world’s governments. And it is they who speak through the work of publications like The Nation which said the following in reaction to Wayne LaPierre’s gunslinger comments about private armament.

The Nation spoke to several people who do—combat veterans and former law enforcement officers—and who believe that the NRA’s heroic gunslinger mythology is a dangerous fantasy that bears little resemblance to reality. Stephen Benson knows what it’s like when bullets start flying. The former Navy SEAL saw extensive combat during his three tours in Vietnam. Later, while recovering from the wounds that earned him his third Purple Heart, he also trained elite troops at the Naval Special Warfare Center in Coronado, California. “In chaotic situations, the first thing you know is that the shit has hit the fan and you don’t know where the fan is,” says Benson. “And unless it’s constantly drilled into you, it’s very hard to maintain discipline in those situations. You’re immediately hit with a massive thump of adrenaline. Your mouth begins to taste like copper. You can hear the blood moving in your system. You can even experience a kind of time-warp. And the problem with that kind of state is that conscious thought shuts down because you’ve been taken over by your nervous system, and your nervous system is saying, ‘holy shit, things just got really bad.’”

http://www.thenation.com/article/combat-vets-destroy-the-nras-heroic-gunslinger-fantasy/

As a connected issue to all the above progressives are looking toward Australia as a solution to the gun control avocation they support most. In Australia essentially the government bought back guns from the public, kind of like the cash for clunkers program seen in the United States a few years ago. The big difference is that if people refused to participate, they were threatened with jail. The Australian 1996 National Agreement on Firearms was not a benign set of commonsense gun-control rules: It was a gun-confiscation program rushed through the Australian parliament just twelve days after a 28-year-old man killed 35 people with a semi-automatic rifle in the Tasmanian city of Port Arthur. The Council of Foreign relations summarizes the Aussie measure nicely: The National Agreement on Firearms all but prohibited automatic and semiautomatic assault rifles, stiffened licensing and ownership rules, and instituted a temporary gun buyback program that took some 650,000 assault weapons (about one-sixth of the national stock) out of public circulation. Among other things, the law also required licensees to demonstrate a “genuine need” for a particular type of gun and take a firearm safety course. The council’s laudatory section on Australian gun-control policy concludes that “many [read: gun-control activists] suggest the policy response in the wake of Port Arthur could serve as a model for the United States.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425021/australia-gun-control-obama-america

So there you can see dear reader how the collective consciousness of mass progressives—globally induced is establishing its attack run on American liberty. First, they intend to shut down free speech by strong individual advocates, like Drudge. Next they wish to continue to establish trust in a central authority, like public school teachers, and police run by international trade unions philosophically committed to socialism. Then they plan to disarm society under the guise of safety. Their only opposition is in building up public momentum against their individual enemies with public sentiment. Now that you know that much, go back and listen to the Drudge interview once again and listen carefully. The guy has been at the top of his game for two decades and knows most of the major media personalities in the United States on all sides of the political spectrum. He’s not a conspiracy wack job. He’s a very real and conscientious person.

As to the assertion that NRA gunslingers are no match for the well-seasoned combat veteran let me put that one to rest. Without question there are many brave people who serve in the armed forces—but to me that is part of the problem of mass collectivism. They are effectively employees of the government and if the government goes bad, they become the enemy against liberty—so there must be checks against their power with individual—and equal ability. But let’s be clear about something, and I know I’m not the only one out there—but under strenuous situations I trust myself far more than any police or military officer to remain cool under fire. If I were not a married man, I would be a contractor such as what works around the world outside of the military services, so professional soldiers don’t impress me. And most cops are such a panicky lot that they make fools of themselves all too often during traffic stops and late night run-ins with drunks at bars. CLICK FOR AN EXAMPLE IN MY TOWN. I certainly don’t want police officers and military personnel to have supreme command over my life and property. No disrespect to them, but they need checks and balances from a civilian presence who is better armed in most cases to keep them honest.

I’ve been shot at, been under severe threat, had guns pointed at me and been under every kind of danger imaginable and I don’t rattle. An explosion could go off right next to me and I’d be under complete control. I can control my adrenaline, and I actually thrive when the “shit hits the fan.” I enjoy those moments and I purposely look for reasons to be in such circumstances. There are many Americans like me just as there were people like that in Australia—people like Rod Ansell who was the inspiration for the movie character Crocodile Dundee.   Ansell was shot dead in a gun battle with police in 1999 two years into the gun ban when authorities came to the outback master’s remote home—blocked off the road and fought it out with the old hold-out. There are a lot of people like Ansell in the world, and everyone is much safer with them armed and free.

Make no mistake about it. The intentions from villains hiding behind certified law are lurking for excuses to unleash their ideology upon everything they see standing in their path. If they could, and will likely attempt by virtual of law, is to make an outlaw out of Matt Drudge, just as they did Rod Ansell. When Ansell was killed by multiple gunshot wounds the authorities excused the effort through the rationalization of insanity—that Rod and his 26-year-old girlfriend were hyperactive drug addicts obsessed with an attempt by the Freemasons to take over the world. Since this new breed of criminal has taken off the masks they used to rob banks with, becoming lawyers and law makers instead, they create now the means for looting by legal means—so they can make outlaws of Ansell, Drudge, and anyone else with the signature of a pen instead of the point of the gun—because when all the guns are collected, they’ll still have them—then it will be too late. So you better know what kind of game you are playing and who is moving the pieces and not white-wash the reality with any illusions. We have a Civil War on our hands—the shots just haven’t been fired yet. But they will be—and when that happens, make sure you are a card-carrying member of Second Call Defense so you can stay out of jail while the legal system still works. There will come a time when it won’t, but until then protect yourself. Because nobody else will.   At that point those public sector security types will point their guns in your direction, just as they did at Rod Ansell in Australia. That is what Obama and his progressive friends are trying to create in the United States. The real fight is one of the mass collectivism against the individual—everywhere in the world. And in a world where collectivists make all the rules—it is the truly insane mandated by the weakest links of their order for which they define the rationality of people like Rod Ansell—which is why Matt Drudge is one of the biggest targets on the internet. First it will be people like him—then it will be everyone else.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

A Career Change to Gunfighter: Hillary Clinton’s call for gun control is opposed to American lifestyles

It was expected yet ironic that Hillary Clinton in reaction to the latest mass shooting in Oregon announced that she would make gun control a central theme of her run for President of the United States. First of all, ironic not just because she is a criminal herself, but because I spent the first weekend of October 2015 on a life changing mission dedicated to the future promotion of the Second Amendment. When I announced a few weeks ago that my next career would be that of a gunfighter—I was quite serious. But between now and then I have many thousands of hours of practice and many tens of thousands of spent money to get where I want to be with that new career. It will be a long process of which I am just starting. I have shot guns a lot over the years and am good with them now. But what I’m talking about is a whole new level where timing is measured within a quarter of a second. Given that progressive politicians like Hillary are going in one way, I am decisively going in the opposite to not only even out the imposition that these gun grabbing politicians are attempting, but to resurrect a marketing of firearms that worked years ago that I have decided needed to be implemented again. I’m talking about the kind of America that we all know and love from the famous Christmas Story movie that plays every Holiday Season where the little boy dreamed fervently about owning his own Red Ryder BB gun. Hillary and her gang of loony progressives are and have always been at war with that traditional American culture and I’m personally sick of it. So I looked in the mirror and decided I’m going to do something about it. And I have taken those first hard steps over the last several days.

I am proud to announce that I am officially a member of the Cowboy Fast Draw Association and several other gun related groups, which is unusual for me. I typically stay away from memberships, but in this case I’ll make the exception. We are in an ideological Civil War in this country and you have to pick a side—and I have. And when I do engage myself in such an activity I don’t choose to lose. I have also made a commitment to Second Call Defense for the same reasons that I joined Cowboy Fast Draw. I am going to make these organizations a part of my daily life and help them in ways that I can. I consider them extremely important to preserving what I love about America. However the things I say, I say on behalf of myself as an individual, not on behalf of them—so let’s make that clear as we go forward.

As far as fast guns to me single action firearms are the fastest. They have less moving parts than semiautomatics and don’t jam up on the feed mechanisms. So in that respect a good portion of the technology invented at the turn of the 20th century was the fastest and most reliable in firearm manufacture. That is the reason that Cowboy Fast Draw is the fastest sport there is, and why there needs to be more promotion of it to the mass marketplace. The first step for my participation in this new endeavor was to purchase a new .45 Ruger Vaquero which I did over the weekend at Right 2 Arms gun shop which is essentially in my back yard. One thing about where I live, which I am very happy about, there are three gun shops within a few miles of my house, real legitimate shops that have a constantly good stock of ammunition and firearms. I am thankful for them. I am particularly sentimental of Mike Reed at Right 2 Arms because he’s a great guy who is making it happen the right way. Then within a few dozen miles of my home is of course a Bass Pro Shop, a Cabela’s and a Dick’s Sporting goods all of which have a decent selection of firearms. God bless America! It felt good to purchase such an important gun from a good, all American gun shop at Right 2 Arms. It felt good buying it.

Of course then my next investment which as a large one—actually bigger than the gun was the targeting equipment needed for Cowboy Fast Draw. The timing lights and targets themselves are pretty sophisticated for a shooting sport and need to be acquired since times less than a second are needed to measure. If a Fast Draw shooter has times over one second, they are too slow, so the targets are needed to work with in knowing how to practice. I will be setting up in the coming months a special range in my basement just for this equipment. To be honest, it was in understanding all this equipment that has been the biggest hindrance to jumping into this sport for me. It is the key to learning Fast Draw.

Equally important is the holster rig needed for shooting Fast Draw. I’ve wanted a good one for many years now, but couldn’t justify it for just range shooting. The holster rig must have a metal lining to allow the revolver cylinder to turn within the holster so not to slow down the shooter and a deflection plate is good to have to keep the gun from going off into your feet. Fast draw largely uses wax bullets and powder charges in competition, so a really good holster is needed for both speed and safety. For me it had to be an official Mernickle Holster that I’ve had my eye on for at least a decade. Those rigs are custom-made for each customer, so it will take a few months to get it. But I bought the one I wanted and it wasn’t cheap.

After buying all those items to celebrate my wife and I took our grandson to the Wild West Festival out in Eastern Cincinnati—beyond the Eastgate Mall by about 15 miles east. I had been meaning to go as some of the people I have known over the years within the Western Arts community perform there. Through Gery Deer I know the Pickle Brothers act and their sword swallowing displays complete with fire and freakish spectacle. There were some fun gun fights and a pretty good Wild West act in the main saloon. The environment was wonderful and really put a cherry on top of the weekend for me since I had just deeply committed myself to another few decades of fun with Western Arts with a whole new skill development. I was certainly in the right mindset to go to that particular festival.

As I watched my grandson take the new gun my wife bought for him around the town and shoot everyone he met, I thought about Hillary Clinton and what a fit she would have if she witnessed a three-year old child shooting everyone he met. Progressives like her would want me arrested for child endangerment. But in that Wild West environment, everyone played along. When he shot street vendors, they pretended to die. He actually shot the gunfighters who roamed the streets and gratefully died spectacular deaths to give my grandson that taste of being a Wild West hero on the hunt for bad guys. When I was a kid, I mostly played those types of games and I have never been at risk to shoot anybody for anything. When I have been in conflict with others, melee combat has been just fine. It’s perfectly healthy for young boys to play with guns so that they can adapt their emotional stability to a proper, healthy red-blooded American man who holds doors open for young ladies, and works hard into the night to care for his family. Not having those types of values gives you people like Bill Clinton—Hillary’s husband, the former president who has conducted his life as a sex crazed lunatic who craves power so he can have access to the girls who love it. During the Wild West period of westward expansion and all the romance that was born of that era, brave families risked everything to live on the frontier to essentially get away from people like Hillary Clinton, big government aristocrats who want to rule the lives of everyone to satisfy their own egos. But in our modern age, there isn’t anywhere left in the world to run to, so the ideologies of what made America great through guns, and the progressives who are so in love with Europe that they always want to remake the world into the image of that debacle of historic failure—are clashing and there’s only room for one side—as the two clearly can’t co-habituate. Progressives are unwilling to get along with people who are not like them—timid specimens of fear and loathing.

All this activity left me feeling very good about America. It was nice to be free for a little while of the parasitic decay so commonly associated with progressive types, like Hillary Clinton. It was a little shocking after all that reverie to hear from them their latest attempts to remove guns from American culture which left me thinking hard about why I enjoyed all these gun related events so much. My conclusion is that the American gunfighter is a unique concept in the world invented here in the United States during the frontier period. It was largely an invention of myth based on actual history surrounding heroes and villains that emerged in the Old West from around 1850 to 1900. The romance and freedom associated with gunslingers at Wild West festivals which excite boyish enthusiasm in young and old alike are unique inventions of American capitalism. The deep-rooted assumption is that guns guarantee freedom because it prevents a larger, faster, or more aggressive lunatic from imposing their will upon individuals. It doesn’t matter if the force of aggression is a country or another individual, the gun allows people the security of being self-reliant—and it’s a comforting concept. It is there that people like Hillary Clinton are so wrong and out-of-step with the correct way to socially carry our nation to the next philosophic step. The world in general has banned guns, and their economies and their people are suffering because of that decision. America has a different experience, it has been defined by revolution and expansion—where the American gunfighter is the pinnacle ingredient of its national mythology. For that reason I am very proud of my decision and I look forward immensely to being a part of the Cowboy Fast Draw Association. It is one of the few groups I find it a pleasure to be associated with because of its well-defined roots in Americana. This is going to be a lot of fun.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Carl Icahn’s ‘Danger Ahead’: Why Trump University failed but the billionaire would succeed as president

DOk course I daily keep up with a wide range of subjects and read heavily on them—which is quite a task if I were to think about it. It’s for no other reason than I have a lot of passion for many things. For instance, I forgot to sleep over the past weekend for both Friday and Saturday nights because there wasn’t enough time to do everything I wanted to do on those days. Sleep was not an option. But of those things I have not read lately much in the financial journals. You might remember my alarm while buying a car recently at the extremely low-interest rates. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. I have been thinking about other things, so didn’t really hear the loud voices coming from people like Carl Icahn about low-interest rates. However, as a Trump supporter for president, I did notice the Icahn had endorsed Trump and his tax package for reasons that I had noted centering on interest rates. Icahn is one of the most respected investors in the world so I felt a little pride at recognizing something that he was uttering which should concern every American immensely. Icahn put his thoughts together in a video called Danger Ahead that should explicitly encourage people to favor Donald Trump. The situation is dire and requires immediate attention. I’ve been warning about this phase in the American economy for a long time, but now that it’s here, we have to take action to solve the problem as we are well beyond the point of no return.

Icahn has done several such videos and doesn’t just stop on the corporate inversion concerns mixed with extremely low-interest rates. He goes further and addresses the other major crises present in America, which is so grossly obvious in politics and in business—our society has lost the quality of its people to do basic business. As a supporter of unfettered capitalism, the only way to keep everything in reasonable check is for people to function from a distinct cultural morality. For instance, as Icahn points out, many of today’s CEOs, and Board of Directors along with hedge fund investors are morally bankrupt so they invite snake oil salesman in the form of politicians to induce unneeded regulation on economic matters further restricting the free flow of financial expansion. Icahn has specifically pointed to a particularly low quality breed of manager class that has emerged in America which is proving to be catastrophic to our ability to deal with the financial crises that is coming.

To be a good manager a person has to function from a general foundation of ethical behavior. If a manager has hidden deep within their psychosis insecurities and didactic desires, they are likely unequipped to be good managers. Even worse, in the chain-of-command structure of most American business managers are reluctant to put second-in-commands to nip at their heels challenging their authority with anybody competent. So the incompetent are often the types who find promotions. The best and the brightest are most of the time left to die in some corner of a manufacturing environment as the worst and weakest thrive. This is a trend that has been going on for a long time—so it’s nothing new. But it’s beginning to have an effect on our national GDP that is measurable.

I can say from experience that the world is dying in regard to management. It’s really bad in the United States—most people on the other end of the phone or on an email are completely incompetent for their positions. They are culturally destroyed so that they are not equipped to function in a modern business environment. Good management is becoming a serious lost art in America, but it’s not limited to our borders—it’s the world over. The primary fault of these phenomena is our education systems which have been heavily influenced by politicians who know next to nothing about money. There is serious knuckle-dragging going on in modern business, when the issue should be reversed. Considering what is spent on modern education we should have the opposite problem. So the blame is on our educations system.

There is some criticism of Donald Trump and his Trump University that was in operation during the last decade. Essentially, Trump wanted to create a new generation of business leaders with his education institution infused with his perpetual optimism. It was a failed enterprise, so many in the media are pointing toward that failure to hang on Trump the selling of false promises as if the whole thing had been a scam—and why the billionaire would be a failed president. But where Trump would succeed as president but not as the head of a university is due to the Metaphysics of Quality which I’ve talked about extensively before. CLICK TO REVIEW. Trump as a president is largely a salesman for all things Americana whereas institutional learning cannot teach people to think from the front of the train of thought. Leaders are a special breed. As president, Trump can help create an environment for leaders to emerge, but education institutions cannot make poor managers into good forward thinking people. It just doesn’t work for the masses. Trump tried, but not everyone was ready for the effort of leadership, and this is what’s essentially wrong with all education institutions—even ones infused with optimism of Donald Trump. It takes great leadership to create good managers, and leadership is not the criteria used to invoke promotions. Instead, we have created a system of brown-nosing and schmoozing to accomplish promotions—and that doesn’t automatically create leaders. Leadership cannot be bought with the price of tuition, it has to emerge from within individuals who have value and know how to spot it in others.

Trump and Icahn are free to say what they think because they are rich. They don’t have to worry about making anybody above them angry with their opinions—which most smart people in the world are very concerned about—because their upward mobility depends on it. If they show up their boss—who may well be an incompetent loser, they may not be able to buy that house next year, or a new car. I’ve had the opportunity to do a lot of hiring over the years and a common question I ask of new employees is how hungry they are to perform the task they are being hired for. I say to them that I expect them to challenge me for my job—that I want them to bring their best to the game table. I don’t want ass-kissers, or appeasers of any kind. I want people who will challenge themselves every day and look beyond me for their opportunity. I never worry about somebody down talking me to someone else because my reputation speaks for itself. All people who are involved in management should feel that way. But they don’t. They watch with fearful eyes always over their shoulders worried that somebody might notice that they are incompetent—because they have been taught that having faults and being not so good at things was a virtue rather than a detriment that it truly is. Trump and Icahn at their senior ages can afford to be critical. They may not have felt so comfortable saying these things 20 years ago, but now they are because the evidence is so grossly obvious. For the record though, I have always said these types of things, so it’s nice to see others joining the party especially people like Carl Icahn.

The net result of this present debacle is due to the failed philosophy of power within the collective instead of the value of individual merit. When Icahn says that the unions are somewhat at fault for the situation, he means that good managers have thrown up their hands and tossed the meat to the dogs instead of sticking around to fight it out. Those who do tend to stick around these days are the suck asses and losers who are more interested in titles than in the merit of their positions. As low quality people, they look toward the position of their office for social value leaving them little intellectually to provide the masses by way of leadership. So America has destroyed one of its valued commodities—the breeding of good hard-nosed leaders of which people like Trump and Icahn are a dying breed. They are both looking for one last shot at fixing the world starting with America—because both are old men who I believe want to leave the earth better than when they found it. And right now, the risk is that they will leave it far worse—not because of them—but in spite of their efforts.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

 

The Real Reason John Boehner Left Congress: How evil hides behind institutionalism

I don’t plan to bash John Boehner into the ground forever. As much of a nice guy as I think he is, nice doesn’t mean a person is immune to criticism, especially when they hold very public government positions—yet John said something that was very insightful within his announcement speech of leaving congress ahead of some serious controversy. The cause of his effect—his desire to step down as Speaker of the House and to leave congress all together by his words is to protect the institution of his office intending to offer that the individual sacrifice themselves to the higher concept so to preserve it. In Boehner’s case, he is specifically indicating the minority of his political party who are rebel rousing constitutional purists, and are going to fight him at every step in future key issues, such as the funding of Planned Parenthood, the debt limit and the inevitable fiscal cliff that we are all facing as a nation. Boehner proposed that the institution was greater than the individual which explains immensely what is wrong with American government in 2015.

Even though Boehner and his wife just bought last year an $835,000 condo in Marco Island, Florida that in itself is not a case of alarm other than it’s a bit expensive for a guy who only makes $223,500 per year as speaker. For one, $835,000 doesn’t get you much of a condo in Florida, that’s nothing too crazy over-the-top even though socialist leaning despots have tried to make an issue of the purchase. That’s not a lot of money for the private sector—but it is for a government official who is supposed to be doing the business of the people who elected him. For Boehner to spend that kind of money on a second home in Florida indicates that he intends to become a lobbyist sooner than later where he will easily be able to make a seven-figure salary twisting the arms of his former friends for favors. Boehner is 65 years hold presently. The rules dictate that all members of congress take one year off to cool their former connections—but at precisely November 1st of 2016 at the age of 66 look for John Boehner to have an office on K-Street as a means to pay for that expensive condo in Florida and to rake in the money for about a 10 year career at that lofty sum. Boehner will become rich off the “institution” he holds in such high regard and he will have done it without really bringing any real value to the table of philosophy and republic preservation. He will have done it just to enrich himself behind a mask of “sacrifice” like every other loser who has left office and found employment as a lobbyist.

It seems like a long time ago but remember Trent Lott, the former Senate Majority Leader in 2008? Well, he and ex-Louisiana Senator John Breaux opened up a lobbying firm and took in $30.8 million dollars over a three-year period after they left office. They now work for Squire Patton Boggs who does lobbying work for Amazon. Their job was to twist the arms of people like John Boehner into doing what they needed for their clients. Boehner was often the monkey in the middle who had Trent Lott beating on his door over some issue or another—a guy who obviously helped pave the way for Boehner to emerge as an obscure Ohio congressman to the eventual leadership role of Speaker of the House by working things behind the scenes. Well when those favors are called in what’s John supposed to do, keep the door closed on Trent? Or is Boehner supposed to listen to the twenty raucous Constitutional purists who demanded that Boehner act out of integrity instead of lobbying dollars. Boehner decided that if he wanted to cash in on the “institutional” scheme of government employment then he’d better do it while he was relatively young. So he sang, zippity do da, and announced his resignation—while he still could cash in on his “sacrifice” within congress for 25 years. For him it makes sense, play golf at his new Florida condo for a year while the House drowns in squabbles that have no easy answer, and then return for Christmas of 2016 as a millionaire to close out his years and family fortune by providing access to corporate America the halls of congressional power. So much for the value of the “institution.”

But what was most sickening about Boehner’s announcement was his social proclamation about institutionalism—as if he truly believed that the House of Congress was so sacred that he needed to remove himself from the situation so to preserve it. That is just ridiculous—manically so. Boehner’s presentation of the assumption was meant to throw people off the trail of his true intentions with a long nurtured social illness that poses that institutions—collections of people brought together under the umbrella of common belief are more powerful than the individuals who formulate the beliefs that the masses collect under. The assumption is that sacrifice erases the need for individual logic so long as that individual is willing to surrender their mind to the collective whole of an institution. The media and virtually everyone watching instantly forgave Boehner for his vagina-like approach to exiting Congress at a critical time because he evoked to the public that his individual needs to avoid the coming conflict was not about himself, it was to preserve the “institution.”

When I am critical of the church and religion in general it is because it trains the masses to think in this fashion, which is one of the greatest evils offered to our modern modes of thinking. I would never propose that being an atheist was the correct approach either. I am of the thinking that the correct approach to these complicated problems has not yet been invented. There is no philosopher from the past who has provided a map to navigate by—that map still needs to be created. But putting the individual in a subservient position to institutional value is false. On the other hand, you cannot have mass anarchy either, where individuals live hedonistic lives indulging at every impulse—evil and otherwise. A code of behavior is needed to hold individuals together so that proper conduct at life can be achieved. Yet allowing an institution to define those guidelines surrenders the individual to the impulses of mass collectivism.   Not a smart idea because what it does is allow for an institution to wear a mask of holiness, whether that institution is Congress or something like the Catholic Church and allows the value of behavior to be applied to the collective efforts of the institution instead of the individual behavior of its members.

For instance, you might remember dear reader the situation of Jerry Sandusky of the Penn State football program.   Jerry was part of a group of well-known and powerful campus personalities who routinely raped children. The behavior was hidden behind the institution of Penn State—the institution was greater than the sum of the individual, so Penn State would live on while Jerry went to jail for his behavior. Yet Jerry was allowed to molest children under the cover of the institution—by using its mass and authority to give him leverage, and access to many young boys. The Catholic Church is known to have conducted themselves in the very same fashion—yet the church itself continues on as a symbol of piety even though it provides a shield to hide the individual behavior of the criminally insane. Congress does the same thing; it hides the individual behavior of its members under the greater good of institutionalism. So if Boehner decides to work the system to his benefit, then its forgiven because he has surrendered individual thought to the yearnings of institutional preservation. But in reality it has nothing to do with the institution so long as Boehner can pay for his Florida condo with the lobby power of K-Street.

Institutionalism is not superior to individual will. Society still has to figure out how to merge good behavior with a code of conduct that is rightly generated by the inner needs of every individual—but surrendering thought to institutional control is not the best option. And neither is the notion of sacrifice. You would think that after many thousands of years of sacrificial emphasis within our institutions—whether it’s sacrificing your life for a job, a family, or a god, that we would have learned to recognize the farce. When a public official like John Boehner says such a thing in a very public statement, you are listening to a ruse—likely in his case—one that he believes himself, especially as a devoted Catholic. Don’t pay attention to the individual misbehaviors of the people who make up the institution, so long as the value of the collective entity is preserved with immunity. Do you see what’s going on dear reader and why we have such a poor philosophy? It allows evil to work its desires behind collective enterprise without the worry of individual value—and this is how poor conduct spreads itself through institutions. With that known, Boehner isn’t just leaving to save himself the future embarrassments that have been headed his way as the leader of the Congressional “institution.” He’s leaving to get rich—while he still can. And that’s the real story.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Why You Should Vote for Donald Trump: The historic Oklahoma State Fair Speech of 2015

This speech at the Oklahoma State Fair on September 25, 2015 is why I’m supporting Donald Trump for president. If you were smart dear reader, you would too. This speech exemplifies why Donald Trump is the best candidate in the last century for president of the United States. When Trump is under the most fire, he gets better. He thrives under the heat of pressure. The worse a situation is, the better he is. With all the controversy he’s endured since the last debate most candidates in his position would have a tendency to run scared. After all, as of this writing Trump is in a feud with Fox News, Glenn Beck daily slams his candidacy and many other establishment Republicans are on a full court press to dump Trump from being a threat to the Republican ticket. But in spite of all that—Trump is at his best under adversity. Watch this speech.

People who function best under stress are extremely rare, and Donald Trump is one of those people. Punch his ticket and jump on for the ride. Because people like him are not about politics, it’s about quality. He is precisely what is needed in a 2016 White House. His Oklahoma speech with no notes, wonderful enthusiasm and rhetorical debate answering directly the criticism of the past week is a work of political art. You should watch it and make sure a friend sees it as well. This is history in the making and you’ll want to participate.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Unconquered Donald Trump: CNN’s debate of the century–and beyond

I have watched a lot of very smart people over the last several years throw up their hands in frustration because the political class will not listen, or let them in, to help solve the problems of our states and our country. The desire is there from those smart people to give it everything they have to fix very complicated problems, but they are purposely kept on the fringes to allow the entitlements that come with public service to continue like whores in a Port Royal brothel. Those same people are angry and frustrated that Donald Trump is poised to bring CNN more than 30 million viewers hoping to watch the billionaire presidential candidate bring a smack down to his rival Republican contenders on the debate stage on Wednesday September 16th.

Their frustration is very similar to those who refuse to believe that big time wrestling is fake—because they want to buy the story line that political theater can somehow be solved with logic. But it can’t. The system is too far gone for anything like that, and as well intended as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz may be, the political establishment is against them to the death. So for a president in 2016 to be successful they have to be good at two things, they have to understand “big time” wrestling, and they have to know how money works. It is well-known that Donald Trump understands money. He is a mostly self-made man built the old-fashioned way. But he’s also an entertainer who knows the value of a brand—and his brand is so strong that it has even survived the testosterone filled banter of wrestling fanaticism. Out of all his accomplishments, the sentiment that Trump is an inductee of the WWE in the celebrity wing of the Hall of Fame likely makes him most equipped to be President of the United States in the years following the embarrassments of Obama, Clinton and Bush than anything else.

Trump has always been a fan of the WWE and is good friends with Vince McMahon in real life. Trump hosted both WrestleMania IV and V from Trump Plaza. This marked the first and only time a WrestleMania has been held at the same venue in consecutive years.

Younger fans will probably remember him best being involved in WrestleMania 23. It was billed as the “Battle of the Billionaires”, with Trump’s representative Bobby Lashley beating McMahon’s representative Umaga. Trump got to shave McMahon’s hair off at the event.

There was even a storyline when Trump bought Monday Night Raw off of McMahon in 2009. He staged a historic commercial-free version of the show, which was one of the highest rated Raw shows in many years at the time.

http://www.rantsports.com/pro-wrestling/2013/02/26/donald-trump-enters-the-wwe-hall-of-fame/

Most notably with that “Battle of the Billionaires” was when Trump body slammed McMahon and punched him in the face several times. It was obvious choreography, but think about a 60-year-old Trump actually body slamming McMahon, even playing around. What is important about that event is that the Trump brand was so well-known and respected, that millions of fans supported Trump as the winner of that engagement where McMahon had his head shaved on stage. It was all entertainment theater agreed upon ahead of time, but the fact that McMahon agreed to allow a relatively old man billionaire to beat him in front of millions of people shows to what extent Trump protects his brand.

Trump with all the gusto of the entertainment value he learned through his support of the WWE is promising to release prisoners from Iran, make Mexico build a wall to seal off the American border, and has shown open support of Israel against Iran. He’s promised to cut taxes, save Social Security, and to make America great again—and rich. And a lot of what he has said is done in the same fashion as a WWE wrestler. Now when I showed some of the clips included here to my wife she was immediately turned off by Trump’s participation in the activity. But I found it fascinating. Not only did he fill the seats of his Trump Plaze, protect his investment in WWE, help his friend Vince promote great ratings for his Wrestle Mania events—Trump also increased his own personal brand which is known throughout the world as a quality—larger than life—persona. Trump worked a relatively simple deal at multiple levels to have world-wide impact, and he even participated as a wrestler. He didn’t just sit up in a glass box and watch; he was ring side with McMahon playing along. It was quite a business transaction—fascinating to watch.

The pressure on Trump for the CNN debate must be overwhelming. Everyone on that stage will be gunning for him. Everyone in the audience is carefully waiting for him to body slam someone. And the moderators want to be the ones to go down in history as the one who stumped Trump’s 2016 campaign. And he knows that’s what’s going to happen in front of nearly as many people who watch the Superbowl ever year. Talk about pressure—it doesn’t get any heavier. But Trump has set this whole thing up for several decades, and I wouldn’t doubt it if it didn’t play out in his mind when he and Vince McMahon were setting up “The Battle of the Billionaires.” The Beltway types will look at these clips of Donald Trump at Wrestle Mania and consider it low brow Entertainment Theater appealing to the trailer trash of America—as they sip their white wine during the appetizer portion of a tax payer funded dinner. But Trump knows that cultures around the world don’t care about debates or fancy talk. They will know when he comes to the table to negotiate that the 6’ 3” man from America in the blue suit and red tie that body slams celebrities in front of millions of people Trump is not going to play nicely. When people like Hulk Hogan and many other WWE greats will likely be part of Trump’s body guard entourage from the White House, Trump will have built up a mysticism that no body else could have dreamed to match.

Who would little 5’ 7” Vladimir Putin respect more, the chain-smoking John Boehner with the fake tan and fake courage—who gets pushed around by the skinny communist bastard Obama, or the larger than life Donald Trump who is seen on video, recently, body slamming Vince McMahon? What about negotiations with Iran? Iran doesn’t understand American culture, they don’t watch the debates. But they will watch the tape of Trump at Wrestle Mania—it will likely scare them because they respect that type of bravado. How about Mexico, a country filled with drug lords and corrupt politicians. Do they respect false words from the Beltway or someone who openly scolds El Chapo and fights giant men in front of thousands of people?

I think what Trump has done is brilliant and it all culminates at this CNN debate. It will be the fight of the century, and this one isn’t as planned out as the one between Trump and McMahon—this is a real fight. But the theatrics are what Trump knows and understands and he’s already working at many different levels well ahead of everyone else. To me its clear Trump has been building up his brand to perform this task for a long time. The brilliance of that strategy is to use an unlikely source, such as the WWE to catapult that brand to a voter base that has not been participating in elections—and to also use that footage to gain footage for future capital. There are all kinds of capital. Most of the time we think of capital as money, but there are other kinds. And Trump is planning to use that capital to break through some things that have been in a stalemate for a long time. And it is fascinating to watch. That is for sure.

All this gives me hope for those smart minds who have been trying to fix things. In the wake of this political destruction, which is going on presently, there will be room from those bright minds to flourish in the wake. When Trump avoids specifics it’s because he won’t be the one to solve all the problems of the nation. His role is to clear out the opposition. But the fixes have to come from the best and brightest that America has to offer. And we need a president who understands how to unleash that talent. Ironically, the best way to learn how to do that is by watching Wrestle Mania. There is more truth in a typical WWE fight than all the political speeches on CSPAN collected over a decade. And that’s the sad truth.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

‘Star Wars’ is not a “Slam Dunk” for Disney: Chuck Wendig’s sticky seats with ‘Aftermath’

On Force Friday as my family was in acquisition mode for new Star Wars merchandise, my brother sent me a picture of the new book, Aftermath by Chuck Wendig to show that he had put his hands on the long-awaited book. I politely dismissed the innuendo that the novel was a “hot item” to purchase even though in our house we have EVERY single Star Wars novel ever produced up to this point. My family loves the Expanded Universe and is on the fence as to how much of ourselves we’ll invest in this new day under Disney. I’m personally hopeful. I think millions of young people will love it. I think it’s mostly a slam dunk of positive infusion culturally. But I’ll have to see how the movie turns out and how much they wreck the continuity of the story which at this point takes place over thousands of years. So I have not yet read Aftermath. I certainly will at some point, but not until I have some basic questions answered—such as, why is Chewbacca alive in the new film—those kinds of things.

However, apparently there is a gay character in Chuck Wendig’s new book, and while a galaxy filled with crazy aliens, species that convert to female when it comes time to mate, and literally thousands of primary and secondary characters—some of which are bound to have some unique sexual habits, Star Wars is NOT about sex. Not in the least. Yet Wendig chose to respond to criticism over his character the Imperial turncoat Sinjir Rath Velus with the following diatribe on his blog, Terrible Minds. Wendig hit back at readers who accused the author on Amazon of “blatantly pushing a gay agenda” and suggested that the franchise was no longer “children friendly”.

“If you’re upset because I put gay characters and a gay protagonist in the book, I got nothing for you,” Wendig wrote. “Sorry, you squawking saurian — meteor’s coming. And it’s a fabulously gay Nyan Cat meteor with a rainbow trailing behind it and your mode of thought will be extinct.”

“You’re not the Rebel Alliance. You’re not the good guys. You’re the fucking Empire, man. You’re the shitty, oppressive, totalitarian Empire. If you can imagine a world where Luke Skywalker would be irritated that there were gay people around him, you completely missed the point of Star Wars. It’s like trying to picture Jesus kicking lepers in the throat instead of curing them. Stop being the Empire. Join the Rebel Alliance. We have love and inclusion and great music and cute droids.”

He later told a reader who attacked his confrontational approach to his critics that he would not engage in a conversation on the issue. “Because on this, I am not interested in conversation. If your problem with the book is only the inclusion of gay characters, then no conversation is possible. Because that’s homophobia, that’s bigotry, and there’s nothing to be done or said. Someone wants to talk to me about the writing style or whatever, sure, I can have that discussion. On this, no.”

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/11/star-wars-aftermath-novelist-chuck-wendig-strikes-back-at-gay-character-slurs

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/09/04/star-wars-aftermath-gay-character

If I were Disney execs and Kathleen Kennedy at Lucasfilm, I’d be very concerned. You really can’t have an author for a kids series dropping “F” bombs and proposing that gay meteors are coming with trails of rainbows to follow. Because the use of a gay character in Star Wars clearly was political, and agenda based, otherwise he wouldn’t be so quick to come unglued. Also, it is disturbing that as a Star Wars author, Wendig assumes that the definition of Star Wars resides along the lines of inclusion of gay people within the Jedi Order of Luke Skywalker. While Star Wars can mean lots of things to a lot of different people, the space opera is about good, old-fashioned story telling based on the Saturday morning serials of George Lucas’s youth. They are westerns set in space and if they become anything less than that, then the profit-making machine Disney hopes the property to be will quickly fade away.   I’ve loved Star Wars all my life, but I will be the first one off the train if that’s the direction Disney decides to go. Star Wars is not about where one parks their male sex organs at night. Any romance that does emerge from the stories has direct connections to furthering family lineage. Star Wars is not Game of Thrones. If there is sex and romance, there has always been a point to it. Star Wars is not the Rocky Horror Picture Show, and if Disney thinks they can expand their market share by 2% then they’ll lose 40% who just will drop interest. Times have not changed as much as Wendig thinks based on his comment that conservative modes of thinking will soon be extinct. Miley Cyrus recently said something similar, and I’m sure around San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York and places where progressivism is rampant, it’s easy for them to think so. But in Kansas, Indianapolis, Atlanta, Dallas—people aren’t going to rush out to buy the next Star Wars product if they feel a gay agenda is being forced down their throat. They’ll drop interest before Episode 8 hits in May of 2017 and Disney will be in trouble.

Here’s how it works, Disney considers the Avengers: Age of Ultron to be a box office failure even though it made $1.4 billion dollars world-wide. While I enjoyed the movie, I walked out disappointed—I knew how Disney would view the profits from the movie. It wasn’t as good as the first film and it had noticeable progressive influences in the movie that just don’t play well with traditional audiences. Feminism and gay pride may be topics now because of the progressive influence of studio projects, but those are not enduring traits that will still be beloved many years from now. Star Wars is a mythology that should have the same resonance 100 years from now as it does in this decade. And I’ll bet money that 500 years from now, we will be laughed at as a culture for even entertaining all this gay pride stuff. For instance, the two best Star Wars movies are A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back. Without those two movies, there wouldn’t be a franchise. Obviously the romance in those two stories was the one between Han Solo and Princess Leia. Leia in A New Hope was a raging feminist who was slowly conquered by a strong male archetype typical in most westerns, Han Solo. Over two films he melted her into submission and made a real woman out of her. That is a story point that will endure with human development for hundreds of years and will sustain the growth of billions of dollars in action figures. But if Princess Leia were to stave off Han Solo and start a sexual relationship with Mon Mothma, the whole mythology would have been rejected by the movie going public in seconds. If Disney turns Star Wars into Broke Back Mountain, then there will be hell to pay. They may gain 2% approval from the gay community and the rainbow weirdos who cheered when Obama colored the White House in pretty colors after a Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. But straight people—who will always be in the majority based on biological function, will reject things that they are uncomfortable with. Disney will not be happy when they learn that Star Wars movies won’t make them $2 billion each and the book market dies from a lack of demand for the product. People go to Star Wars to get away from progressive politics, not to relish in it. For me it’s a traditional storyline that is similar to a western—so I love it. Take that traditional element away and I’m not interested. And there are millions who think just like I do.

http://www.therealstanlee.com/disney-considered-avengers-age-of-ultron-a-box-office-failure/

Just a word of warning to Disney—I love the company and its products. Part of that love comes from the traditional family values that it represents. If traditional value is removed from the product, I’m not inclined to spend money on it. There have been many times where obvious gay people perform at Disney World, and I put up with it to be inclusive, but when they are flamboyant about being males pretending to be women with high-pitched tones to their sentence structures, it just gives me a headache. If some hot chick dressed up as Sleeping Beauty wants to stand next to me for a picture, I’m fine with it. But if a dude dressed up as Sleeping Beauty wants to cuddle up next to me to satisfy their own sexuality—that’s not OK. I don’t want to explain that kind of thing to the young people around me, and I don’t want to be put in that position if I’m spending a $1000 dollars a day at an amusement park. And I’m not going to rush out at midnight to buy a book about gay protagonists. Star Wars is not a sure thing. It can be screwed up, and based on the comments from Chuck Wendig, that apprehension is well justified.

I’m completely alright with expanding the role of women in Star Wars. Jaina Solo is bigger than God in our household. I’m also alright with heroes of different skin colors. But when it comes to sex, I don’t want to know about it. Heterosexual activity can be gross at times, but gay sex is just unappealing and I don’t want to be reminded of it when I look at an action figure. If Disney wants to kill Star Wars, then let these “artistic” types have their way with the traditions of Star Wars by turning it into the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Fans of the series will be turned off, but the real terror will come to Disney execs who measure box office receipts—when they find out that their cash cow just laid an egg—and that’s not something that’s supposed to happen in a galaxy far, far away.  Star Wars is not about gay pride, or inclusion. Sex is a “collective experience” something that is shared. Star Wars is about following the bliss of the individual and in saving yourself you save the galaxy. When many people follow their “bliss” evil is conquered and good resumes its work in the world. That has nothing to do with sex. But it has everything to do with what goes on in the human soul. Based on Wendig’s comments, he needs to go back to Star Wars school and Disney needs to re-think who they let drive the car of the franchise—because artists like Chuck are bringing that car back with lots of new dents, scratches, and sticky seats. And that’s just gross.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Vote No on Issue 3 in Ohio: Why marijuana and the people who use it are the scum of the earth

Two of the most prominent Tea Parties in Butler County, Ohio had a meeting at one of my favorite places, the Elk’s Club which overlooks Trenton to discuss the pros and cons of the upcoming marijuana legalization vote in November. I couldn’t make it as I had another engagement, but I wanted to go. Sheriff Jones was there along with others and I would have liked to been there to express my opinion. So I’ll give it now for posterity–for those who wonder where I stand on the issue. I am dead-set against the legalization of marijuana for any use—even for a rope. I hate the product in every form possible. I hate the shape of the leaves, I will not buy anything with hemp in it, and I hate the smell. More than once I have been in physical confrontations with people just for smoking it near me, which I promise will happen more often if it becomes legal. I hate the stuff in every form that it was created.

I do not support medical marijuana. If I was in pain and needed some chemical from marijuana to have relief from the pain, then it is time to die. I say that as I have had a broken wrist and ankle for the last two months, still competed in my summer bullwhip competitions, rode a bicycle for exercise 24 miles most of those days and I have not once taken an aspirin for the pain. So I sure as hell won’t be smoking or injecting anything from marijuana into my body ever for any reason. Pain I can deal with. A corrupt substance that brings out the worst of the human race I want nothing to do with. I HATE POT. And I hate people who use pot, who think about pot, or justify pot. There are better scientific methods for dealing with illness; medical marijuana is not one of them. It is a pathetic ingredient for weak people.

I have managed to get along ok with people who have used marijuana in the past. People make mistakes. I never used it. I have always had a hard-line against it all through my high school years. I had girl friends that used it, I lost friends to it, but they never, ever, ever consumed marijuana in my presence—ever. It was always a major no, no as a predicate for my friendship, and those who forced me to pick between friendship with them and marijuana learned quickly that I meant it when I said I would never speak to them again if they used it after knowing me. And I did not compromise on that prerequisite at any point in my life. There are a lot of people who are stupid when they are teenagers. They grow up a bit by their late twenties. In their thirties they start to regret being so stupid. And by the time they are in their forties, they are alright; I can begin to forgive them for their past transgressions involving pot. But I always look at them as a bit tainted. I don’t hold it against them in the fashion that they can’t erase their past mistakes, but because they chose to do it at some point in their life, it does have an impact on my assessment of their personal value.

For that reason, most of my best friends are well of 60 years of age. That is because most people my own age have at least tried pot at some point in their life. I get along plenty well with younger people, but I don’t have very many close associates because of my feelings toward pot. I can be friendly with people who are users—especially business friendly—but anyone who uses marijuana even for medical reasons I have little respect for. Some people grow up and mature away from pot and I treat them fairly. But always in the back of my mind look at them as a personality that was susceptible to its use—and that is an alarm flag to me.

I don’t care that the Indians (Native Americans) used pot. To my mind, that’s why they were so easily defeated by a bunch of people who came from Europe and stole their land from them. Smoking pot, peace pipes, and their entire drug induced shaman tricks are some of the reasons their culture has failed. Their foundations of earth worship and tribal nonsense centering on collectivism is disgusting to me. Dances with Wolves was a great movie by Kevin Costner, but the premise of it is rather ridiculous. The Sioux were slaughtered because they were a collectivist culture and pot is the chosen recreation among those types of people, because it turns off the individual mind, lowers the walls of personal sanctity, and introduces collective consciousness.

When I learned that Ayn Rand was willing to smoke pot to prove she was open-minded, it had an impact on how much I was willing to take her work seriously. I think she did great work, which eventually led to the basic foundations of the current libertarian political philosophy, but her comments about pot limit how seriously I regard her. And the same is true of libertarians. I am not one. When I hear the name I think of pot, so I could never be a libertarian. I don’t want my neighbor smoking pot in their back yard because I don’t want to smell the shit blowing around in the air anywhere near me.

Now the typical pot user would tell me, as they have for over four decades, that I need to “mellow” out, that I’m twisted up too tightly about too many topics—that I need to “loosen up.” Well, it’s not going to happen. I like who I am, and part of that is that I have never used pot, I’ve stood against it, and I am completely clean to have such an opinion. I have nieces and nephews who have used it and I don’t compromise on their behalf. It does change the way I see them. It saddens me to know that the bright little kids that they used to be were crushed into oblivion by the peer pressure use of pot. I still care for them, but I don’t respect them. That is the cost of using pot, and me finding out about it.

Many would say that I have an impossibly high standard. That may be. But I’m fine with that. When my wife and I were younger we knew a couple who were newly married who got severely stoned on their honeymoon, and I was a serious stick in the mud over the issue, which put a tremendous amount of pressure on our relationship at home, because I was virtually the only person who felt so strongly about such things that my wife knew. Everyone else, parents included were much more accepting of it. My position was that I’d rather be single and alone for the rest of my life than to ever try marijuana. In other wedding parties while everyone else was relishing in drunkenness and drug induced stupor I have always been the square one that didn’t partake in the mindless orthodox of collective numbness. And I am very proud of that.

With all that known, it should be clear what my position on legalizing pot in Ohio is. I’m not a live and let live type of person like libertarians are advocating. I’m not one who proposes more laws either. But in regard to marijuana, it is illegal now, and I’m fine with keeping it that way. It is a drug that I have observed makes people stupid. It destroys minds before they are fully grown—by the age of 25—and handicaps them for life. I don’t care what a government study group says in support of hemp, pot, marijuana, or even medial use of the THCs in the pot plant. I hate pot, I don’t find anything funny about Cheech and Chong’s movies. Pot is just bad. It’s stupid to smoke it, it’s weak to want it, and it’s a huge negative to a culture of any kind that uses it in any form. People should love to think, to be aware, and to live freely under their own ambitions. They should not want to numb themselves for any reason even under sickness. Life is meant to be lived and drugs alter that life. The Indians were wrong in their use. Every musician, actor, or pop culture idol is wrong in their avocation of it. There is nothing good that comes from pot and I’ve watched the behavior for a long time. Since I’ve been free of its use, I can speak clearly, and with certainty as to its evils. Pot has no place in a culture that anticipates that it should be ambitious, and forwarding thinking. Being comfortably numb, as the Pink Floyd song has advocated for years is not an honorable position. It’s the position of a weak and self-destructive personality that has little to offer existence except for excuses.

VOTE NO against the vile, despicable marijuana use in Ohio, in any and all forms. Vote HELL NO!

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.