Firing Andrew McCabe was a Great Thing: Restoring confidence away from a corrupt government for which he was just a part

It shouldn’t feel so good but it does. When it happened late Friday night on March 16, 2018 that Andrew McCabe was being fired from the FBI rather than just allowed to retire at the tender age of 49 years with a multimillion dollar pension, there was a sense of justice that flowed across our nation like a nice warm blanket on a snow filled afternoon. This is just another great reason for the election of Donald Trump and is what it looks like when a guy like him hits his stride in understanding how things work in Washington D.C.–or at least have worked. Of course, not everyone in the FBI was crooked, but due to the nature of such powerful employment positions it is clear from the love stuck text messages of FBI agents Lisa Page and Peter Strzok who worked directly under McCabe, who then worked directly under James Comey that the tax payer funded FBI had become radicalized toward a certain type of political party. I’m not going to say that their idea candidates were liberals like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, but the FBI idea of conservatives were people like the Bush family and John McCain—people they could control as an institution.

There was a time only a few years ago that the word RINO was denied to even exist among the voting public. But after the election of Donald Trump they are now very obvious. In local southern Ohio politics people who are obvious Democrats like Lee Wong who is running for county commissioner within Butler County as a Republican, are reacting to the national trend set by Trump. Lee wants to join the former Democrat Don Dixon there who is a politician that had to move to the political right to have a career as a politician—both of those guys are what could be termed RINOs because they are truly Republican In Name Only, because they know they could never win an election in those conservative areas unless they showed themselves more politically conservative than they were. And that was clearly the case with the young man elected in Pennsylvania this past week, Conor Lamb who essentially ran as a Republican only he called himself a Democrat which pulled the party in that direction to win against an entrenched Republican. The proper definitions for behavior has been put to the test and this has caused very positive consternation at the highest political levels. What was once covered in secrecy is now well out in the open and people can finally see the true nature of these political candidates for what they’ve always been. And in many ways the FBI was able to hide a lot of bad political radicalism behind a similar veil.

As the gun debate has raged over the last several months while liberals tried to use the usual tricks to spark emotions toward gun confiscation, we have learned why we really need to take guns in the opposite direction. We know that the top members of most of our government institutions have become radicalized against the type of life that formed in America, the yearning for freedom and independence that tend to be the foundations of Republican government. Only even under Republican government, there was an unquestioned trust in government officials that they would always do the right thing, even though it was incredibly obvious that they didn’t. Lois Lerner at the IRS was one of the first obvious signs of what was poisoning the well in Washington D.C. People in general were too busy to care that Lois Lerner had weaponized the IRS to work against political groups, and she was caught and plead the 5th, doing just what McCabe had tried to do, retire and escape into the background with a healthy government pension taking the crimes they committed for the “greater good” to the grave. Only that “greater good” had nothing to do with the American people, it was all about the collective entity of the various institutions they represented. Lerner with the IRS or McCabe with the FBI.

Then came the report also this week that involves the acting FBI deputy director David Bowdich testifying that the Dept. of Justice (headed by former AG Loretta Lynch) forced the FBI to delete over half a million fugitives from the gun background check system. Why you might ask? Well so that criminals could get a hold of guns who clearly shouldn’t have had them so that gun violence would occur, and the Obama administration could then use those deaths politically to advocate for gun removal from society. This was the type of FBI that Andrew McCabe and James Comey were running under the direction of Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder. And it was this kind of justification of resources that put the might of the FBI behind Hillary Clinton with all guns literally blazing. A corrupt government had put all their bets on the house winning the 2016 election and the house lost for a change exposing them all. That house didn’t care who it had to kill or harm to preserve itself, and it had been functioning that way for many years. Only the election of Donald Trump forced it out into the open. Who could count the amount of lives destroyed by the FBI over a long period of time who attack people like General Flynn when the government organization themselves were guilty of far worst, and many times over.

What good is a FBI background check on firearms if an attorney general like Lorretta Lynch, under the direction of a president of the United States can manipulate the way the FBI does its background check in order to inspire more violence killing untold thousands of people with guns, so that they as a collective administration can move the political needle more to the left? If such a thing can happen on little things it can certainly happen on big things, like tampering with the election of an American president by the people who wanted a change from this behavior. And McCabe got caught, as did James Comey—and they were both fired. Comey was fired early by Trump himself. McCabe only when the evidence became so grotesquely obvious that action had to be made. To let McCabe ride off into the sunset the way Lois Lerner did would be a crime in and of itself. Without bringing justice to these obvious law breakers we could never hope to restore our trust into role the FBI was supposed to play in our government.

In regard to gun control, how can we even propose reasonable measures when it is clear that our government was running away from the American people and serving a tyrannical administration as activists? It is just against those types of corrupt elements that the 2nd Amendment was designed to protect us from them. We gave the FBI enormous power, and once that power was abused as it obviously was under James Comey then what is the next step? When the FBI can be directed to put guns in the hands of criminals so that gun violence can increase creating political pressure to confiscate guns as a societal norm, then how can there ever be trust? Then those same people tried to attack a president that half the country wanted as a solution to this mess using all the mechanisms of power to create a scandal—and they expected to get away with it because all their people controlled the power they used to commit those corrupt acts—and what did they think would happen if they were caught?

Years of service are meaningless of during those years a government employee becomes so out of touch that they can be used as extensions of criminal conduct by the hands of power in Washington D.C. The moment however long ago that McCabe and Comey allowed themselves to be instruments of manipulation by political power players they made their service to the FBI worthless. They certainly weren’t “serving” the needs of you and I dear reader, they served the instruments of political power which is why they felt justified in attacking the Trump administration with illegally obtained FISA warrants, illegal surveillance, and a network of fake news generation that was born out of their gun control methods of creating negative stories designed to move the political needle. McCabe was one big part of a weaponized FBI that was only stopped because of an election. If the election had not worked then many Americans would have been forced to entrench themselves in their homes with the Second Amendment as their last line of defense against an out of control government. Because as the FBI was under Comey and McCabe, it was clearly abusive, weaponized, and dangerous. The firing of Andrew McCabe felt good because it showed everyone that justice wasn’t out of the question for such abuses restoring some confidence that our system of checks and balances still work. Which was something that everyone who pays attention to such things needed to see.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Tomb Raider: How little things can and often do add up to big things

My daughter is still young, she’s not even thirty years of age and she’s literally already been all over the world. To say she travels a lot would be an understatement. She and her husband just returned from Banff in Canada where they went on a nice little holiday for the fun of it. She’s a professional photographer so that trip was to get some nice portfolio shots. But that for them was just a little trip. They’ve been to Europe, Iceland, New York, Chicago and out west just over the last half of a year or so and every other week it seems they are going on a new journey. But while she had a free moment she wanted to see the new Tomb Raider movie with me and her mom. Tomb Raider was something I introduced her to as a little girl. I always knew how much she loved the character but I was reminded of just how much when this new film starring Alicia Vikander as the newest Tomb Raider action star taking over for what used to be the sacred ground of Angelina Jolie, came out. Of course, the movie was fabulous, I thought it would be, but was even better than I originally considered. Even more than that it was a reminder for me just how little bitty things can really have an impact on kids which shape them into adults. My daughter in every respect as viewed by other people on the outside world has everything, and they wonder how she got that way often. Sometimes it can be the smallest thing that inspires someone to step into greatness and for my daughter it was the inspiration of Lara Croft.

It’s always been my policy personally, and I passed that on to my children, that if the adults around you let you down that its good and even healthy to find fictional characters to invest in so to set the bar high on personal behavior. I always had good people around me growing up from an adult perspective, people who were positive to emulate, but they fell short of my personal goals. They didn’t reach as far as I would have like to have seen them, so I looked to big characters in movies to shape many of the personality traits I have today. And it worked, But I had an interesting challenge raising my own children, I had two girls and the world didn’t offer them much by way of cool inspirational characters who knew how to embrace their femininity yet strove to push the limits of themselves through the world in a positive way.

It was literally twenty years ago when I was working on a project for an early fulfillment center building conveyor systems. I was working second shift with a lot of other young people who were struggling with the long hard hours and trying to maintain good lives with wives and girlfriends even while we worked 12 hours a day six-day a week for well over a year. I helped a lot of people get through that tough period and when it came Christmas time, I received a lot of gifts from appreciative people who had come to depend on my encouragement. One guy actually gave me a samurai sword because I had talked him out of suicide once he found out his girlfriend had left him compounding a series of other problems in his life largely due to the long hours we were working. He listened to my advice and within six months he went from trying to kill himself to become wonderfully successful. So he presented me that Christmas with a very nice samurai sword. Another guy gave me a copy of the famous Japanese book, The Book of Five Rings because he said that I spoke like the author of that book and that he hoped I would see that and do great things with my talent. Then another guy gave me a copy of the new Tomb Raider III video game, which I had never played but had thought about trying.

My daughter told me the story while we waited for the new Tomb Raider movie to begin at Cinebistro in Liberty Township of how I came home the day I received that old Tomb Raider video game and pretended to shoot up our house with fake guns. She apparently had never forgotten the energy of that moment. I told her at the time that I thought she might like this game because the action hero in it was a girl named Lara Croft, which was like a modern Indiana Jones. She and I went to playing it over the long Holiday weekend and we had one of those daddy, daughter moments that has lasted now for two decades. My daughter liked the game so much that she has spent all that time reading every comic and novel that has been produced about Lara Croft and playing every new video game. When the previous Tomb Raider movies came out back in the 2000s with Angelina Jolie starring as Lara Croft I built those times up and we went to see them as a family together and had a great time which she soaked up. And like I said she has built her life up as her own person but it is amazing how much those influences pushed her to live a quite extraordinary life of her own.

She’s seen more of the world than most people do in an entire lifetime, she’s been married for ten years already and they have a nice house in Liberty Township with a respectable amount of land in what is one of the hottest real estate areas in the United States. And she has a child of her own now as well as a growing client list that is willing to pay her a lot of money for the unique way that she takes pictures. Yet a lot of it was born in just one weekend long ago when she was only around seven years old and we played that Tomb Raider game together during that one memorable Christmas. You just never really know what kids will latch onto as a parent so it’s good to try lots of things. But even what may seem like very small things at the time can lead to big life changing elements, for good or bad. In the case of my daughter her experience with Lara Croft was very positive and it let her set her own personal objectives very high which has led her to a wonderful life so far.

To make it even better the new Tomb Raider was a very good movie. It was not disappointing at all, which was a concern of mine going to see it. My daughter and I had a wonderful time. It’s not often that she gets to go to the movies with just me and her mom these days, because she has a life of her own now and her time is in high demand. Her client list keeps her busy almost every week so getting a window to do something together is pretty rare. I was thinking about it while we were seeing Tomb Raider. There might be four or five times like this over our entire lives so I was determined to make the best of it, and we did. But what was best for me was that I thought of all the other little girls out there who could watch this new Tomb Raider and have such a positive experience that it might inspire them the way it did my daughter. And that made it truly a special event. One that many people including myself will never forget.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Why More Guns are Needed: Students breaking the law to help gun grabbing politicians cover their ineptness

Watching all those kids walk out of their government schools and into an anti-gun rally was fascinating. Then to watch the liberal politicians in Washington D.C. make fools of themselves by using those brain washed masses to grab for guns—it was appalling. It was a circus of clowns selling a point that was as divisive, and improbable as anything proposed in many years. Gun control is not on the table for me. In fact, given the sheer stupidity of the government in the years past, in making terrible concessions with hostile nations—like Syria, Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela—on and on, and on, and on, and running up our national debt, expanding the welfare state, letting radical government unions leverage themselves against the tax payers, allowing American intelligence agencies to become radicalized against conservatives—such as the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, the IRS—then to have these same idiots tell us that we need to get rid of our guns and to trust them implicitly with our lives and private property—somebody is smoking crack. I’m not going to surrender my security to those idiots. We may put our trust in them to do jobs given to them on our behalf as Americans, but we need a fail safe so that when those types of people fail but fall in love with the power we gave them, we still have a means to take our government away from them. We need that leverage so they can’t use our own police and military against the people paying for all this activity. The boss (the American people) need a way to fire those who prove themselves incompetent. That’s what the Second Amendment is all about. It’s certainly not for sport—although that can be a nice byproduct.

I had to write the article I did before this one, CLICK HERE to read it for review—to provide context to this article. Essentially what Democrats and gun grabbers want is for the people of the herd to remain grouped, so they can be easily controlled. The people who want to control you are the people demanding gun control. The kids in the public schools sucking up to their authority figures have been programmed since pre-school to take an anti-gun stance politically on guns—because they are products of their environment—the government schools run by politicians who want to stay in power even if they prove themselves to be incompetent. In that respect the gun grabbing politics of this matter isn’t about saving lives—its about saving the jobs of people who haven’t done a very well in politics, yet they control our law enforcement methods. While the police and military may be working quite fine under the Trump administration, they could be used as weapons under a radical president like Obama. So when politicians abuse their authority and we are faced with a state power that can destroy our lives at the whim of a politician, we have to be able to counter that activity with our own force.

As I explained in that previous article there really are two kinds of people, people who are in the herd mentality, and those who are the hunters. It’s not the fault of people born small, or of a different sex, or even without strength on the battlefield to live in the mentality of the herd if they decide they don’t want to. America was founded by people who wanted to hunt, not to be hunted and that was the drive to fill up North America with the type of personalities who would gladly trade the comfort of European government for the toils of owning land and working it against the elements of nature and threat of Indian attack. This was only made possible with the invention of the gun. As guns became more a part of individual lives the idea of a self-governing people become more expressed. Finally, if people didn’t want to be in the herd, they had a choice of using the gun as an equalizer to become one of the hunters.

Being a hunter doesn’t mean you go around killing people, but what it does mean is that you are free not to function within the confines of the herd mentality. The people demonstrating against guns at the many little rallies around the country that featured law breaking in its own way—students leaving class to participate in a progressive political position of strengthening the herd while discouraging the hunters. What progressive politicians are really after are to remove the tools that keep people from acclimating into the herd of people they control intellectually, and physically. So long as guns are free to use in America the kind of liberal policies that come out of our government schools can’t propel themselves unchallenged into the next generation. Once guns are removed from society the same liberals protesting gun ownership with government school walkouts will be the same people showing up on our doorsteps demanding our food, our energy, even our cars—because as a group they have a need and they can then assemble the masses to take what they want. This is the dream of socialists, to let the herds rule the hunters by essentially declawing the nature of the predators to allow the herd to flock about in the safety of a managed society. Only the herd finds out too late—every time that the politicians they thought they could trust turn out to be the wolf in the little Red Riding Hood story. “My grandma, what big teeth you have.”

If you know your history it is shocking compared to what we know today, at how many politicians in Europe and even in America were putting their bets that Hitler would unite the world under a common socialism. Even FDR in the United States was playing both sides in the expansion of Germany in Europe. Most of the English parliament were pro-Hitler even though the people under their authority were not. There was great pressure to let socialism expand under Hitler to unite the world under a common political philosophy and to hell what the common people thought. After all, the aristocrats at the time thought everyone to be a timid part of the herd and they would do what they were told. The entire decade of the 1930s was this way and the start of World War II happened because of the lead-up politics which imposed itself everywhere. The primary reason there was never an invasion of American soil was that it was one of the few places where virtually every home had personal firearms to protect the occupants. That wasn’t that long ago, so don’t think it couldn’t happen again. When governments propose that their citizens give up their guns and trust them completely with the fate of their civilization, what they are really after is to protect them from you. They want you part of the herd so they can steer you where they desire. They don’t want you as a hunter who can stop their plans cold just through the possession of a firearm.

It’s not just the power of owning a gun that harnesses the thrill of the purchase. It’s what it gives the owner. If governments think voters are members of a democratic herd, the gun makes every potential voter a member of the hunting class, a self-destined individual who can decide for themselves what they value and what they do with it. In a self-governing society, the gun is the key to such an ambition. That’s why buying a gun always feels so good, because the purchase isn’t just about purchasing a powerful weapon, it’s an actual philosophic position to self-determine oneself out of the herd mentality and into that of a hunter. Not a literal hunter, but a person who can live by one’s own accord and as a member of self-determination instead of a passive participant in the world affairs of mankind. Owning a gun is to decide not to trust those in power blindly. We all hope they will be successful in running governments, but if they decide to align themselves with future Hitlers or other terrorist organizations, such as radical Islam—then there is a ground defense in America that is a failsafe against the legislative bureaucrats who fall short of the tasks we’ve assigned them as elected officials.

Removing guns from American society with any kind of gun control is off the table. The debate should actually be going the other way, that average Americans should have the ability to equally withstand anything the military might be able to throw at us. While today things are good and mostly peaceful, one of the best ways to keep it that way is to keep the politicians honest and have the weapons that offset their intents at aggression. Whenever anybody starts talking about the value of life and how they hope to legislate a utopia of prosperity, the roots of a future Hitler are emerging, and they should be feared, not respected. It’s not that such ambitions are not worthy of contemplation, but it is ignoring the basic values of trust that exist between human beings. Fearful members of the herd cannot be trusted. But hunters and people of self-determination can be. And the gun makes people who way—self determined. That makes guns the foundation philosophically to a great society. And anybody who says otherwise has other ideas.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

Revelations from the Hidden World: Preditors and the Herd

I understand the frustration, many of my readers have been complaining about being knocked off my blog subscription list or having trouble finding my articles altogether. Believe me, it’s not you. Obviously, and I am quite used to it, there are many factions that watch everything I do very carefully and hacks are part of the business. With the kind of things that I write, obviously the wrong political philosophy will take exception and will seek their own self-preservation by whatever means in their power. With all the talk about Google, Twitter, Facebook and so many other social media platforms—not to mention publication companies and movie production enterprises—we are in a time where they are controlled by the static liberalism of yesteryear, and they want to keep it that way. If they can they will try to keep my efforts as hidden away as possible. This is the case so too with what we call the Deep State—which are essentially a bunch of people trying to keep their jobs from being taken from them through political change. It should come as no surprise to anybody that my blog pisses off a lot of people and those people will do anything to keep you from seeing it. In that regard, if you find yourself off my subscription list the best thing to do would be to simply sign back up. Just never get caught assuming that the pathway of interaction between myself and you dear reader will remain contentious free. You should always assume that in that path there will be many villains trying to stand in the way. That is the best way to prepare yourself for these embroiled times.

If you have ever watched a wolf, or a big cat in Africa sneak up on a pack of herbivores to the point where they get too close, you will notice that the herd will not break off in a dead sprint of self-preservation. Instead, like a deer caught in the headlights of a surprise they never expected to see, they lock up and pretend that the threat is not there. For them the best chance at survival is to either play dead or pretend that the threat is not there and hope that the odds favor them from annihilation. If they stay put they fantasize, maybe the hunter will take down another target leaving them to escape. It is a desperate hope that all creatures, even the tiniest insect share in common when threatened with a superior force—hope that they don’t notice you.

That is why “they” think that the way to beat a threat best is to ignore it—you know, the hear no evil, see no evil thing. They believe that ostracization from group activity is what protects them most from being hunted by ominous, mysterious forces. Put in the most basic terms, they think that to protect their static intellectual positions in life, they must keep any dynamic presences away that might disrupt their order, the daily routine. If they are animals, that static order is knowing where the fresh grass is, and where they can get water. When they need those things they’d rather not think about the lion that is hiding in that grass waiting for them to come and drink water. Most often, out of convenience and a necessity for survival, the herd of static thinkers can’t afford to think about the dynamic threats to their existence, because they are not capable of stopping those forces other than in ignoring them anyway, so why stress about it? That is the way of all group behavior. They are timid collections of beings who believe that their best chance at survival is to remain in a group where they are protected by sheer numbers and the same holds true for humans.

There hasn’t been one day in my life where I associated myself with such group mentality. I’ve never yearned for the taste of group acceptance in any way—as I see it, what do I care what a bunch of sheep think? All I care about is that they do what I need them to. I often say I understand Donald Trump in many ways, but I can say that something I have that he doesn’t is that he likes groups. He may be a hunter but he loves the sheep. I don’t care about them at all. For him it has served him well, his books sell well, he has produced top rated television, and of course he was able to become president because he cares about the popularity of issues. But what he has in common with me is that he doesn’t change his behavior based on the opinion of the herds.

Any hunter knows that when going into the woods with camouflage and waiting in a tree stand awaiting a deer to cross your gun sights, the whole exercise isn’t about killing the deer for meat. You can purchase meat at the store. Instead, for hunters, it is about the psychological process of establishing oneself as the top of the food chain, of being able to take life out in the woods and using it for one’s purposes as opposed to being hunted by some other force. Fisherman go through the same kind of realignment. Many if interviewed at the lake for the day will say they enjoy the tranquility of fishing—being alone in their boat and having a relaxing day, but in essence what they really enjoy is the knowledge that in the food chain they get to play the role of hunter instead of the hunted. In their various group associations where the natural predilection is to retreat behind the safety of the herd they lose touch with this essential individualism and by hunting and fishing they recapture those aspects of themselves. And by being quiet so to lure the hunted to your weapons of malice, whether it be a gun or a fishing pole, the hope is to bring the world of the hunted to you without triggering their skittish natures away from your objectives.

This is why the first thing they do in school shootings, or other acts of violence is try to identify whether the character was a “lone wolf” or rather an individual who doesn’t function within the impulses of group association that are actually the function of all public schools. The fantasy is that if they can put peer pressure on people not to be this way that they may as a group have safer access to the metaphorical watering spots that are out there in life. But what they expect actually goes against the very nature of existence. Speaking from experience I can say that all groups work very hard to protect their herds from the camouflaged threats that are outside their control. I have told this story before but I’ll say it again for the context of this article. Many years ago a friend of mine who had a genius level IQ was giving a presentation to Cincinnati City Council. At 25 years old he and I knew all the characters on a first name basis, many of them are still in politics, people like Todd Portune, Dwight Tillery, and Roxanne Qualls. The issue of the day was what to do with the banks project on Cincinnati’s riverfront. The city council was taking open opinions from builders and my friend and I showed up. Of course, there were about 7 boring proposals that all were terrible then my friend goes up and gives this wonderful, Elon Musk type of big picture speech. Most of those ideas over the course of the following 15 years were used by the eventual developers, but it took a long time to accept. Without question his speech was the best of the evening, by a long shot. It wasn’t even close. Then after the meeting everyone shook hands as they usually do—he and I positioned ourselves in the middle of the room to give television interviews and to talk to the various other builders and the council members—whom knew us from another project we were working on within the city. Not a single person approached us. They pretended that we weren’t even there.

I had a similar experience at my five-year high school reunion. At the time I had the most kids who were the oldest and when they were giving out prizes for who had been married the longest, had the most kids, and that kind of thing I was poised to win in like five different categories based on the amount of experiences I had so early in life at that point. My kids were even running around in the seated crowd chasing each other. There was quite a bit of anger that I brought my kids to the reunion because apparently that is something we weren’t supposed to do. But my point was to show my kids what a stupid exercise it was not by telling them about it but letting them see it for themselves. Needless to say, the people who put on the whole class reunion experience tried to pretend that I wasn’t sitting five feet in front of them. Or that I knew one of the people running things since she was in the first grade. It didn’t hurt my feelings as much as it defined the truth of many things I had long suspected—which of course has brought me to my current life.

The other day when I spoke at a Lakota schools weekly meeting I noticed something similar—not from the school board members, but certainly the media. When I was a spokesman for the No Lakota Levy—a group that opposed higher taxes, the television cameras and print reporters would always seek me out for comment, but now—as an individual not representing a group, they did their best to pretend that I wasn’t there. They gave camera time and print to the people of the herd, but certainly not the hunters—for all the same reasons provided above. I would say that it’s an understatement that none of those media types like my blog. A story may appear on Channel 5 News or in the Cincinnati Enquirer today, but its forgotten tomorrow. However with me, people find things often that I have written ten years ago and they’ll send me private messages telling my how brilliant it is and ask why everyone in the world doesn’t know about these things. I always say, because the rest of the world isn’t ready—or they are part of the problem and they don’t want it articulated. Their strategy as it always has been and still is, is to ignore you.

You might say I have a chip on my shoulder. I’m very nice to people always as a first impression. I rarely ever explode on people.  But sometimes I do, and it happens more than most people would like to see. My daughters on the other hand aren’t much different, especially my oldest. When a waitress messed up a birthday party for me at Dave and Busters a few years back my daughter went from mild-mannered professional photographer to a maniacal pit-bull in less than a second and embarrassed the young waitress badly. Management comped us for the rest of the evening with an unlimited game card to use to play all the games there. My daughter is certainly a hunter and she learned it from me without question. She’s still learning how to turn it off when she needs to, but she has it. She’s watched me take on some pretty tough situations and looking back its amazing that more people didn’t die in some of the conflicts. But I can say that I have walked through the worst of Washington D.C. at 3 AM in the morning and nobody bothered me, because they knew better. I’ve done the same in Over-the-Rhine before it was renovated as an economic zone, and nobody every challenged me—because they can tell by the way you walk, talk and present yourself that you aren’t from the herd—and unless they are in a situation of survival, they don’t want trouble. They may think about it—but they really don’t want it. Most people will pick life over death if given the option, and they’ll pick comfort over difficulty. They instinctively know that as the hunter you are always in the leverage position, so they fear naturally what options you might give them. That’s why they try to ignore you. I carry that chip proudly because I have earned every bit of it as an individual. There were many times when life would have been a lot easier to trade the chip in for comfort, but I never have, and so knowing how rare it is, I keep it on my shoulder proudly. And it’s going to stay there.

Those are just some of the reasons that you will find that by just signing up for this blog it isn’t enough. I have been watched by every spy agency that there is and I’m very used to it. I can tell lots of stories of how my wife and I were harassed often by various authorities because at the time we were young and thought to be impressionable. To the herd they do seek to kill the hunters while they are still young and believe me they tried with every effort. But obviously I’m here to tell about it and now the herd has grown still. This blog site has millions and millions of words, and many thousands of copies have been made of these articles and placed all over the internet in various forums. I am heavily restricted by Google, and certainly Twitter. The editing of key words to my YouTube account has gone on now for over ten years, so there’s nothing surprising about the revelations that all these liberal organizations are discouraging conservative material from reaching audiences. But people find their way to me anyway in spite of all those attempts at censorship and the influence base has grown proportionally. The hunter will eat if they are hungry regardless what the herd does..

Just remember that all this is to be expected. If you are reading here you are already asking the right questions. Pop culture is the entertainment of the herd and I appreciate the products of the various groups that are out there. But just as in politics, the groups just because they number in size are not the most powerful. Democracy isn’t powerful because of the sheer numbers of participants. Even a big elephant will run from a tiger, it’s not about size, but attitude.. It will always be individuals that hold all the real power—the hunters of human endeavor who roam alone as a dynamic force always pushing the static to adapt. And when groups have to hide and to keep other people from seeing something—that tells you all you need to know about the nature of power and who wields it.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Elephant in the Room: Democrats kill people with guns, not Republicans or NRA members

According to Ayn Rand’s definition in her books, which is as good as anyplace to sink roots into a definition, politics is the study of the principles governing the proper organization of society, it is based on ethics, the study of the proper values to guide man’s choices and actions. Politics and ethics have been fundamental branches of philosophy from the beginning. Philosophy is the science that studies the fundamental aspects of the nature of existence. The task of philosophy is to provide man with a comprehensive view of life. With that being said liberals and conservatives really can’t get along, because their fundamental approaches to even the most basic attributes of life are different. In such a case, one philosophy will have to dominate the other—they cannot coexist.

This is a new thought for me, I have tried for many years to be open-minded to other people’s thoughts, but when it comes down to the rubber hitting the road, liberals have no desire to coexist with conservatives. They only want to convert them into aspects of the liberal. They are very militant even for supposedly representing the more pacifist nature of the human species. They only desire peace so long as you think the way they do, which is to essentially not think at all. They require you to not think in order to get along with them, to not have opinions, to not judge, to assume that history is one month old and that interpretations of anything are subject to being redefined based on the sentiment of the day.

Considering things that way it should come as no surprise that liberals in the form of Democrats are the gun grabbers of society—while they have always been the perpetrators of violence. If we consider history, such as in the case of mass shooters and murderers it will become very obvious that they are largely always Democrats—more specifically liberals. Below is a list of major shootings over a long period of time that was sent to me by a reader of these pages. It doesn’t take much to see the pattern that has emerged and persists to this day. After reading it consider how absurd it is to even allow such people to lecture our society on the nature of how the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted. And even more so, how these idiots expect us to live in a gun-less society and share resources with them.

In 1865, a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States .

In 1881, a left-wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States, who later died from the wound.

In 1963, a radical left-wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.

In 1975, a left-wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.

In 1983, a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.

In 1984, James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonald’s restaurant.

In 1986, Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in a Oklahoma post office.

In 1990, James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.

In 1991, George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, TX.

In 1995, James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.

In 1999, Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.

In 2001, a left-wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.

In 2003, Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.

In 2007, a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.

In 2010, a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.

In 2011, a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.

In 2012, Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.

In 2013, a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school in Newtown, CT.

As recently as Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.

Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats with guns.

Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or conservative Republican was involved in any of these shootings and murders. Guns don’t kill people; Democrats do. The same basic logic could be applied to the mass shootings since 2013, especially the Vegas shooter who was a millionaire gambler—and a Democrat. Many of the ISIS inspired killers are also politically speaking, associated with left leaning philosophy. Radical Islam for instance has very little in common with conservative philosophy. It is not enough to suggest that people of all kinds can get into a room and get along, because their essential political philosophies are not conducive to one another. And it is not even appropriate to assume that such people should not talk about their foundational beliefs out of respect for those who don’t feel the way they do about things. People who have radically different political beliefs cannot function in the world together.

Democrats are not shy about their desire to use force to impose their will on others. They are, historically speaking, very intolerant of other people’s beliefs. You don’t see people from the NRA running around killing people. It just isn’t in their political makeup to behave in such a way. They certainly aren’t on the list shown above. Yet Democrats are the ones who have resorted to violence when things have not gone the way they’ve desired. In extreme cases they’ve grabbed guns and tried to kill people, such as the Democrat that attacked Republican baseball players in 2017 by trying to kill them while in the field of play. But you don’t see Republicans doing such a thing because their fundamental philosophy about life keeps them from even thinking about it. Most people I know, myself included, who happen to be very conservative don’t even talk about shooting people, because that goes against the nature of life. The gun is to protect life in the mind of a Republican. To a Democrat the gun is there to take life. The Republican tends to be for the life of a fetus, to the Democrat they are for abortion—the killing of a human if it inconveniences the life of a woman. The differences are epistemological in nature. Politics isn’t a dirty word, it’s an essential element to understanding what kind of person we are dealing with, and to that effect how they view the basics of life.

Literally the elephant in the room is that conservatives stand for life and act in accordance with life in most everything they do. It is not in their nature to become mass shooters, or to even impose themselves on another life because they respect life—all life. Liberals in the form of Democrats however are all about imposing themselves in a group think way on anybody and everyone. If Republicans do not have guns and a way to protect their lives, it will be Democrats who will raid homes in the middle of the night trying to steal what is valued there. It will be Democrats who will say to everyone who they can, “join us or die.” To those who assume that Nazi types and racists like the KKK members of the American south are some brand of conservative, that would be wrong as well. It was always Democrats who formed the KKK and all racist organizations because like all liberals—Nazis included, they don’t value individual life. Only the collective efforts of the mob that rules by force against the defenseless. And it is those people who are screaming for a gun free society. That is pretty funny when you consider the absurdity of it. Because it will be Democrats who will steal a gun breaking the law many times over and use it as a sacrifice of themselves for some liberal cause. And that kind of thing will continue to happen as long as liberals are allowed to coexist with the life loving conservatives of American sentiment. There will never be peace between the two political philosophies because the two just aren’t conducive to one another. Only one side will survive, because that is the nature of philosophy. A truth and a lie cannot live in harmony. Death and life are not after the same goals. And that is the cold hard truth of this matter that is before us presently.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Crime of the West Virginia Teacher Strike: Its time to replace radical school employees with Alexa

What a disaster that was in West Virginia. The teacher’s union strike that went on for 9 days as public employees used children to extort for themselves higher wages showed precisely why the Supreme Count is poised to outlaw public sector unions to begin with. The deal struck with the West Virginia governor is to give every public employee 5% in raises every year from here on which is a completely destructive approach to managing tax payer money. What the government of West Virginia signed up for are huge increases in pay for all their public employees that take no consideration into changing economic circumstances which essentially paint themselves into a long-term corner for which there will be no escape. The public-sector unions did the reprehensible, they shut down the productive tasks they were supposed to be commissioned to perform to demand out of tax payers a bottomless pit of income that essentially comes from every tax payer their system touches.

But what was the rush? The union radicles will say that their main issue is that they have poor insurance coverage but what they are clamoring for is something that doesn’t exist for people outside the public sector either. Insurance coverage in general is in a state of change and market forces are polished off and reintroduced to the process. What’s unusual in West Virginia is that the unions do not have collective bargaining power. Average wages for a West Virginia teacher are around $45,000 per year. With their sudden 5 percent increase that is several thousands of additional dollars per year for as long as they are employed, which is a lot of money. To many people that might seem like a lot, but public-sector employees complain about such high rates because they are comparing them to other places around the country—like across the border where average rates are about the same in Ohio, but in districts like mine at Lakota the average pay is much higher.

Really what should have happened was that every teacher who walked out and participated in the strike should have been terminated. Every public employee who helped with this mess should also be terminated, including the police. But in this case the employees felt they were in a do or die situation and their strongest position was now to take action so enough of them walked off the job across the state to shut down every school leaving kids stuck at home using them as bargaining chips to essentially extort more money away from the public trust. Because of the large increase that they received, school managements across the country will see more of this behavior in the coming months so a plan needs to be in place to deal with it.

The real pressure to act now is the knowledge that the Supreme Court is about to release a decision on public sector unions by June, and it looks like the strength of those organizations will decrease tremendously. That made West Virginia a strategic hot spot for a strike to attempt to get other unions to follow as a final protest hoping to rock the vote at the Supreme Court with this ominous warning. Since West Virginia didn’t have collective bargaining power what good would the upcoming Supreme Court ruling have to prevent similar strikes in the future? The leverage the unions wanted to put on display was that there simply wasn’t enough replacement teachers available to step into the classroom to cover for these striking teachers which is why West Virginia government buckled in just 9 days to the demands of their public-sector insurgents.

It will take time even assuming that the Supreme Court outlaws public union’s power to extort money from coerced membership, for the culture to change. Many of these striking employees don’t see themselves as radical insurgents, but as a culture they behave that way because teachers as a profession have been molded as progressive instructors so they don’t see any reason not to use children as bargaining chips for their own gains. That means that the profession of teaching needs to change into something else while these old relics are phased out and new, fresh thoughts can be introduced. States are going to have to prepare for massive walk offs from the teaching profession by these trained radicals. The West Virginia teachers knew that the vacancies for new teachers were low so what did they have to lose in walking off the job? Nothing. There just aren’t enough potential employees to threaten their employment with.

The way to break a strike is to replace the workers striking with new employees. When those employee positions are all getting their money from the same source—the tax payer—it gives them leverage for a walk off. The way to beat that is to decentralize those efforts into a more privatized endeavor. There should always be a certain percentage of non-union employees in schools ready to take over if the unionized teachers walk off the job to protest some turtle crossing—the business of teaching should never stop. And we do live in an age where teachers could be replaced by machines. And automated teaching system should be utilized in case a physical teacher isn’t in the classroom. If teachers refuse to work, then something like Amazon’s Echo or Google’s Home should be put into each classroom to replace those teachers while the non-union staff of administrators ensure that business as usual continues.

In a lot of ways, I think Amazon’s Echo is far superior to an average teacher in the classroom. Some teachers are exceptional, and I think those are people who wouldn’t chose to be protesting at a statehouse for higher wages anyway—they are probably worth whatever money we pay them. But for some slug like many of those teachers protesting in West Virginia I would encourage those school districts suffering to replace them with their own Alexa. If you know anything about those systems they are much better than a real teacher, and far cheaper. They can answer questions, provide scheduled assignments and collect information. They can even provide lectures for topics that are needed. If public schools utilized this technology better they wouldn’t be in such bad positions to waiting for teachers to fill their needed positions. With the economy producing such low unemployment anyway, the traditional way of staffing so many positions with live people really isn’t practical, especially if they are only going to go on strike anyway knowing that there isn’t a deep bench to replace them if they decide to walk off the job for 9 days demanding a pay increase. The great thing about Alexa is that it doesn’t have legs and will never run out of energy. It doesn’t take coffer breaks or bitch about their pay. They don’t eat and smell like coffee and decaying teeth when you ask them a question. In a lot of ways, I think they should be the future of teaching.

Since the teaching profession is changing anyway—as the Supreme Court will eventually mandate, we might as well come up with a plan to deal with the really good problems that we are facing. If there is a teacher shortage and the ones we do have want too much money and expect these extravagant insurance plans, let’s just use Alexa to teach classrooms. We don’t have to pay them insurance, heck, they don’t ever get sick and they do essentially the same thing. So what are we waiting for?

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.

The Darkest Hour: Boone County Schools wimp out as teacher unions breathe one last breath

The Boone County school board voted to take no action on arming teachers in their schools this past week due to the range of emotions on the topic. Essentially educators and those who get into the business have for too long thought of the process of teaching as a separate activity from the world where the pressures of existence are removed so minds can learn. Learn what? Well that’s a discussion for another time as this is the kind of teaching method we currently have in the United States, and the people in that business have allowed themselves to think of it in a certain way—and that certain way is not indicative to reality. Daniel Boone for which Boone County School was named would be ashamed to see his name used on buildings of such cowardly disposition.

The teachers unions across the country are of course against letting teachers arm themselves with CCWs in the schools because they are a progressive organization to begin with. They are all about bigger government all the time in every circumstance—which is why they are trying to get out from under this modern-day pressure with pushing school boards to hire more school resource officers. But that costs a lot of money whereas the arming the teachers with CCWs doesn’t. There isn’t enough money to pay teachers the high salaries they are demanding let along adding more employees to the payroll. The teacher union positions just aren’t grounded in any kind of reality, which is common for them. After all, the teaching in public schools is that the world is made up of specialists and when you have a problem, you should leave it to those specialists. People who are specialists with guns, they suggest, should be the ones who handle them.

But what’s been refreshing about this guns in schools’ debate is that a respectable number of teachers around the country support the CCW measure, and they are interested in carrying a gun for all the right reasons, and that’s all it would really take to make this proposal successful. While it’s nice, but expensive, to have armed security at schools to engage a potential suspect it’s not enough. The nature of attacking a school requires a certain randomness that cannot be prepared for. Armed guards are just another layer of security that a terrorist could observe and overcome. But not knowing who or which teacher may be armed is impossible to prepare for and that added layer of security would serve as a better deterrent than anything—and would likely discourage an attack by the very nature of the position.

Aside from the progressive “no guns anywhere on planet earth” position of teacher unions the nature of education should encompass some firearms training since guns are a huge part of our society. Instead of fighting the NRA the way that public education does currently, they should be joining forces. I have no hope that might happen soon, but after 7 years of a Trump presidency, I can see that possibility looming on the horizon, so we might as well have that debate now. Rather than waiting for the first school to step in that direction the good ones, like my area district of Lakota should take advantage of their leadership positions and shine a light for everyone else to follow. Guns are going to be a bigger part of our lives going into the years of the 2020s like it or not because behind the culture of guns are behavioral improvements that are a natural part of gun ownership. Guns are only the enemy to progressive groups, which all teacher unions are, so the natural reaction is to villainize the NRA. But the code of conduct that comes with gun ownership are valuable lessons that young people should be learning and schools should join together if their real aim is to teach students how to live a complete and fulfilling life, the basic nature of gun ownership. I would go so far to say that shooting sports should become a part of school curriculums in gym instruction and in competitive sports. Why not have a school shooting team that competes against a rival school? They do it for golf, why not guns? Learning about guns would be a lot more beneficial to students than learning to hit a little ball into a hole on an expensive golf course.

Understanding trends is important to predicting behavior and public schools have only one choice in this matter. The future is not in the favor of kids like that David Hog from Parkland who have gone around the country advocating against gun rights. The students of Parkland are simply uttering what they have been taught by the teachers of the progressive teachers’ unions and their politics of an anti-gun world. That world is changing presently and a combination of decreasing public morality and a general swing toward conservatism by a successful Trump administration is changing the face of everything and that can most be seen at the level of the Supreme Court who recently heard oral arguments on the nature of public sector unions. During that hearing Justice Neil Gorsuch didn’t say anything not giving away how he would vote on the decisive issue which should take place in June. At risk for the teacher unions is the notion that they compel members to contribute dues to their organization in trade for employment which is a violation of free speech. Gorsuch is the deciding vote so it’s likely going to happen that public-sector unions will be found to be illegal, and that will be a major blow to every progressive organization that feeds off the money generated by the public unions. People might wonder why I haven’t been writing about this issue for a while—well, there are different ways to skin a cat. I’m now part of the winning political team instead of being on the outside such as the case of a decade ago. Yes, elections have consequences and things are turning favorably in a direction I can support. I strongly believe that teacher unions will lose their power before the Trump presidency ends, but kids will still need to be taught things, and school boards still need to navigate how best to do that in a changing world full of robots competing for our jobs, decimated home lives for kids, and a much smaller government combined with a more powerful private sector functioning at 3% unemployment and a GDP of 4 to 7%. So why not join forces with the NRA to help teach people proper gun ownership and conduct? Those skills directly transfer over into other aspects of people’s lives in a positive way.

Hiding from the issue isn’t a decision though. Or making decisions on one’s heels isn’t either. Guns are a part of our lives and gun free zones such as schools make them dangerous for the students, not safer. Pretending that guns are not a huge part of American culture is ridiculous. The European model of anti-gun sentiment just isn’t a viable position. I’d recommend anyone who is on the fence of this issue to watch the recent film Darkest Hour which did well at the recent Academy Awards. It’s about how Winston Churchill stood up to Nazi pressure to yield Europe to German socialism and Italian fascism. Everyone in the ruling parties but Churchill was for passive, non-engagement surrender. It was a fascinating behind the scenes look into Churchill’s challenges. In a fit of frustration on the issue he went down into London’s Underground and talked to people directly on the subway system. It was there that the people told him they were willing to fight the Germans on every street of London, that they did not want to surrender to Hitler. From there Churchill decided not to negotiate terms with the Germans and England stood their ground. Even though the Germans bombed England, they did not have the troops to occupy the island and tyranny was stopped at the English Channel. The bluff had been called. That is precisely why American has never been invaded, and why it never will. Because if it where Americans could fight the occupier at every street and field across North America, and that same mentality needs to be a part of our schools, because that’s what we should really be teaching kids. Soon the teacher unions will be much less powerful and logic can once again enter the debate and the first item on the agenda is this CCW issue. The best schools will act ahead of the curb, but eventually everyone will have to. For them, the school boards, it is best to be a part of the winning team.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: Use my name to get added benefits.