Tag: Teachers Unions

Keep Pam Geller Alive: Get wealthy while fighting terrorists–find out how

Not so oddly enough I know something of the two primary figures at the center of the AFDI Mahammad Art exhibit and contest in Garland, Texas which took place on May 3rd 2015. The winner of the art contest I have covered here before, Bosch Fawstin—who is the man behind the Pigman graphic novel whom I was made aware of as a potential partner for my own Cliffhanger stories. CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW.  Then of course I know a bit about Pam Geller, who organized the event. Pam is a long-standing Ayn Rand fan and is 100% all in when it comes to pushing back against radical Islam. When my novel Tail of the Dragon was being released I approached Pam about providing a blurb. She was willing until she realized that the novel didn’t deal directly with the problem of Islamic radicalism. She declined as she didn’t want to stray her attention away from the task at hand, bringing the public an awareness of radical Islam with the laser guided diligence that she has been providing for years. So it didn’t surprise me to see that these two characters were at the center of all this controversy. Fawstin won essentially by drawing a simple cartoon of Muhammad yelling to the viewer, “YOU CAN’T DRAW ME!” as the cartoonists states back with his pencil “THAT’S WHY I DRAW YOU.” For that simple drawing Fawstin has gone into hiding as Pam Geller had a Fatwa declared against her. To understand the lunacy behind the “fatwa” which is an issuance of death aimed at a target, this video will tell the story very well. This is what we are dealing with represented by Islamic Imam Anjem Choudary.

Watching that exchange pissed me off more than just a little. I personally thought Pam pushed it a bit by hosting the art show just as South Park a few years ago did something similar by putting Muhammad into their television show on Comedy Central. I’m pretty tolerant of people’s religious beliefs as I view them all as a kind of baby step toward universal understanding of the forces truly at work. To me Islam and this prophet Muhammad are just rip offs of Zoroastriansim. That particular religion dates back to around the early 2nd millennium BCE. The offshoots of Zoroastrianism were of course Christianity, Gnosticism,, and Islam as many different groups of people took their version of it and added a new religious mythology to suit their needs. I’m fine with whatever people need to do to understand their place in the universe—religion is fine, it’s a nice first step to bringing values to a person’s life—and I tend to like religious people more than people without it—because generally people who have religion in their lives have some sense of value that they try to live by. But to insist as these radical Muslims do, that all other religions and their references be eliminated in favor of a limited interpretation of reality is simply ridiculous. When Muslims have a general rule that their “prophet” cannot even be shown they are advocating in America something that just isn’t possible. Islam wasn’t even a religion until well over a thousand years after Zoroastrianism so much of the Islamic attempt to edit out what came before them, including Christianity are deliberate attempts at ignorance by shutting off their subjects to history deliberately insisting on turning off their minds to logic. Muslims deserve to be insulted when they collide with a culture in America where everything is up for debate and scrutiny.

The attempt of radical Islam is to force ignorance upon the world, and that in American culture is a much more serious crime than in drawing some prophet who ripped off aspects of Zoroastrianism to lash out against the wealthy clans of Mecca who feared the ancestral paganism that made them rich at that time. The creation of Islam is ironically a religious version of communism where the proletariat was given a psychological path toward anger against the bourgeoisie. Those too lazy to work very hard in life found in the religion an excuse to not be all that productive, so they jumped all in surrendering their lives to “Allah” then pointed to the Quran as the declaration of proof. Of course to keep their ruse alive they had to make Muhammad into a figure of respect as he was the author of their revered book, and to maintain the illusion of his prophet hood, they refused to even allow their subjects to depict the guy in any visual way. Well, that might work in some sand bitten, god forsaken region like the Middle East, but in America, that kind of behavior is just out of the question—as it should be. In a free society everything is fair game for debate and the illusion of Islam insisting that religious participants close off their minds to reality just isn’t going to happen, even under a penalty of death. Think about how stupid of a requirement it is in radical Islam to insist to not even show an image of Muhammad. Then to threaten death to anybody who questions it. See the problem?

Yet even as many have come out and criticized Pam Geller for poking a stick into the very intellectually limited cage of Islam, those same minds advocated tolerance for the defacement of Christian symbols, namely art exhibits where urine, defecation, and other vile acts were committed against Jesus Christ. It becomes quite clear quickly what is behind all this radical Islam nonsense and it’s just not going to be tolerated in the United States.   We are dealing with a religious war between two primary religions where the Islamic faction is hell-bent on the destruction of any rival under any condition. And that kind of intolerance just isn’t going to have legs in American society. It’s an information based culture that is going to do anything they are told not to—just because they can.

The two knuckle draggers who drove a 1000 miles to shoot up the art exhibit, Elton Simpson and his roommate Nadir Soofi from Phoenix, Arizona were way out of line. They showed up after such a long drive in body armor and military weapons to kill anybody they could. Expectedly, there were plenty of firearms on hand to put the two thugs down. Buy the 60-year-old police officer a beer for neutralizing the threats, and advancing on their location after he put them down to finish the job. That’s what every American should be able to do, and to perform the task, everyone should do their part by getting their concealed carry permit and arming themselves as heavily as possible. If one of these archaic idiots tries to do such a thing in public in the future, they need to be dealt with in the same way.

However the best way to eliminate the threat of these Islamic radicals is to use capitalism to destroy their culture—first starting in America, and then migrating it unapologetically to the Middle East. Currently the U.S. State Department is paying $20 million dollars to anyone who mails, emails or calls in information on four Islamic State commanders leading operations in Iraq and Syria. The State Department’s Rewards for Justice Program has paid out more than $125 million to more than 80 people since 1984 for actionable information that has put terrorists behind bars and prevented acts of terror. A person could become quite wealthy by coughing up information on Islamic radicals planning further hits on American targets—especially those against Pam or Bosch. The best way to strike back against these terrorists who insist on ignorance to advance their agenda is to rat them out of the holes they hide in and enrich yourself in the process. Here is the link, if you know of some radical Islamic loon that you think is planning something against any American activity on domestic soil—or anywhere in the world, click the link below and submit the tip. Buy yourself a new house, car, and cover your retirement for the rest of your life in the process. Enjoy the benefits of capitalism to the fullest extent and use it to crush this threat.

https://www.rewardsforjustice.net/

It is intolerable to even allow people like Pam and Bosch to be threatened for drawing a picture or hosting an art exhibit. Liberal advocates desiring to crush Christianity opened the door long ago to analysis of decency when they allowed the defacement of Jesus in art, and advocated on behalf of free speech to justify it. Pam simply did the same thing turning the hypocrisy against those advocates. Was it aggressive, sure, but we are at war with these ideological nutcases whether or not we want to be. So what has happened is set in stone and from here on out we have to deal with it. The first and best thing every American should do is—purchase a gun and carry it. Learn to use it and don’t get all panicky under stress.   Have it so you can use it the way the police officer in Garland did. When a target threatening the safety and security of any American is presented, neutralize that target as quickly as possible. The second and probably most enriching thing that you can do is rat out any jihadist thug hiding in the cracks of life wherever they might attempt to show themselves in the light of day. Don’t be afraid of those idiots—turn them in and let the guys at the Rewards for Justice sort out the good tips from the bad. You have a much better chance of winning some money with the Rewards for Justice Program than in winning the lottery or getting rich at a casino.

And while you’re at it thank Pam Geller for flushing out a couple of these scum bags. She did a good thing and she deserves the credit for having the brass to stick herself out there to fight these maniacs. You can thank her by keeping her alive, so get her potential assassins off the street by using the Rewards for Justice Program to scoop them up and drop them into a hole where they won’t be able to hurt anybody. And while you’re at it, get rich in the process. It’s the American way and unapologetically wonderful.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

How David Icke is Right: More clear vision from your trusty Hoffman lenses

What was the reason that during periods of slavery in America that reading was kept from those captive under a master? Well, it was of course to keep the slaves uninformed and unaware of the world around them. Why does a jealous man want to keep his wife from driving a car, working a job, or otherwise interacting with other people—well, to keep her from finding a better option than him. So long as the man keeps the woman under his thumb, he can suppress his own insecurities about losing her to a rival. Whenever a person or an institution exhibits the desire to control information that flows to objects of their interest—the real desire is to prevent the discovery of options.

With that said we live in a time where the religions of old are tired and worn out. They are no longer relevant to a modern audience without turning off our minds to the world around us. Islamic radicals are attempting to execute that task to this day in Iraq by destroying archaeology in that war-torn country every day—essentially erasing the past. St. Patrick in Ireland destroyed the pagan culture of that country and is celebrated to this day for bringing Catholicism to the godless heathens of the old hills and mounds containing the skeletons of giants previously found there. In Ohio the mound builders have been associated with the academic canon of the Adena Indians, even though it appears they were a much more advanced, and global culture that was erased because it threatened the religions of the age—the Christian perspective which designated that Columbus discovered America and the inhabitants were heathens. The Aztecs, Mayas and Incas were all destroyed because they worshipped pagan gods on a Spanish crusade to make the people of Mexico and South America Christians. Among the religions of the day, there was a deliberate suppression of cultures that came before so that the mind of humanity would focus on the version of god worship designated by the latest institution that proposes their religion is the most valid. They can only accomplish that task by destroying the evidence of rivals that might make followers question the validity of the religion in question.

The same mentality has migrated into politics. How many times have we witnessed a public school lie to pass a levy, a politician take a bribe and cover it up with charity action, or a president conspire behind the scenes to stay in power? We see it all the time, and the way they stay in power is they attempt to get of information and the flow of it under control so they can mislead the public into believing whatever they tell them. The practice is widespread, and rampant.

This is why there are so many conspiracies regarding UFO’s the origin and function of the Moon, and the radical assumption that there is a lost race of reptiles who rule the world. There is a lot of evidence which points to something strange going on, but the government doesn’t allow for transparency to discover the truth. The fact that they feel they have to hide things indicates that there is something they wish to withhold, which instinctively leads us to deduce that they want to control us for the sake of it. The slave knows that they were being controlled when they were denied the ability to read. Women know they are being controlled by an abusive spouse when options are taken away from them, instead of provided freely. And mankind knows that the government knows something about UFO occurrences because of their desire to control the information discovered in various Air Force encounters and discoveries made through the space program at NASA.

It is quite obvious that there is something wrong with the Moon. In the 60s and 70s NASA couldn’t wait to get there, then suddenly without any real warning—we stopped going. It took all the way into the 2000s for President Bush to announce that human beings would return to the Moon, but that idea was scrapped quickly. The next president in Obama told NASA that it was their primary job to make Muslims feel good about themselves—don’t worry about all that moon business—oh and by the way, we’re going to scrap the Space Shuttles and hitch rides with the Russians. The space program at NASA was reduced to just sitting in a tin can floating around the earth called the International Space station as if working with other countries was more important than colonizing, mining, and exploring the Moon, or Mars. Currently NASA is set to send humans to Mars around 2030, but in the mean time, forget about that Moon.

Well, it’s hard to forget about the Moon because people are photographing technology on it, and it is now coming out that the astronauts who walked there were being watched by something that was already there. Neil Armstrong who was from my area of the country became a recluse for the rest of his days after his walk on the Moon. In 1979 Maurice Chatelain who was the former chief of NASA Communications Systems confirmed an issue that was commonly known around the space agency at the time, that Armstrong reported seeing two UFOs on the rim of a crater near where they landed. That had to be a little strange to a man who thought he was the first to arrive someplace where no man had ever set foot. The public never learned about that little issue because NASA censored it, at least according to Dr. Vladimir Azhazha from Moscow University as the KGB was monitoring the NASA communications. Probably explains why no other country ever went back as well, because they all know what apparently the rest of us have been kept in the dark about—that the Moon is not a geologic object that broke away from earth billions of years ago, but is rather a manufactured thing used specifically to bring some level of terraforming to Earth. And there is and have always been parallel species to humans that used the Moon as a stage point from Earth travel to wherever they originally resided.

It sounds far-fetched, I know—but it will all be confirmed within a few short years. We’ll see the same type of thing on Mars—relics of old civilizations long gone—possibly some still emerging, will be seen. The Moon apparently is much more complicated than what we’ve always thought it was and is without a doubt the origin of most of our modern religions. Of course if NASA wanted to deny all these things, they’d find the funding to go back and renew the quest to learn what the Moon is all about—but nobody in the political class wishes to embark on such a journey—because they already know what we’ll find there.   They can’t hide it forever, commercial space travel is headed to space. Politicians might try to keep Hilton from building a hotel there by denying a permit from the United Nations—but the legal push to populate the surface of the Moon is going to happen over the next 50 years, so everyone is going to have to fess up sooner or later. The history of that place can’t be hidden any longer.

Listening to these lectures from David Icke—a guy who went from a respected BBC broadcaster to a loony kook king of conspiracy within just a few years—he and I have a lot in common.   We both love the John Carpenter film They Live. CLICK HERE TO READ MY COMMENTS ABOUT ‘THEY LIVE’ AND THE SUNGLASSS NAMED AFTER ME. They Live was a classic 80s action film full of wonderfully cheesy lines and an over-the-top premise. But there was, and always was a hint at something a little too true about the plot—the idea that another competing species was working and manipulating human beings in a negative way. It is only science fiction, but it resonates in the same way that a woman who knows she’s in an abusive relationship knows she’s being controlled, or the slave knows that it’s an act of rebellion to read a book by candlelight in the corner of a barn—because information is forbidden when control is the desired objective. In our present society, there is a lot that is forbidden and if it’s considered why, soon one comes to similar thoughts as David Icke. I don’t know that it is reptile people left over from the Anunnaki of Sumerian legend—but there is something along that lines that is certainly a part of a social tapestry that nobody discusses, and any information into a resolution is strictly forbidden. I actually think that is just the tip of the iceberg—the truth is much more mind shattering—which is likely why authorities started down this path of censorship.

I have enough of a supernatural background—along with many other experiences—to know that Icke is not crazy. He may not have the whole truth, and may rely on mystical input too much, but he’s not crazy. That’s why I would encourage you dear reader to go back through this article and listen to each of the lecture segments presented from David Icke when he spoke to a sold out show not that long ago in London. Like Icke I look at the world of mythology for the truth to some of that withheld data, and try to puzzle out the gaps distinguishing fact from fiction. How much of myth was actually true—why did ancient people believe the things they did? Were they just a species with overactive imaginations, or was there something to mythology that was rooted in fact—but that the facts have been deliberately erased by religions and political classes who desperately want to stay in control? Given what I know about the human race, it is the latter that is occurring. I am 100% certain of it. I’m certainly no mystic lover, and I’m not a tin hat type—I enjoy facts, truth, and the validation of obscurity through adventure. And I am happy to declare that Icke is far more right than he is wrong.

So what do you do with that information dear reader? Well, go shelter yourself in the corner, light a candle, and teach yourself to read. Then, we will arrange to free you from the shackles that bind you—starting with your mind. Don’t be a willing slave to ignorance. Free yourself not just in name, but in action as well. And to prove it, demand to your politicians that the United States return to the Moon—and see what they tell you, and why. That will give you your answers.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Mason High School’s Covered Girl Challenge: Public education purposely turning children against you

As public education advocates were marching on Columbus to protest Governor Kasich’s budget cuts to affluent school districts, the Mason school system showed what the government schools are really about. For those who think that my criticisms of public schools are exaggerated check out the activity that was being organized at Mason. Keep in mind that Christianity is heavily ridiculed in government schools yet in Mason, Ohio—one of the wealthiest regions in the country students are being encouraged to wear a Muslim hijab to school as a gateway to Islam. What is interesting in this is that radical ISIS beheadings are the news topic of our day and thousands of years of archaeology is being destroyed in the Middle East by radical Muslim terrorists—yet here is a publicly funded institution encouraging the spread of Islam. Here is the memo that went out to students and their parents announcing the upcoming event.

Mason High School is blessed to have a unique and diverse student body. In order celebrate this diversity and promote open-mindedness, the Muslim Student Association is inviting all female students to participate in “A Covered Girl Challenge” which will allow students to wear a headscarf for the whole school day. Afterwards, there will be a discussion (open for all students, male & female) held in Z223 to share experiences and reflections.

In order to participate, students and/or parents should attend the informational meeting offered and turn in the attached permission slip to Student Activities or Mrs. Jenkin’s room in Z223.

On the morning of April 23rd, there will be booths set up in A2, C1, and Z1 to help participators adjust their scarves and answer any questions.

To learn more about what the Covered Girl Challenge is all about and what a headscarf is watch this video: https://youtu.be/_WosD_GTz_E

Please note the important dates below: Informational meeting: April 20th after school in Z223 Covered Girl Challenge Thursday April 23rd during school day

Covered Girl Challenge Discussion after school on Thursday April 23rd in Z223 Flyer and permission slip are at the link below:

http://www.edline.net/pages/Mason_High_School/2684432697290919314/Student_Activities/FORMS/EMA

If anyone has any questions please email masonhsmsa@gmail.com

 

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/04/ohio-public-high-school-hosting-a-covered-girl-challenge-asking-students-to-wear-hijab-for-a-day

Now, what conclusion would any rational person make by that event? It’s not like Mason is some backwater school in the middle of nowhere—its right in the heart of America.

Here’s the deal, public schools are all about using confiscated wealth and breeding into the minds of youth nice little socialist followers who will support an aggressive agenda once they are of voting age. They are unhealthy places that no parent who truly loves their child should send an innocent mind. Public schools are bad places that intend bad things for newly formed minds. What other conclusion is there about the Covered Girl Challenge at Mason High School? Think about that and let me know…………………………………………………………

Why are we paying for these palaces of doom to destroy our children?

Send this to a friend and ask them the same question………………….why?

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Doc Thompson and Skip LeCombe: The Henry Reardens of talk radio

Doc Thompson and Skip LeCombe on their Morning Blaze radio show have been doing daily wrap-ups for the topics they covered during their 6 AM to 9 AM time slot on a video summary. Below is a sample of their show from April 1st 2015 which I picked because at the end Doc shows off his Rearden Steel t-shirt. The two of them have done a great job keeping a lively and informative broadcast that has become for me essential to beginning my day. Breakfast just wouldn’t be breakfast without Doc and Skip on The Blaze Radio Network.

One of the best parts of the Morning Blaze Show is the police blotters that come on at around ten minutes to 7 AM. Doc reads various news stories featuring police arrests in an old-fashioned style that is laced with rhyming comedy. It takes some work everyday, but they put their time in and do it right leaving me openly laughing during the segment much of the time. The segment encapsulates to what extent Doc and Skip do just a little bit extra above everyone else in talk radio to give their audience something fresh.

Most radio hosts show up on the radio and talk for 1 to 3 hours—take a few calls and essentially read the news to listeners, which for me is a valuable service. But Doc and Skip go just a bit further every day consciously mixing comedy with some rather pointed commentary on contemporary events. They know their subjects and relish in breaking down some of the most complicated topics of the news cycle.

In a lot of ways the Doc and Skip Show on the Morning Blaze reminds me of something that would come out of Atlantis in the book Atlas Shrugged. I know Doc enjoys that book—I wasn’t sure how much over the years he had retained his enjoyment, but obviously he enjoys it enough to wear a shirt featuring it. Ayn Rand for many conservatives is tricky stuff, mainly because she was an atheist, and I know that Doc is a Christian. In my own life, I wouldn’t call myself a Christian, and I wouldn’t say I’m a libertarian—I’m certainly not a social liberal. I’m not loosy goosy on topics of conduct. There is a lot I like about Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism just as I like a lot about the Christian faith as a religion, but neither tenant of thought goes far enough for me. The problem with Christianity is that I love the values, but I hate the notion of surrendering life to a deity in a spirit of sacrifice. Ayn Rand is really one of the only writers to emerge to capture the spirit of productivity and to embrace capitalism as a moral premise. But the religions of the world—Christianity included—are at odds with it. Rand dared to ask why sacrifice was necessary for a productive society, as capitalism is the mode of the creative. If people are creative and make things from their minds, why is sacrifice needed in a culture at all? That is the greatest moral dilemma of our age and humanity is facing it for the first time.

Over the years I have become less religious not leaning toward atheism in any fashion, but in developing a thought process that has the values of Christianity, but the empowerment of Objectivism. Current religions don’t go far enough in my opinion to solve the riddles of our age—and instead stay too far anchored into the past. I want to see more responsibility out of individuals instead of just pointing to the heavens and declaring that God wills something to be done in my life, so thus it shall be done—good or bad. That doesn’t work for me and never has.

Henry Rearden from Atlas Shrugged, the head of the company on Doc’s shirt—was a very self-empowered person, and there is a serious lesson to be learned from that book which should be expanded and promoted in a much greater fashion.   Of those in modern media, there aren’t many like Doc who has not run away from an association with Ayn Rand’s philosophy. He may not agree with everything about Rand’s Objectivism—but he understands the message of personal responsibility that pours from it in defining why some people do things that are really important in life, and why some just become parasitic entities for their entire existence. Without that very important distinction, there would be no proper identification in our art to properly explain why capitalism is important to societies.

Much of what Doc does on his show is paint the world from a vantage point as though he were broadcasting from a real life Atlantis featured in Atlas Shrugged. Viewed through the prism of a person who has read and understood the Ayn Rand classic, the news on the Morning Blaze is unquestionably in that spirit—which is why it has become a must in the morning for me. As the world crashes down around us, there are pockets of sanity popping up around the country that are migrating to The Blaze to live our lives independent of the wrecked economies of socialism, including the embrace of American culture of more European style collectivism.

In my own life I feel like every character who was a protagonist in Atlas Shrugged wrapped up into one person—and I’m living that life currently. I have a little Ragnar, a lot of Rearden, but even minor characters like Richard Halley I understand all too well. In my own work I am seeking to step beyond Rand’s musings, which is now over 50 years old and explore topics spawning off her initial concepts. I am less interested in pleasing the masses of society, and have instead come to broadcast them to a much smaller audience in a metaphorical Atlantis for the same reasons that Halley did in Atlas Shrugged. My Curse of Fort Seven Mile is one of those projects that I know going into it that will not be accepted in New York literature circles, and I don’t care. I write those stories for people like Doc Thompson—not for the pop culture icons of progressive definitions of coolness. Since I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead I have wanted more to the story, but there just isn’t many writers out there who can write that kind of material with the authority and definition that Ayn Rand did. First of all they lack the experience, but mostly they lack the personal conviction and couldn’t write such a thing in their wildest fantasies. Just as there are a lot of talk radio hosts, there really aren’t any like Doc Thompson who puts forth just a bit more effort shown proportionally throughout his endeavors, like his police blotters.

Doc Thompson could be a talk show host at the level of Howard Stern if he wanted to be. I remember when he was brought to Cincinnati to take over as the primary man on WLW. But Doc has never really played well with others, not where it had to compromise who he is—even if the opportunity for more money and fame threw themselves at his feet. He has stubbornly been like Henry Rearden from Atlas Shrugged and conducted his radio show his way for his own purposes, and it took someone like Glenn Beck to recognize the benefits and to give him a prime slot on a global network. But even with the reach of The Blaze, the primary audience is an extreme minority—like the members of the fictional Atlantis from Atlas Shrugged. For those people Doc and Skip put on a great daily show. To the rest of the world, they are sadly being left behind. Even though the broadcast is easy and free to them, most of the time they will find themselves the butt of Doc’s jokes, instead of on the side of the typical audience member—and laughing intellectually at the follies of the world.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

I’m Sick of Homosexual Marketing: Their lifestyle choices are imposing, and disrespectful

Personally I’m really sick of the whole social homosexual issue and don’t have much sympathy for the Indiana and Arkansas governors under protest from gay groups over their recent legislation which should be covered already by the 1st Amendment anyway. I’m not gay, and don’t personally associate with gay people because they typically don’t share my values, and I have no plans to change that value judgment. I think the Rocky Horror Picture Show was a terrible movie, and I hate gay pride parades because of all the stupid color combinations. Yet in spite of the opinions of the progressive left and right, that does not make me a homophobe—as they like to call people who don’t share their appreciation for anal intercourse—which is gross in any fashion—man or woman. When I look at people I try not to think about what kind of sex they enjoy, just as I don’t want to know if they like fried chicken or sushi. Whatever their choices—keep it to themselves, because I likely don’t want to know. Sex is a very small part of existence, so policy should not be built around any sexual orientation. Gay people don’t have a right to molest straight people with audacity and gross behavior in public—then cry foul when people don’t like what they see. When those people utter such, they don’t deserve to be called names and attacked socially by a collective mob to change their behavior under coercion, which is what has been happening in Indiana. At that point gay people lost their sympathy and have simply become bullies. They may have a rainbow inspired aggression—but they are still bullies.

An example of how gays step over the line all too often occurred when I was much younger—I was at a video game arcade using the rest room when a very wiry person came up to the stall next to me. Now it was a big bathroom so there were many other stalls he could have used, instead he stood right next to me. That was problem number one, because I don’t like people too close to me unless there is no other option—and there were options. Then he tried to have a conversation with me, which was mistake number two. I really don’t like to talk to people when using the restroom. I like to get finished as quickly as possible and get out of those places—because they usually smell bad. So I didn’t want to talk to him. Then he tried to look over the divider at my assets, and he was not shy about it. I’m not ashamed of anything there, so that didn’t bother me so long as I’m dealing with a heterosexual. But as it turned out, the guy was gay, and he asked me if he could perform oral sex. That was it. I called him a fag. He called me a hater and grabbed my shoulder to look me in the face as if he had authority to touch me, so I punched him. I heard a pop when my fist hit his face and he went down and stayed there. I stood there for a moment to see if he would move, which he did a little. I finished with my bathroom visit taking extra time to see if the guy would try to engage in conversation—but he didn’t. Instead he stood up, refused to engage in any further conversation not even bothering to wipe the blood from his face in the sink and left. It was a really strange ending to a really uncomfortable trip to the restroom.   He was obviously embarrassed that he ended up on the floor after trying to engage in sexual activity, and left quickly once he could stand again. I expected security to come, but they never did so after waiting around for about 15 minutes, I left never to see that guy again. If that had been today, I would have had an army of PC police there to put my face on the news and the newspapers would have written about it until they ran out of ink—but back then distinctions in such behavior were still judged as something negative—and the sentiment toward change has not enriched our culture. There have been similar incidents over the years, but that was the worst and most obvious—and the question I’ve always had is–why should I have to put up with those people?

Men and women have separate bathrooms for a reason, so that sexual conduct doesn’t get mixed together. But with gay people, there are no barriers, and they defiantly have the advantage because only they really know if they are gay or not. If a guy wants to use the stall next to me in the restroom, my wife has a right to know if some rival for her affection is trying to get a mental picture of her private affairs. If the guy is heterosexual, she doesn’t have a rival, but if he’s gay, she does. This is a problem, as a straight person, I should have a right to use the restroom without sexual advances—and in this modern society—you never know. If you’re endowed, you can’t hide that stuff behind a stall, so the eyes of a gay person can see everything clearly—if they want to. So where are the rights of heterosexuals in this whole discussion over non discrimination—because in order to protect ourselves from sexual advancements, one must make a value judgment against those who clearly are willing to cross the lines of acceptability?

It is baffling to me how critics of the new Indiana law interpreted The Religious Freedom Act. Gay advocates as reported by The Blaze in the following article reflect the lunacy.

MSNBC host Ed Schultz clashed with a conservative guest from the Heritage Foundation Tuesday night over Indiana’s controversial religious freedom law.

The liberal host opened up his show asking Ryan Anderson, “How does this law open it up for blatant discrimination?”

“This law doesn’t open the door for discrimination,” Anderson quipped back. “This is the law that’s been on the federal books … and it governs over 30 states.”

“Wait a minute, that’s not true,” Schultz responded, contending those laws don’t have “the definition of a person connected to a corporation.”

“No, no it does,” Anderson rebutted. “The Supreme Court held just last term that the definition of person in the federal RFRA includes corporate persons.”

“Cut his mic off! Cut his mic off! We’ll bring him back if he wants to be courteous.”

Share:

Schultz disagreed and reiterated his view that the law opens the door open for discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals.

“Corporations do have rights!” Anderson said. “The New York Times has free press rights. It goes not just to each reporter, but to the institution. … In the same way, people who form organizations also have their religious liberty rights protected.”

Schultz then asked Anderson if it was the position of the right-wing that business owners should be permitted to tell gay people to “get the hell out” of their restaurants.

 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/31/msnbcs-ed-schultz-loses-it-on-conservative-guest-over-controversial-indiana-law-cut-his-mic-off/

To make matters even worse, members of the UConn coaching staff are boycotting the Final Four in Indianapolis because of the Religious Freedom Act saying “UConn is a community that values all of our members and treats each person with the same degree of respect, regardless of their background and beliefs, and we will not tolerate any other behavior.” Well, given that they are a progressive institution to begin with, their statement is consistent with the teachings of the progressive movement—but they fail to identify one glaring issue. In order for this whole thing to work—this equality thing, it requires people like me to put up with swanky perverts who want to turn our bathrooms into pick-up joints and to treat them with some level of restraint. If I were to walk into a women’s bathroom undoubtedly there would be quite a stir as woman would likely scramble to cover their private parts from my male eyes. But we are supposed to disregard this restraint in the presence of gays and allow them to view without any feelings of guilt the fruits of our privacy for the benefit of their sexual perversions. The action on their behalf requires nothing. But for someone like me, it requires an abandonment of value and preservation reserved typically between the sanctity of a husband and wife.

If there is a business that typically caters to a religious crowd, don’t they have a right to discriminate against those who might drive away other members of their business who seek refuge in their endeavors? Don’t straight men and women have a right to use the restroom without being eye candy to the deviant—or will UConn protest the term deviant to describe a person who spends too much time thinking about sex? Don’t businesses have a right to sport productive enterprises that might be negatively impacted by a couple of dudes making out in public with pink tights and a hat full of flowers? Of course they would. To argue otherwise is insane. Yet the progressives have done just that and revealed to what extent they wish to impose themselves on society. They want normal people to lower their expectations to the level of the valueless, and to allow themselves to be sacrificed to the mass whims of collectivism. And when faced with such a vile understanding, the conservatives don’t even have the guts to speak out against it—except for Ryan Anderson from the Heritage Foundation. He defended the law quite well and you saw what progressive Ed Schultz did—he cut off his microphone.

The only way that gays can win their position is to stop the debate against them with name calling, or break down any moral retribution that might be cast in their direction due to them being entirely too focused on sex instead of higher elements of mental acuity. In both cases they act as a parasitic organism against society at large, and personally, I’m tired of hearing about their feelings. Homosexuals represent between 2% to 10% of the total population depending on the survey source. At best they are asking 90% of the rest of the country to put up with their marketing efforts toward finding more dating options. That’s pretty much what it boils down to. And for the rest of us, particularly me, I’d say we’ve heard enough from them. I’d like to go to the can without worrying about some rainbow princess trying to watch me, and if two drag dressing transvestites want to suck face in a business of mine, I should have a right to toss them out to keep from intruding on the privations of the other customers, and all their kids. At some point enough is enough, and we’re there.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Rich Hoffman on Matt Clark’s WAAM Radio Show: Why Ted Cruz is considered a radical

I was on with Matt Clark’s WAAM radio show over the weekend covering the Ted Cruz presidential candidacy when a topic of some importance came up—the reason why he specifically is considered an extreme and dangerous radical. This was a topic I have personal familiarity with as those types of terms have been thrown in my direction as well—so I have a clear understanding of why members of the left, center and even the political right cast those aspersions in the direction of their foes. Matt and I talked a bit about these issues in the following clip.

Speaking from personal experience, and I imagine Ted Cruz went through this in a much grander fashion, I remember when I first started this blog and why. I had come out openly against a new tax increase in my school district and the union thugs instantly targeted me with name calling and searched deep into my closet looking for skeletons they could use against me—to keep my mouth shut. That made me very angry. I have dealt with much worse in regards to evil people before, but it was clear to me why they were doing what they were doing and I had to imagine how many like me were forced into silence with such terror tactics. I was in a unique position, as a bullwhip handler and long time Wild West enthusiast with a martial art background I am uniquely suited to deal with personal threats to my safety and those of my family. I didn’t have to worry about personal violence against me. I am also not a social climber in a community fashion or in a career—so I don’t worry an ounce in what people think of me. But more than anything I have lived a life consistent with my utterances and I have a long history going back to my earliest childhood memories of standing up to bullies, fighting on the side of a well-defined, “good,” and being uniquely bold in my proclamations. At the time just before this blog I considered that I was likely one of the few people in America who didn’t have skeletons in his past that he was ashamed of—there were no stories of whores from wild weekends in Vegas, no drugs from my past, no personalities who would emerge to call me a hypocrite—I have always been what I am, and was always extremely proud of it. I have been consistent in my beliefs from the time of my first memory to the present. The conclusion was that the battle before us was worth fighting and I was qualified, so it was my responsibility to embark on the journey.

This position is important because much of what the political left does to disarm those who threaten them is apply guilt as a tactical move to shake off their opposition. All of their Saul Alinsky tactics center around using guilt as a weapon of perpetuity constantly moving the bar of righteousness further toward their tactical objectives—which have largely been shaped by a Karl Marx philosophy. The way to beat them, and to do so badly, is to force them to fight people who don’t feel guilt and are immune to their tactics and thus force them to answer questions that they can’t—because their entire premise is one built on emotion. If their opponent does not feel guilt and cannot be moved off their position, the left and center political radicals lose a lot of their tactical advantage.

That has largely been my story and the essence behind Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom, the blog I have written for over five years now—every day.   I know from experience that there isn’t a single person on the left, or middle who can match my efforts and I use my ability and position like a sledge-hammer against them day after day gradually pulling the mind of America back to the right—where it has always belonged.

At the start of the above radio show I joked a bit with Matt that I was politically to the right of Ted Cruz—that the new presidential candidate is likely too far to the left for my liking. The joke is that Cruz is clearly one of the most conservative right leaning candidates running for president in 2016. However, in reality, I am likely quite a bit further to the right fiscally and socially than Ted Cruz is—and I don’t consider myself a right-winged extremist by any means. Many on the left have tried to paint people like myself as part of the Nazi wing of fascism—which is simply laughable. Hitler was a socialist—and I am the complete antithesis to people like him. I am probably one of the least fascist people currently on earth. Such a definition doesn’t even meet a unit of measure on my political spectrum because such a position is still way too far to the left for me. I don’t want to control anybody. By default, because I’m a responsible person, I do have a lot of people who look to me for means—but there is never a day where I take joy and contemplate how I might leverage them to my advantage so that I might massage some intellectual desire to rule over others.   So the typical left-winged definition of the extreme right-winger is completely wrong and does not apply to me in any way. And I know that they don’t have an answer for it, which is why there aren’t more comments on my pages—because I can put up millions of words of opinions and thoughts about a great many subjects and they can’t answer to any of them. They can only ignore you and hope you go away.

Ted Cruz likely is a similar personality and he had to make the decision before entering the senate if he wanted to even play this game with the left. He appears to have went through the same process I did and decided that he was a personality that could handle the scrutiny, would not be subject to the bribes and deals from K-Street, and would be poised to stand in the fire like a block of ice and not melt under the heat. The big fear from the left about Cruz, as well as the right, is that they will have a hard time matching up to him. Cruz brings to the field of candidates a difficult match up for which the left does not have—a person who can function without an ounce of guilt and is therefore immune to the Saul Alinsky style attacks.

As an added bonus Ted Cruz was a champion debater at Harvard and may well be one of the most capable minds currently in the world who can go toe to toe with anybody on any rhetorical argument—including the slickest beltway lawyers. Ted Cruz will likely give thousands of interviews over the next two years and will have very few gaffs.  His confidence alone will win voters who either didn’t vote in previous elections or convert those who are on the fence.

In the Matt Clark interview I brought up my experience with the Ross Perot campaign from many years ago—in 1992. I had been deep in that campaign and learned a lot about politics during that time of my life. I was on Fountain Square in downtown Cincinnati passing out literature for Perot when most people came up to me and showed an interest but stated that he didn’t have a chance of getting elected—so why vote for him. The problem was that if everyone who wanted to vote for him actually did, Perot would have been president instead of Bill Clinton and the disasters of the next century would have likely been averted. But people didn’t vote for Perot, and they received eight years of the Clintons, another eight years of the moderate Bush family, then eight years of a socialist oriented Barack Obama—and now an America going over a fiscal cliff as a result. All that damage could have been avoided by voting for Ross Perot who wasn’t even as well positioned as Ted Cruz is now.

Perot was a candidate who likely went through the same process I went through and undoubtedly Cruz underwent as well—which is why it took him so long to announce his candidacy which ultimately hurt him down the stretch. Perot was able to tear up Clinton and Bush in the debates because he was functioning without guilt and that made him very dangerous to the established powers. Cruz is a better candidate than Perot in every capacity—so this should be exciting. What will get accomplished are things that must be addressed. There is no option at this point; America needs a presidential race that battles out the philosophy of good and evil once and for all. And for that fight, Ted Cruz is uniquely poised. It will be an exciting two years for sure to watch the left and political moderates scramble to hold their positions without the weapon of guilt at their disposal. My prediction is that like this blog, they won’t be able to do it—leaving Cruz to always be the last man standing in an argument. That is not a way that the establishment can hold onto power. And they know it—and they are genuinely terrified—as they should be.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Meaning of Cliffhanger: Boons beyond the edge of safety

It has come up more than once over the last several weeks, most noticeably after the recent release of the latest installment of the Cliffhanger stories, The Curse of Santa Maurta as to what’s behind the name. The name of Cliffhanger for me is a personal one for two reasons, first I grew up loving the Jules Verne inspired films, Journey to the Center of the Earth and Island at the top of the World. Those films were done with a style and approach to adventure consistent with the best cliffhanger serials of their day and I fell in love with the optimism of how they combined science and adventure—much which was refined so well in the 1980s by the Indian Jones films, and Back to the Future specifically in the character of Doc Brown. I think I always wanted to grow up into something of a mix between Doc Brown, Indiana Jones, and Dirty Harry—and all of those stories were very top-heavy in the swashbuckling cliffhanger style of story telling typical in early cinema. For me personally the start of a love for cliffhangers was in the Disney classic, Island at the Top of the World. I always loved the fearless desire to solve problems in that movie while pushing to see what was around the next corner always presented in the style of a cliffhanger.

Also, for as long as I can remember, up until just yesterday, I have had a nearly obsessive quest to live life on the edge. I love danger and taking very large chances. When I was a kid I was always the first to jump from one cliff face to another while in a high adventure explorer post. And now I am involved in politics and transactions with other human beings that could have perilous consequences with even a slight misstep. But, in spite of giving peace a chance—I just can’t do it. If there isn’t a certain amount of danger in my daily life—I’m just not happy. I have always believed that some of the freshest and most innovative ideas come to a mind on the edge of reality—pushing the limits—and somewhere in that science is the key to invention.

My first jobs before I was 19 years of age consisted of a body-guard, a repo man, a fashion model and other colorful, short-lived enterprises consisting of living a very fast life as quickly as possible. It was on the way to a live stage performance as a model that I decided to marry my wife and chose a way of life that didn’t involve taking so many chances—thinking at the time that at some point my luck might run out. It turned out to be the very best thing for me as my first endeavors emerging straight out of a stable relationship were a gunsmith, an inventor, and an entrepreneur by starting a little company called Cliffhanger Research and Development. I desired greatly to invent new tools and concepts traveling to trade shows and filing patents on my ideas—and I did this for several years—until I was in my mid-twenties and realized what was stacked against me–politically. The world seemed poised to destroy the type of adventurous spirit I fell in love with in movies like Island at the Top of the World, and wanted to stuff my spirit into a box to be controlled. During this period of my life I met mayors, the extreme wealthy and learned to read the tides of politics. I learned a lot from one particular woman who lived in Indian Hill and had a very successful husband who spent most of the year traveling around the world avoiding his wife. I wondered often why a man like him would leave the fruits of so much labor behind to avoid his responsibilities in marriage, as his wife at the time had a lot of influence in the media around Cincinnati. After many offers from this woman and her immediate friends around Indian Hill to become a gigolo to them—it was an obvious conclusion that their husbands were driven by the same condition that pushed me along—a need for danger and adventure in their lives. However, I didn’t want in my wake such chaos and destruction. There had to be a better way, which displayed clearly to me that a new philosophy was needed in our culture that was clearly missing.

Instead of becoming wealthy from all my adventures I ended up being sued, owing a lot of money in taxes to the government, and putting a lot of strain on my own marriage just from some of the sheer risks that I always wanted to take. All of my endeavors where legitimate and well in the spirit of Doc Brown, but the world was deliberately standing in my way for some reason, and that condition became the next danger to overcome. It was the reason why I named my company Cliffhanger Research and Development. Much of my life was coming from the edge where literally every day could have been the end of my life as I knew it, and I was most comfortable in that position. I needed, and still do, to know that life is unpredictable from moment to moment and that anything can happen.

Over the years I’ve learned to waltz with this tendency of mine without leaving so much destruction in my wake. The desire to live life as a cliffhanger has become quite an asset instead of a liability—I never have a shortage of fresh ideas to solve complicated problems—because as I’ve always felt, most good ideas come from the edge of acceptable reality—the parameters of safe travel, intellectually. So I can take massive chances to my heart’s content—the luck never runs out not because its given out by some strange unmet gods, but because it’s internally generated through natural optimism, and I live a pretty good life without any regrets. I would still like to make my living as an inventor, but in the barriers to entry to that marketplace I found a much more lucrative target—the failed philosophy of Eastern and Western civilization.

The best way to tackle many of our modern problems and all the inventions that are being held back from human civilization because of a failed way to embrace a proper philosophy is the reason I created the character of Cliffhanger to fight crime and a world hell-bent on internal personal destruction. The characters in my Cliffhanger stories come directly from my past which is vibrant and full of color in a way that is unique. Really the lessons I learned living life so recklessly on the edge in my late teens and twenties has given me an insight into things that I haven’t been able to find in any books or stories that I have ever read. For me it goes back to that woman in Indian Hill who had it all—a wonderful home in an exclusive community, all her bills paid into the future for a hundred lifetimes of excess lifestyle, a beautiful pool in the back with a pool house larger and better furnished than most wealthy people’s homes, and a husband who liked her enough to marry and at least keep her from having to work for an employer. She had the adoration of the Cincinnati media and could call up some of the wealthiest people in the country any time she wanted. But she wasn’t happy—and her husband wasn’t either. They had lost their edge to life—the very thing that made them fall in love with life, and made them rich in the first place. They lost as they tried to secure their holdings with political maneuvers that took their fortune and placed it on the safe bets—thus destroying them as people.

For many years thereafter a friend of mine and I worked as part of his tree trimming business. We would climb trees and remove them from dangerous precipices on the property of many wealthy people. The men were always the same no matter where we went, and the women all had that hunger in their eyes for some needed adventure. During their climb for wealth they had lost something—that edge some sports teams have when they have a lead late in the game, then start playing it safe to protect it. More often than not they shockingly lose the game in the final seconds. The reason for that behavior became an obsession of mine.

I could now in my life become one of those people—but I avoid it like the plague. At a stop light just this week the temperature was 32 degrees outside and it was pouring rain at 6 AM. I was on my motorcycle as usual, my tires were bald from a hard winter of everyday driving, and the bike nearly slid to every stop I made. A guy pulls up to me at a stop light and yells, “F**kin’ ride hard man! You rock! Livin’ the dream!” He was of course referring to a middle-aged man riding a motorcycle on bald tires in near freezing conditions in a pouring rainstorm during early morning rush hour traffic. He desired himself to be out in the danger of life with me, but likely he was taught at some time in his past not to do things like that for fear of his own safety. Instead he takes other chances against life itself, like drinking too much, having relationships with other people who are dangerous and unhealthy and approaching safety in his life with a passive-aggressive rebellion they think nobody notices—like getting a tattoo where they think nobody can see.

Like the heroes from the movie Island at the Top of the World I have discovered in people something they don’t know much about themselves—perhaps not to the degree that I feel it—but most people do. There is a deep child-like yearning for adventure—for cliffhangers in their life where each day is a new one, and they never know what might happen. I am most happy in those conditions. I love the fire and I seek to stand right in the middle of it wherever it’s at. Because within it there is a boon to society that lives out on the edge, over the cliff—and often you have to hang over and extend yourself to reach it. So I invented Cliffhanger as a character to explore those boons. It is my hope that people who find their lives too safe and un-tempered in the fires of life will get what they need through my Cliffhanger stories. The safest way to bring people the needed danger their lives demand is through a character that is as fearless as anything ever put to print. But for those stories to have validity, they have to come from something tangible, and in the case of Cliffhanger—it does—a life lived hard and without a single day of reflection into something safer.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Obamanation: Just too embarrassing to discuss

I don’t like Obama, I think as a president he’s an idiot, and he’s at best one of the worst things that’s ever happened to America. But today I actually feel sorry for him. It would be terrible to live in his shoes, to have such an intellect that has led to so much destruction—and to be solely responsible for it. What a mess his presidency is—its not even dignified enough to have a closure as Nixon did—with a resignation ahead of impeachment. Obama’s time in the White House is such a miserable failure that it can’t even end with dishonor and an apology. He is so bad that such things wouldn’t even help.

“Was it worth it?”

That’s the first question Fox News host Megan Kelly posed to State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki on Wednesday night, several hours after the U.S. Army announced they were charging Bowe Bergdahl with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. The Obama administration released five Taliban commanders to free the former Army sergeant from captivity last year.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/25/megyn-kelly-gets-tough-with-state-dept-spokeswoman-on-bergdahl-swap-was-it-worth-it/

I hate to say it, but I reported on all this in 2014 when Obama brought the Bergdahl family to the Rose Garden for a press conference as if his actions in releasing a very controversial figure would give him a chance to wipe his hand across the ass of the deserter’s mother and allow the father to show the radical roots of their son through his speech. Obama stood by and smiled a knowing smile looking fully supportive of the misunderstood terrorist of the Taliban as Bob Bergdahl spoke Pashto–as if the Bergdahl family represented the future fate of all Americans—soon to buckle under the weight of Stockholm syndrome complete with a Taliban beard and worship of Allah from the White House. Obama had just made plans to release 5 terrorists for a deserter and had the parents of the weak-kneed solider thank the god of the terrorists in front of millions of people. Somehow Obama calculated that his Saul Alinsky tricks would wipe the minds of America so that they wouldn’t see what he was doing.

It took the army most of a year to release their findings but finally they had to agree that Bowe Bergdahl was in fact a deserter and had actually caused the death of American soldiers trying to retrieve him from his defection to the Taliban. There was no way for them to spin the situation in the White House but Jen Psaki tried—but to no avail. What was she thinking even going on the Kelly File to try to spin the story? As I watched I couldn’t help but feel sorry for her—as all her words would go down in history and never be forgotten. Even worse was the thought that Obama himself was watching and hoping for a half court miracle shot by Jen to turn the tide against public opinion. But she only dug the Obamanation deeper into the quandary of failure.

It was ugly. So ugly, I can’t even write any more about it. I’ve said all this before, and as usual, I was more right than I wanted to be. But even as much as I despise Barack Obama as an American president, I don’t hate anybody that much—to watch them make such complete idiots of themselves—the failure of the White House is complete. And they have nobody to blame on earth but themselves—and that is the worst punishment for their crimes imaginable, because it will be stuck to all of them for the rest of their lives. This Bergdahl situation is simply that bad. It is embarrassing, insulting, and deeply revealing all in a single action. And it is a story that will have legs for a long time, and go down in history books for centuries.

Even worse look who is defending people like Bob Bergdahl. Here is a quote from the extremely liberal New Yorker.

“Imagine that you have a child, a wanderer by nature, who gets caught up in a war that has persisted aimlessly for many years; his roaming has festered into a chronic pathology for which there is no known cure. Then imagine that the child, who had hoped to help make a change for the better, becomes so disillusioned that he or she decides that there is no choice but to just walk away into unknown territory. If that were your child, what would you do?”

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/bob-bergdahl-good-father

Clearly, Bob and his wife started the process of imbedding in the young Bowe the type of weakness that made him a deserter. For that family, as bad as the embarrassment is for Obama—it will be worse. What a mess!

These are just embarrassing human beings.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Global Failure of Public Education: Participation trophies reveal their menace

Do you remember dear reader, about twenty years ago when talk radio was alive with the sound of insult—where school kids were being made fun of for expecting participation trophies just for showing up? Well, now you know what was going on, what the purpose of their public education was all along. I always suspected it, but didn’t have hard facts because it was difficult to tell if what was happening was localized to a few radicalized school districts, or whether the behavior was truly global, like many suspected. It turned out to be the later, it was a global menace that has literally destroyed the minds of youth towards the always aim of softer versions of communism the world over. I was able to confirm such vile teaching methods during my levy fights at my home district of Lakota. Many at the time thought that was a far-reaching sentiment, but time has confirmed the accusations into what is clearly an assault against capitalism by the entire public education system. If a government sponsors the education of its people, then they are likely guilty of promoting communism over capitalism resulting in the disgusting melt down which took place in Frankfurt, Germany by a group of socialist minded youth called Blockupy.

It’s not the fault of the kids participating in the riots—it’s the fault of their parents and education systems which instructed them. Most parents no matter where they live in the world has accepted the government tag lines, that parenting is a co-partnership with the greater village—namely public education professionals, and that each home should be a dual income tax generating entity serving the needs of the state. This has left the mentoring of children to public education and thus the anti-capitalist rants of a majority of educators who are direct employees of the state. It was always a bad idea, but now we have facts to back the accusations. The poor fools of Frankfurt have been cheated, and taught to be stupid—unthinking despots—tools for the global desire by governments to be in charge through socialism and communism. Today’s youth are yesterday’s children who were given participation trophies and taught that fairness and equality matter more than performance and effort. The results are some of the massive stupidity uttered by the Blockupy protestors which is the latest spin by socialist organizations to consolidate young people into protest such as was attempted by the Occupy Wall Street losers in America a few years ago.

The Blockupy protesters don’t understand money or how it’s made. They have been deliberately taught by their years of public education to believe that wealth is created by government-funded by taxes and now they believe that all methods of money-making are evil. They have also been taught that all organizations that make money, or move money such as banks, corporations, and entrepreneurs are members of a global elite who wish to push austerity measures to protect their profits. In truth the basic premise of Blockupy beliefs is that only government is capable of fairness which is why that push is being enacted in the United States from liberals with the hope of creating a kind of product recognition in the minds of the public that fairness and equality come from government so that gradual acceptance of the belief that government can do the same with income equality as well. The premise of income fairness and equality has its roots in that participation trophy taught to kids in their single digit years—and now as young adults they want their trophy, they want their free health care, they want their housing, they want their job, they want the life that was promised to them by radical teacher union members uttering the speeches of extreme progressive organizations committed to Karl Marx.

In the United States most people over 35 years of age understand that the country is a capitalist oasis and that is why it is wealthy. America is not a wealthy nation because of a few global elites; it is wealthy because it’s a capitalist country. Germany is wealthy compared to other European countries—they have a strong auto manufacturing sector and they are still pretty good engineers—but compared to the United States their GDP is rather small. Germany produces roughly 5.8 percent of the world economy, whereas the UK is 2.6 trillion per year and France is just a bit below that. Germany is the strongest economic power in the European Union at roughly 3.9 trillion dollars per year in GDP. For comparison the United States produces $17.7—roughly, and is just ahead of China. However China as a communist country is largely dependent on the United States for much of its economy. Without that interdependence, China would fail as an economy as much of what is made in China is for Western markets. To put things really into perspective, the entire land mass of Russia which makes up most of the entire continent of Asia only produces $2.1 trillion dollars. Comparatively, just the company of Apple in the United States is worth nearly $1 trillion all by itself nearly a half of the entire Russian economy. So understanding these players and their commitment to socialism for most of the 20th century is important. They are all broke whereas America continued to grow in spite of government attempts at socialism. When the rubber hits the road in America, people learn to become capitalists, for the most part, or they stick out their hand seeking government checks and get made fun of for their lack of effort. Sure the youth thinks it’s unfair, but what do they know? Their public educations taught them to think incorrectly—so by the time they grow up in their mid-thirties, they may learn by then to think correctly about things. But understanding all that is a predicate for understanding why the Blockupy people were in Frankfurt protesting the new headquarters of the European Central Bank.

What they are protesting is the proposed austerity cuts to the types of things they were taught were “natural rights” such as any method of public spending that will have a direct impact on unemployment rates. But the reason for that is due to the fact that only government is making jobs off tax payer funded activities as entrepreneurs have largely pulled out of Europe and have moved to America or someplace where capitalism allows them to create wealth leaving behind all these losers protesting austerity cuts. But there is no choice; there isn’t enough money in the entire European Union to pay for all those promises that have been made to people through the socialism which has spread to every corner of the entire European and Asian continent.

America is struggling over the issue of socialism. We too have a youth trained to believe in the participation trophy, but largely adults accept that capitalism is the method of money-making in the United States and they stop fighting against it once they reach adulthood and begin to participate. Obama is a classic European style socialist which is why he spends and spends and spends—because like the idiots of the Blockupy movement his plan for America is to protest against the future need for austerity just like they have been in Greece and now in Frankfurt—never intending to pay the money back and protesting against the banks to relieve the debt obligation. To right thinking people such a policy is reckless—even stupid. To the socialist minded—it’s a right they have after being born to just be given things without earning them.

Austerity is the only path forward in Europe and a full acceptance of capitalism is the only real way to put money in the pockets of families. Those same families will have to learn to take care of their own children in the future whether or not mom or dad stays home to care for the growing minds of the youth using education systems to only expand on a foundation created under the family roof. We’re not talking about the benefits of conservatives over liberalism-we’re talking about what makes people successful as opposed to parasites. There is no other option as history clearly shows. If you want a trophy, you have to actually try at something and win at it. You don’t get an award just for showing up—you have to strive to achieve something before you can get something. Most of planet earth currently doesn’t believe such a thing and the fault resides squarely on the shoulders of global public education. It has failed humanity, and now its time to pay. Europe is just the first of a long line of dominos that will soon fall because of the failures of public education and the government sponsorship of socialism as a way for them to stay in control over a population that would otherwise know better.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Blaze Coverage of Tesla: Zero to 60 in 3.2 seconds and a smiling Preston Tucker

I was listening to Pat and Stu on The Blaze Radio Network when Glenn Beck rushed into the studio to interrupt their show declaring with great excitement that he had just driven one of the new Model S Tesla dual motor cars that accelerated from zero to 60 in 3.2 seconds. Beck offered anybody who wanted to test drive one of the new cars by Elon Musk a free ride which immediately sent the radio crew into tapes so they could take Beck up on his offer. Musk has been proving himself to be leaps beyond the current automobile offerings. I have been complexly turned off to electric cars viewing them as environmental wacko projects—because electricity is still largely generated by fossil fuels. However, the magic of the Model S and the rest of the Tesla product line is the dual engine concept which removes all the mechanical linkages which inefficiently drop power dispersal in conventional cars. The Tesla delivers power exactly where it’s needed achieving supercar acceleration in a car that is priced like a regular luxury car.   Watch Stu’s test drive in the following video.

http://www.glennbeck.com/2015/03/19/i-thought-i-was-going-to-pass-out-glenn-test-drives-a-tesla/

One of my favorite and deeply personal movies is the George Lucas production Tucker: A Man and his Dreams. In that classic film Preston Tucker invented a car that was far superior to the products being put out by the Big Three–Ford , GM, and Chrysler in 1948. Tucker is certainly one of the people I most admire and he was about the age I am now when he was trying to get his Tucker car off the ground. Otto Kerner was a US attorney who on behalf of the Big Three attacked Tucker for making his revolutionary car “too good.” Kerner was later jailed for three years and fined $50,000 for 17 counts of bribery, conspiracy, perjury and other charges for stock fraud. The result was that Tucker’s cars featuring a 5.4 liter Franklin 0-335 aircraft engine with hydraulic vales, fuel injection, torque converters on each of the rear wheel—disk brakes, a padded dashboard, self-sealing tubeless tires, and an independent springless suspension—was stopped before it even got started. At the time it was an incredible car about thirty years ahead of its time. The Big Three rather than compete with Tucker looked to bury him, literally suppressing automotive development for nearly a half century thereafter. Only now are they finally starting to climb out of the stalemate technologically that they have been under for so long. Tucker never went to jail, but he never got his car to production either.

Elon Musk unlike Tucker was much wealthier going into the project and was able to achieve market domination in the electric car market while the Big Three were reeling from years of mismanagement and stagnate technological development. At the same time foreign offerings were starting to finally bore Americans. Musk using American ingenuity and the benefits of capitalism launched a new car company that has put on the road a car far in excess of the current offerings. It is technically well ahead of its time and is setting a new standard.

Even as I write this roller coaster season is coming to Southern Ohio where I live. I love the technology of roller coasters and have watched them evolve from wooden roller coasters to the sleek new metal coasters. The electric current launches common now in the best of them make it seem like the logical next step for personal transportation. But it took Elon Musk to actually use the technology in a way that should have been applied decades ago. Tesla’s technology is only state-of-the art because the technology involved was purposely underdeveloped to protect the industry of old. Yet the direction of General Motors didn’t save them from going bankrupt before 2010. The direction of the old cars just doesn’t meet the future, and they failed as a company. In amusement parks new technology comes out all the time to unleash new sensations to thrill parks. The same enthusiasm should have been carried over into personal transportation—but it wasn’t—leaving the door wide open for someone like Musk.

And Musk isn’t alone, just a few days ago I wrote an article about the new self driving Mercedes, and of course Richard Branson is emerging into the market. Both Branson and Musk are also building companies that are punching the reaches of space—so it is natural that their automotive companies are going to push the limits of previous mediocrity. The race for the best between Musk, Branson and the rest coming into the field of play will change the way we all transport ourselves around and I’m excited to see how it transpires.

With the electric car power is not so easily lost to where the tires hit the road. I can easily see a day where the very power that makes them run could be cheaply produced through Thorium energy leaving cars that never ran out of power—no matter where on earth they are. Power creation is another field of endeavor that has been deliberately suppressed by the previous generation. For the same reason that traditional coal power was kept over the emerging technology of Thorium Tucker was destroyed so to protect the Big Three—but to what result? The big companies failed anyway, just as the current energy creation companies will—its only a matter of time before someone breaks through the deliberate suppression of better methods using competition to drive human beings toward advancement.

It was exciting listening to Pat and Stu during the Tesla portion of their show. It was unscripted and their enthusiasm was noticeable, and contagious. In just a few weeks, I have been largely won over by The Blaze and their coverage of this emerging technology. If I could have a car that goes from zero to 60 so quickly without the noise and violent expulsion of energy—I’d take it. If it’s truly better, it should replace the old, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is something we should all embrace and thank because it is yet another example of the wonderful attributes of capitalism and the excitement that comes from minds un-tethered from the rules of engagement established by criminals like Otto Kerner. When people like Elon Musk have success, like he is with his Tesla Company—I smile a bit to myself at a victory Tucker predicted would happen. Musk is doing what Tucker couldn’t—and that makes me very happy to see someone—ANYONE—doing it.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.