Tag: Trump

Trump Hosting the Tech Bros: Making enemies work for you, instead of against you

A lot of people from the MAGA side of things had a lot of problems with Trump hosting the Tech Bros in the White House, the Bill Gates types, along with Zuckerbucks, and many others.  All the big tech companies, such as Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Apple, and many others, worked hard against Trump to destroy him, not just to beat him in an election.  And with Bill Gates, he has his hands all over COVID, and many deaths that resulted from the created bioweapon.  Why was he sitting next to Melania?  He should be in jail!  I get it.  I don’t like any of them.  But I understand what Trump is doing, and I think it’s a great idea.  It would be hard to cheerlead a dominant, thriving economy and to leave those guys out of it.  And there is a bigger point to make about it that we’ll get to.  However, the wealth creation that comes from the tech sector is truly massive – the kind of economy that most European countries would love to have from just one of the people sitting at that table.  And here was Trump getting all of them, former enemies, cheerleading his efforts to expand economic opportunity through the use of AI.  As I have been saying from the beginning of AI, our experience isn’t going to be Skynet from the Terminator movies; it’s going to be more servant-oriented, like Star Wars, where bandwidth expansion will make human beings busier than ever.  AI is going to want to serve the human race, not to take it over, and the people at that dinner were happy to have a President who could put differences aside and help bring their passion projects to life.  I personally love Apple products, and it has bothered me to see them working against the Trump administration all this time, except for recently.  Watching everyone at that big table praise the Trump administration was more than a little satisfying.  And I only see good things coming out of it.  Should we trust any of them?  Of course not.  But it’s good to get your enemies to work on your behalf, any time you can.

Now, there are many things to consider, especially regarding technology.  The downside to AI and computer software in general is the impact on the human mind as it attempts to adapt to it.  The Furry Culture that people are discovering now, as a result of Tyler Robinson, is very sexually disturbing, but emerges from a mind incorporating these new changes from technology to reality.  Tyler Robinson is the killer of Charlie Kirk and his boyfriend, who was a persistent gamer who seldom ever left the house, and lived in that virtual world, losing touch with reality, obviously.  If there weren’t so much anxiety between this new technical gamer culture and reality, would Charlie Kirk be alive today?  Would the world be better off?  And many would say that technology is the root of evil, corrupting the youth.  And there is a lot of evidence in that direction that is perfectly justified.  However, with all these new elements comes the need to ground all thinking in the traditions of the past that have proven effective, and to build a future around them.  And that responsibility comes directly from leadership, which is what President Trump is providing.  In many ways, Trump’s embracing of those who have worked against him allows rebellion to be pushed aside and for the human race to accommodate the changes it needs for its own sake much better.  With leadership, people will find their way through the changes, rather than letting them emerge in a vacuum where everyone loses touch with reality.

But even more important is the notion that the Trump administration is a fascist one, that suddenly has all kinds of implications after the murder of Charlie Kirk.  Why do young people think that Trump is a fascist, or anybody from the MAGA movement, for that matter?  Elon Musk obviously fell off the wagon as a tech leader, which has continued to mystify people who wonder why Musk was ever drawn to Trump at all.  But why would Trump let these crazy characters near him in any way when they have shown themselves to be enemies?  Well, because it’s better to have people close than isolated.  And nothing dispels the fascist accusation more than not being one, and being accommodating of all people with all kinds of different beliefs and working them toward a common goal that they share with many other people.  When Trump sits down with people who have not been friendly toward MAGA positions, he is building the party.  Elon Musk, for instance, is leaning against trying to start a new party, but is considering getting behind J.D. Vance after the Vice President did a nice job hosting The Charlie Kirk Show podcast after his assassination.  You do much better in life bringing people together than in driving them apart, and in so doing, Trump takes the air out of any fears leveled at him that he wants to rule as a dictator.  The argument falls apart whenever Trump does these big meetings with people many think he should make enemies out of, or pay back with revenge.  That kind of thinking is what holds back the world.  As a businessman, Trump believes he can utilize everyone as an asset that benefits the task at hand.  In this case, a thriving economy that benefits all people, providing many with upward mobility.

I personally have a lot of enemies, and people I wouldn’t trust with a 30-foot pole.  However, in my day-to-day life, I don’t let everyone know who my enemies are.  If they want to talk to me, I accommodate them and measure if there is anything useful that can come from the experience.  But I don’t trust them.  And I’m sure that is the case with Trump.  If you are powerful, you don’t need the approval of others, and Trump doesn’t need the approval of the Tech Bros.  But they need him, and if he can bring them all to a table to expand the economy and work with him instead of against him, then so be it.  We don’t have to prove anything by putting them in jail.  There is still time for Bill Gates to atone for the harm he has caused to the world and many others.  But if there is a benefit to be extracted from them in some way, you will never know it if you don’t open the door to the possibility.  And that traditional way of validating honor is what we’re talking about.  When people mean to do you wrong, we measure a resistance to them as the only ethical outcome.  However, building larger entities, such as an economy or a political party that truly affords people personal freedoms, is even better.  And people shouldn’t know where they stand with you.  Conflicting with people you hate isn’t always the best thing. Instead, it seldom is.  However, if you can get them working in a direction you support and can guide them in that direction without compromising yourself in the process, then that is best.  And that’s undoubtedly what Trump is doing.  And I think it’s a good idea that many good things will come from it.  Not without their challenges, but they are things that will improve the world we live in.  And that is always a good idea.   

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Killer Tyler Robinson: And his professional gamer, transgender lover

We know enough now of the killer, Tyler Robinson, to understand what happened in the assassination of Charlie Kirk.  The legal system will eventually catch up, and everything will come to light.  But what we have here is the confirmation that the trans movement is even more dangerous than we have been warning it to be.  The attempt by the radical Marxist left to desecrate the human temple of procreation has descended the world into madness and murder.  And when we study how a kid who looked to have had a pretty everyday life, with pretty standard parents and exposure to the finer things in life, could have fallen off the rocker so drastically, to the point where he was living with a guy in an apartment sexually, and that the guy was trying to become a girl.  And that the pressures of living that lifestyle outside of the gamer culture were too much to deal with.  And like a lot of these trans shooters have become, they turn to violence, in the case of Tyler Robinson of Utah, who was still a young person with all the options of life ahead of him.  That he would turn to obvious violence to eliminate a big personality directly associated with the Trump administration, in Charlie Kirk, as he spoke at a local college on the benefits of MAGA values, Robinson turned himself in to authorities after he essentially confessed to his father, and a Mormon family friend.  At 22 years old, his life was over the moment he pulled that trigger and then ran home to confess to his family and to his boyfriend.  Now that the lawyers have gotten a hold of him, he isn’t talking much, but his roommate is, Lance Twiggs—an aspiring professional gamer.  Based on the bullet casings left behind at the murder, Robinson was clearly down the rabbit hole of gamer culture that tends to lose touch with reality. 

No matter how smart you are, once you dip into the well of homosexuality and non-traditional sex with a member of the same gender, you can’t take it back.  Many people make this mistake in the early years before starting a family and having children.  And given the way Robinson grew up with very engaged parents, his father, who owned a family construction business, was also a 27-year veteran of the Washington County Sheriff’s Department.  So he had a duty to turn his son in, which is unusual.  But it also gives insight into just how difficult it would be to be close to parents who had spent a lot of their lives actively with him, going on vacations to Hawaii and Disney, on exotic fishing trips, and having a mother who was deeply involved in his life.  Taking trips to the Grand Canyon.  Getting good grades in school, maintaining a 4.0 GPA in high school.  Being close to his two younger brothers.  His grandmother described Tyler Robinson as being “squeaky clean.”  They were a Republican, Trump-supporting family, and they spoke every day, right up until the moment of the murder.  So what happened that such a kid with so many opportunities in life, and having a loving family, would grab a gun and pull the trigger on Charlie Kirk during a public speech at Utah Valley University?  The parents appeared to have done everything right, but how could such a kid fall off the edge like that, even to the point of killing someone so brutally in public, surrounded by thousands of other people?  We are dealing with a real evil here that is looming in the background.

I know quite a few people in law enforcement and several people who used to work for me are members of Trump’s Secret Service, so I have good understanding of security protocols, and as popular as Charlie Kirk is, his security should have never set that venue up like they did, where he was speaking from a tent down in a bowl with so many high distances in the background.  It allowed Tyler Robinson to get on top of a roof and take a sniper shot at Charlie Kirk just as the speech had turned toward trans rights.  When the bullet struck Charlie in the neck and blood poured out of the grotesque wound, nobody yet knew that the shooter was having a sexual relationship with a trans roommate, who would very shortly confess to the location of the gun and the radical left-wing politics of his lover.  I also recently hosted an event featuring Vivek Ramaswamy, which allowed me to meet his personal security team, who face similar challenges to those of Charlie Kirk.  Not having a presidential-level Secret Service is tough for these very popular people who speak under private security.  It’s always better to set up on a hill so that a bullet dropped from 200 yards would be much more dramatic than shooting down into a bowl, as it was at the college where this assassination took place.  But part of Charlie’s effectiveness was in being personable and vulnerable.  To put trust in the public and, through that trust, to reach them with the values of God, family, and the Trump administration.  Taking too many precautions at these public events would erode the purpose of engaging with the audience.  And Tyler Robinson took advantage of that vulnerability with an act of terror that would forever change the world.

So I’ll offer, which will come out as we learn more, that having a sexual relationship with a trans lover was too far of a jump for an otherwise normal kid in Tyler Robinson, who had done most everything expected of him right in life up until that point.  But the embarrassment that he felt in having that relationship was too much, and he sought to shelter himself from social judgment through left-winged politics.  And he and his lover could get away with it so long as they lived in the unreal world of professional gamer culture, which is home to many lost kids who struggle to function well in the real world.  In video games, you can easily switch genders with your avatars, and you can be as violent as you want without consequences.  And when you embarrass your family, you can hide in that world and shield yourself from judgment with Democrats and their social approach.  Once you cross that line sexually with another man, you can’t ever live it down, and many young people have been convinced to embarrass themselves socially in much the same manner.  And they can’t live with the result.  And they certainly don’t want to hear Charlie Kirk talk about the Bible and the benefits of family when they have made personal decisions that they can never take back or live with—further eroding their minds from reality.  And the really terrible thing about Tyler Robinson, now that we know more about him.  The further they are from their families, the more vulnerable they are to liberal influences, especially in colleges, once they move out and away from their families.  And becoming politically radicalized then becomes a replacement for the family they left behind, which they still crave desperately, and they’ll do anything for them, even kill.  When social judgments then become the enemy, to quiet the voices, they turn to violence, which is why so many of these trans shooters are turning to terror to express their anger at the world for judging them for their terribly bad decisions.  And it keeps happening because Democrats have justified their anger and bad choices to exploit their weakness for party power and control.  Leaving young kids feeling like they have no other option but to kill those who look down on them.  And if it can happen to Tyler Robinson, it can happen to anybody.  And there are many more people like him who are considering doing the same thing for the same reasons.

Rich Hoffman

https://www.signupgenius.com/go/10C0B4AA4A728A1F49-58659927-help#/

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Public Discourse and Political Integrity: A Reflection on Warren Davidson’s Trenton Town Hall

In the heart of Butler County, Ohio, Congressman Warren Davidson recently held a town hall meeting at Edgewood Middle School in Trenton—a bold and commendable move in today’s politically charged climate. With approximately 500 attendees, the event was a rare opportunity for constituents to engage directly with their elected representative. Although I wasn’t able to attend due to scheduling conflicts, the proximity of the event to my home across the Great Miami River made me want to go.  I love Warren, and he’s usually spot on with his issues.  However, I would have liked to have been there to see the protesters who showed up, the ‘Tax the Rich’ types, because it became quite a media event. Still, the significance of the event and the reactions it provoked offer a compelling lens through which to examine the state of public discourse, political representation, and the ideological divides that continue to shape our communities.

Warren Davidson’s decision to host a live, unscripted town hall was gutsy. In an era where many politicians avoid direct engagement with constituents, preferring curated media appearances or controlled environments, Davidson’s willingness to face the public head-on deserves recognition. His district, which spans Butler County and parts of surrounding areas, is politically diverse. While former President Donald Trump won Butler County by a significant margin—roughly 60%—a vocal minority remains that opposes Davidson’s policies and broader conservative principles. These individuals, often aligned with progressive or left-leaning ideologies, represent a segment of the population that feels increasingly marginalized in a region dominated by Republican politics.

The town hall, however, was not without its challenges. Reports and social media coverage highlighted a group of vocal disruptors who attended the event with the apparent intention of derailing the conversation. Rather than engaging in respectful dialogue, these individuals resorted to heckling and creating distractions, undermining the very purpose of the town hall. While public debate is a cornerstone of our republic, there is a line between passionate disagreement and outright disrespect. As someone who has attended events featuring speakers with whom I disagree, I believe in maintaining decorum—listening, shaking hands, and finding common ground where possible. The behavior exhibited by some attendees at Davidson’s town hall was not only counterproductive but emblematic of a broader erosion of civility in political discourse.

The media’s portrayal of the event further complicated matters. Coverage focused heavily on the disruptions, framing them as indicative of widespread dissatisfaction with Davidson’s policies. This narrative, however, overlooks the broader context. The disruptive group represented a small fraction of the attendees—perhaps 20 to 30 individuals—yet their actions were amplified to suggest a larger movement. This kind of coverage plays into the hands of those seeking to challenge Davidson’s seat in the upcoming election, painting him as vulnerable despite strong support from his base. It’s a tactic often employed by those on the political fringes who hope to gain traction by manufacturing controversy rather than presenting substantive alternatives.

Davidson’s alignment with Trump on many issues, particularly fiscal policy, has made him a target for criticism. While Trump’s approach often involves aggressive spending to stimulate economic growth, Davidson has positioned himself as a fiscal conservative, advocating for reduced federal spending and greater accountability. This divergence has sparked debate within conservative circles, but it also highlights Davidson’s commitment to principle over party. His stance on limiting government expenditure reflects a belief in personal responsibility and economic discipline—values that resonate deeply with many in his district, including myself.

The disruptions at the town hall were not merely expressions of policy disagreement; they were symptomatic of a deeper ideological divide. The individuals who sought to hijack the event often espouse views rooted in socialist or Marxist frameworks, advocating for increased taxation and expanded government programs. Their arguments, while emotionally charged, lack practical grounding. Demanding higher taxes to fund expansive social initiatives without addressing underlying spending habits is akin to maxing out a credit card and blaming the employer for insufficient wages. Fiscal responsibility begins with managing expenditures, not simply demanding more revenue.

Moreover, the push for higher taxes often targets the wealthy under the guise of promoting equity. Yet this approach overlooks the broader implications of punitive taxation—namely, the disincentive to invest and innovate. Not understanding why investment occurs and what a lack of it does to a society as a whole.  The same individuals advocating for increased government spending are frequently those who struggle with personal financial discipline, projecting their frustrations onto systemic structures rather than addressing individual accountability. This mindset, while understandable in moments of hardship, ultimately undermines the principles of self-reliance and economic freedom that form the bedrock of American society.

The town hall also served as a microcosm of the broader political landscape. With Trump’s administration well underway, Democrats find themselves on the defensive, seeking avenues to regain relevance. The disruptions at Davidson’s event were not isolated incidents but part of a coordinated effort to challenge conservative leadership in regions where progressive influence has waned. These tactics, while effective in generating media attention, do little to foster meaningful dialogue or policy innovation. Instead, they contribute to a climate of polarization and mistrust, where political opponents are viewed not as fellow citizens with differing views but as enemies to be silenced.

Despite the noise, Davidson remained composed, demonstrating the kind of resilience and integrity that defines effective leadership. His willingness to engage with constituents—regardless of their political affiliation—speaks to a commitment to representation that transcends party lines. While I may not agree with every aspect of his platform, I respect his dedication to public service and his courage in facing criticism head-on.  I agree with most of his positions, but I was a much quicker yes on the Big Beautiful Bill than he was.  In a time when many politicians retreat from scrutiny, Davidson’s approach is both refreshing and necessary.

The media’s role in shaping public perception is crucial and cannot be overstated. By focusing on the disruptions rather than the substance of the town hall, outlets contributed to a distorted narrative that misrepresents the event’s true character. This kind of coverage not only undermines the communication process but also fuels division by amplifying fringe voices at the expense of constructive dialogue. It’s a reminder that media literacy is essential in today’s information landscape—citizens must critically evaluate sources and seek out diverse perspectives to form informed opinions.

Looking ahead, Davidson’s reelection prospects remain strong. The vocal minority that seeks to unseat him lacks the organizational strength and policy coherence necessary to mount a serious challenge. Their efforts, while loud, are unlikely to resonate with the broader electorate, which values stability, fiscal responsibility, and principled leadership. Davidson’s track record, combined with his willingness to engage directly with constituents, positions him well for continued service.

The Trenton town hall was a testament to the complexities of modern political engagement. It highlighted the importance of respectful discourse, the challenges of ideological division, and the resilience required of public servants in the face of adversity. While disruptions and media bias may cloud the narrative, the core message remains clear: representation matters, and leaders like Warren Davidson play a vital role in upholding the values that define our communities. As constituents, it is our responsibility to engage thoughtfully, maintain integrity, and contribute to a political culture founded on respect and accountability.  And to be thankful that there are politicians out there, like Warren Davidson, who are willing to do the job in the way that he does.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Lakota’s Levy is the Most Expensive in Ohio’s History: Meet Ben Nguyen who is a solution for the future

After I met Ben Nguyen and endorsed him for the Lakota school board for the upcoming November 2025 election, the business of why he was running evolved into a community priority.  Ben is a young man who wants to stay in the school district, but with the loan amount that is looming with the approval of this massive levy from Lakota, the easy math is projecting the debt burden alone to be an imposition of $1.2 billion onto the economy of the Lakota school district, which is outrageously too much.  The amount of economic growth that the community would need to generate to offset the cost of this levy is unrealistic, and it would certainly set the course for the kind of decline that most affluent areas experience over their lifetimes.  Things have been relatively good in West Chester and Liberty Township for several decades, mainly because we have had a strong political commitment to prevent excessive taxation.  That has kept things somewhat affordable, but it’s a delicate balance that requires constant political pressure to maintain low taxes.  Butler County itself has a lot of Republicans in it, and republicans don’t like taxes for big, ballooning government.  It has been a significant number of years since the Lakota school district attempted to put a levy on the ballot, mainly due to the brand damage that the school itself would have incurred, as we have maintained a sharp resistance to excessive taxation within the school district.  However, Lakota has been waiting until it had a four-member majority of Democrat-minded big spenders, and it now has that, and it is taking its shot with the most expensive school levy attempt in Ohio history.  And what they want now isn’t all.  If they can pass this levy, they have an operations levy in mind that will also be enormously expensive.  So Ben and I discussed all this on camera, because people want to know some of these details that newspapers and yard signs never get to tell the complete story. 

Even though Ben has just graduated from Lakota, he had a great experience at the school. He loves his community and wants to stay in it, attending college at Miami University.  And start a family in his hometown.  However, the problem is a math problem: at the current rate of inflation and interest rates, the already average cost of a home in the Lakota school district is around $450,000.  By the time Ben graduates and wants to start a family in his mid-20s, those exact costs will be in the $ 600,000 range, and the math doesn’t work out.  And that will all be without the price of this Lakota levy.  Adding that $ 1.2 billion debt liability to the community would be the end for many residents who are fixed-income types, and it would significantly shorten the list of people who could afford to buy into the community.  And as we drive around cities with former opulent homes and wonder how they become crime-ridden slums, this is how that process begins.  A good place to live is started.  People get comfortable with things and stop monitoring costs, and they elect Democrats.  Democrats get on school boards and city councils, and start voting for excessive spending, wrap their communities in debt obligations, and poof, a slum is born.  The economy collapses.  The values drop.  And everyone loses a lot of money, and the only opportunities people see for themselves are crime.  It’s essentially the story of Middletown, Ohio, just to the north of the Lakota school district.  There are numerous examples throughout the city of Cincinnati.  However, due to the kind of people in Butler County who lean towards Republican politics, we have managed to prevent that cycle up to this point.  But the danger is looming.

So as Ben and I sat down together to shoot a video so we could talk about all these things, one of his key reasons for running for the school board is to keep the taxes low so that he can afford to stay in the school district and to raise a family here, as he grew up.  As a young man with natural political gifts, he wasn’t trying to overachieve; he was trying to save his community from excessive taxation.  And in my opinion, that is a very noble quest that is mature well beyond his years.  As I spoke to him, it was clear that his intelligence is precisely what the Lakota school board needs.  We discussed a variety of topics, including the support of current school board member Isaac Adi and past board president Lynda O’Connor. Many believe those endorsements are liabilities to him, suggesting that we need to present a completely fresh start as a Republican Party approach.  But when you’re dealing with these kinds of issues, you have to be able to unite people of drastically different levels of Republican politics.  In a two-party system, 50% of anything will have people very wide apart on most political matters.  However, on things they can agree on, the political system must be able to rally people toward a shared objective.  And high taxes and the defense against them is one that most Republicans can relate to.

Ben and I covered a lot of topics that should make it very easy for voters to get behind him.  With him on the school board, there is a chance to really shape the future with some reasonable management.  However, it will take more than just Ben Nguyen; there will need to be more people to join him, otherwise, he will be outvoted by the same individuals who have just proposed the most significant tax increase in Ohio’s history.  And even if this one is defeated, Lakota will try again and again until it passes with spring votes, summer votes, or anything it takes, until they catch people off guard and can manage to extract more taxes from the community.  And once they do that, the impact on the community will start its decline.  So this isn’t just a fight to elect a very young man, Ben Nguyen, to the Lakota school board.  This is a fight to keep the cost of living low enough for people to afford it, so that our community won’t follow so many others into their decline due to over taxation.  If left alone, Democrat types who end up in these political offices over time will do as they are in Lakota, asking for outrageous amounts of money with no end in sight.  And if we want to manage that process, we have to have people like Ben Nguyen on the school board.  He needs to get elected, and our community needs a plan to elect two or three more like him, so that there is a clear majority that can vote and prevent tax increases.  Ben isn’t against school funding.  However, as we discussed, Lakota has a $250 million yearly budget, which should be sufficient to operate a school that teaches children.  The community well supports Lakota schools as they currently are.  The purpose of this levy and the tax burden that comes with it is to facilitate more wasteful spending, including building new schools that will require more staff to run, and that means more people on payroll, inflating an already high budget.  So, Lakota needs to hear from the community, no more taxes.  And they need a school board that can work with what they already have.  And Ben Nguyen looks to be a first step in that direction.  And after speaking with him, I can’t wait to vote for him.  And after you hear him talk, I think you will feel the same.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Proverbs 22:7: Why America rules over the rest of the world

It is a topic that has come up a lot, especially since Trump has been trying to negotiate peace between Russia and Ukraine and end the war there.  Why the United States?  Why do we get to set a dollar standard?  Why do airports have to speak English universally?  Why is it that the United States thinks it needs to be, or can be, involved in the world’s affairs?  How can the world be equal if the United States consistently views itself as the best or wealthiest country in the world, and that somehow gives it power over all other countries?  And the answer is simple: only the United States has adopted capitalism as an economic model, while all other countries in the world have some degree of socialism in their economies, which restricts their financial growth.  A friend of mine recently brought this to my attention with a nice quote from Proverbs 22:7, which says, “The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.”  And that’s very true.  If a country penalizes itself from wealth creation, it loses the ability to be equal in any discussion.  And being poor, especially by choice, will always leave a member of a negotiating party at a disadvantage.  America has the power that it does because it’s a rich country, and it’s rich because of capitalism.  And you’d think other countries would have woken up to that fact, because they are poor by choice.  The reason America has the power and influence it does is that it has a population of only 300 million, yet it produces the largest GDP in the world, competing directly with countries like China and India, which have populations of over a billion each.  Because all other countries in the world have adopted Marxist ideas, they have limited their wealth generation and ultimately their influence at the table regarding the fate of the world.

The issue of fairness arises frequently in these discussions.  Is it fair that the world is designed like this, where human beings are valued more for their wealth than for their better values, which reflect power and influence?  It’s a matter of leverage; people in the world want money and will do this or that or something else to get it.  And when too many artificial restrictions are created to access money, then naturally, people with less of it are on the wrong side of any negotiations.  So, by choice, those who have very little money are in that position because they chose to do other things than make money, and the world does not honor their choice. We have invented money and wealth as measures of achievement, and in all human cultures, achievement is highly respected.  Gaining wealth is a measure that, by default, is universally understood by all people.  And to lobby for making some other value more critical, such as compassion for the weak, or valuing vacations over working too hard, will ultimately leave the one without money at a disadvantage, leveraged by those who do control the money, because they have more of it.  Money comes in many forms but what the book of Proverbs has always struggled with as a foundation of Christianity for instance, because even Jesus struggled with this problem by attacking the vendors at the Temple which led to his crucifixion, is that the meek are overlooked and often oppressed by the rich people of the world, and that everlasting life in Heaven might give them relief from that reality.  This is a debate that has been ongoing since the beginning of time, but the rules have remained unchanged—he who owns the gold rules.

Trump has been effective because he understands how to control leverage in negotiations, as he always puts himself on the side of smart money.  And whoever does that will win the argument every time.  Not some of the time.  All of the time.   And the question of fairness is then a universal law that is the same here as it would be on the other side of a black hole in space, on the other side of reality.  This rule would never change.  The Bible struggled with the same idea: what power does the Lord in Heaven have over the earth if people will do anything for money and what it can buy.  And the answer is a hard one, because money represents wealth creation and how people measure such things in polite society.  The rest of the world has chosen to rebel against the premise of money, and they counted on peer pressure to create other value systems that the world respected, such as transgender rights, or helping people experiencing poverty when people have been deliberately made poor with terrible social policy.  For instance, because of capitalism, a poor person in America is infinitely wealthier than a person in a Marxist hellhole, like some African country that has deliberately suppressed capitalism.  Their poor state is a result of a desire to control wealth creation, so that people can be ruled over, and that they won’t acquire personal wealth to compete with their overlords.  When a government seeks to exert power over its people, it must limit their access to wealth so that private individuals cannot undermine the government’s authority over them.  So that decision ultimately constricts their ability to generate wealth. 

Trump has spent his life accumulating wealth, and his ability to do so has given him the capacity to negotiate at multiple levels.  Being rich for him means he gets to win the argument.  And from that perspective, he can command the world to sit at his feet, as the members of NATO remarkably did in front of his desk in the Oval Office recently, after Vladimir Putin came to Alaska to visit with Trump after quite a spectacle.  The world came to Trump to appease him because of the power of the American economy.  And because they don’t have money themselves, due to poor economic decisions, they find themselves at a disadvantage in the discussions they have with all other parties.  With all the talk about Russian power and military might, it’s worth noting that they don’t have a very robust economy, which leaves them at a disadvantage at the negotiating table.  People can talk about how mean Putin is as a tyrant, but because of his need to maintain control over his people, the Russian economy is too restricted and always at a disadvantage to a capitalist country like the United States.  And when push comes to shove, the capitalist country will always outleverage the authoritarian government that has put too many barriers on personal wealth.  So that is why America plays the role in the world that it does.  Fairness is a sentiment, not a value.  It’s an intellectual observation that doesn’t align with the realities of the world.  Jesus might have struggled with the same issue involving the money changers at the temple, as many are declaring that America shouldn’t have the kind of power in the world that it does.  However, it has that power because humans use money to measure value, and value is derived from the things we do.  And when things are restricted by policy, then who is to blame?  Or, if individuals refuse to work, they are always at a disadvantage in life compared to those who work hard and have financial means.  Who is to blame?  America has given upward mobility to many people through the premise of freedom.  And that is why the United States has a better leverage position over all other countries that are too restrictive on individual wealth creation.  And in that moral quandary is the ethics of wealth creation, and why the world is much better off because of it.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Why Federalizing the Police is a Great Thing: We can trust Trump to give power back

With all the talk about federalizing the police in cities with excessive violent crime, an underlying flaw in thinking is revealed.  Chicago is a creation of liberal politics that is out of control.  Over Labor Day weekend 2025, 58 people were shot across 37 separate incidents with eight fatalities.  And that has become all too normal in that progressive city, where crime has been incentivized and police are hard to find.  Washington, D.C., was just as bad before Trump federalized the police force there and put National Guard troops on the streets to supplement the police, and crime has been driven down to nearly zero.  In the District of Columbia, Trump can do that, and even the very Democrat mayor Muriel Bowser has enjoyed the results.  She has not been a Trump supporter and has instead worked against him in the past.  But even she can see the noticeable results.  So we’re dealing with a shell game that is consistent among many other topics, but it has been exposed here because Trump was able to control the situation in the District of Columbia, as opposed to the theory of putting ground troops into other cities in the nation.  That some evil people are trying to destroy the United States by using our own laws and terminology against us, which is being exposed in Chicago by the resistance to do in that violent city what Trump has done in Washington, D.C.  Democrats don’t want to solve the problem of crime in places like Chicago.  They want the crime, and that is what emerges from the resistance that J.B. Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, has been caught up in as he violently opposes Trump sending the National Guard to reform the streets of Chicago as well.  With crime levels at the rate that they are, a national emergency is more than justified, which gives Trump a clear path to send in the troops. 

Should we be cheering on such an effort?  After all, I’m very suspicious of police powers.  Based on the Constitution, should we even have a standing army? I would be inclined to say no.  However, here is a situation where we already have policing forces on the payroll, and they aren’t doing much else.  And we have police unions that restrict the recruiting and retention of current police forces, which are obviously not enough to deal with the crime incentives in big cities.  And you have criminal elements who use the potential of violence to gain control over other people.  And when people are afraid, traditionally, they vote for big government Democrats to save them.  That’s the theory anyway, that’s what political people believe.  So there are hostile, anti-American forces working behind an assumption of constitutional protections who want to use the rules to bring down American society.  And where they can, they use crime as a destabilizing force to undo everything legally, even to the point where lawyers seek to protect the criminals and the criminally minded, rather than a peace-loving society that is thriving.  In the case of Trump sending troops into Chicago, the governor is furious and is utilizing legal retaliation to stop it.  For his politics, and those of the Democrat party, they need 58 people shot over Labor Day weekend.  They want eight people to die every weekend.  To stay in power within political orders, they need trouble so that people vote for them to save them from that trouble.  And once you understand that, you will see that open borders are meant to overwhelm voting opportunities, that drug policy is there to deliberately poison Americans to the point of killing them.  And violent crime is a direct attack against a society that values private property over state-controlled assets.  If people have to turn to the government to protect their property, a communist dream is then realized, which is the point.

I would go several steps further and take away the gun-free zone status of cities like Chicago and let good guys with guns shoot bad guys with guns, and things would straighten up really fast.  But short of that, something has to be done, and when you have National Guard troops and other military units always ready to engage violence somewhere in the world, then why not send them in to these dangerous cities to clean up crime?  Is federal independence more valuable than those 58 lives?  That is the question that has been imposed on us.  Should we have independence when the cost of that independence is lives that fall victim to violent crime?  That is the question that we are tasked with behind the criminal conspirators who want the crime to shatter our society.  J.B. Pritzker wants to run for president and position himself as everyone’s dad, a parental government figure.  So he needs the crime so that he can have a reason to run on a political platform of saving people.  But if they are already saved and self-reliant, then why would anybody vote for Democrats?  That is their problem, and Trump exposes it by taking away the crises and fixing them, leaving Democrats exposed in ways they can’t handle.  But should we federalize our police forces by eroding states’ rights?  Once they take such power, then why would someone like Trump ever give it back? 

Same interview on YouTube

If the same question were posed during Obama’s administration or Biden’s, I would not trust federal forces to do anything in any community.  It would be a power grab that would be unacceptable.  But in Trump’s case, he has earned a level of trust that only hard knocks could provide, and it is different.  I think it’s the only way to solve the crime problem, and I want to see federal troops in every crime-ridden city, putting an end to all crime problems.  I also want to see the military ending the drug trade and specifically the power drug cartels have in all American cities.  They should all be eradicated, and we should invade other countries like Mexico, Colombia, and Peru and clean up all crime organizations involved in the drug trade and in human trafficking.  And once the world is cleaned up, we can talk about separating federal powers from states’ rights issues.  I am confident that Trump will respect constitutional limits and return power to the states and cities once the issue is resolved.  But, if it were up to Democrats, federal police forces would only be strengthened because their ultimate aim is to give the government the power over private property.  So when J.B. Pritzker complains about Trump overstepping his authority, it’s actually the plan that Democrats hope to have by supporting crime, to push society into just this kind of concession.  Only under Democrat rule does that kind of authority become tyranny.  But under Trump, it’s freedom.  Freedom from crime.  Freedom to own and maintain private property.  Freedom to not be killed while walking down a city street.  The crime is there to tempt society into giving big government control over to private ownership and to have people applauding as it is ushered in.  But what’s different with Trump is that he can resist the temptation to make such policies permanent once the problem is solved, and that is what Democrats really fear.  Trump will address the issue and restore that power once the task is completed.  Which Democrats can’t afford to see happen.  Yes, Democrats are willing to see people die to make their point.  And if those people don’t die of violent crime, then why would anybody vote for any Democrats, ever?  That’s what we are dealing with.  

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Gavin Newsom is Lost: Why Democrats have nobody like Trump

Gavin Newsom has been in the news frequently lately, and he has something to say about almost everything.  And nobody believes any of it.  As governor of California, and this isn’t a political comment, just a logical one, he lost all credibility during COVID and has barely managed to hang on despite several challenges in a state that leaned far left, when it was fashionable.  But we are talking now about a world where Democrats have lost around 2.5 million registered voters and Republicans have gained about as many, and that is just a few months into Trump’s second presidency.  Gavin Newsom is a phony, like many politicians who have gotten away with it over the years, and if politics hadn’t changed as much as we’ve seen, Newsom could probably be considered a candidate for president in 2028, which he clearly aspires to be.  However, he has a poor track record, culminating in the LA fires.  But it was the way he handled COVID that set his future in stone.  The people in California won’t let him live it down, let alone a national campaign.  COVID-19 changed many people and the way they think about politics.  Today’s baby-kissing politician could be tomorrow’s lockdown governor violating all our personal rights over some virus released from China.  And of all the lockdown governors, Gavin Newsom was one of the worst.  It’s almost comical to watch him now trying to build a campaign for the Democrat Party’s presidential nomination.  That is obviously what his plans are, but the political order changed under his feet, and he seems lost to capture any message, because all the old stuff just isn’t working.  The buzzwords have died, and he has no new ones to offer.  Leaving him bouncing around from topic to topic aimlessly. 

The difference between President Trump and everyone else is essentially authenticity.  Trump can drop an F bomb during a speech, and people can relate to it.  Gavin Newsom can do the same, and people perceive it as insincere.  And that’s what’s new now, Trump is a product of the times and the people.  Politicians like Gavin Newsom are completely do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do types who count completely on manipulating the public to exist.  And people are too battle-hardened to accept that premise anymore.  And, there is too much media these days for shaky commentary.  With all the podcasts and startup news shows, especially on Trump’s Truth Social media platform, politicians like Gavin Newsom cannot withstand the constant scrutiny.  In the past, when there were only a few news stations and some talk radio to discuss these topics, Newsom got away with having a shiny exterior because there was never any time to get into the details.  But not these days.  And Trump has shown the world what a real person in a powerful position can accomplish.  And nobody the Democrats have will be able to duplicate it.  And Newsom is among the best that the Democrats have to offer.  They have big problems that are worth considering.  Watching Newsom try to adjust is actually very revealing because it points to a much deeper problem for all Democrats.  Why don’t they have their own version of Trump?  Well, because the new standards require authenticity as a person, not the kind of showboating that was once accepted as usual.  And Democrats as a party have sought to exploit people through emotions.  They have not actually done anything.  The world is looking for doers, not more administrative types who lock down their states, then get caught at social gatherings drinking wine as the world burns down outside. 

Gavin Newsom, in a remarkably short time, as he has been trying everything to capture a national audience, has appeared on the Charlie Kirk Show, attempting to appeal to Trump voters, and has since turned to the radical left, becoming as anti-Trump as anyone could be.  He’s tried to be overly friendly, radically mean, even violent, trying to draw a crowd.  And it’s just not working.  And that’s the main problem.  With Trump, nobody doubts what he’s thinking, and he built that brand over a long time with constant repetition.  Gavin Newsom has changed many times, and nobody really knows who he is, because he’s so inconsistent on topics.  I recall when Gavin Newsom was one of the first to join Trump’s Truth Social platform, going where voters who wouldn’t vote for him were, and trying to win them over.  He has maintained a relationship with Sean Hannity to appear more appealing.  He has tried to debate DeSantis, and that didn’t work well.  He’s tried everything, and nothing has worked, leaving him scrambling now that the clock is ticking toward the midterms and Democrats are bleeding support.  Not gaining any.  And this isn’t just a Newsom problem, but a party problem that even Republicans have.  Politics has changed a lot over the last five years, since establishment types tried to exile Trump and his supporters forever.  And what ended up happening was that it strengthened, and a new standard was set that few politicians who came before could follow.  What is going on behind the scenes is literally revealed in the nervous hand movements of Newsom, which are evident during interviews and give away a lot that nobody sees when the cameras aren’t rolling. 

In sales, it’s a fine line between enthusiasm and overemphasis.  And when someone knows they are selling something that people don’t want, they have to resort to body language to emotionally pull the people they are talking to past the doubt phase, and into the subconscious utterances of hand movements.  Using the hands a lot in communication is an attempt to remind the person you are talking to that you could grab them forcefully and make them listen to you.  Excessive hand movement is a big no in communication, as it forces the people listening to put up emotional barriers. And if the person using hand movements is trying to lie or manipulate an audience, it becomes quickly exposed by overplaying the situation.  In Trump’s case, he believes in the products he has sold, so his communication works, and people can feel it.  With Newsom, he clearly doesn’t, as he is constantly changing his positions and approach.  He doubts it himself, so he tries to hide it with excessive hand movements.  And instinctively, people think of his hands as something that is trying to attack them, so they put up barriers to that reception.  It’s a major turnoff for people listening to a politician like that.  In the past, the media would cover the distance, but they can no longer do so, as they have lost their power too.  There are many differences now compared to when Newsom first started as governor.  And it will only get worse for him and all Democrats.  And Democrats have nobody else but Newsom.  There isn’t anybody coming up in the background.  All the buzzword politics have worn out, leaving them completely unprepared.  And that desperation in messaging is now showing itself in rapid succession.  All they have is an attempt to tear down President Trump and his accomplishments.  They have nothing to offer as a replacement.  And in knowing that, they have a desperate message that can’t go anywhere, and is losing support by the day.  And even worse, their track record is horrendous, especially in California.  Blue states and cities have performed poorly, so Democrats have a lot of huge problems.  And after all that we’ve been through to get here, it’s actually fun to watch. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Link Between Mass Killers and Pot: Robert Westman was a drug user who worked at a pot dispensary

There has been plenty of time to cover this story, but few have, as they are hesitant to address the topic due to its inconvenience.  But there are a lot of reasons why I have a visceral hatred of pot and its consumption, marijuana specifically.  And you can’t discuss mass shootings such as the one committed by Robert Westman recently, where he shot up a church full of children, killing two of them and injuring 17 others, including three elderly workers, during a prayer, without talking about drugs.  The 23-year-old was a trans kid, and there have been a lot of shootings recently that also involved trans kids, obviously having a hard time adjusting to what society has informed them through popular culture, and the nature of human reality.  That is one area where reality collides with the brick wall of social engineering, which goes drastically against biological nature.  But that’s not the root cause of the problem here, and if you study the trend behind the school shootings, it becomes undeniable that the consumption of marijuana is common among all of them.  In this case, with Robert Westman, as of a few months ago, he was working at a marijuana dispensary called RISE that sold medical cannabis.  He also sold handmade skateboard accessories with a girlfriend at local markets as recently as last year.  He was a constant vapor, so much so that he thought he would get cancer from his active consumption.  So this kid was one of those stringy-haired druggie types having a hard time coping with reality and turning to drugs often.  Even mentioning as much in the many notes he left behind.  If you have watched the kind of people who shop at these dispensaries for drugs, whether medical or recreational, they are not our society’s best.  Very little good is ever going to come from people who indulge in recreational drug use—and saying that brings up the real problem that certainly deserves such scrutiny. 

I’ve heard all the debates, and I remain a hard no on recreational marijuana use.  It’s the dumbest thing a society could endorse.  At least one of them, for reasons nobody is talking about.  In some people, the active ingredients in marijuana and other drugs produce psychopathic thoughts that are dangerous.  These active ingredients can trigger reactions in individuals who already have underlying conditions.  And politically, we have a lot of people who want to make money off people’s consumption of pot, because they justify that people are going to do it anyway, so why not make some tax money off it?  It’s a free world; who is anybody to tell other people how to live their lives?  So even Republicans have moved to support recreational marijuana and to legalize it in states that fall for the scam.  And before you know it, there are all these dispensaries going up everywhere, lowering the sidewalk appeal of all other businesses, justified as free market enterprise.  So, for the qualifier, I am against all drug use, even alcohol.  I would say it’s wrong to get an after-work drink to knock the edge off just as much as smoking dope from legal marijuana recently purchased from a dispensary.  Anything that is impairing your mind is dangerous and should be avoided.  When I hear that pot is legal and that should settle the matter, it only represents to me a bad decision by stupid people to legalize a hazardous drug that, in a certain percentage of the population, has a bad reaction to it, and they turn into mass killers.  Most, if not all, of the most recent mass killers had a relationship to marijuana, and the frequency of their killings could be graphed to the same rate of state legalization, where more of the wrong kind of people had easier access to the drug.  In the case of Robert Westman, he was so seduced by the druggie lifestyle that he chose to work at a dispensary.  He could have worked at McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, anywhere.  He decided on the RISE dispensary. 

So why is it so dangerous?  Well, since the beginning of human records, people have consumed drugs to alter their state of mind.  And in that drunken or impaired state, a mind loses its resistance to outside forces, which are always present.  And let’s just put it politely, a mind has a much easier time communicating with quantum characters.  Life forms that live in other-dimensional space.  Some cultures refer to them as demons, while others consider them angels.  Some cultures, such as Islam, call them gin.  Some cultures, such as the Japanese, refer to them as kami.  Shamans in Peru refer to them as ghosts just hanging out beyond our conscious existence, whom they communicate with directly through ayahuasca consumption.  There are spiritual forces that are just as common as mosquitoes, who are ever present everywhere we go, and once you lower your intellectual defenses just a little bit with drunkenness or inebriation from some pot smoke, you find all kinds of really dumb ideas starting to pop into your mind because you lose your resistance to those influences, the drunker you are.  And pretty soon, you are just as dumb as local school board members, such as in my community, at the Lakota school board, dancing naked on table tops at education conferences, and passing out puking and drunk in the bathroom with their panties vanquished to chaos. 

We refer to such influences from outside the logical mind as evil.  And in our society, through mental impairment, we are giving access to our lives to these many evil forces by legalizing intoxicants, such as marijuana.  Oh, I know, the Indians smoked pot, and a lot of other things.  The Canaanites used a lot of drugs.  So did the Egyptians.  Everyone does.  But what happened to all those cultures? An aggressor defeated them.  The root cause of most trouble in all societies from the beginning of time has been in drug consumption and the inherent effects of intoxication on the minds of the participants.  So when you know that this kid, Robert Westman, was doing drugs.  And you see the messages he left behind, such as himself looking in the mirror and seeing a devil, you are seeing a kid stepping away from the rails of his parents, who were divorced, and indulging in intoxication, being vulnerable to the many lifeforms that roam outside of our conscious thoughts.  Lowering those resistances to those characters opens the door to many negative consequences.  And most people don’t go so far.  Those destructive thoughts might pop into their heads, but they logically resist them, as they were taught to do by a healthy parental structure of family support.  But some people can’t, and this kid looked to be one of them.  All the signs were there, but we did not see them because of the legalized nature of marijuana.  We were told we couldn’t judge him as he became a her.  And he was hanging out with the stringy-haired skateboard crowd, which history says is probably experimenting with drugs, such as pot.  And politically, we took away the taboo of pot use by making it legal, because we wanted the tax money.  But in the process, we took away our logic to judge various degrees of intoxication and to call it bad, because we legalized it.  But that doesn’t change the danger that comes from altering a mind that was built to resist such influences.  Then, to make it vulnerable to intoxication that unleashes evil into the participants on a scale that the human race has underestimated.  And if we really want to understand mass violence, we have to understand drug consumption and why people do it.  And what happens when they do? 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

People Like Jen Psaki Make People Like Robert Westman: Democrats and their ideas are dangerous to a safe society

To answer the question as to why the 23-year-old shooter, Robert Westman, killed two children and injured 17 other kids and elderly adults with a mass shooting at a church in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the only appropriate answer is that the Democrat, anti-family policies of social destruction are to blame.  Mass shootings are happening, specifically recently within the transgender community, where the apparent problem of kids who fall for the scheme are finding it impossible to live in society as a whole.  There are a lot of shootings by trans people; Nashville comes to mind.  You don’t see mass shootings coming out of kids with religious backgrounds, two-parent homes, or NRA members.  They are happening from kids with broken homes, a relationship to drugs, and by those who are seduced by Democrat ideas of social victimization and gender neutrality, meaning that a person can identify not with the reality of their born sex, but can change it depending on their feelings.  And that emphasis on feelings is what looks to be triggering this massive and deadly social failure. In the case of this 23-year-old man, who changed his name to Robin in 2020, he obviously wanted to make a point by leaving behind a manifesto of anti-Trump beliefs, releasing a video on YouTube to drive home his point.  He wanted people to know his radical left politics and his anti-religious position, even to the point of painting statements all over his guns.  It looks like he used four different guns, saving enough ammunition in a 9mm to kill himself with a bullet to the head in the Catholic church parking lot where he conducted the mass shooting.  There were a lot of very troubling discoveries that followed, and many of them came from the media, which immediately dug in and avoided talking about the trouble with transgender mass shooters, where a tiny part of the population is turning to violence to express themselves by becoming killers. 

Robert Westman’s mother worked at Annunciation Catholic Church for five years, from 2016 to 2021.  And it would have been during this tenure that Robert Westman decided he wanted to be a woman, rather than a man.  His parents were divorced, with his dad living about a mile away from the church.  Thus, the church itself plays a role in all this, as well as in what it proclaims to those connected to it.  The reason that Democrats quickly move to gun bans after these shootings is that they can’t admit to the real problem that they cause in society, which Jen Psaki articulated really well with her controversial comments on prayer.  As a former White House press secretary and a current MSNBC host, it’s no wonder people like Robert Westman think the things they do.  She said about the prayers people were making in the wake of the tragedy, “prayer is not freaking enough.  Prayers do not end school shootings.  Prayers do not make parents feel safe sending their kids to school.  Prayer does not bring these kids back.  Enough with the thoughts and prayers.”  Essentially, what people like Jen Psaki are saying, which influences the thinking of individuals like Robert Westman, is that the experiments of replacing the family with government are failing.  That if only we took away all the guns, all their crazy ideas would suddenly work.  Without dealing with the psychological problems of gender neutrality that originate in broken marriages or drug abuse.  Or even learning liberal ideas in public schools or the broader mass society.  The anger directed at this church, as communicated by this mass shooter, has the same tone to it as what Jen Psaki said about prayer. 

These killers have a common theme to them, even if recently it has been transgender individuals conducting the violence.  Traditionally, it could easily be said that people who are taking too many drugs are the root cause.  But what you find is that well-adjusted kids who come from a healthy family structure are not doing these kinds of things.  They aren’t killing people.  They might have a bad day, but they don’t seek to destroy elements of society with such hatred, which Robert Westman clearly was trying to do.  The hatred of the church itself is part of this story, which Psaki actually says with disdain: “prayer isn’t enough.”  We must, according to her, and the killer, do more.  We must turn to the laws of men, of government, to make “parents ‘feel’ safe.”  It’s about feelings again. How do people feel?  Do parents feel safe sending their kids to school?  Do you feel like a man or a woman today?  We are supposed to make our society work based on feelings rather than logic.  And where do we get healthy logic?  From a good parental structure.  The government has not been a good replacement.  And the rejects of that attempt are kids like Robert Westman, who build up so much anger in their lives that they would seek to express it with a mass shooting, which is happening way too often by people who identify with left-winged politics.  And the evil at work here is something that churches are dedicated to managing, which makes them a target for killers and media personalities who essentially want to destroy their influence for good. Because if people are good and happy, they won’t turn to Democrats for parental care.  A government that indulges in feelings and forces a society through violence to accept those feelings as the foundation for all collective beliefs.  Only that premise stands opposed to the trajectory of the human race.

When violence is used as a means of communicating, the clear indicator of failure is not far behind.  When kids like these trans kids, who Democrats have told that their feelings about things will be respected by society, and yet they discover all too late, after they’ve changed their name to a woman from a man, that society rejects them as an abomination, it was the Jen Psakis of the world who lied to them to begin with.  The belief society expressed to young people, like this kid, during his mother’s tenure at that church as an employee, was that you could be what you felt.  It was a notable trend in left-wing politics, and it has turned out to be a disaster.  Anger at a mother who wasn’t there for him, or a society that didn’t validate his beliefs, where feelings were respected no matter what they were, leaves people very frustrated.  And the political left actually seeks to weaponize young people like this killer to advance their topics, such as removing guns from society, so that free will can’t be defended by the whims of collectivism.  The anger being expressed, whether it’s on television or through mass shootings, is that we should not turn to God for safety or guns.  We should turn to a parental government that will take care of us and shield our feelings from the harsh realities of life.  And when that doesn’t happen the way it was promised, people already on the edge of sanity fall off the cliff and turn into killers.  So it’s Democrat ideas that are the real problem, and the varying degrees of insanity that come with it.  And until we deal with that problem, Democrats will produce into society a lot more malcontents like Robert Westman.  Democrats have tried to remake society and replace the church as a foundation for goodness.  And they have attempted to replace the family with a parental communist government.  And those failures are evident in people like this killer.  And when society fails and people like this shooter come out of it, they can only blame themselves.  Democrats are dangerous, and the people who follow them are potential problems once reality becomes known to them in ways they aren’t psychologically prepared for.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Fed’s 2% Inflation to Lower Wage Rates: Micromanaging employers and causing quite a mess

There is a dirty little secret that the Federal Reserve has about its role in mass society that needs to be discussed in relation to interest rates and what it considers managed inflation.  The Fed recently met at its annual Jackson Hole meeting, and it reminded me of many things, particularly the time when my grandkids wanted chicken nuggets from McDonald’s and their dining room was closed.  We were in my RV, so the only way to place an order and collect the food was to use the drive-thru window, which I barely fit through.  The McDonald’s in Jackson Hole is very close to where the Fed meets against the backdrop of the Teton mountains.  For a tourist town with one of the largest concentrations of wealth in the world, it’s a small McDonald’s with a pretty small parking lot.  Certainly not RV friendly.  However, I managed to make it work with less than an inch on all sides of my vehicle, and it’s a story that has gained a lot of popularity in my family.  “Remember that time grandpa did this?”  And everyone says, “Which one?” because there are a lot of things to talk about.  The town itself is one of my favorites, and I can understand why all the bank presidents who are members of the Fed want to meet there to discuss monetary policy.  It’s a really good place to go and is America’s version of Geneva, Switzerland.  I think the Tetons are better, though.  So after the Fed meeting there, Jerome Powell indicated he was going to do what I said he was going to have to do, and what J.P. Morgan had been pressing for, along with President Trump, and that was the Fed was going to lower interest rates.  Not happily, but because they have to.  The economy is too good to hide phony interest rate profits for the banks behind artificial inflation numbers meant to frighten the world away from Trump’s presidency. 

However, there is another issue at play that we need to address regarding employment.  The Fed believes that in managing money, it must bake in 2% inflation per year because that is the only way to offset the erosion of wages that employers provide to employees, which dilutes the actual value of labor.  Because the Fed believes, which is one of the reasons for its existence, that employers will not incur the hard cost of paying employees less for their labor as they age and become less valuable.  Therefore, the Fed believes that it must step in and manage the economy because employers won’t do so on their own.  Often, when a company gets out of step with its cost structure, it has an obligation to reduce its costs, either through a reduction in force or wage cuts.  However, most employers are hesitant to lose their legacy talent and invest a significant amount of money in retaining them, when in reality, they should consider letting them go on the open market and replace them with cheaper and younger workers.  The NFL has to do this all the time with salary caps, which are imposed on teams to keep them fresh and relevant.  If a player wants to leave a team for more money, then that team can turn to free agency to replace that player.  If the market wants to pay a lot for that experienced player, they certainly can, but there is a salary cap, so that team won’t be able to pay a lot to other workers as well. 

That’s why we should operate in America with some gold standard, because value has to be protected. Instead of the Fed having the temptation to print more money, it would micromanage the economy with continuous infusions of cash, ultimately diminishing its buying power and hiding the inflation it creates in the process.  And try to hide it behind other economic conditions as a justification, which had worked until Trump came along and called the Fed’s bluff.  And because the Fed believes that free market pressures won’t manage the economy effectively, they have baked into all their assumptions about economic flow that they must micromanage employers who won’t trim their fat with inflated wage rates at their companies, as they fear losing talent to their competition.  So, the Fed bakes 2% inflation into everything.  That’s why, when reviews are conducted with employees, a standard minimum of 2% is required to maintain your wage value at the same level as the previous year.  The trick is that as you get older, you actually lose buying power in most cases because inflation eats up whatever increases you manage to get for yourself.  The goal is for Americans to earn less over their working years, not more, because the actual value of labor must be managed by the Fed, which introduces all kinds of problems, as it’s not really employers who are the problem.  That is just the excuse that the Fed applies to cover a lot of liberal politics, for which they are prone.  Labor unions, for instance, are very guilty of propping up wage rates that are artificially too high, which then feeds the Fed’s argument for mass micromanagement of the economy with incremental inflation to let people believe they are being paid a certain amount on paper, but in truth, the money is worth a lot less.  People don’t notice because it happens over time.  However, every three years, at a minimum, workers lose 6% of their buying power if they do not receive raises in their pay that are well above 2%.  To receive an actual 2% raise, employees would need to obtain a 4% raise with each yearly evaluation.  Which certainly isn’t the case for most people. 

Consider the problem at the McDonald’s in Jackson Hole that I mentioned, which had its drive-thru window closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  And the government was pushing for a minimum wage increase that inflated the real value for entry-level jobs, such as McDonald’s workers making $15 per hour, when the real value for their jobs is likely under $10.  When politicians interfere in the process of manipulating market values, the Fed must attempt to cover up the mess with interest rate hikes to conceal the inflation it creates, which often exceeds 2%.  Our goal with inflation should be zero, and if we held it to the gold standard, it would have to be.  These are the problems you get when you let pin-headed bureaucrats micromanage an economy with Marxist ideas instead of free market capitalism, and it’s a real problem.  So Jerome Powell knows all this and is reluctant to lower interest rates, even though all the parts of the economy that they usually hide behind at those Jackson Hole meetings are too good, forcing his hand.  So he’s not happy about it.  But a lot is coming that he won’t be pleased about.  There has been a significant amount of tampering that has impacted wage rates, and employers have not been the primary source of the issue.  It’s too much administrative mess that comes from the Fed, and short-term politicians who have caused all the problems.  McDonald’s workers, like the one in Jackson Hole, should not have employees making over $20 per hour.  Wal-Mart should not have employees making $20 to $25 per hour because all other labor has had to increase their wage rates to obtain workers.  But the money is all on paper.  People are not actually making those actual wage rates because the Fed has had to hide the impact through inflation.  And now they are being forced to lower interest rates, which will expose the whole mess.  Although the meeting in Jackson Hole might have been very scenic, it wasn’t enjoyable.  There will be a lot more to happen with monetary policy in the coming months.  And the Fed is going to lose a lot more control, as they very well should. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707