Ron Chernow at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner and the Reason for Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom

I am a fan of Ron Chernow’s historical books, I enjoy them immensely. In that regard I did make a point to watch him speak at this year’s White House Correspondent’s Dinner and the result of that entire evening I think warrant’s the attendance of the President next year. I certainly understand why he didn’t appear this year due to last year’s major abuse of the 1st Amendment by comedians. I thought it was a classy pick to put Chernow as the headliner. That isn’t to say that I agree with everything that Ron Chernow says or his point of view on it. I am personally not a fan of Alexander Hamilton. As I have made it well-known, I think the Anti Federalist Papers are far superior to the Hamilton driven Federalist Papers, which I have studied both extensively. To say I enjoy them as a great work of philosophy in Western Civilization is an understatement. But I respect the work Chernow has done, especially in his latest book on Grant. And I believe very strongly in the First Amendment and also think to his argument that the Bill of Rights are paramount to any debate of American concepts. To that effect I must remind everyone that the 2nd Amendment protects the 1st. And both are hands off completely in any legal consideration, and I find it ironic that many of the journalists in that room cite the 1st Amendment as paramount to defend but seek to change the 2nd. It just doesn’t work that way.

Chernow I thought was respectful to that group of radicalized media contributors, and in the context of history he was correct. But they had become a weaponized faction of political diatribes and that is another problem all its own. Yes we need a media to check the powerful and to keep them honest. But we also need competition to keep the media honest, and in this present time we don’t have it. Many people ask me, weekly and dozens of times at that, why I write so many articles every day of every week month after month after month, and I don’t think they ever really understand the answer. Which is fine, I don’t really expect anybody to. But the foundation of it goes back to a discussion I had with Michael Clark who used to work for the Cincinnati Enquirer but now works for the Journal News as a softball advocate for big government positions. I always knew he had liberal leanings, but we had a good relationship in the beginning until I started this blog to effectively pound the Lakota Levy in my community into the ground. I was a little shocked when he told me that he found my blog as competition for his newspaper articles. It shocked me because I viewed them as separate media, but that’s not the way it was for him.

When I first got involved in this whole 1st Amendment crusade it was fresh off a recent trip from Hollywood where I was working as a stunt advisor for a project and had just got a fresh taste of West Coast liberalism. While sitting among Hollywood’s finest leading stars and listening carefully to them, some were the stars of the television show Beverly Hills 90210, and the Twilight series of movies that were so popular. Some just came off the set of Pirates of the Caribbean 3 and there were even more there to watch the production of this hot new RealD 3D technology that was going to revolutionize Hollywood, I had a really good introduction to what would become the liberalization of the entertainment industry. They put up with me because I had something they wanted, but they were certainly not tolerant about my Ohio conservative beliefs. I certainly didn’t hate them for their thoughts, but they obviously didn’t like me. What ended up happening with that project was they filmed my work and used it for computer animation in films like The Immortals and Iron Man 2, and they did that because they simply didn’t want to call me back for the live work. Not that I cared that much, but I thought it conspicuous that they felt that strongly about their political beliefs that they would make business decisions based on them. But that was clearly the case.

I came back from that trip and saw in my home town a Republican Party being torn apart by a changing tide. Many Republicans were being forced to publicly support the massive Lakota Levy in Butler County even though the concept of it was very liberal. So they felt caught between a rock and a hard place so I offered the strength of my name branding to help them out. I had the experience working in communications so I thought I could string that thread in just the right way and I did. But the deeper I dug the more filth I found, so in that process I decided to start my own kind of opinion column and this blog site was born. However, at that time the newspapers were trying to divorce themselves because the opinion letters to the editors were getting out of hand with the Tea Party movement and they wanted to get back to the message of staying on the liberalization of America agenda which was very important to them. I had seen it first hand in Hollywood itself, in the producers, directors and actors working in the business. And I was seeing it first hand in our local media. Not everyone mind you, but certainly a majority.

Of course I knew lending my good name to such a thing would cause trouble but I had that covered too. I mean who is going to physically accost me, which they did try. But I’m an expert bullwhip handler, and a handler of many other things. I put myself in that position to help out my GOP friends and it worked for several years before many members of the media stopped appreciating the spike in interest in their newspapers and wanted to get back to the plan, which meant they had to eliminate me. Their attacks were so vicious that it severely pissed me off and the rest is history. I will probably write these articles forever. I can write more than they can, and more intelligently and I think the 1st Amendment does need to be protected, even from the press who clearly had a monopoly on the subject. Who checks the checkers? Well, citizen media, and its very much-needed so that is why there is an Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.

My name is a good one for a reason, and I do protect it for obvious reasons. I never yield to a challenge, which has also pissed off more than a few people over the years. But I never start the fights. I do finish them, and that will continue. I have more energy than they do so that isn’t going away soon. And that is a cornerstone to the preservation of the 1st Amendment. Having energy and a literate approach to things in life I think is a good thing. I am not a fan of big government Alexander Hamilton; I am much more Jeffersonian. If I lived in that time I could have easily have been Arron Burr except he was kind of an idiot. But I understood his hatred of Hamilton so a duel to the death was something I understand and think would be good in our current time. There would be a lot less backstabbing if we had that kind of culture still. Yet what does remain is a need for positive discourse that is literate in its approach and that is what I set out to do. So I am in agreement with Ron Chernow that the 1st Amendment is needed and should be protected. But the press in that room is also part of the problem because they have attempted to use it the way a terrorist has abused the 2nd Amendment. And the best way to keep them honest is by methods such as what I have used in my own life. There are thankfully lots of good people doing just that, and it is helping restore in America many of the needs that our republic requires. Ironically, that is how Trump was elected, by this honesty from the American people finally getting out. Competition has brought forth the truth which is what we are all supposed to be going after in the first place.

The great hypocrisy is when those same media types hide behind the 1st Amendment but then decry the 2nd is where we get into trouble. The 2nd is just as important as the 1st, they are both needed to have a proper government and more countries should be learning from America how to do things in their own countries. If they learned from us they could advance as cultures as well. The Bill of Rights is a great work of western philosophy that should be duplicated around the world. But you can’t pick and choose, one supports the other. And while those media outlets present at that dinner were mostly nodding in agreement with Ron Chernow, they were also working to undermine the 2nd Amendment. And that is simply not an option. So long as that is the case, I’ll do my part to protect what I consider in the original works of the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers to be some of the finest thoughts on government discourse so far created in the long line of historic consideration from any known culture. My ambitions go far beyond politics, which is why I don’t mind lending my good name to the effort, it goes to the concepts explored in the great James Joyce classic, Finnegans Wake. I love the concept of America so much that I don’t want to see it fall to the Vico Cycle. It needs to live on forever as an idea that others should follow, and not be allowed to be destroyed hiding behind the shield of the 1st Amendment as a means to destroy the entire Bill of Rights in one, giant sweep of oppression and crime ridden anarchy.

Rich Hoffman

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

Above The Line Politics and the White House Correspondence Dinner

I had some strong thoughts while visiting the Republican Headquarters in Butler County at Bridgewater Falls the other day about the nature of politics and the temperament of our current culture. The headquarters is at the back of the shopping complex and faces the highway there and I actually caught myself looking both ways to see if anybody was watching for a moment and instantly caught the ridiculousness of the issue. Sadly we have allowed politics to become such a dividing issue and the burden again has fallen on Republicans to make all brand of liberals feel more comfortable with their thoughts, and that just has to come to an end. There is nothing wrong with visiting the Republican Headquarters in the middle of a fine day, or even people knowing that you are a Republican. It wasn’t that long ago that knowing those kinds of things wasn’t considered so taboo, such a closely held secret. As usual it is the result of the liberal side of things that have sought to make such things so, largely because they are so insecure with their thoughts that they can’t stand to have them measured against other ideas. Its their way or the highway and that has gone on for a long time, and Republicans have yielded, at least until President Trump has been refusing to go to the White House Correspondence Dinner and instead holding his own events on those nights such as the one shown below.

I’ve been very conservative all my life. There has never been a time when I wasn’t. I worked as much as I could at the time for the Reagan campaign as a 7th grader, doing debates with other students for extra credit and even giving interviews from a student’s perspective to the local newspaper. And as always I have been able to 100% of the time sit down with people who didn’t think the way I do and talk to them in a friendly way. As a matter of fact, unless I am first attacked of course, I can’t ever recall having disagreements in conversation that were ever cantankerous, where I have had a political fight with anyone. I can talk to anyone at any time about anything and I have always been respectful to other people’s opinions. I may not like them but I don’t beat them over the head to change them either. My thoughts have always been to allow people to come to their own conclusions about things and that usually if given the tools of thought, that most everyone comes around to my way of thinking eventually. So why make an enemy of them? Now if they choose to be an enemy, that’s perfectly fine with me as well, but I never seek to make them that way. That’s on them, completely. And once they are an enemy, I treat them that way—especially on these pages.

That’s my experience on how Republicans generally behave, they typically live and let live—to a fault. Republicans have not stuck up for themselves near enough, and this has allowed liberals to believe that they are equal at the table of thought by insisting that their below the line victimization status can sit at the table with the big kids and be validated as they cruise through life with the training wheels on thinking they can win the race. They can only win if Republicans cripple themselves and join Democrats below the line. The premise as it is stated by them, and I have a lot of experience with this as well, is that all people and all thoughts are equal and that they have an equal say at the table. Well for those who have followed me on these pages over the years, before Trump was even a consideration for public office, I exposed this lunacy quite openly. I had several debates about local issues from a truly conservative point of view on WLW radio and television all the time. I was quoted in the newspapers nearly every week and the other side couldn’t beat me in any debate so they did what they do to every conservative, they try to personalize and destroy the person who is in front of them, then ostracize them from group activity as if to punish their behavior forever. My enemies who made themselves that way, lobbied all the news outlets begging them not to have me on anymore because they couldn’t beat me. But it was their intolerance that caused all the anger because their positions were so weak that they knew they couldn’t hold up to real competition which is the core of their problem and it persists to this day. The problem is completely theirs. People of different opinions should be able to talk, but that is not the liberal position. They want to destroy opposition, not work with it. And we have seen to what extent. What they have tried to do to President Trump and the people who elected him is every bit as bad as what I described, and then some. It’s now obvious to more people why, Democrats don’t have anybody who can beat Trump in an election. They are losing everywhere. They picked up some House seats this year because many Anti-Trump Republicans left the party and retired leaving open seats that were filled by Democrats. It didn’t really matter because those Republicans were RINOs anyway. It was good to finally get to see who was who on the battlefield, so it wasn’t considered a tactical loss, more of an intelligence gathering exercise. And Democrats are losing because they can’t compete if they have to run a race without training wheels. In reality their political philosophy falls apart. Their philosophers, Sir Thomas More of Utopia, and Immanuel Kant, eventually leading up to Karl Marx had some thoughts that have not held water over time and that is the facts of it. That is also why I don’t go around body slamming Democrats all the time. I generally wait them out. If they are smart people, they will eventually think the way I do anyway. But that tolerance is completely one-sided.

For the first time in years the White House Correspondence Dinner didn’t have a comedian making fun of the sitting president. Trump refused to go because he wasn’t going to participate in a below the line activity. As a businessman Trump understands the game and he knows how to lead. And leading isn’t participating in the blood sacrifice that liberals want from their leaders. Republicans and Democrats for many decades going back to Bob Hope have attended this White House Correspondence Dinner and taken the jabs from the celebrities who attended with good heart and not allowed it to be personal. But the essence of that activity has been to allow all the participants to function with the training wheels of thought on, so nobody really challenged each other anyway. This is the same below the line thought that goes on in most group-oriented activity, where individual traits are made fun of so that group protections are sought out for cover. Such as making fun of a person’s weight, or their hair, or the way they talk so that conformity into group assimilation takes place, which is how liberals like things. That way individual thought yields to leaderless consensus. When presidents went to such events and allowed people to make fun of them as individuals that satisfied the ancient city-state need for a blood sacrifice of a king for the benefit of his constituents, which is the foundation of all liberalism. And of course every society since the dawn of mankind has failed when those sentiments are yielded to. It may take a few thousand years to get there, but they all fail eventually. Trump is changing that presently making this latest Dinner much more conducive to above the line thinking, which is and will always be leadership driven by individual responsibility and behavior.

The answer to the question is that it is not Republicans who have to do anything different. We should not hush our mouths or look both ways before going to the Republican Headquarters as if we were going to a speakeasy in the 1920s. And the media should not have been allowed to become so liberalized. That is one of the reasons I started this site was my experiences with working in Hollywood, and through the local media channels showed me that yielding to pressure from liberals to keep my thoughts to myself or else weren’t going to fly with me. I’m not going around beating people up who don’t think like me. But don’t think for a second that you are going to threaten me just for having opinions. Opinions I might add that have the backing of all human history behind them and are quite relevant. And we all have in President Trump a guy willing to stand up for our beliefs on a big stage and that is really good to see. The changes are happening, and we can see them making the world a better place. But we have to understand that it isn’t our task as conservatives to make liberals feel better about themselves. Only they can do that and often what they discover is that they have always been wrong. It’s just a matter of time for them to realize that and join the rest of us above the line.

Rich Hoffman

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

The NRA Meetings in Indianapolis–All is right with the world

It was a great day, the temperature outside was ideal, the sun positioned just right in the sky. I had met my family at Kings Island for dinner and to have some of their great potato wedges by the train at Rivertown. Then to end it all I was able to watch President Trump give a magnificent speech at the NRA Annual Meetings in Indianapolis. Additionally, a few days ago my latest edition of American Rifleman arrived in the mail and I was eager to read it, so I did as Trump gave his speech to cap off the evening. It was a version of a perfect day that was like a warm blanket to wrap in that let you know that all was right in the universe.

I can understand that a love for these kinds of things is regional, and traditional. I came from a family of farmers in a part of Ohio that is essentially the buckle of the Bible Belt. Everyone I ever knew had guns, shot guns, cleaned guns, and traded guns, so to me they are a fundamental part of American life. Critical even which is why liberals are so eager to get rid of them. If you want to redefine America and make it into something else, you must take away this whole concept of a 2nd Amendment. Liberals after all want more than anything to have a ruling class that centrally controls everything, and gun ownership is all about individual liberty. Those two things don’t go together. That makes it exceptionally joyful to have all those liberal elements removed if just for an evening so that you can just enjoy the things that make life better, and the culmination of the Trump speech in Indianapolis at the NRA event was just such an occasion.

Its one thing to be accepting of other points of view. Most NRA members that I know are very accommodating of other sentiments. Personally, I have been around the world more than once and know people from many countries and I understand their beliefs and cultures where guns are not part of their daily thought patterns. It is inherit in most cultures to believe theirs’s is the best based on their own point of view because they are functioning from a lack of knowledge which paints their world view. However, as I’ve said there is a right way and a wrong way of thinking. Not all concepts of thinking are correct or lead to a successful civilization. So my joy of the NRA events have more weight behind them than just hometown sentiment. If I’ve said it once I’ve said it thousands of times, guns in a culture are the means to freeing it from the tyranny of the mistakes that have plagued mankind from the beginning of time. They are a philosophic contribution to the mechanisms of freedom which ignite all culture as an original thought, not some reflective diatribe passed down through the ages. What is needed in all life-giving exercises is imagination and the platform to think freely. A culture of guns takes away the premise of oppression and paves the way for a mind not concerned about authority figures, but for its own survival and fruition, which therefore becomes the boost for cultural contributions. Therefor, the gun and the ownership of them are a basic epistemological necessity for any successful culture not living off its warlike past but building a bridge into the future with new ideas and approaches to the challenges of the universe.

They usually don’t explore these needs at the NRA events such as the one that President Trump spoke at. Mostly they tip toe around them and it comes out in their need to rebel against static government approaches to culture building. Slogans toward such efforts are sufficient to rally up the crowd but it is never really considered just how important guns are to the creation of a free society and that is where the real value of civilization resides most. It’s not the back in the train government types, Plato’s philosopher kings which universities promise you can be if only you pay over $100,000 in tuition to their liberal professors to get the Oz certificate that says you have a brain and therefore ruling power over the earth. In order for that scam to work guns have to be removed from society so that those types of people can then rule, and justify all the cost they spent to acquire that leverage. The hatred of the gun by such people traces back to their basic problem. The gun is the great equalizer and if all things are equal, those types of people just can’t compete in the world and that is their real fear. That’s why they want guns removed from society, so that their world view can have a chance. But they need the power of government to give them that leverage. They don’t get it from the natural world.

Trump is the right kind of president to have such a speech at just that type of event. Trump isn’t exactly the kind of conservative that was born in Ohio, he’s from liberal New York. Like a lot of people who are successful in life he has learned along the way what works and what doesn’t. Not all thoughts are equal, there are right ways to think and wrong ways, and through his life he has come to the right way of thinking. Because to be successful at life he has had to. There are liberals who have done well. They have managed their businesses conservatively and turn toward socialist action to prevent competition from nipping at their heels, but at some point in their life they had to think correctly about things to become successful. And that is Trump’s story. He wasn’t lucky like I was to get a head start in correct thinking by being born in a place where they had it right all along. President Trump had to get there on his own, which is a common occurrence for most aging people. There aren’t many people like Bernie Sanders out there who arrive at old age as bleeding heart socialists who just never learn the right ways of thinking in life. During the speech Trump announced that he was withdrawing from the UN Arms Trade Treaty which was a pretty big deal symbolically. Doing so assured an artificial value system from a global perspective would not be adopted in the United States, but that a recognition of gun rights would be solidified in legislative thinking which then would be implemented domestically. In short, we would rule ourselves as a country and not revert back to the Vico Cycle of global mess which is plaguing the world currently with all that hinders it.

As a gun owner and advocate I naturally have to spend a lot of time putting up with people who don’t yet get it, and it does wear you out. It’s not nice to rub people’s face in it, I think its good to let free minds be free, which means they need their time to come to the values of conservatism the way that Donald Trump obviously did over the years. Sometimes it takes them many decades to arrive there, but I believe in letting people figure it out on their own. If they want a guiding light, I’m happy to help them. But I’m not willing to yield value for conformity to a system of thinking that clearly is wrong in its foundations. So personally, an evening with President Trump and the NRA is a welcomed treat, a chance to be free of all the slow thinking dysfunction which swallows up so much global potential by following the paths of the past back into the hells of Dante. For one brief day and just a few hours at that, all was right with the world.

Rich Hoffman

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

Who Cares about Joe Biden When Revenge is the Sentiment of the Election?

I almost didn’t even feel that a comment or remark should be made about Joe Biden announcing his run for the presidency, however, there is an undercurrent of knowledge to pursue on the matter. While the rest of the world is happy about Joe Biden, because they need their horse race to drive cable news ratings, the reality of the situation is that my predictions about the Democrat party which I made on a live radio broadcast several years ago is coming true right on time. I predicted then an end to the Democrats as we knew them and nothing tells that story more than the candidacy of Joe Biden. The values of Democrats in general as I have said for years are tied to socialist causes, and Joe is all about that soft socialism appeal. But we are well past the un-naming of those thoughts and deep into the world of outright socialism that a guy like Joe Biden, whom I’d consider a radical far lefty, certainly not a centrist, is out for a cold reality on the campaign trail. He has no idea what he’s doing because the world that made him has already died. He just doesn’t know it yet. Joe Biden has no chance of becoming president. 0%.

For the Democrats to work they have to be unified, as they are natural collectivists. But their weakness is that their ideas are not conducive to passion, only sympathy. And if the sympathy isn’t working, they have nothing to run on, which is why I think as a party they are ending. I know there is a lot of concern about the nation turning to socialism especially now that most Democrats are open about their commitment toward that group oriented planter philosophy which has greatly limited the intellectual appeal of all culture from the dawn of the city-state. I see the situation differently, that we as a nation averted a complete disaster by naming socialism as the villain to our demise before it happened. The Obama administration for which Joe Biden was the Vice President did a lot to scare people away from the socialism they had been planning and that drove enough Republicans toward Trump to elect someone who would change the political landscape, and for good. What is going to happen over the next year and a half is something I don’t see the Democrats surviving, especially Joe Biden.

Watching Joe Biden’s campaign announcement was the first clue that he doesn’t have one. He’s talking to a Democrat base that went extinct two years ago and only their ghosts remain. And ghosts can’t cast ballots. Democrats do cheat at voting and dead people do vote all the time for them, but nowhere near enough to ensure any kind of victory. He, and the rest of the mainstream Democrats are in a lot worse situation than Republicans were in 2012 and 2013. Back then conservatives were split and Trump emerged from that fissure to fill it with action that is at the foundation of Republican philosophy. The only way that Democrats could meet that debate which resulted in the election of President Trump, was to cheat, because their thoughts on matters has very little appeal, except among really stupid people. Understanding that much the Democrats performed a far worse scandal than what Watergate was for the Nixon administration. But they never planned to get caught, because they did run everything at the time, the FBI, the Justice Department, the White House, most of and the Beltway Culture. Heck, at the time James Comey and Robert Mueller were even considered Republicans. As was the Speaker of the House John Boehner. Now we know better, Comey and Mueller were obviously pushing for Democrats to gain more leverage and they were willing to use the law as a way to assist Hillary Clinton into the Presidency. And John Boehner quit his job and became an advocate for marijuana. So much for conservatism.

I heard the story of George Papadopoulos who was working for the Trump campaign as a minor leaguer and how he was arrested after returning back to the United States after a foreign trip. The way the FBI talked to him and handled the entire case is something that in my mind provoked an open revolt. Rather than go peacefully with the FBI in my mind Papadopoulos should have kicked all their asses right there at the airport. Anybody speaking in such a fashion as they did to him upon the arrest doesn’t deserve compliance, they deserve their asses kicked and then some. No badge could overcome that basic understanding of a federal arm of government abusing its power than that case. It was quite clear after hearing Papadopoulos tell the story. And that kind of harassment didn’t stop there, it persisted into many people who were supporting the candidacy of Donald Trump, which then exploded when he actually won. Now its time for revenge for all that, and the politics of the Joe Biden crowd just don’t get it. That is obvious due to the nature of the announcement video that they put out, which was one that was edited after advisors approved it, not liking the first one. We are not in the days anymore where teams of advisors can navigate a candidate into the White House. That process is too slow for today’s news cycles, and Biden will wash out over that trait alone.

It will be the revenge for all these Democrat led investigations into Trump that will be the nail in the final coffin, and they all have it coming. Republicans are known for turning the other cheek, but that is the difference that all these Democrats are failing to understand, that is not the way it is now. In the revolution of the Republican party that took place early in this current decade, the more aggressive part of the party won out, and now revenge is very much part of the 2020 campaign, and there is a lot there to expose. And Uncle Joe had his dirty hands in the bowl too. He’s not going to come away looking pretty on this one. None of them will. The great thing about President Trump is he isn’t afraid to pull the trigger.

I thought as many did that Trump should have pushed to throw Hillary Clinton in jail right after he was elected, along with those who helped her run the biggest political scandal of all time. Trump wanted to live and let live. He won the Presidency and wanted to let bygones be bygones. But the Democrats went for his jugular and they didn’t make it. Now its his turn and those who support him. They won’t survive. Trump likes to win and they gifted him with the political timing of a party already on the edge that will have many of its leaders on the precipice of real jail time and that isn’t going to help Joe Biden go anywhere politically. And if Joe isn’t the guy for the Democrats, then who is? There are so many running and they all lack any kind of focus. The next best candidate is the open socialist Bernie Sanders and that doesn’t sit well for all the Democrats who still wish to conceal their socialist natures. Yeah, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats and I will have to say, they deserve everything that is coming to them. Including the loss of the House of Representatives.

Rich Hoffman

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

Nothing is Too Expensive

With all this talk recently about capitalism and socialism, which is something I have spent a lot of time thinking about, there is another component to the puzzle for which nobody ever speaks about, and that is the driving force of ambition. What makes a society better or worse than some other is the amount of people who exhibit, and act upon their ambitions. And for that I would argue that a capitalist society has more people in it who are ambitious which drive it forward, and are therefore critical to the success of any culture. To that sentiment, there is a good way to measure that type of health and that is in how people spend money and how they measure themselves against the value of money.

When a person says, “well, that’s too expensive” what they are really saying is that they lack the confidence or gusto to step up and put forth the ambition to gain access to something of value. What I’m not saying is that you should spend yourself into oblivion to have something just so you can show off and pretend that you have value among your peers, and that you fake ambition with credit. But when it comes to a house, a certain car, a vacation—or in my case guns that you may want to get where the temptation is to say that the item is too expensive and not worth the effort, what you are announcing to the world is that you do not have the ambition or desire to obtain that object.

To me nothing is too expensive in the world. The question is, do I really want to put forth the ambition to obtain it? It’s not whether or not the object is out of my reach. The question of whether it is or isn’t is the path to the socialist side of things because it assumes that only certain classes of people can have the wealth to buy that certain house, or certain car. But in the capitalist society if I want to buy a golf course or a skyscraper, I should be able to, and have the freedom to. So when I hear that someone thinks something is too expensive what they are really saying is that they lack the will to do the work necessary to obtain the goal.

I have heard really good people I’ve known all my life say these kinds of things. I come from a family of farmers on both sides, and that is to say people of humble means. They said all the time that this little thing or that little thing was too expensive. Much of that came from their Christian backgrounds where meekness, and humble recognitions are traits to pursue so by saying that a new Mercedes is too expensive for them to drive they are really trying to advocate what good people they are in Biblical value, compared to the materialist who works all day and night just to have a fancy car. A lot of the values we have about material wealth and the acquisition to it come from these types of beliefs, and socialism is always there like a lusting demon to siren song all of society into the crashed rocks of a lack of ambition. By saying something isn’t worth the money even if an individual yearns for it, is to declare that they do not have the value or confidence to pursue the object. The object only represents pent-up desire. The effort to obtain it is the fuel that drives culture. And when a society functions after such pursuits then we can say that we have a society of values because the material objects then represent effort.

When we rob ourselves of such value as a civilization, we are then declaring that the here and now is a transitory phase and that death is our ultimate goal. Such people say, “why bother, you can’t take it with you.” That is a person and a society that is on the decline and often they try to mask such efforts behind their religious beliefs aimed at the afterlife. After all, how can they be penitent if they are working their fingers to the bone to have a new 85” flat screen television? They may want the object but in all reality they like thinking about death more so their aim is to dig one more shovel full of dirt closer to their own grave to hide their inherit laziness. And that is the way of things.

I don’t buy things for status symbols and most of what I do spend money on is for things that I do with my family. But the things I do spend money on, that have value to me I never say it’s too expensive and let that be the guide that drives me away from an object. There are of course times where things are too expensive because the seller is trying to rip you off, which is a different discussion. But in planning a big trip with a family, or buying that new gun, which are the types of things that I personally value, cost never enters into the picture. I’ll do whatever I have to do to get what I want. I’ll work any amount of hours so that I can have the privilege of obtaining the object. I never see something as too expensive, even if its millions of dollars. If I want it, it’s up to me to get it. Not some excuse like religious meekness, or social structure assumptions. Capitalism frees us of these limits and those who are scared to have their laziness revealed are the same ones who decry capitalism—because of it. There is no class structure limiting us under the flag of capitalism.

In American culture even if your father was a loser and your grandparents were idiots, you are not confined to follow in their path. If you want you can work hard, gain some money, and buy an SUV decked out with all the goodies, the same way that a top executive for a big company can. The question is do you want to match the efforts it takes to obtain such a thing. In my personal life as much as I talk about individualism, I pour a lot of that effort into my family, because ultimately if you really care about them, your influence leadership is to their benefit and that makes me happy. I don’t care what others think of me, but I care what I think of me. So when it comes to family I spare no expense. Not at all, because my value for them far exceeds any limits of effort on my part. There simply is no limit and it shows the way I live and spend money. Of course you have to decide if you want to spend money on this thing or that thing because money isn’t infinite. But if you focus your efforts, you should be able to buy anything, nothing should ever be considered too expensive.

It’s just a little thing to consider but I hear it all the time and it’s always wrong in the context of the individual pursuit of obtaining material objects. When people say something is too expensive what they are really saying is that they don’t think themselves worthy of that effort and their own ingrained meekness is speaking as an excuse not to even try. And that is how you get a declining culture, when people stop trying.

Rich Hoffman

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

College Has Always Been and Continues to Be, a Scam

It’s been a while since I’ve talked about it, but my article on the most successful people who never went to college, which I produced nine years ago continues to be one of my most popular, and most accurate. With all the talk these days about that collapsed dream, the scandal of parents buying off college admissions, the socialist proposal for free college for everyone paid for by the state, and the general liberal nature of the whole experience the truth is never talked about regarding the necessity of college and how it was designed from the beginning for all the wrong social matrixes. At the heart of liberalism is the desire for social tiers, the kind of structure where blood lines mattered and the power one obtained in life depended on the ancient notion of what kind of family one derived from. Much of the world still functions from that primitive state where even weddings are arranged between families to preserve bloodline authenticity. It’s an ancient notion that we have outgrown in the United States and it has taken the world a long time to accept the idea. The truth is that college and the concept of it was invented to preserve that ancient notion and to avoid the realities of capitalism and the merit-based society that derived from it.

It doesn’t take much to understand why parents like Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin would go to so much trouble to get their kids into a prestigious school, because they understood that the nature of the endeavor wasn’t to actually teach their children anything, it was what going to a specific school meant to their future lives in the form of social structure. Even in the way that people follow sports teams of their alma mater there is a notion that has replaced family blood lines present that still preserves the European, or even Asian notion of kingdom building and where one fell on the structure of royalty. By going to a school with a reputation for giving social access to its students, just having attended the place meant that a level of social acceptance would be granted to the student participant. In the same way a child born under some family name might have been a complete idiot, but due to the abilities of some great-grandfather who managed to curry favor in some king’s court a hundred years ago, that reputation still gave that idiot access to owning good lands, and a higher stock of a wife just because of the family name.

When America came along with its capitalism and a merit-based culture this whole bloodline thing died quick. It didn’t matter who your daddy was, if you were smart, ambitious, and hardworking, you could become anything you wanted. That’s how it worked in theory anyway and does in practice. But reluctantly, those who were lazy, and certainly not willing to do the hard work to climb a ladder toward success enjoyed the tiered structure of yesteryear where you were invited to social events based on your family name. As the bloodline sentiment died away in Western culture, the idea that University participation would replace it became more urgent and it took hold for about 50 years in the United States. But it has never been a priority in America because deep in our hearts we know the truth, that college participation is not emphasized to gain intelligence or to learn anything, its to satisfy the whims of a social class that is desperately hanging on to an ancient notion of class structure that would protect them from a merit based society.

We are learning now that the notion of a college scam has had a crippling effect on our economy in the West as it has been expanding faster than there were minds filling its needs. Kids going to college were learning all the wrong things and it has been taking them decades to unlearn all the bad things they learned there. The reality in the business world has been that Yale name as a alma mater still got you an interview, or even a job by a boss who still valued such things, but it certainly didn’t give anybody an advantage over another applicant who was actually smarter and harder working. Following the alma mater route has crippled companies with sub par employees who just weren’t as effective as a merit-based hire.

Effectively public education has always pushed the college notion in preparing young minds to attend the institutions of higher learning. The government schools of course want to keep this bloodline notion alive because it makes the lazy and unimaginative seem less complacent. Government for its purposes doesn’t want a free flying mind that will challenge its authority all its life, it wants the clipped wings of all those who fall under its authority. So the purpose of any government sponsored education system isn’t to teach a mind to be free and independent, but to have its wings clipped so it stays on the ground and under the control of the government through a structure they find acceptable. And for many of them, if they can have a decent house, a decent car and some money for social events, they are happy to trade what they could be for what their lazy natures prefer. Public schools spent all their time breaking kids down into their proper structures that would follow them all through life, then the colleges would finish the job. If a student managed to go to college, they would then get access to an interview at a company playing along with this system where you could only interview if you had a bachelor’s degree. Or that you couldn’t get a pay raise unless you had a master’s or doctorate. The effort there was to preserve that ancient system so that the participate would trade a free life for that of a clipped winged life so that they could have a good paying job.

But the reality has not been conducive to that sentiment. Employers have discovered that merit is the best indicator of getting the best people for a job. And that list I published all those years ago show that college has nothing to do with success as long as capitalism allows merit to rule over the old bloodline notion. Don’t marry that spouse just because they went to the same school as you did, but because you love them. Just as many couples ran away from arranged marriages in Europe seeking an authentic experience over a socially arranged one. We have seen that companies do better with hard-working and hungry applicants instead of one who went to Harvard by brown-nosing their way through life to arrive at a job interview filled with liberal propaganda and to play company politics like the Game of Thrones just so they can get the corner office. Companies wanted something better for themselves and the college graduate has not given it to them.

The reality is that the entire concept of college, while admirable conceptually, is entirely a scam designed to extract vast amounts of wealth from parents who secretly just want a good life for their kids. To get at that wealth colleges had to convince society that parents could buy a bloodline status for their children with a tuition fee, and that has worked for the most part until our expanding economy revealed the truth of it all. When companies had no choice but to consider employees without college degrees the ruse was revealed and now the entire structure has come into question, as it should. And liberalism all along thought they had a fertile ground for their future existence by forcing anybody who wanted to play the bloodline game to run their gauntlet of liberal propaganda. But now they have all been exposed and what we are seeing are the remnants of that belief system. And its sad to see given its true form which has been revealed by the neurotics that were revealed in the great college scandal stories of our present time. The parents never did really care if their children learned anything. They just wanted to give them a name which would give them access to decent things in life. And that kind of life value never had a place in a capitalist country just as the future will determine such things to be even less so.

Rich Hoffman

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

We Need Guns for Civilization to Work Properly

The Democrats continue to propose this notion of impeachment of President Trump and to be honest, this makes the best argument for the Second Amendment that could be provoked. President Trump was elected by an honest election process, and with all the legal scrutiny that could be generated against him, he was found innocent of any wrong doing, yet the calls for his removal from office continue on, and have even increased as Democrats realize they are losing power at a rapid rate. It is a reminder why we must have the Second Amendment, because if a president of the United States can be abused the way that Trump has been, it can happen to any of us and the only way to defend ourselves truly is not in a court of law, but with the barrel of a gun, as is obvious by the antics of our present circumstances. I put my message to those who want to impeach President Trump on Instagram and for me it would be a last resort but its safe to say, that if Trump were to be impeached, I would consider the law and order of our governing system to be too far gone to hold any merit, and the only thing that would hold our society together would be our guns.

Not having guns as the foundation of our country and our entire legal system is simply not an option. I will never trust anything mankind proposes by way of justice without a gun being somewhere nearby. People are fallible and they often abuse words on paper if they can get away with it to obtain power at someone else’s cost, and that is just not permissible. I’m not going to allow it, and the only way to enforce that is with gun ownership. Guns are the stabilizing factor of western civilization which keeps us free. Without them our society would have fallen apart a long time ago. Guns keep everyone honest and that has been a good thing. But let’s face it, the Second Amendment isn’t for hunting, it’s for taking back our government from the powerful, if we need to. And if Trump is impeached, then when would we declare that everything is too far gone to deal with things without violence? There are elections every four years, and that is the time where the opposition can knock out someone from power if they can. That’s how our system is supposed to work. But if someone cheats and tries to do it with legal gymnastics and an abuse of the law, which is clearly what happened to President Trump, then what other recourse do any of us really have?

I propose that guns should be a greater part of our lives, we should wear them openly and allow all those we are dealing with to know that we are all functioning from an equal footing. Guns are the great equalizers, they are what makes us respect each other, not some words on a page. Guns are an invention by mankind that have brought in the notion for equality in the first place. Without guns, we would not have had many of the social revolutions that we have had in the United States. Guns have played a much larger role than many people give them credit for. There has been no political figure that we’ve had in the world that would convince me that guns were not needed to keep everything balanced and in order.

The shame of it is that we’ve allowed a political class to define gun ownership and their use as dangerous and a safety hazard, as if they were in the same category as tobacco and alcohol. From a government perspective they know they can’t truly rule over our society without having guns removed from the discussion, and truly, deep down inside, that is what “government” as an entity wants to do, they want to control us. That’s sort of their job title. But what keeps the tendency for human failure from harming us? Well, it’s the fear that if government abuses its power that the people they rule over will shoot back. I would contend that without guns or at least a culture of weapons, that no foundation of law and order would persist in any culture.

I have been around the world a few times and visited some of our greatest cities on earth and I can say honestly that the lack of guns have made most of them armpits. In order to have a gun free society work the intellectual aptitude of the inhabitants must yield themselves to the weaknesses of their culture because that is the only way that peace is achieved. Whereas in cultures where guns are openly worn and discussed, the intellectual curiosity of the world around them tends to go up. As I write this I’m thinking of England, a place where they clearly don’t understand gun ownership in a personal way. They love their institutions in England and they are willing to trade their personal freedoms and security away toward a trust in their authority figures. But at a cost, they are a declining culture that is limited to the whims of their government, and that is a dangerous place to be.

Then there is the example in Paris, which I have called many bad names due to their present state chaos. They have their yellow vest protests which have been going on for a long time and are the result of the failed socialism there for many years. After the fire at Notre Dame over 900 million dollars were contributed to help restore the cathedral prompting many of those weekend protestors to question why similar contributes didn’t flow toward their pockets. After all, it was gas prices and taxes that were keeping them poor and middle class. Why couldn’t “the rich” just give them all 900 million dollars so they could sit around their homes all day and play video games? What isn’t understood by these people was the value Notre Dame had to so many people around the world, and that value was reflected in the contributions. Notre Dame had value. A bunch of dirty, stinky, lazy socialists do not have value, so nobody wants to give them 900 million dollars to sit around complaining and playing games all day. It is that lack of understanding that can often make governments dangerous because they seek to appease those types of dumb, shortsighted people in elections which means that the mobs of the angry can then confiscate the wealth of the hard-working. In Europe this is a real problem, which is why more people don’t have more things. A culture that embraces gun ownership tends to be one that also understands the nature of value and it prevents more violence, it doesn’t act as an agitator of more instances.

Gun ownership I consider to be the foundation of civilization. Without it governments and the people they are supposed to represent fall apart quickly. So it’s a great benefit to have more guns in more places in any culture. And it’s what keeps the bad guys away. It’s also what keeps the temptations to impeach presidents from getting out of control because we know from history that people in power will do just about anything to stay there. And when they feel they can abuse others to keep their power, or to advance it, they certainly will. What I can say is that if my president is impeached, I’m not going to be very happy about it, and I will look toward the Second Amendment to restore balance, and order. Yielding to authority is simply not an option. I never see a day where guns aren’t the center of civilized discourse, because of their equalizing effect. It puts everyone on equal footing which should be encouraged, not discouraged. But then again, people who want more gun regulations are not really interested in peace and equality. They want power and they want us disarmed so they can have their way with us. And that is the deep, dark secret nobody wants to talk about.

Rich Hoffman

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