Tag: Tea Party

A Rapidly Changing World: The freedom of new media is making all the difference

I had a few unique thoughts as I watched at 3 AM in the morning President Trump greet the three prisoners recently released from North Korea. My ol’ friend Gery Deer published his last article titled “Deer in the Headlines” in the Jamestown Comet, a newspaper he has written for over the last ten years largely due to it had become a negative influence in his life. He did a spot-on Channel 2 in Dayton featuring his reasons which I thought were interesting, and very reflective—and actually indicative of the kind of world we were becoming as North Korea came to the table and decided to play nice for a change. The reasons that caused that change were not the ones that created them in the first place and in lots of ways traditional media had been to blame. It took a president and a whole lot of new thinking people to break down the barriers created by the old ways of doing things—like the local newspapers that controlled the sentiment of each community. People involved in that old way are having a hard time figuring out what kind of world we are living in. To them everything is upside down—which I think is a wonderful thing. But it is not lost to me how people are feeling pain in the transition.

About ten years ago I knew all the media in my town of Cincinnati. I regularly corresponded with newspaper reporters and reporters from the main television news networks. Back then community comment sections were the hottest part of a newspaper that people read, and I was a frequent contributor. I also wrote for other publications as my work was published in Forbes and American Thinker. I had written a few books and done what authors did, learned to autograph them and attend conventions and film festivals promoting my work the way everything was traditionally done. As many know I have a lot of experience with talk radio and have even hosted a few shows from time to time appearing on big national shows and some local powerhouse stations in Cincinnati, and even doing work for one of my favorites WAAM in Ann Arbor, Michigan. I also did some work out in Hollywood and had several projects bouncing around Wilshire Blvd during the 1990s working with agents to get things done—so I had some point of reference when I started my blog Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom in 2010 to essentially drive elements of the growing Tea Party movement in a positive direction, because I could see that traditional media wasn’t enough. Newspaper editors didn’t give enough words per page to flush out complete thoughts, and television only provided 3 to 4-minute segments. Talk radio wasn’t much better, they only gave you about 12 minutes per segment, and many of the things that were coming on the horizon politically, and philosophically required much deeper thinking. Not even the publishing industry was fast enough to deal with all the changes. By the time someone wrote a book on a subject, the information was outdated, so what was needed was something that was vast, articulate, and could string a storyline of ideas over years in a very dynamic fashion. That was the reasoning for my decision to pretty much give up on all that traditional media and put my extra efforts into what has become Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.

Of course, nobody in traditional media wants to acknowledge that a blog has any real power. They refer to them as personal rant pages as if they were just the opinions of some loser Facebook poster. I don’t see them that way at all, rather I see a blog as a replacement for the opinion pages of newspapers, which is precisely what has happened. My blog is very popular, it gets many thousands of impressions each week and it has had great staying power. People from all over the world are still reading things I have written over five to eight years ago, where most newspapers scrap their content after a few years or charge subscriptions that people would be crazy to pay for information they can get free elsewhere. A major advantage that a blog has over other forms of media are that there really isn’t any advertising. I do a little on my site for issues that I care about, but not like a newspaper that has pages of ads that nobody wants to see just to get a little bit of news.

A blog also doesn’t have a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy. Editors are notoriously liberal, so even if you tend to be a conservative columnist, there is a bunch of rules that typically must be followed to get your work through the editor. I found that even in the most conservative publications that I had worked with in the past, that most of my best ideas would be scrutinized beyond recognition by the time it made it through the editing process—and I decided I didn’t want that kind of thing in my life. The trade-off is one of quality control, its good to have good clean editing to clean up written articles, but on the other hand, its likely better to get raw opinions from the writer to truly flush out opinions. I have decided that the raw expansive thoughts were better for my readers than a tightly controlled publication that was overly concerned with the structural aspects of writing. The rules weren’t as important as the content if you had to pick, and these days you do with the speed for which things happen. The news is happening so fast that all that extra scrutiny was getting in the way of an audience that wanted information and opinions faster than traditional media could produce that content.

Each day I write about 5000 to 6000 words, about 1500 on my blog site in articulate articles about a variety of topics and the remainder in a professional capacity, meaning I get paid. The blog to me is an even exchange, I flush out thoughts that people want to know more about. I’m not interested in squeezing out money from every little thing I do because I am more interested in helping to shape the world of tomorrow in a way that I can live with, so the words I produce I have no reason to get a monetary value for. And from experience I can say that my word content is very unusual—there are few people anywhere in the world who can produce that much material every day, seven days a week, yet I do and my readers have learned to trust that little light in the darkness. Working with traditional media, I often was frustrated that I could not get everything out that I wanted to say about something due to the limits provided. The thought process by traditional media was that if you couldn’t say what you needed to in five to ten minutes or in under 500 words, that you were rambling. But as I have learned over time, that was part of the problem, that approach, because many topics are very complicated, and they require extensive explanations to flush out the root causes of whatever we were talking about. As a writer I enjoy the freedom of not having slow minded editors and publication owners putting caps on my thoughts, so the blog is a much more powerful way to get a message out. And when you have a readership like I do, where some of the top minds in the country are reading everyday instead of reading the traditional newspapers, the effectiveness of communicating an opinion is much more powerful. My goal has always been to get people thinking—they don’t have to think just like I do, I just want people to think. I also don’t care about appeasing the masses in a popular way, I am more interested in the smart people who shape the world—truly. I really don’t care what some pot smoking lottery ticket buying loser thinks about what I say. But I do care about the billionaire, or the top-level politician and executive who makes decisions and needs to have context to think with.

And that brings us to North Korea and Donald Trump. If it were up to traditional media, those prisoners would have never been released and North Korea would still be acting like a country of tyrants. Donald Trump probably wouldn’t have been president either. A lot of the reason that traditional media hates Donald Trump is that he has proven them irrelevant, which hurts, but it’s the way of life these days. They have resisted the changes that were happening and stuck with what they knew rather than doing as I did, and that was to adapt. If you really enjoy writing, then write. If you want to get paid, then work for someone. I have a very successful career and I am personally very well sustained. I don’t need to sell my writing to validate my existence and there is a freedom in that. Yet it is within that freedom of new media that a passion for Donald Trump was able to take hold and elect someone out of the box, and it is because of his presidency that those North Korean prisoners were released. If we were still living in the days of printed media and half hour nighttime news broadcasts, the world would still be a much more dangerous place. Thankfully we aren’t, and I am very proud of the part that I play in all this. It has been certainly worth it and has been a very positive experience. Thinking is good, and anyway that we can get people to think is worth a lot more than a place card in traditional media. The respect obtained from media personalities is nothing compared to what comes from a job well done when people who need to hear important things at just the right time can take those words and save the world from itself.

Rich Hoffman

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

It’s all about Resisting Authoritarianism: Star Wars, George Lucas, Donald Trump and what we all see in the mirrior each day

Of course, it’s an official Star Wars Holiday, May the 4th, 2018 and at the precise moment that tickets went up for sale on Fandango I bought mine for Solo: A Star Wars Story. I am more excited for this movie than any one that I have thought about for over two decades now, so it made me very happy to get my tickets. Financial projections for the movie were released yesterday and they are predicting that Solo: A Star Wars Story will make in the $150 million-dollar range on its opening weekend. I honestly think it will be higher and will surprise a lot of people and here’s the reason why. Within this interview shown below that George Lucas and James Cameron did together for an AMC series is everything that is needed to be known as to why I love Star Wars so much and why it’s so successful. I know quite a lot about George Lucas and share with him some very basic foundation ideas about life. But ironically, both he and Cameron have evolved into Hollywood liberals over time and it is there where they depart from the rest of American society and have lost touch. All that is revealed in this short 3-minute clip, it is quite fascinating to watch.

Like George Lucas for me Star Wars is the most anti-authoritarian art that I can think of displayed on a mass scale—and that is what I love about it. That’s why even as a grown man, I still get excited about new Star Wars stories. Star Wars at its best is a warning against authoritarianism. And within Star Wars there’s no character more anti-authoritarian than Han Solo—he’s a free spirit to an almost extreme and most represents that young George Lucas who used to race cars and fight movie studios to make his movies. Deep in their hearts, most people yearn to be like Han Solo—even though they won’t always admit it, they don’t like authority figures, especially now in the United States with all the trouble we are discovering with our FBI and Deep State revelations. This new Han Solo movie comes at a particularly powerful time for movie audiences and I think its going to do some big business and may set Star Wars right again after starting off the new generation in a rough way under Kathy Kennedy. All the progressive messages that Disney and Lucasfilm stationed in San Francisco have not resonated with movie fans because it steps away from the formula of what makes Star Wars so great, something that I think George Lucas himself began to forget as he got older. So did James Cameron, I don’t think his new Avatar films will do quite so well as they did back in 2009 because he is a much less anti-authoritarian director than he used to be.

Where liberals like Cameron and Lucas go wrong is in their assumption that Democrats are the anti-authoritarians and that progressive society is the vessel to hold their message into the future. It actually is quite the opposite and I find it astonishing that being smart people, that they don’t see it. I would attribute their blindness to the fact that by working in the entertainment industry they are regionally surrounded by liberal types of people so they have lost touch with the origins of their anti-authoritarian roots and mistakenly associate all Republican ideas on the Nixon administration, which was the era for which they came of age. As creative people, they can see the need for anti-authoritarian ideas, but they can’t apply them to the world around them which is why neither filmmaker has made a hit in around a decade now.

Lucas made in Han Solo that young 1950s rebel that we know from race car tracks all across the country, the main character in Grease that John Travolta played, and the character from Happy Days that was played by Henry Winkler, the Fonz. When Ron Howard was brought in to direct this Solo: A Star Wars Story I knew immediately what was happening, and I am very excited to see those results not just because it goes back to a time in cinema that I grew up watching, but because all these very unique elements were coming together to give audiences something they just weren’t getting anywhere else in any other media format. There is a tremendous need for anti-authoritarian drama, maybe more now than ever, and while many of the modern filmmakers have forgotten what it was that made them great in the first place, Ron Howard is one of those pure directors who has liberal sentiments, but at his core he understands all this anti-authoritarian stuff better than anybody.

Like George Lucas Star Wars for me was always about pushing back against authoritarian influences and hod rod space ships. I enjoy greatly the imagination that comes from Star Wars productions, but nothing more than in their various vehicle designs. I’m a huge fan of their Incredible Cross Section books published for the Star Wars movies by DK and have spent many hours looking at them and thinking about how those vehicles could be made in real life. Hot rods and anti-authority sentiments go hand in hand in American society and are very much part of our own love of car culture. We love our cars, our ability to go where we want, when we want to, and still maintain our personal space. In the 1950s up to the 1970s cruising in our fixed-up cars was very important to Americans, especially young people. I would attribute this deep love to the success of the Fast and Furious movies, which also make a lot of money even though the plots aren’t that good. They touch on that deep love of cars and how they give individuals space against the authority figures in their lives.

However, as political reality would have it, there isn’t a more authoritarian political party than what the Democrats have turned out to be. Their authority has become the influence of mob rule where they shout down anybody who doesn’t fall in line and that is where the George Lucas and James Cameron political ideology falls apart and why they struggle with films in the modern age because the world has moved in a very different direction. All these filmmakers are anti-Trump when in reality it is the new president who like the Fonz has stepped onto the world stage and spit in the face of all authority figures. Donald Trump has a lot more in common with Han Solo than George Lucas or Stephen Colbert, yet at some deep level they understand it enough to put it down on paper in script form, but they can’t apply it to the political world around them due to their regional influences. It’s quite fascinating to watch.

But I couldn’t be happier with the result—I think for this movie Solo: A Star Wars Story that all the right creative pieces came together to really make something special that audiences are deeply craving. I think this movie is going to take a lot of people by surprise and is going to really reignite what Star Wars movies mean to people, and what sets these off from other forms of science fiction. Especially in the age of Trump where all the authority which has been built by political progressives—people who used to think they were part of the counter-culture, the old hippies from the youth of George Lucas and James Cameron, the new flower children, the environmental radicalism and the green is the new red movement people who gave birth to people like James Comey, Clapper and Mueller, I think Solo: A Star Wars Story will be best served as a mirror for us all to look at and realize how far many have drifted from the original idea of what we all truly desire to be—free people able to do what we want when we want to do it and that the real tyrants in our lives sometimes are those people who look back at us in the mirror every day.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Revealing Statement Made by James Comey: Beating the law at their own game

One of the greatest fears that people have is of the law. They think that because our legal system is written in such a way that it defies the type of education that we get in school, and that only specialized lawyers can interpret it for us, that the law is something they cannot defend against. We can protect our homes and families with guns, but when it comes to the law we are at the mercy of specialists and the court system which we all innately know can be leveled against us to serve the interests of our enemies. We know and understand that if our enemies want to come after us that we might have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees just to keep what we had before the legal incursion—so when the law comes after you, it means to destroy you and can be quite vicious. The law is never about individuals, it’s essentially about the institution of normality which has been established through collective case-law, to impose the order of the masses against individualized effort. That made James Comey’s comments recently particularly powerful when he spoke about his wishes that Hillary Clinton were president and what impact that might have had on his future. To me this one comment encapsulates the entire case against Donald Trump from the Mueller investigation, the Rod Rosenstein rebellion and the general behavior of the FBI over the last three years toward presidential politics:

“I think I would still be the FBI director…Secretary Clinton is someone deeply enmeshed in the rule of law, respect for institutions, a lawyer,” Comey said in response to a question about what he thought would have happened to him if Clinton had won the election.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/comey-id-still-have-a-job-if-hillary-clinton-won/ar-AAwAQcN?ffid=gz

Then consider what Rosenstein said about the mounting pressure to submit documents to House Republicans, that the Justice Department was not going to be extorted—obviously he forgets who he works for. Yet in the context of what James Comey has said, now with everyone under great pressure, pressure that the FBI, CIA, and all the career bureaucrats within the Department of Justice have never had to contend with in their entire lives—they are starting to say what they really think and we are learning a great deal about the values of our legal institutions which were always at the cores of our fears. Confirmations of our worst nightmares has surfaced, in a constructive way.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/justice-dept-won’t-be-extorted-rosenstein-warns-republicans/ar-AAwBVNM?OCID=ansmsnnews11

You should never have to fear the law unless you are up to bad things, but that’s not what we are talking about in this case. The people who are having their lives destroyed because they are somehow affiliated with Donald Trump’s acquisition of the Executive Branch wouldn’t find themselves in the trouble they are in now if they had not fallen on the wrong side of politics and that is the danger. We don’t elect people like Rob Rosenstein to office, we elect presidents who do fill those positions, so everyone in the Justice Department works for the President and should be more respectful. Comey should have been more respectful before he decided to leak information to his friend to inspire the special investigation that Robert Mueller is now conducting on his witch hunt, which is all it is at this point. The institutions of government as formed by ideological moderates in both the Republican and Democratic parties are using this investigation to keep an aggressive president from changing their good life as politicians being enriched by a corrupt process. They have been using for years the institution of law and order to preserve their racket, and its very disgusting. In the past when there have been challenges to the institutional system, those people were destroyed by James Comey and Rod Rosenstein—and people lost their net worth’s and even went to jail fighting the law which was protecting a corrupt band of Washington politicians.

People like James Comey have sold the purity of their institutional roles to themselves by not looking at the corruption which created the laws, but on the laws themselves as law enforcement officers. In a similar way that a cop collecting traffic citations to raise money for the local municipality will tell their victims, “I’m only enforcing the law” they rid themselves of the responsibility for the imposition by not paying attention to how that money is spent. They surrender their judgment to the greater aspect of the institutions they serve. Maybe city council members swipe money out of the coffers to pay for strippers in Las Vegas, or perhaps to fund a new government project that helps them get elected at the next election cycle, the money and how its used is of no mind to the law enforcement officer—they are only there to enforce the law. In the same way, Comey has surrendered his thoughts to the merits of law enforcement choosing not to deal with the corruption of the laws in the first place, and why they were created. In Comey’s world and that obviously of Rob Rosenstein, lying to the public isn’t hard because they are protecting the merits of the institutions that they serve, and in their world that is task they are bound to by duty. They don’t see anything wrong with doing such a thing because they are protecting the institution for which they are a part. When Comey said of Clinton that she had respect for institutions, what he meant is that like him, Hillary Clinton put individual value behind the need of institutions to function. He is blind to someone like her who functions beyond the scope of institutions because she has always been one of the law makers which formed the institutions in the first place. That’s why his statement is so interesting and revealing.

Many people in life associate their value by the role they serve in the greater world of their occupations. A lawyer will introduce themselves at a dinner party as such—an engineer will as well. A FBI Director likely will think of themselves completely by the role they play in society—not necessarily as a dad, a husband, or perhaps a collector of coins, Legos or baseball cards. What they do for a living is what they are to the world at large—they base their value on their status within the institutions they serve. However, thinking in such a way can make such people weapons against the innocent because those who control those institutions might be malicious and up to no good and if law and order can’t be counted on to protect the innocent, then who can? The answer is nobody. Comey, Rosenstein, Mueller and many others are functioning from this assumption that they were the top of the food chain of institutional value, and that their jobs were bigger than the Executive Branch. This occurred because previous presidents yielded to the awesome power we’ve given to our institutions of law and order, because of that basic fear we all have of the law, that we think we aren’t smart enough to translate laws for ourselves and need lawyers to protect us from that scary foreign language.

The case against Trump by the federal government is exposing this massive weakness in institutional judgment. The law is clearly on the wrong side of history and now they are finding themselves caught in the quandary of their own failed philosophies. It’s not enough to say to the world that they “serve” the institutions of law and order when we can see clearly that those institutions have been used against us for years, and now that we have a president in the Executive Branch we are seeing things we always suspected clearly for the first time, and we—the electorate—don’t like it.

We should not have to fear our own system of law and order. The institutions of the FBI and other government agencies should never seek to impose themselves on the public with fancy terminology that can only be interpreted by an overpaid specialist or the judges they play golf with on the weekends. If the law doesn’t serve the people of our Republic, then it’s no good. And Donald Trump was elected by us to represent our needs, and if the institution is picking a war with him, they are essentially picking a fight with all of us. And I can say this as a guy who has fought the law many, many, many times—sometimes even representing myself as legal counsel—I’m not going to take it. That’s for sure. While its true, I do have a lot of guns to protect myself from thugs, better than that I have a mind that isn’t afraid of any lawyer or judge. And neither should you dear reader. If you want our Republic to work properly, you need to stop fearing our own legal system, and to take command of it. Voting for a good person in the Executive Branch isn’t enough, obviously.

It’s time to change the title to this song–because they “ain’t” going to win this time.

Rich Hoffman

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

I Don’t Respect the FBI: Until they prosecute their own criminals, they have lost legal authority under Constitutional scope

Well, it’s about time. I wouldn’t call the report from Sara Carter regarding congressional lawmakers who have made a criminal referral to the DOJ on the many illegal activities surrounding James Comey and those directly connected to him partisan. Democrats have no trouble acting on any little rumor, so the GOP took too much time to take the substantial evidence presented and act on it in a meaningful way. I think it should have been done a year ago, but at least now thanks to all the additional information presented in FBI text messages and Comey’s very incriminating book, the case is quite clear. Here is how the report was released according to Sara Carter.

“Congressional lawmakers made a criminal referral to the Department of Justice Attorney General Jeff Sessions against former senior-level Obama administration officials, including workers of the FBI connected with the unverified dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, as well as those involved in the warrants used to spy on a former Trump campaign volunteer, this reporter has learned,” writes Carter.

“The lawmakers also made a criminal referral on former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and threats made by her DOJ against the FBI informant, who provided the bureau with information on the Russian nuclear industry and the approval in 2010 to sell roughly 20 percent of American uranium mining assets to Russia,” she adds.

“House Oversight and Government Reform Committee member Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Florida, along with nine other colleagues sent the letter Wednesday to Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray criminally referring former FBI Director James Comey, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for their involvement in the investigations into President Trump and alleged violations of federal law,” says the reporter.

http://ussanews.com/News1/2018/04/18/report-gop-leaders-file-criminal-referral-against-clinton-comey-lynch/

My position on this is simple, either some of these people go to jail listed above, or the current system of law and order loses my complete respect. That means they better never break down my door looking for evidence of some kind because I will consider them hostile anti-Constitutional agents functioning within America—and I have an obligation to protect that Constitution with force. That’s what the evidence shows them to be—hostile agents–so that is how they will be treated until the legal system can prove to me that they have things under control. I’m not going to put up with a double standard, where the law applied to me is one way, but for Hillary Clinton and James Comey, it’s another. That doesn’t fly, so I am eager to see the legal system do the correct things to rectify the situation. I personally would like to believe in our legal system again, but from what I have witnessed with the Department of Justice, the FBI and the Hillary Clinton campaign during the years of the Obama presidency, there was clearly a double standard which still exists. As Comey continues to conduct his book tour he seems oblivious to the prospect that he could go to jail for how he managed the FBI as a director, leaking documents, lying under oath to congress, and making decisions about serious matters based on partisan sensibilities. He’s admitted as much and put it in his book—and he did so with the assumption that he was above the law. If I had done the same thing I’d be under arrest right now. So until that double standard is resolved, I don’t recognize the authority of the DOJ, the FBI, the CIA or much of local law enforcement. They have a lot of cleaning up to do before they earn back my respect for their authority.

The FBI raid of Trump’s attorney Cohen’s office and personal residence did it for me. The destruction of Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort, just for being associated with the Trump presidency has displayed rather grossly that we are all in danger if the power of these government agencies are turned against us. If they can be turned on Trump, they can be turned on all of us, and I’m personally not OK with that. That is not acceptable behavior. If Martha Stewart had to go to jail for lying to the FBI and the rest of these people like Flynn, Manafort and Cohen are in similar trouble for similar reasons, then Hillary Clinton should get the death penalty, as should most of the Democratic Party because they are guilty of far, far worse. They not only lied, but they destroyed evidence and the fact that they are still free and not prosecuted tells us that there is a double standard. Justice isn’t blind, it’s fully awake and it is discriminating in a terrible way between liberals and conservatives. That is not how law and order was supposed to ever be.

For me, the sooner these prosecutions take place, the better. I would like to see our society return to a civil system of respect and order. But we don’t have it now because the government at the highest level attempted to cover up several crimes that they committed to get a criminal candidate elected into the presidency. The FBI was bending the law to pick their new boss and if that goes unchallenged, we essentially will never have law and order in America again. So there isn’t a choice in the matter. One of those names listed in Sara Carter’s report must go to jail—at the very least. Likely, several of them need to go to jail—including Comey. He at least did as bad as Martha Stewart whom he prosecuted for lying to the FBI. Hiding evidence and leaking government property to outside sources is worse than what Stewart had done and we just cannot allow that kind of behavior to go unchecked. Otherwise it will be worse for all of us the next time.

Just to be clear, I do not recognize currently the authority of the FBI or the DOJ and that will last until the bad actors listed on Sara Carter’s report are prosecuted. It’s not a political thing, it’s just about respect for the law. When the people who were hired to be good guys turn out to have abused the system for whatever reason, they must be punished to the furthest extent of the law, otherwise we can’t declare to have any laws or agency of enforcement that really matters. A failure to act on obvious evidence by our elected representatives would be to surrender law and order to the chaos of the power-hungry and the insurrectionists of liberal society—and I’m personally not OK with that.

If anybody really wants to fix things for the benefit of America they’ll act appropriately. I watched very carefully the 20/20 interview with James Comey’s wife, the Hillary Clinton activist. Clearly, she was calling out for middle America to join her in impeaching Donald Trump. She was a radical who has bent her husband’s ear in dangerous ways. Sure, she spoke well while doing it, she is a Beltway liberal who is articulate and smart, but she has plans and she used her husband to implement those plans. That in itself wasn’t illegal. It wouldn’t be the first time a man in a powerful position was brought down by a woman—regardless of if the woman was a prostitute or a wife of 40 years. The concept is the same, Comey found himself caught between Loretta Lynch, the White House, the ethics of law and order and a house full of Hillary Clinton supporters. He tried to walk the tight rope as long as he could until Trump was elected, and he was blamed for it at home. Because of pressure from his wife, Comey couldn’t do his job with the president. It didn’t help that all the agents working for him like McCabe, Lisa Page, and Peter Strzok were already making plans to use the FBI to end the newly elected president. So Comey tried to make everyone happy and it pushed him into breaking the law for which he is the guiltiest of everyone, because if he had done the correct thing in the beginning regarding the Clinton email server, the Democrats could have tried out someone else. Of course, from his point of view he had good intentions. But then again so did Martha Steward, Michael Flynn and many others who have fallen victim to an aggressive FBI. And now its time to pay the price and until that price is paid, I have no respect for the authority of the FBI. They might as well be a club of Girl Scouts selling cookies for as much as I care—they certainly aren’t guardians of law and order.

Rich Hoffman

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

How to End the Opioid Crises: Why people desire to do “drugs” and pursue “intoxication”

Everyone seems so concerned suddenly about the opioid crises that has been destroying American civilization for many years now—because the effects of such a society are just now becoming irreversibly evident. To date the best explanation, I have ran across understanding this crises came from Ayn Rand in her 1970 essay called “The Comprachicos.” Of course now that was 50 years ago so the damage is much worse than it was then, but it does go a long way into explaining how evident even in the early stages the devastating effects of opioid abuse truly was. One particular paragraph in that essay I think says it all, “drugs are not an escape from economic or political problems, they are not an escape from society, but from oneself. They are an escape from the unendurable state of a living being whose consciousness has been crippled, deformed, mutilated, but not eliminated, so that its mangled remnants are screaming that he cannot go on without it.” To my experience this is 100% true and should be the main thing taught in all institutions of learning.

You have to peel back the layers of life quite a lot to get to the notion that ruling humans desire to become Comprachicos over all others, and they have every intention of starting the process as early in childhood as possible. If you speak diligently to the busy soccer mom and school levy activists with a van full of kids at a Burger King on a Saturday afternoon after the morning games you would think by her conviction that everything she is doing is for her kids and their friends. She truly believes that she is sacrificing all her time and energy into doing what’s best for her children. That same type of person will work very hard with her husband of the moment to put away tens of thousands of hard-earned dollars to help pay for their children’s college tuition—so that their kids can have a shot at a good life. Most people, especially parents believe in these basic foundations of child raising, so they have no understanding of considering that the original intent of all of it was to cripple those young minds from the outset so that they would grow up and become adults living under the whims of a select number of rulers.

Yet if you have the right kind of mind—one that has learned to think from birth until a well-balanced adulthood, you can clearly see that the intention of public education, and the college experience from the outset was to cripple the minds of children instead of filling them with knowledge and the desire to think. A mind’s ability to process information is what makes the human being different from all other life in the universe, as best we can tell. Even when we do discover some form of bacteria on some moon in our Solar System that form of life is nothing compared to a thinking human being. A human being’s ability to think is quite extraordinary and I have no faith that A.I. will overcome the human brain’s complexities. Calculating information is one thing, conceptualizing it is quite another and that is what humans do best. Every living human being desires to think—it is evident as infants. The pain for most people is that the older they get, and the further away they get from those pure moments of youth where they were able to think without artificial restrictions placed upon their conceptual thinking, the unhappier they become. To anybody still left with the ability to think it is quite obvious that the purpose of all education as it has been developed in first world countries is to cripple the minds of young people into existing within the barriers placed there institutionally. A mind is crippled into thinking within the box of conceptual thought, not outside of it as humans were always designed to do.

The older a child becomes, and the more adult they strive to be, the more they must seek to numb themselves from the dueling realities at war in their minds. Inside their biological bodies is a mind that wants to think but functioning in the world that the body finds that the rules of existence require the mind to be numb to endure the stagnation of thought that confronts it. Sadly, kids with each year of their life gradually give up on their thoughts and fall back on the basic memorization of society’s rules of conduct to operate, and this pressure squeezes them until there is nothing left. By the time the kids hit the college years and go through their various initiations into adulthood, mostly involving alcohol and “partying” the minds of such people are lost usually for the rest of their lives—and the education system then can claim success in their original objective. Such people pick their political party affiliation—which those in charge rule covertly behind the curtain so that the illusion of “democracy” can be maintained—people believe they are contributing factors in the process of their lives. They pick their occupation which is often controlled by the same forces as their chosen politics. They pick their sexual mates—who are often molded to be gate keepers to this hidden world of compliance—to ensure that as people buy their homes, their cars, and mow their lawns, that the illusion of self-expression stays within the confines of social acceptability—molded by the same sexual mates which deliver a new crop of brainless youth to the next generation.

Yet deep down inside is that will to think which was there at birth, and the now grown adult must shut down those thoughts with drunkenness, and other forms of intoxication. If they can manage to convince their doctor to give them some “meds” for their achy back, or their stiff knee, or their kid who has a “hyperactive” disorder, they’ll take those drugs in a second and they’ll numb their brains on a Saturday afternoon blindly watching a college football game without a thought in the world except what is required to make a living so they can make their house and car payments.

Before we can do anything about the opioid crises, we must tackle the cause of it. Attacking the supply side isn’t enough because the desire is still there to shut down the mind so that it’s thinking isn’t in conflict with the rules of society. People desire to be thinking creatures—biologically, but our method of human development currently requires us to turn off our thoughts and to conform to a static system of rules where we endeavor to send our kids to pre-school, enroll them into sports running around all weekend to satisfy those requirements, and to send them off to college without considering that all those elements are meant to destroy the minds of our children instead of fulfilling them. That same levy fighting soccer mom can only find relief when she can get her lips on a glass of wine or some other intoxicant, and she craves it like a person in the desert dying of thirst craves water—for much the same reason. Her husband does the same with his beer and his mixed drinks. At another time in their lives or even occasionally with friends they might smoke a little pot to take the edge off. And what are their kids to think of their defeated parents? They can do only what they are taught, so they follow in their footsteps and before we can all blink, all these people are abusing every drug legal and illegal that was ever created to turn off their minds so that they can live without the conflict of their true desires at war with the socially imposed rules of conduct.

To solve the opioid crises, we must reinvent ourselves as human beings, and that is no small task. But it’s the only one that will do the job. The true problem with drug abuse is that the intellect of the human mind is not conducive to the institutional parameters of historical thinking. All human institutions were formed from previous notions of science and religion—and they are obviously not relevant in a healthy way to modern life. So our minds are locked in conflict and the best answer our social norms have come up with is to bend our minds to institutional thinking rather than what our vast imaginations are informing us is the real needs of the human race. And that is where we must focus.

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

Don’t Worry About War with Russia, Syria, Iran, or China: Cheaters on a test have no ground to stand on

Let me say regarding the Trump action in Syria that on many levels it is justified. There are people who think the president should not have been pulled into the conflict, and there are those who are terrified of war with Russia. Neither concern is warranted. Essentially, there will never be peace in the Middle East so long as Iran and Russia are propping up dictatorships in Syria. We can’t run from evil. It’s that simple. Like it or not for there to be peace in the world, the world is going to have to become more American. There will never be a world of differing opinions that just mesh together seamlessly. There must be an epistemological starting point for peace and that must come from at least basic shared ideas. Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran are all hostile communist nations—Russia still is in many ways, and until they truly join the world as free market capitalists their values will never match those of America or even Europe, and conflict will always be a threat. So there is no way for America to turn away from the gassing of the Syrian people and allow the Middle East to fall under the rule of ISIS terrorists and Russian manipulation.

There will be no war with Russia, like I’ve said about China and North Korea, none of these countries have the money for it. They are bullies who must act with force to get what they want—and so long as they are functioning in the world this way, there will be senseless death and destruction attached to random terrorism. Russia certainly doesn’t have the means to go to war with the United States. They are broke now let alone after any kind of military engagement with the United States. For years, especially during the Trump administration Russians have been provoking American troops whenever possible and over the last few weeks a lot of comments have been made. Trump has been standing up to the bullies of the region even though he’d rather think about something else. And when they crossed the line, he had to take action because when you tell a bully you are going to punch them in the nose, you had better do it if they don’t yield. Russia continued to back Syrian aggression so Trump had to send in the targeted military strikes.

But do not worry about provoking Russia. This is all part of draining the swamp. The Deep State has always used the threat of hostile nations to scare the American people into paralysis in believing that we all need those extra security offerings provided by the FBI, CIA, and Homeland security. To sell that threat they need people like Putin to be thriving in the world, so they go to great effort when our eyes are turned away to provoke hostile actors around the world to believe they have a seat at the table. But guess what, they don’t. I’d refer to Plato’s shadow man theory from his great book The Republic. The Deep State creates these shadows on the wall to keep our attentions on the scary practitioners of existence to essentially keep that Deep State in power. The Deep State even controls what we call political ideology, what the ideology of the political left and right are by manipulating over a long period of time the differences between the epistemologies of political theory in the United States. But the truth is to peek behind the curtain and eliminate the real threats, to take down the puppets and drain the swamp water where everyone in the Deep State is hiding.

Only when all the enemies of the world are conquered, which is very near a reality after just over a year of a Donald Trump presidency, will people come to know that the Deep State has been always the real threat. Without the Deep State there is no Putin, there is no China, and there is no trouble in the Middle East. And when I say “Deep State” I’m not talking about a bunch of black masked Bilderbergers of wealthy elite—they are just people like anybody else. I’m talking about the ancient yearning of people to desire to rule others as either kings, religious leaders, or military generals who truly desire to take mankind back to the days of the primitive—intellectually, so that they can rule the way they understand—through fear. They need deficits, they need villains, and they need a big strong police state to keep people from looking at anything too closely. In truth however, and this is what people are learning, all those threatening countries are not very strong unless the Americans prop them up to look meaner than they actually are. By Americans I’m talking about the CIA, and the FBI—the American media, and the other agencies who make their livings off protecting “us” from those same villains.

For over two years now we were led to believe that Russia’s President Putin hacked our election system and deposed the incompetent Hillary Clinton putting instead Trump in place. Well, Putin had nothing to do with me—it was people like me who voted for Trump and I’m no fan of Putin. If Putin wanted anybody to win the American election of 2016 it would have been the pushover loser, Hillary Clinton whom Russian had already smacked around plenty when she was Secretary of State. They certainly didn’t want a businessman in the White House who understands money, because it is money that truly does decide who the winners and losers are in the world. By defeating the remaining tyrants in the world through exposure and turning the formerly hostile countries into capitalist zones to truly compete with the United States in trade, that is the only real path to peace which would then allow America to turn back toward itself and not get stretched across the earth putting out every little fire that every bad actor known to mankind can ignite.

I think its great that American is bombing targets in Syria and is calling the bluff of Russia. I told everyone who reads here that there wouldn’t be a trade war with China, look how fast Xi caved on his tough talk. Do you know why dear reader? Because they need American imports much more than we need them. All communist countries have one fundamental problem, their societies do not produce citizens with imaginations, so they have serious intellectual property problems. That means they have to steal it from those who do, and that is how China has been making their living for a long time. Russia is in much the same boat, without the West to copy off of, they are left to their own devices. They are like that kid in school who didn’t study for a test and have to cheat off the person next to them for the answers. Well the person who did study and has all the answers has the leverage in that situation. Halfway through the test if they decide to put their hand over their paper, the cheater is stuck with no resources to complete the test. That is essentially what Trump is doing in China, what he has done in North Korea, and what he is about to do with Russia and Iran. When you have the power position you use it, especially if it creates an opportunity for peace. Which is precisely what is happening presently in Syria.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Criminal FBI Agents Robert Mueller and James Comey: Once you’ve seen a teacher’s bare breasts, respect can’t be returned

I have a school aged grandson who is learning what its like to transform from an unrestricted young person acting on his own volition largely and integrating a portion of his daily habits to the mass hoards of society. He’s learning to stand in lines with other kids and how to go along to get along and its very painful for me knowing that many of the things that kids learn are completely wrong. The habits that young people learn are not conducive to making smart, useful adults—they are taught to make compliant future followers of whatever political order emerges out of a mixed economy driven largely by a Kantian tilted philosophy. The emphasis of human development thus is on social engineering and not individual needs. But you can’t hide kids away from the world either. They have to learn to navigate it without being social rejects, they have to learn to become leaders and they can’t do that unless they understand how people live and function—so they have to stand in lines and participate in mass events drawing out their own conclusions about how their individuality feels about what they witness. But like I said, its painful to watch. The results for many are what we see in our modern FBI now that they’ve been caught in some of the most criminal activity imaginable. If Trump had not been elected president the behavior they had been engaged in would have continued unfettered. Only because he was elected did it expose the FBI criminal network to those of us in society with a mind to see outside the lines at their true intentions. As a result, I lost my faith in the FBI two years ago. Now, I view them as part of an enemy force working against our Constitution in America which obliges me to protect it from them—and that’s a big change in opinion that is growing by the day. It has taken most people a long time to accept that reality, because we were all taught to stand in lines as kids, but with each week more are seeing the obvious. Robert Mueller and his friend James Comey are enemies of the state as it should be, and those who support them are guilty as well which has put us all in a very dangerous place.

I think it is stunning that Robert Mueller allowed under any connection to his out of control multimillion dollar investigation commissioned by never-Trump political opponents to overturn a legitimate election, and to raid the personal office of Michael Cohen—Trump’s personal lawyer to advance his stalled case by any means possible. It’s an obvious abuse of authority given to the FBI to conduct the nation’s business. Yet the FBI isn’t raiding the offices of anybody else, only political opponents to the established order of Washington D.C. That should send shock waves of concern to everyone, no matter what political side they are on. That type of FBI behavior coupled with what we have learned about Facebook this past week and the intrusion on our privacy that is possible with it shows all too clearly that outside the lines of our normal living are some very sinister elements which require a correction. The FBI is out of control and is acting as a villain, certainly not the white hatted law enforcement that we need in a civil society. They have been weaponized by political opponents to violate the lives of most of us, and the only reason they thought they could get away with it was because most of us learned to stand nicely in line while the authority figures kept us from looking too closely at what they were really up to.

I was never a kid who learned to stand in lines in school. I did of course what I had to in order to survive that public school culture, but I never liked it, instinctively. There was a gym teacher who was having an affair with one of the sixth-grade teachers. She was unmarried and young, he was older and married and we’d see them flirting with each other, and everyone knew what was going on. But they thought it was a secret and they often abused their authority to keep it that way. Anyone who snickered at their behavior found themselves overly scrutinized during gym class and even the lady would show aggression at students who let it be known they knew about the affair. Well I snuck out of lines a lot, and I snuck out of class a lot taking extended bathroom breaks so I could explore around the school and on one such trip I found those two in the process of having sex in a janitor’s closet, during school hours. The first reaction of the gym teacher was to tell me I didn’t see what I saw and that if I told anybody I’d be in big trouble. So you know what I did? I went straight from that closet and into the principal’s office and told on the two. I didn’t waist five minutes. But guess what, I was told that what I was saying was a very serious allegation and that they’d look into it—and I got into trouble for being out of class. I received several weeks of detention and was told that I needed to mind my own business—basically to stay in line and keep my eyes looking forward, and not to question those of authority around me. Me and that gym teacher developed a hatred for each other that we never got over. I had him for gym class for the next three years and there was always tension between us. Of course nothing ever happened to either of the teachers and they married by the time I was a freshman in High School. I was treated pretty harshly by the gym teacher from then on which spoiled any love for sports that I might have developed during that period because I couldn’t stand the guy who ran the sports programs. However, what I did learn was to always look outside the lines at the many crimes being committed in full view if only people could turn their heads and look at them—because there are a lot. That is precisely the case with Robert Mueller and the political thugs who support him. The crimes are quite audacious.

I learned early in life to always question authority figures because titles alone didn’t make them good. The FBI isn’t just good because they are part of American law enforcement just like teachers aren’t good just because they are employed by a good school. We put our trust into the institutions that these employees become a part of, but if they abuse that trust, then there are consequences. And with Robert Mueller, if he couldn’t find anything with the amount of money he has spent investigating Trump, he should have said so. But because the investigation was started out of revenge for firing his friend James Comey, the endeavor was never in pursuit of justice, but impeachment of the President. He certainly isn’t conducting this investigation into Trump to make me happy. But after a year to come up short and desperate then abusing his authority to have Trump’s lawyer raided is a major overreach. You don’t see the FBI raiding the offices of Obama’s lawyers, or the Clintons. You don’t see indictments of Loretta Lynch—which means everything that’s happening now is political. That means that you or I dear reader could be singled out for abuse by the FBI not for crimes committed, but because we aren’t on the side of the political establishment that people want us on and that is not an acceptable criteria. I have lost faith in the FBI. Just like that teacher in the sixth grade, once I saw her bare breasts and the gym teacher with his pants down around his ankles I lost respect for both of them and no amount of abuse could restore it. That is the pain of seeing things for how they are, but its important to do so whenever possible, even though we are all taught as little kids to keep our focus on what they tell us to, while the authority figures in our life commit many crimes—and expect to get away with it.

Rich Hoffman

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

Business Professionals in Politics: Now that the results are clear, we may never go back

No matter what people think of President Trump’s ideology, there is no question as to his unequivocal success. Watching him speak at a kind of town hall, round table meeting in West Virginia we were seeing an Executive Branch veteran now taking charge of things as he’s come to know them, and it was pretty magnificent to witness. The difference really comes down to experience in life, in how career politicians used to do things and how people who have been successful in private enterprise have. I think this is historic because all of politics has been shaped by the aristocratic model of yesterday. Yet due to the economic philosophy of capitalism, which is unique in the world, America has produced different types of people who are now entering politics. Trump being of course the most obvious but I was at an event earlier today where Jim Renacci spoke at a meet and greet and he had the same kind of swagger—directly influenced by his similar background. There is a tremendous difference between successful people seeking important political positions and lawyer types who enter those fields to satisfy the reality that their field of endeavor is already saturated and political theater gives them something to do—even if they lack the experience to be effective.

Many years ago, I was working on a big deal and I had to sit down and work out the details of a project that had several multimillion dollar investors on the other side of the table. I wasn’t any older than 22 years old at the time, so I didn’t have much money to work with. But I did have a multimillionaire on my side who was very successful also and he quizzed me on the meeting before I left. He was satisfied with my approach but before leaving his office to go to the big meeting he gave ma a $100 bill and told me to put that in my wallet during the meeting. He said that knowing it was there would straighten out my posture and communicate nonverbally information in my favor. It was kind of a Dumbo carrying a feather thing believing it would make him fly kind of psychological element. He said that the people across the table would be able to detect if I had empty pockets and the meeting would be different if I did. They’d know if I was just an empty pocketed fast-talking kid, or an anomaly that had something they wanted and could be brought to the deal making table.

I did my thing and of course it went well, and afterwards the millionaire asked for his $100 bill back. I thought that was odd because he spent $100 bills like they were pennies, but I gave it back. As he took it he said, “now go earn your own.” I understood what he meant, and I worked hard to do just that and the process for me was certainly a building block experience. I learned that what I went through isn’t all that unique, most people who do those types of capitalist endeavors go through a similar process, and those experiences make a certain kind of resilient person forged through trail and tribulation into the proper conduct of business.

Years later when I was still pretty young I was on the Darryl Parks radio show being talked about as this cut-throat business guy who was giving public education a rough way to go because I was measuring success and failure based on real world business applications as opposed to political ones. For instance, I was crashing the argument that teachers had which stated they were overworked just because they took work home to finish on the weekends or had to answer an email while off normal operating hours. To my understanding that was normal behavior to work 7 days a week all hours of the day, even when on vacation, because that’s what it takes to be successful in business. Rivals of mine thought it funny that I was being referred to on the radio as this business tycoon because they wanted to believe that my pockets were empty and thus so was my experience level. That was largely because I only let them see a part of my life and not the whole picture because I had learned all those years before with that $100 bill lesson that the best way to get things done is with a variety of approach and that meant sometimes playing up or down the expectations of your opponents. At that time, I rode a motorcycle to work everyday of the year and even sometimes a bicycle the full 12 miles one way that I traversed in all types of weather the whole way. My rivals drove of course BMWs, Mercedes, and all the variations of Cadillac from the latest models and part of their reasoning for doing so was to impress their peers and set the table for any discussion that would take place to their advantage. They assumed that I was poor and had to live out of a box because I didn’t display the usual elements of success that they understood. So for them it was quite earth shattering to hear me talk on the radio and to learn that I had the leg up on them in every category of dealing, which of course, worked to my advantage.

Part of that hard commute wasn’t just to build an impression into my rivals, it was to give me that psychological advantage over those around me who had grown soft in their positions. Their expectations were a weakness I could exploit, and you can bet that I did. They made it very easy for me. It is always good to keep people off-balance when you have to deal with them on some important matter. In many ways its just like fighting another person, you don’t want to give away everything you’re going to do during the fight. Now you may be the superior person, but why make it harder on yourself by letting the people you’re fighting know your every move and defense. It’s good to be unpredictable and to keep those you are dealing with guessing as to what your motives are. By the time they figure it out, they will already be defeated.

That appears to be the big difference between Trump and the traditional caliber of politician. Even the China trade disputes and the NAFTA negotiations between Mexico and Canada are showing they are no match for President Trump who is just applying basic business ethics to the world of politics—and he’s easily beating everyone. The media trained to think of politics in the rules of university merit are bewildered as to what’s going on because nothing Trump is doing was taught to them by anybody. Trump is using every little trick he has ever learned about business negotiations to squeeze out better options for the United States and its beginning to show unquestionably—and people of all backgrounds and political ideology are enjoying the results.

You may have the best resources, and you may even be the best person, but you never want to give away the easy stuff. If you are not working with a lot, its good to show up to an important meeting with a $100 bill in your pocket. If you have a lot, but want to force others to underestimate you, its good to let them think you don’t have a $100 in your pocket and that you are in desperate need of a penny. Sometimes its good to show up to an important meeting where everyone has a $100,000 automobile in the parking lot on a bicycle dripping in sweat. And sometimes its good to raise tariffs on Chinese goods to force them to reveal how much intellectual property they have been stealing, or to send troops to the border to truly confiscate money from drug dealers so that a wall can be built along the Mexican border, or to get the Canadian Prime Minister to eat out of your hand so that he can’t be accused of bad trade practices. These are the skills of a businessman, not the politician. Typically, the politician shows up for hard meetings ready to shake hands and with an eye at the lunch menu. Their role in these matters has traditionally been cosmetic. But not anymore. Now that the world is getting a taste of business people in political matters. I don’t think they will ever go back to how it was—and that would be a wonderful thing to see.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Liberal Loon Nasim Najafi Aghdam: Why all PETA activists are just a few bad experiences away from mass murder

So what happened to the Urmia, Iranian immigrant Nasim Najafi Aghdam to cause her to shoot up the YouTube headquarters just south of San Francisco—at the northern tip of Silicone Valley? In a bizarre attack on the Google led company she shot four innocent people before apparently killing herself thus ending a bizarre life of liberal crusades practicing veganism and the religious practices of Baha’I, for which her family reportedly fled Iran to practice spending roughly a year in Turkey two decades prior. She legally bought the gun she used, her family warned police who had spoken to her just 11 hours prior to the shooting and nothing set police off to look into Aghadam’s actions any further. Aghdam also didn’t know any of the YouTube employees—she just randomly selected them, so what gun law, or law of any kind could have helped the situation? What might we say was the cause and corrective action of this particular shooting?

The first thing I’d say about Nasim Najafi Aghdam is that she was obviously suffering from mental health issues, the way a lot of liberals currently are. The reason is that their view of the world is not conducive to what is actually happening. As a PETA activist Nghdam was crusading against the nature of life itself, where those at the top of the food chain eat those under them. To any rational person such an arrangement is insane and if the question of why god would ever design such an existence is legitimately asked, only insanity can begin to provide an answer. Most of us just accept that we are the superior life form and that if we want to eat another animal, then we do so. But to ask the question as to why, or to go so far to believe that one must be a crusader against the very nature of life to the extent that Aghdam was, then mental instability is the path such people usually find themselves on.

To satisfy the illusion of working against such a system of living, where people eat those cute little animals that were seen in Aghdam’s YouTube videos, the young liberal activist had to convince herself that the work she was doing through her art had merit. So using the First Amendment Aghdam made a series of bizarre videos dedicated to her 10,000 YouTube subscribers which paid her a little money and gave her a taste of American life. But the moment that was disrupted with a policy change her natural liberal tendencies formed in her home country of Iran clashed with the merits of American capitalism where everywhere she looked she could only see a slow killing evil—which is common to liberal people who hate capitalism—she felt her only option was to attack the company that brought her so much grief, which so happened to be the company that provided her with the vehicle of expression to begin with.

Of course, once the media learned that Nasim Najafi Aghdam was one of their target demographic groups—she was a foreigner from the enemy country of Iran, she was a young female, and she was a PETA activist, the story of her attempted murders jumped right off the front page within 24 hours. YouTube as a company touches most people in the world these days, so the public interest in the story was very great, but the story was pulled anyway because the gun control debate couldn’t be advanced otherwise. People like Aghdam face an American culture with only the objective of changing it and once they realize that they can’t they get frustrated and sometimes become very violent. The media on their part do not understand why it isn’t white NRA members who are attacking these places and shooting people up—because they don’t understand the essential meaning behind the NRA and the people who make up their membership. Yet it is the typical American heritage to use the gun to hunt for one’s own sustenance who fled European oppression, much the way Aghdam did in Iran. Only one side was in harmony with existence and the other was against it—trying to change that reality with activism.

The average PETA activist who takes off their cloths and puts themselves in cages in public are not that far away from the kind of murderous activity that Aghdam indulged in. Once they put animals at the same level of human beings and protest that all life is equal they are going against the laws of the entire universe and that can be very frustrating for them. The essential pitfalls of the typical liberal is that they fight for equality by trying to repress development, intellectual and scientific. That is the core argument behind all climate science and even religions that hope to deny science to support their ancient texts. Both approaches are seeking to bend reality to the desires of their observations and when those don’t align, mental instability is often the result. Not being in accord with life is to stand against the trajectory of its experience, and liberals are often guilty of that generality. Not all of them go so far as Aghdam did, but in her case she had not been in America long enough to understand how the country works at the epistemological level. She was using the concept of American capitalism provided by YouTube to communicate her radical ideas but the moment she lost that device, she couldn’t see any other way out but to commit murder.

Imagine Aghdam going to the target range learning to use her Smith & Wesson 9 mm knowing that she intended to use it to kill employees at YouTube, and speaking calmly to the police when they found her asleep in her car on her way to commit the murders—knowing that once she went that far that she would never have a normal life again, that she’d either be killed or put in jail for the rest of her life—yet her activism drove her on toward a level of radicalism that clearly crossed the line. Her desire to change the world superseded her desire to live within the context of existence.

Most conservatives that I know, particularly those who are in the NRA would never take such a radical step because they like life too much. They enjoy hunting, watching football games on Saturdays and Sundays while grilling out in the backyard. They by the nature of their values are aligned with existence, that we have to eat to live and that something has to die so we can continue on, and they find ways to deal with that universal conundrum—what makes us so special to be at the top of the food chain and thus able to decide what lives and dies? Such discussions are at the heart of the American experience and lots of people come to the United States so they can participate in that relationship. But for those like the liberal Aghdam, they don’t accept the basic concept of American life, so how can they assimilate to it? It is quite clear that a certain percentage of liberals are just crazy by the nature of their opposition to universal law. Not all of them kill people to bend those laws toward an equality that they dream might exist if only this happened or that happened. But I would say that all liberals who are activists against basic realities are prone to such meltdowns and should be considered dangerous. Any of them could be one disappointing event away from mass murder just because they don’t have any other way of interacting with the world except in protests and threats—and when those things don’t work, they have only murder to fall back on.

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

The Mind of Austin Bomber Mark Conditt: My experience in knowing people who wanted to blow up stuff

It doesn’t get the FBI off the hook for all the crimes they have committed in Washington D.C. or the many police organizations around the country who seek to preserve a protective barrier to allow a deep state to permeate our lives unimpeded—but the police work in Austin regarding the serial bomber there was what we all expect. Under great pressure, they did a wonderful job of figuring out who Mark Conditt was, as the 23-year-old terrorist bomber and how to pinpoint his location and stop the crimes giving the young kid no other option but to blow himself up saving us all a lot of money in legal costs and incarceration. The way they captured him was just as good as the fact that they did. Snuffed out of his hideaway hotel outside of Austin Conditt knew the cops were onto him so he tried to leave in his car noticing that they were following. He pulled over to blow himself up before he was caught. Conditt waited for the cops to get close enough before detonating the device hoping that he’d injure some of them with shattered glass, but the wounds were minimal, and the incident ended quickly—and in a good way. You could say the kid went to pieces over the incident.

Yet the most disturbing attribute to the case was something I have been warning about with more frequency. Conditt left behind a confessional video that showed what viewers called an “outcry from a very challenged young man.” From all outward appearances Mark Conditt looked like a nice all-American boy. But like the millions of kids who are growing up now in broken homes where it would be assumed that government schools and the many institutions of human endeavor could replace the need for strong families to raise children, that has turned out not to be the case. However in Conditt’s case, he had a conservative background, got along with his sisters, was renovating a house with his dad and worked at a semiconductor manufacturer. By all outward appearances, the kid had it together. So what could have possibly gone wrong?

I’m sure it will take time to get all the details out as to why this kid who seemed to have it all literally came apart in his car as authorities closed in to arrest him for terrorist activity, but I would add the suggestion that there is a quiet desperation emerging from all young males in this modern world which seems to be handing out opportunities to everyone but young white males these days—ostracizing them in the process with a sense of hopelessness. Conditt was oddly enough homeschooled which is unusual for a violent case of this kind but does bring up some interesting observations. Sometimes it is just as bad to know too much as it is to not know enough. It looks to me at these early stages that Austin Conditt knew too much about the way his future was shaping up and it generated anger in him that he destructively chose to unleash in this devastating way.

I knew a kid like Conditt once who grew up in a very conservative house in a very conservative community who ate lunch with me a million years ago in the cafeteria at Lakota schools. Every day we had a group of kids who sat at our table where we planned to set off a series of bombs on the last day of school in our freshmen year. I was the group leader who pulled everyone together for the endeavor, but my friend was the mastermind behind the various bomb devices. The intention wasn’t to kill anyone, but it was intended to show our disrespect for the education institution we all felt trapped in. This kid was a valedictorian in our freshmen class and at that time had the highest scores in any conceivable testing available at the time. After hanging out with me for the next three years though he dropped down into the top ten in our school because I was always telling him that all that ranking stuff was useless. The thing that plagued him most was that everyone around him, his family, his school, and even the state of Ohio had his life all planned out for him and his desire to blow things up stemmed from a quiet declaration to claim his own life for himself. I think his friendship with me kept him from really hurting anybody. Every day at lunch we planned for this big last day of school event, and when it finally came, instead of blowing up cars and entire buildings it turned out to be a nice compromise of a few fireworks launched by the buses—totally harmless and quite festive.

My concern as the day came near that if we actually blew things up that our entire summer would be ruined with court appearances, so I think what we ended up doing was a good thing in the end. The fireworks went off. People liked them. We all got on our buses and went home for the summer and we moved on. That kid spent the summer with me doing all kinds of adventures and by the next year was a different person no longer angry at the institution itself but was much more able to focus his anger. That lasted so long as we were friends. Many years later when we stopped having much in common to talk about he drifted back to that same self-destructive state. It wasn’t because there was anything wrong with him, other than he was so smart that he didn’t have filters to see things other than how they really were, and that was just too much pain for him.

I see in Mark Conditt a lot of the same kind of thing. He was born into a time when the Christian white male is being condemned in the media just for existing, and it can look to such a young person that there isn’t anything to live for. It also provokes a person to lash out at the system that is blaming him for just being alive. So for those guilty of it, there is a lot of danger in trying to redistribute the notion of privilege from one sector of civilization to another. When it is considered that opportunities are limited and one sector of society or another will have access to those opportunities, there will always be someone like Mark Conditt out there looking to lash out at how miserable their future forecasts are. The real problem is in the artificial limits that our present society has created for people, especially young people. There are opportunities for everyone if we would take away the regulations that prevent economic growth and allow the human imagination to expand our society in such a way that adventure in thought and action would give kids like Conditt and everyone else a shot at the dreams that can be achieved in America—instead of leaving them as hopeless husks of human flesh victimized by the limits of a progressive oriented society.

If we really want to solve these problems we have to deal with the philosophy that is delivering youth to these desperate outlooks. To become a terrorist bomber takes some real commitment, and the energy behind that commitment comes from somewhere. We have to understand that, because there isn’t any regulation on earth that can stop such a desire. Those who think that a more managed society is the answer they couldn’t be more wrong. The more that human beings are regulated, the more they desire to rebel. 95% of society may fall in line, but there will always be a dangerous few who will rebel on any side of the political spectrum. The real solution is in less social tampering and unleashing more opportunity to more in the world. If there is a theme to the violence of human civilization it is in the struggle for the perception of opportunity. Without the hope for opportunity, people—some people—will do desperate things. And so long as that is the case, dangerous people like Mark Conditt will always be out there.

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