No Gun Control: We can’t trust this government especially after what they did to Rudy Giuliani

No Gun Control, we can’t trust this government

I’m not making threats when I say the FBI raid of Rudy Giuliani on the same day as Beijing Biden’s “state of the union” is why we can never give government rights to regulate guns.  The harassment and confiscation of the electronic devices Giuliani had by the FBI shows the massive corruption that the DOJ is capable of and how willing they were to break the law.  Of course, we know, as I said in the video above, that there are lots of strategic reasons for the raid from the big-government types using the FBI for political terrorism.  We are all big boys and girls, so we don’t need to talk about how unfair it is.  It is what it is.  The least talked about portion of the attack was digging up dirt on Trump, hoping to find something to build a case against his re-election.  The Democrats, who are the bosses of the FBI, know history.  Many times, a “great leader” was exiled out of their homeland only to gain strength and return for conquest.

Vladimir Lenin comes to mind before the Russian Revolution of 1917.  Except for this time, the communists are worried about Trump coming back into power. Many Democrats are concerned about Trump helping Republicans win back the seats within the House and Senate.  And even worse, they are worried that those Republicans won’t be Frank Luntz Republicans, the wishy-washy weak John Boehner types.  But more those like Ron DeSantis and Kristie Noem.  The risk to Democrats is genuine.  They expected complete conquest of Republicans after the election of 2020, but that hasn’t happened.  And now there is panic, so they used their pals in the FBI to harass President Trump’s attorney, the long-time well-respected figure Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Law Enforcement himself, and former mayor of New York.

I mentioned guns because it’s evident that we have a lawless society, and the Democratic party is in power and has control of our three-letter intelligence agencies.  What other conclusion is there?  Yet I have no plans to submit to their takeover of our country and their desire to undo America from within so that their financiers in China can conquer us for a greater good that only they think is good.  Just as China wants to do everywhere, especially in Taiwan and Japan, they mean eradicating us any way possible, and the Executive Branch represents that attack.  That leaves us needing guns to protect us from the lawlessness that this current government exhibits audaciously.  I don’t want violence, but this administration certainly does, and they attacked Giuliani as a warning to us all to submit to their power and authority.  If Rudy Giuliani can be attacked the way he was by the FBI and Biden Justice Department, then they can and will do it to any of us at any time.  Their intentions have been made known.  So why in the hell would we listen to these corrupt government types when they say that we should trust them with gun control?  That is like following instructions from a robber to leave your house unlocked so they can pillage you and your family whenever they feel like it.  Gun control is off the table in every way it could be.  Suppose we can’t trust elections, and we can’t take back our government from these riotous thieves? In that case, we’re going to need those guns for proper management of our government because it’s evident that the FBI doesn’t work for America; it’s for the corporate influences and the Chinese government behind the Biden presidency.

Additionally, various audits are going on regarding the election fraud that occurred in the election of 2020.  Rudy Giuliani has been one of the leading figures regarding questioning the election results.  Mike Lindell has been another as well as Sydney Powell.  All these people are being proven to be right about their accusation of voter fraud.  That is yet another reason to attack Giuliani, shut him up and find some dirt that might destroy his credibility.  If only they could get to Giuliani before the Arizona audit gets leaked.  When that happens, and everyone will realize that there were large amounts of fraud in those five states that shut down in the middle of the night to steal the election and that Fox News had the inside gaff, which is why they called it so early.  Many people at all levels of government could and should be in big-time trouble over that election.  Democrats have no choice but to deny, deny, and deny, attack, attack, and attack all those who might point out the crimes committed.  We are dealing with massive corruption here by the government that controls the FBI, so what does anybody think is possible with this situation?  That we might ask them to stop being so mean? 

What was done to Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, really all the Trump people who have been harassed and abused from well before his administration ever started was more than enough to justify a complete armed revolution.  We haven’t yet as Americans because we still have hope that the system might work yet.  But when we see a current president going after a former president and using the FBI to do it, then that is the Democrats begging for a war they think they will win.  Because Frank the duntz Luntz told them so.  We should all be insulted that this government has gone this far.  They are going for blood, and they intend to scare us all so far that we will comply without defending ourselves, just as they do in China.  That is where this playbook comes from.  The raid of Rudy Giuliani was unprovoked, illegal, and the sheer evidence of foreign influence over our current government that is as anti-American as conceivably possible, and it’s all reprehensible and cannot be accepted. 

We must deal with reality and not hopeful dreams; we are dealing with a vast evil that has no problem abusing people, even to their destruction.  And they aren’t doing it in the darkness of night; they raid these high-profile figures at 6 AM to show their command of our days.  They go for lower-profile people too, but they don’t make the news.  Our court system does not work anymore.  Wokeness has infected our corporations and entertainment culture to the point where they are trying to corral us all into the slaughterhouse pen for our projected destruction.  Then to seal the deal, they promote gun control as a fix to all the problems they caused for their very mechanisms of evil.  And the greatest insult is that they expect to get away with it because they always have.  To my mind, this means that when Republicans gain control over the Department of Justice, which Trump had, but he was too good of a guy to use that power—the next time, we better use it.  Otherwise, there will be nothing but blood to spill to regain our government and not find ourselves sold to China while sleeping, which looks to be the case now.  But there is no room for gun control of any kind.  There is no trust in this government because of the FBI’s behavior as political operatives for the Democrat Party.  That fault is their own, and they have not been shy about flaunting that power.  So, for our right, neither should we.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=bniNjt4gII


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

Protecting Drivers from Protestors: The trick of using free speech to destroy the Constitution

Protestors Should Not Be in the Road, Ever

It’s about time; Oklahoma is proposing legislation to protect drivers who run protestors carrying their anarchy into the roadways of that state.  Other states such as Indiana and Florida pursuing similar protections, which is a perfect thing and long overdue.  We have witnessed many riots over the last several years, especially the race-baiting Democrats who have been engaged.  With them, it’s been quite a show; they were the ones who were responsible for slavery and fighting to keep it in place.  Now to cover that crime, they seek to control people of color another way. They are obliged all too often with riots in the streets every time Democrats find they need a diversion from their many crimes and liabilities derived from legislative errors.  Many of these protests are just thinly disguised attempts to exert Marxism into American society. Hence, their target is always commerce, which is why these mobs have been seeking to shut down our nation’s highways.  On several occasions, panicked drivers being forced to sit in traffic as these mobs destroy their property in terrifying ways have tried to drive through the attackers harming and even killing them.  For the drivers, not only did they have their property destroyed and had to sit through a terrifying occasion, but then they end up prosecuted for using their car as a deadly weapon.  It is hardly fair, and justice has been desperately needed. 

Thankfully, states like Oklahoma are providing that justice.  While nobody wants anybody to get hurt, no protestor should ever expect their free speech to harm other people’s liberty, specifically their right to commerce.  The moment that any protestor affects the individual lives of other people, such as showing up at their homes and playing loud music or chanting through a bullhorn to keep the occupants inside awake, we are then dealing with a disturbance of the peace situation.  The violators have then surrendered their constitutional protections of free speech and should then be arrested and prosecuted.  That is the same with protestors who have disrupted the meals of their targets in public.  Those protests are then disturbance of the peace violations and need to be met with aggressive action.  The occupants of a restaurant are there to pay for a nice meal.  It is their right and privilege.  Robbing that experience from people to usher in some protest is not acceptable and not part of the ground rules of a free society.  The protestors may be free to speak their mind, even if it’s wrong.  But they do not have a right to rob other people of enjoyment.  Whatever legal jargon might allow for a gray spot in interpretation requires clarity quickly, which, thankfully, these states mentioned are beginning to do. 

Now protestors might argue that taking away their right to get people’s attention will weaken their ability to get their point across.  That is not the problem of a society of commerce.  That is the problem of the protestor.  If the protestor has a good point, people will follow them.  If people think of the protestors as an inconvenience, they will be ignored, and their points glazed over.  That is how battles in a free-market economy are conducted.  Nobody has a right to dominate the minds and thoughts of others.  However, that’s not what the protestors want.  If we read the many books that they have been circulating for years, books such as The Coming Insurrection, Mao’s Little Red Book, and Rules for Radicals, it’s clear they want Marxism disguised as fairness.  So, they don’t care at all about individual rights, and they openly seek to destroy unregulated commerce.  And to deal with protestors legally in this regard, we can’t allow ourselves to think that we are protecting free speech when in all reality, we are working against all the other rights of the Constitution. 

It is a basic premise in our society that if people are walking around on railroad tracks or a highway, their safety is not the responsibility of other people. Suppose they put themselves in danger by being within the means of commerce of any kind, boat, plane, car, train—anything, that their life is in their own hands.  That is true even if there is a mob of hundreds and hundreds of people.  It is not the truck driver’s duty to stop the work and delay shipment of their product from one place to another because many protestors decided to bring their gripes to the truck driver’s life and alter his reality. While traveling at a moderate rate of speed, the truck driver should be unable to slow down and move right on through the mob unimpeded.  If there are injuries or deaths, then that obligation rests on the people in the road, not the drivers, to have one more thing to worry about.  If animals cross into a road, which could be understood since they don’t know better, they are struck all the time.  It is understood generally that the right to commerce is more important than an accident from some creature, unfortunately, being in the road when a car comes along.  However, in the case of humans, they do know better.  Now they may be impaired by drugs, or they may be sick with political ideology.  Regardless, they are still ill of mind and prone to destruction if they end up in the road and are hit by a car or truck while protesting. 

For many years, these ideas have been generally understood.  However, in our now overly litigious society, we see challenges to this premise. Many drivers have been stopping and yielding to these protestors because they are more afraid of the legal system than the derelicts of destruction that often end up in these mobs.  That is why the many state legislators must do as Oklahoma are doing now, making the issue quite specific.  Commerce must be a protected right, people’s ability to be free of a protest should they want to be supported.  We cannot allow people who wish to bring harm to our constitutional republic to use our rules against us disguised as free speech, but with the intent of violating the whole foundation of our legal system while in the process, which is what has been happening.  The challenge has left people feeling defenseless and vulnerable, which should never be the case in a civil society.  Because the alternative is that if protesters act with lawlessness, which is their premise when they loot and vandalize during protests, we fight back with lawlessness.  I don’t think that’s where we all want to go.  It would be better if everyone agreed with the laws, and we could at least have that as a common means of exchange.  But putting up with the chaos and aggression against commerce is not an option.  Commerce is much more sacred than the feelings of a Marxist minority, or even a majority, should that ever occur.  And before open violence between drivers and protests happens, the ground rules need to be clear: what Oklahoma and many other states are now doing, and not a moment too soon.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=bniNjt4gII


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

Why Not Make a 51st State: Democrats can’t win elections without cheating

Who is worried about turning Washington D.C. into a 51st state? I’m not.  Of course, there are the usual reasons for being concerned about it, such as putting two more Democrats in the Senate, which liberals want.  They are doing the same thing with trying to make D.C. a state as they are trying to do with court-packing on the Supreme Court.  They think that if they stuff more Democrats into the system, the world will suddenly like them and accept who they are, what they represent, and what their plans are for the future.  Democrats think that if only they can control everything that people see and hear, that their policies will not be rejected at face value.  But as I said in the video attached, the reality of what they would get is far from their intentions.  Sure, in the short run, Democrats might pick up a few seats. Still, I would be willing to gamble that if Republicans put their attention on election reform in preventing mock elections with fake mail-in ballots cast without voter ID, then Democrats may never win an election again.  They aren’t nearly as popular as people think they are.  Democrats only think they are popular because they talk only to a limited number of liberal people in their lives, and that circle is shrinking fast.  The best way to defeat Democrats isn’t by playing keep-away with state expansions; it’s with voter ID. 

I’m all for a 51st State

I always love to hear that other places in the world want to become part of the United States.  Perhaps if Washington D.C. became the 51st state, then Puerto Rico might become the 52nd.  Then where might we find more states?  Might Cuba desire to become a 53rd state or the many little countries of Central America?  After all, what does everyone think people from those places are running from?  They are running from socialism and communism to someplace where they can work and be somewhat free.  They may not know how to live in a capitalist society.  But we could teach them.  President Trump did an excellent job of starting that process.  We know that Latino people and blacks will vote for Republicans; they are even becoming Republicans, which is why liberals are freaking out with racism claims all of a sudden.  What they saw from Trump scared them, and they fear losing their crutch of minority voters forever.  You see, for Democrats, it’s all about gaining power through cheating and people from other countries bringing their socialism to America and then toppling our government with the expectations of dependency.  If you take away that threat from Democrats, they have nothing to stand on.  You essentially take away their entire political platform.  

But what if we took America to those far-flung places, by choice of course?  Not by invasion or threat, but by culture.  What about Hong Kong?  Why not make it a territory of the United States by giving them a choice to leave China and become a state of America?  Who says our borders must be what’s on the map now?  Why not take our borders to those countries with people who want their version of America?  They could still retain their identity, such as Texas maintains their history, and New York does.  But they could accept our capitalist culture and be free to live under our Constitution as we enjoy.  Why make people live in dangerous countries where the governments are corrupt beyond belief?  Why not give them a choice of options to let them see the benefit of what American statehood is?  Why not offer the same thing to Congo and other African countries?  I would bet that many of the people there would love to have the opportunity of having what the poorest of Americans have, and they’d appreciate and likely vote for Republicans once they learned that it would be for their good. 

Democrats are fluffing their feathers, trying to look so big and menacing.  But they are just peacocks. What’s under all those feathers is just a skinny bird, easy to beat.  They have Republicans convinced that Democrats could win elections because conservatives in the past have never had a reason not to believe our election system was so corrupt.  But with voter ID and severe limits on mail-in ballots tightly controlled, Democrats would lose massively in all houses of congress and their states.  Especially now that blue state governors have shown themselves to be so massively inept.  Democrats want the expansion of states to get a short-term boost in their control of the House and Senate.  They hope that election laws stay loose so that this reality isn’t poised upon them.  They hope to swipe away at Constitutional powers before this secret about their true nature is revealed to the world.  The way to beat Democrats and liberalism, in general, is to expand America beyond our borders.  To the places in the world that want our values and the power of our capitalism.  It would save many people the world over the dangerous trip into America if only America came to them.

Is that colonialism?  Liberals would say so, but they’d be wrong.  There is a difference between conquering a country and making it into an American state and inviting them to have the option by a vote.  How many people in Hong Kong would pick America over China?  Or in Cuba, the same? Wouldn’t the Cuban people love the opportunity to buy a car that is less than 50 years old and have 1000 cable television channels as we do in the states, and a job to pay for all of them?  If given a choice, wouldn’t most of the countries of Africa choose the life of an American as opposed to the communist militants and outright socialists they have now? Wouldn’t they love a nice big Wal-Mart next to the Congo River?

Ahhhh, I bet they would. They’d love the air conditioning, if nothing else, and refrigerated water!  I think statehood would be an excellent idea for many of these places, and people would love it and be far better off than they are presently.  But Democrats stay in power by cheating in elections and keeping those countries rotting from within to force migrants into America looking for freedom, then making them dependents and voters for them as soon as they enter our country.  They stay in power by avoiding the ultimate question, is one tyranny better than another.  Well, at least in America, you get to keep most of your money.  The government is a better cartel in that they don’t kill you as you sleep in the night and take your children into sex trafficking and the drug trade.  The cartel in America gives you free stuff in exchange for a vote.  Imagine the world if this was not allowed.  Instead, America came to those places on the wave of justice expected in our culture?  Then we’d have a different story, and we wouldn’t be worried about Democrats gaining seats in the Senate.  Republicans would have a perpetual majority forever.  And Democrats may never win an election again.  Of course, this is true; it’s what Democrats fear the most about their slim grip on any power, ever.  It’s that people might learn how vulnerable they are, then begin to turn the tables on the Democrat game, which is precisely what we should do, and now.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,https://rumble.com/embed/vciikp/?pub=3rih5#?secret=bniNjt4gII


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

How to Find a Leader: Joe Biden is not one

It is one of the most misunderstood concepts of our society.  I am going through the editorial process with a publisher on a book on this topic called The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business. Still, we need to address the difference between a leader and a politician for our case here today.  Because obviously, most people don’t know the difference.  Every day in the news, somebody talks about Joe Biden as if he’s our “leader,” even Tucker Carlson on Fox News.  There is a treacherous psychological mind trick going on here that is costing us a lot of national bandwidth that we need to straighten out because we are different in America than other places globally, and we need to understand why.  We don’t elect leaders into office in the United States.  We don’t make an effort to be led by titles.  Remember, unlike what everyone tells us, we are not a Democracy; we are a Republic.  And we elect people to represent our views in America.  Not to lead us, leadership is scarce, and when we find them, we like them.  But we can’t limit our scope to always waiting for some leader to emerge before leaving the campfire and exploring the nearest cave the way leader-driven cultures tend to do.  We built our country to assume that leadership would be hard to find and was very rare, so leadership wasn’t needed in the political class.  We just needed representatives to carry out the interests of the people who elected them, which is a vast difference from what we are told. 

As I talk about in my upcoming book, leadership is forged like gold from the massive pressures of the universe.  Not everyone has the stomach or the heart to be a leader.  Typically we don’t see leaders emerging in our political circles because the conditions for making a leader do not exist there.  We see them come about in military life to some extent, we see them in sports, but most of our leadership in America comes about in the business world.  The percentage of authentic leadership is noticeably low; it’s a fraction of the total percentage of an overall population.  For example, Tom Brady is a prominent leader in sports.  He makes his coaching staff better with his leadership and teammates no matter what team he’s on.  Tom Brady manages always to find success.  You can see that type of leadership in CEOs, such as Steve Jobs.  Modern-day Elon Musk has excellent leadership.  It’s not the money he has which exhibits it, but it’s in his long string of successes and how he can communicate complicated vision to many people.  Of course, when we think of leadership, we think of General Patton.  I think of Claire Lee Chennault, who created the great Flying Tigers.  But these are all names unique to the history and within our populations.  They are far from commonplace. 

The health of any culture should always be measured by the number of leaders it produces.  But for that to occur, you have to understand what a leader is, and by calling politicians leaders by their titles, or worthless CEOs who expect to lead by title, then we are kidding ourselves toward the objectives of success, in a healthy culture that proportionally, America is the best globally. We have our Tom Brady types coming out of leisure activities and our Elon Musks in science and industry.  Other countries don’t have those people.  It’s not because the skills aren’t in the population.  But those cultures do not have a means of emerging them from obscurity into change state contributors, just as Indians of the Wild West spent much of their lives walking over gold but having no means to bring it out of the ground. And even if they did get to it, what would they have done with it?  They had no economy to make money.  They had no concept of money, so they never extracted gold for sociological use.  There needs to be a means to bring about the treasures of existence, and if that culture does not develop those means, you will never get to the prize. That is what leadership is; it’s a treasure of human endeavor that can advance a society when it is found and utilized.  But it is not created by silly titles, which is the prevailing belief by those too lazy and ill-equipped to develop a culture that produces leadership.

If we recognized that simple leadership trait, we would eliminate much of the corruption we see in politics currently and in the past and future.  Because we have by default given out leadership designations to people by title and not merit, we have prevented authentic leadership from emerging and improving our lives and circumstances.  Back to Tom Brady, think of all the professional football players we have seen over the years.  But not until Tom Brady came along was the whole leadership package developed into a guy who had taken his football teams to so many Super Bowls and won when the surrounding players were all different, and even the teams were different.  Tom Brady is proof that it’s not teams that win big games; it’s one individual who is a true leader.  Socialist and Communist countries always fail because they have no interest in finding leadership.  They have built their entire societies around collective consensus instead of leadership.  That is undoubtedly the case of our institutions of learning and our government of today in general.  They think leadership comes out of group behavior when it is forged from the pressure of success and failure—through much pain and turmoil and a refusal to take the loss as an answer to living. 

By calling any political person a leader, we are cheapening the word for its true meaning and use.  It is worse than all that it is a general punt by a declining society to be so quick to call worthless people leaders because the culture desires to shift away responsibility for leadership to people with titles instead of hashing out the problems themselves.  They might fail in the task if they did try, but by not trying and giving the responsibility over to a titled person who does not have leadership, but is like Mitch McConnell, a politician in a high office, then a failure shouldn’t come as a surprise.  Mitch McConnell will never be a leader of anybody.  Joe Biden will never be a leader, nor is Vice President Commie Harris.  Skin color can’t make a person a leader.  Bootlicking doesn’t make a leader.  Diversity training won’t make a leader, so globalism will ultimately fail because they seek to suppress leaders in favor of a system that makes politicians by title into positions of authority without earning the right through the pressures of living and becoming the best, thus creating leadership. 

Not understanding leadership has led to many of the problems we see today and destroys the lives of those unable to see leadership for the value it brings.  But make no mistake, just because someone wins an election, it does not make them a leader.  Just because someone gets a promotion, it does not make them magically a leader.  Not even a Super Bowl can do it; in the case of Tom Brady, he has shown that you must win many Super Bowls under many different conditions to show the power of leadership.  But without these tests and high expectations, you get sorry performance and a culture destined for failure.  And that is the danger of calling worthless politicians leaders when they are only haphazard politicians who represent us in politics at best.

Cliffhanger the Overmanwarrior


Share, subscribe, and see you later,


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

Keith Kinnunen and Liberals: There are a lot more mentally depraved people in the world which requires us all to be armed to defend ourselves from

Not that it’s a surprise, but we now know that the shooter of the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas was Keith Kinnunen—a loser who had managed his life poorly who targeted that church because they had given him food instead of money. This instance reminds me of many of my personal run-ins with homeless people. Once at the Kenwood Mall a homeless person was on the side of the highway exit looking for food, but what he really wanted was money. My wife and I went to the food court and bought him a bag of Arby’s for which he immediately threw to the ground. I’ve tried to help people like that since, but often with the same result. It doesn’t surprise me when people who find they can’t live in the world due to their lack of mental development (which is almost 100% of the time their own fault) or because they have drug addictions, that this loser Keith Kinnunen was upset that the church only gave him food instead of money, and sought to take his rage out on them due to his own radical ideas of self-indulgence.
When Kinnunen pulled out a 12-gauge shotgun to kill parishioners at that church, he managed to kill a few people before Jack Wilson pulled out his own gun and shot the assailant dead in seconds, as concealed carry holders are supposed to do. Its always sad to see anybody lose their life, but this case had a happy ending, a lot more people were able to return home to their families due to a good guy with a gun shooting a bad guy with a gun. The problem with the case is that liberals put their own two cents into this case by suggesting that instead of focusing on the success of Wilson’s actions that we should be looking at eliminating the need for gun violence in the first place, which is an astonishing statement considering that it is the liberal view of the world that caused the conditions.

Kinnunen was a troubled person his entire 44-year life, as a guy who had been married two times with ex-wives available to tell plenty of stories of his crazed anger and drug abuse, the guy was so irresponsible that he was just another homeless person. Many have pointed out that he wasn’t mentally healthy which is obvious. The burning question in this case and all of them for that matter is what the cause of mental illness is, which I often say the entire Democrat party could be guilty of. Trying to decide what is mental illness and what isn’t is where liberals have a hard time because their entire lives could be said to function out of some mental depravity not that unlike the killer in this Texas church case. They support drug abuse, do not believe in family structure and have a sense of entitlement which suggests that the world owes them something. They are not much different at face value than Kinnunen getting angry with the church because they gave him food instead of money.

This is entirely why most all liberals are opposed to open carrying of firearms because they see themselves in killers like Kinnunen. They want to believe that they are mentally healthy people, but when the facts come out on the kind of people who perform these mass killings in nearly every case, its not just a case of mental illness, but are the products of liberalism in our society—drug abuse, lack of personal responsibility for actions, and a sense of entitlement. Whether that entitlement comes in the form of federal workers demanding higher taxes to cover their inflated pensions, or whether its some loser like this Kinnunen guy who expects people to feel sorry for his bad decisions in life and to give him money for drugs so he can forget about his problems—that he himself created. Liberals sympathize with these killers because they see themselves in the mirrors of their existence—and they certainly wouldn’t want to have an armed society that could protect themselves from liberal incursions, which are frequent if left unchecked.

There are tens of thousands of liberals who are not much healthier than Keith Kinnunen functioning right now in our schools, our BMVs, even at the post office. The only reason they have not become homeless people running around food kitchens looking for free money is because we overpay them to be government leeches. Most of them are about one paycheck away from becoming assassins like Keith Kinnunen. Not that they would go out and shoot someone tomorrow, but they think about it. Believe me they do. It took Keith Kinnunen 44 years to get to that point, so its not like people become killers that fast, but the thought is in their heads and they want desperately to hide it from the rest of us. That is why they are against an armed society. Its not what they fear in people like Jack Wilson, its in a loss of a safety net to catch them if they should fail in life like Kinnunen did. Because they have more in common with the killer than they do a church going do-gooder.

Without question we could have put a suit and tie on Keith Kinnunen and stuck him on MSNBC and called him a political pundit and if he talked about global warming instead of cash from church food giveaways, we’d accept his positions as rational. But its all extremism and rooted in beliefs that need others to fill them for sustenance. Kinnunen was self-righteously religious and likely took Bible verses rooted in socialist sentiment too far and believed that people owed him a living, whereas the global warming crowd requires others to believe in a complete fiction to validate their point of view. Both ideas are rooted in collectivism requiring many sane minds to drop away their logic to accept the premise of lunacy.

We accept logically that liberals can use the IRS to steal our money for their own government theft, and that the power of government can be used to overthrow elections such as the impeachment case against Trump, but that there is some invisible line that separates the actions of Keith Kinnunen from demanding money at a church instead of food, and when a shootout breaks out over the issue liberals want to prosecute the gun owners. When in truth it was a failure of liberalized society that allowed a guy like Keith Kinnunen to live outside of jail, on and off the streets as a drug addict and a violent person to more than one spouse. We all knew Kinnunen was dangerous, but our society failed to recognize that threat because honestly, he was too close in behavior to most Democrats. So, he continued in paralysis until he eventually pulled out a gun to kill people of his own sense of entitlement. His insanity is really the responsibility of a society that did not set him right at an early age and allowed him to become a menace as a grown adult. That is why our future will require more people to carry guns in more places, because this guy isn’t the end by far. There are many just like him ready to snap and they are listening to the liberal dog whistles to fetch them on society as a menace. And it is then that we must defend ourselves.

Rich Hoffman

Dealing with the Leftist Frankenstein Monsters of Evil: The Texas Church shooting and why more guns are needed

If it was the sexual antics toward a government takeover of our 2016 election from Lisa Page that ended our thoughts of 2019 it should be the armed parishioners who took out a domestic terrorist at a Texas church that should launch our ambitions in 2020. Because there were trained participants of a security team armed at the church led by the guy who killed the suspect in the conflict, Jack Wilson—the attacker was subdued in about 6 seconds. Without voluntary armed protectors at the church ready for such action many more people would have been killed. This was a perfect case of what we have been talking about for many years. And this was another high-profile example of how such a system could work thanks to a recently passed state law that permitted concealed firearms inside places of worship. If not for that this tragic case of two people being shot would have been much more egregious, and unnecessary as we must all admit that evil is alive and well in the world, and when it shows bad intentions, it must be dealt with. Of course, the challenge to that assumption is that one person’s evil can be another person’s heaven, so there are additional complications into defining evil. But everyone can agree that when aggression is taken toward others in a life and death matter, that evil is amiss, and it must be eliminated quickly, not a 911 call later.

I always think about these things, but fortunately I live in an area where our local sheriff gets it, he understands the purpose of the Second Amendment. Yet even for me, I was a lot troubled while watching the film Richard Jewell, the day before this shooting, where in a scene where the FBI came to Jewell’s house they confiscated all his guns that had been laid out on his bed. It troubled me to see that just because the FBI accused Jewell of a crime that those agents could come into his house and just confiscate all his property, and given the reaction of the people in my movie theater, they seemed to be OK with it, accustomed to such a tyranny disguised as “safety” for the public at large. That is a very dangerous notion, and one that troubled me tremendously. It was the direct result of a culture that has been sold to us to think of guns as dangerous, or even as part of some counterculture. In that same film Jewell’s lawyer asked if the bombing suspect was a member of any fringe organizations, like the NRA and Jewell had to ask, “is the NRA a ‘fringe’ organization?”

It is that attitude actually that makes our world all that much more dangerous. Guns have always been a part of my life, since I was a very little kid to the present. And I’ve never really had a reason to use a gun on anybody, even though lots of times I could have been more than justified in doing so. It just wasn’t my go-to option when danger was amiss. But its always good to know that the option was there. I think guns should be carried everywhere, to restaurants, shopping complexes, to and from work, everywhere—because you never know when evil will show itself. This is especially true in public schools where everyone knows that they are typically gun free zones—making them obvious soft targets for bad guys looking to invoke terrorism on the innocent. Guns should be in reach of every human being on planet earth. If they were, a lot less evil would be taking place. That is for sure.

When bad guys show themselves, as this one at the Texas church in White Settlement did, the threat should always be eradicated in seconds, not minutes. It is always sad to see anybody die in these kinds of conflicts, especially if they are innocent, but the need to end that threat quickly cannot be understated. And when evil is unleashed, it needs to be quelled as fast as possible. If not faster. This is why also every shooter in America should practice speed and accuracy with their firearms so that when a threat is presented, ending it happens almost second nature with instinct. Taking a kill shot such as Jack Wilson performed is critical, there is no time for talking and pleading. This is why every state should also have a stand your ground law instead of a duty to retreat. When aggression appears, the shooting defender should not think for a second about some silly legal obligation created to retreat when showing a villain a passive attitude could end up getting a lot more people killed. A shooting defender should put a bullet in the head of evil before a countdown of 1 enters the mind. The threat should be over before anybody even realizes it started. That is why having an armed society is the best way to deal with the realities of evil.

There is no reason to contemplate the nature of a villain when they show they are willing to harm innocent people just minding their business. Laws should be clear on the side of gun owners willing to be that stop against threats at a moment’s notice. We want more Jack Wilson’s carrying guns. Whatever we might say about experiments in modern life where we have taught too many people to be parasitic in nature, that stealing, and bad behavior are forms of valor, such as what was suggested in the recent film “Joker’ we shouldn’t be surprised when hopeless losers in life are attracted to the antics of evil and consider using fear as leverage in the games of life. When we make it so that a clear definition of good and evil is blurred with addictions to pornography, drug abuse, and a social state where government takes the place of good parents, we should expect some to go too far and to fall off the edge and become dangerous. And to that warning, we should know that this one shooter at the Texas church is only the tip of the iceberg. That there are many tens of thousands just like him thinking of doing the same, only the next time it may be a school, a shopping mall, or a place of business. And when they make that mistake, someone needs to be there to stop them with a gun and a quick bullet to the head to end the thought and intention of evil that always follows.

It’s time to stop playing patty cake with anti-gun activists who sympathize with evil then want to disarm us to defend ourselves from their Frankenstein monsters. Those on the left who experiment with these false political philosophies build these monsters which we must defend ourselves from and it’s time to stop giving them a seat at the table as equal partners and to call things as they always have been. Guns are part of the solution especially when they are in the hands of skilled users. A person comfortable with a gun is one of the safest people in the world to be around, not the other way. Guns aren’t the danger; it’s trusting a system that is intent to build social monsters that is. And protesting gun use on their creations isn’t “fringe,” it’s actually the most patriotic thing you can do. And we should be doing a lot more of it in 2020.

Rich Hoffman

Donald Trump is Fighting Back the way Teddy Roosevelt and Thomas Jefferson did

First of all, we are not a democracy, so dying in darkness has nothing to do with the current situation regarding President Trump and his declassification of the documents used against him politically by Democrats to attempt an overthrow of his election. We are a republic which requires smart people to prevail at the end of the day in a representative fashion to manage a country. This concept of “rule by the people” doesn’t work because not all people are smart or good at movement. A simple majority vote simply leads to communism then anarchy and really aren’t conducive to good government, which is really what is behind the attempt to destroy the Trump administration at the outset. Because people who essentially wanted to destroy the American Republic and replace it with something more socialist knew that Trump represented a turn away from the typical Democrat. So they did everything they could to destroy him and anybody connected with him.

I am happy every day these days, most of them anyway. Trump is running the country the way I have wanted for my entire life. He does and says what I’ve always wanted to see because anybody who looks could see what kind of game was going on in Washington D.C. They weren’t working for us as American taxpayers, they considered themselves above our station and that their political view of the world was rooted in making the presidency into a kind of king’s court for which they were members. The rest of us were mere peons, which I never accepted as a reality, and is the root of my political interest. I’ve always been interested in presidential politics, going back into my grade school days. While a lot of kids were trying to sneak of copy of Penthouse from the local bookstore that they were too young to purchase themselves, I was reading presidential biographies about life in the White House. They only ones who ran the presidency the way I thought it should be done was Thomas Jefferson and then later Teddy Roosevelt. I never personally had an interest in a president who just wanted to get along with everyone. I wanted someone who wanted to fight for a small government appetite at the top office, and Trump has clearly offered himself to perform that task so I feel a need to be protective of his efforts. As I talked about here many years ago, the Edmund Morris Theodore Roosevelt Trilogy which took many years to produce is one of the best collections of books on Roosevelt ever produced. I think President Trump however is far better than Roosevelt. But I was reminded of how important Roosevelt was with the very recent book by Dan Abrams called Theodore Roosevelt for the Defense which was just released a few days ago. It was a great book about the kind of character Roosevelt was and why he was important to American life at a critical time in our history.

And it will go down in history what a great president that Trump has been. Once the cameras get cold and forget about their daily ambitions to over-throw the country one news story at a time, Trump will be remembered as one of the best American presidents without question. And one of the most heroic moments of it won’t be the way he stood up to world leaders looking to sap us all dry anyway possible, but that he rooted out insurrection attempts within our own government. As Jefferson said, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny in government.” Or how about this little gem of a thought, “I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labour of the industrious.” Or on the nature of republic government as opposed to just flat rate democracy, “Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.” And this one is one of my favorites, “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

I think we can all agree that Thomas Jefferson was hardly a crazy radical and was one of the greatest American presidents. Jefferson was well read and very interested in being a top contributor intellectually to the spirt of American government. And Roosevelt was much the same, he loved to read and was very, very educated. But while Jefferson liked to think and philosophize, Roosevelt liked to fight. He just thrived off conflict with other people which really improved our government for a while. He liked to fight so much that he stepped away from the Republican Party just to spite the party boss at the time and went on to help found the Progressive Party to get back at his rivals—which turned out to be a disaster. But that’s a story for another time. What matters is that he brought the will to fight and a vast intelligence to the White House and that held our government together at a critical time. Trump isn’t crazy about reading, but he is very smart and was excessively accomplished before he ever came to office and his love of fighting is very much an important attribute to his election. People like me voted for him not out of any desire for racism, or ignorance. I doubt there are many people on the political left who are as accommodating of ambition no matter what country it comes from as I am. And I seriously doubt many of them read as many books as I do, or write about the benefits of our republic as me. And I will say gladly that the insurrection against President Trump can’t go unmatched. He has to kick some ass, I expect him to, as do millions of his supporters. That’s why we elected him. Its better to have the fight legally through elections than with guns in the streets, which is where we were headed. I have no intention of accepting any form of socialism in our government. What we do have I consider unacceptable. More of it simply isn’t an option.

This is exactly the moment I talked about a few years ago, where I stated that the Democrat Party likely would come to an end. They can only rule by force, and by cheating because the American people who are actually smart are not with them, regardless of political ideology. Even with the incubation contributors of colleges toward liberalism, and our horrendous public education system which is essentially a 12 year advertisement for socialism, there were enough people who supported Donald Trump for president because of all the reasons we knew of regarding a government that had lost touch with what they should have been doing as elected representatives all along. The Democrats had lost that connection more than anybody, and as I said, I don’t think they’ll survive. And with how they all collaborated to remove Trump from office, there were many crimes committed, and that will bring them all to a much-deserved end. And the beginning of that end was the Trump declassification of the documents that prove all their plots of insurrection to be true. Now William Barr has the green light to bring the Justice Department down on those insurgents and they will get everything they deserve, because we elected a president who wouldn’t just take it. But would fight back the way we have always wanted to.

Rich Hoffman

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

Movie Review of ‘Snowden”: Make the kid a deal and put him to work

I have often thought of Oliver Stone as a brilliant screenwriter, climaxing with the movie Scarface starring Al Pacino.  As a director, I liked JFK and Natural Born Killers—which I thought were very ambitious.  I also liked his movie The Doors for the style of his approach to the subject.  But too often, Stone fizzles out in the second act and his movies never live up to the hype.  Art and activism are tricky bedfellows and most of the time the result just isn’t very good—so when he brought out Snowden just before the 2016 election as an obvious appeal to get a pardon for Edward Snowden stuck in Moscow with his longtime girlfriend unable to return back to the United States due to charges of treason and espionage—I wasn’t all that excited to see it.  However, due to the recent Wikileaks dump from the CIA called Vault 7 I thought it was time to at least see what all the fuss was about and learn the back story of Snowden.  Disappointingly, the last act was flat, as most Oliver Stone movies have been for years where the big payoff sort of sputtered out the moment that Snowden learned that you could turn on a laptop and watch women undressing in their bedrooms.  After that the story was really about a young twenty something who had his sensibilities hurt and had lost his nerve.  A story that was meant to show Snowden as a hero instead showed to me a 29-year-old genius who didn’t know how to handle a veiled threat from the upper levels of the CIA.

When Snowden’s bosses at the CIA let the young contractor know that they had been watching him in his private time he showed a naiveté that couldn’t match his big brain and the two things crashed into each other. Snowden had been given too much access to too much at too early of an age.  That scene based on real life was essentially the moment from the John Grisham novel—The Firm where a bright young prospect is nurtured along by older and wiser mentors only to have them reveal that they have control over every aspect of his life.  It’s essentially a hazing ritual that goes on in just about every place on earth that deals with the flow of money—where gatekeepers want to let someone who might be able to knock them out of a job in a few years, know that they are in control until they decide to hand over the reins.  According to Stone’s movie on Snowden—the kid got cold feet and let his mind erode away his logic.  No, I don’t like that the CIA and FBI are spying on everything we do as Americans, but there is a better way to make the case than what Snowden did out of a neurotic grasp on reality.

One thing that did surprise me was how determined Snowden was to become a special forces trooper, and once he broke his legs joined the CIA. During his entry interview, he was asked what his influences were—artistically, and he stated pretty much verbatim what I would have said, Joseph Campbell, Star Wars, Ayn Rand and Thoreau.  I also didn’t know that Snowden was a pretty straight-laced conservative who didn’t drink or smoke. After the first act I was pretty excited about Edward Snowden—he seemed to me to be a freedom fighter of a reasonable caliber.

But after watching him with his liberal girlfriend who was a sweet girl, but dreadfully naive—then with his co-workers, I realized who the guy was—and he was no hero. He is an excessively smart guy who essentially flew too close to the sun, and his wings melted. Down to earth he fell as The Guardian newspaper from England broke the story which they knew would embarrass the United States who was obviously struggling with a rogue government that had become the Deep State.  There are a lot of parasites out there in the media who want with every fiber of their essence to see any American do anything to embarrass their country even if its justified.  Because they are jealous of America and its reach into and around the world.

Now that the act is done however, there are lessons of plenty to go around. Our intelligence people in the federal government have assumed that everyone wanted to make that deal for security which I illustrated recently in an article about James Comey—and I’m not one of those people.  I don’t need some pinhead in the CIA to protect me from a terrorist.  If I see one, I’ll take care of it—better and cleaner than those idiots.  I practically begged some terrorist in Paris recently to attack me—I was wearing my cowboy hat around a radical poverty-stricken Muslim neighborhood and there were no takers.  These terrorists aren’t nearly as tough as the people in the CIA want to make them out to appear.  The CIA dramatizes everything so that they can get funding and more power—just like everyone else.  And when Snowden was confronted with an invasion of his privacy at the start of the third act of the Stone movie—he should have turned the tables on his bosses.  That would have been the manly thing to do—I would have gathered up pictures of those CIA heads in every compromising position and published them for all to see with even the hint of a threat—instead of overreacting and doing the whole—“I’ll show you” thing and reveal every state secret.  Needless to say, I couldn’t relate to how Snowden handled things in the second part of the film—he went from being very much in control and determined, to being a beaten young man under the emotional manipulation of a liberal girlfriend.   As I said about her, she was sweet and would have been a good match for someone with a fraction of Snowden’s ambitions, and ultimately she likely changed him to the point that he didn’t have the sensibility to work for the CIA anymore seeing people blown up on deserted streets in Syria as designated terrorist cells complete with collateral damage.

The undercurrent of the Snowden film which could have been good—but wasn’t—was that America had no right meddling in other country’s affairs—which of course we do. When other countries don’t solve their own problems, their immigrants come knocking on our doorsteps—so to protect our own nation—we have to go into nations that still entertain socialism, communism, and extreme religions and do what we can to diffuse bad guys planning to harm Americans domestically—and if left alone to their own devices will steal planes and run them into buildings, or bomb us in our many public gatherings as a punishment for embracing capitalism.  Snowden as a conservative changed during the film into something of a millennial crybaby and Stone seized on that aspect of the young man rather than that earlier much more conservative person.  Snowden’s character arch went from something likable to something rather pathetic and I blame the CIA for being second-handers and latching onto the kid so fast because they were essentially out of ideas themselves.

I am all for dismantling the Deep State which was revealed by Snowden and most recently caught manipulating the Presidency of Donald Trump but I’m not willing to throw the baby out with the bath water. If I were Trump I’d make Snowden a deal, I’d prosecute him for sure under Jeff Sessions and make him go through the embarrassment of public scrutiny.  But I’d put him into community service as an intelligence operative for a fraction of the cost of what he’s worth as a brilliant mind for 30 years.  A little freedom cheaply paid is better than rotting in prison, and so long as he’s in Russia, or other places—he’s helping other bad guys out there beef up their personal security and he’s not working on behalf of the United States. With a mind like Snowden—he deserves a second chance not for his benefit, but for the benefit of our country.   But his work would have to be more community service at a low wage instead of being thrown in jail only to be useless.  It’s good to keep enemies close, and Snowden should be in the United States doing work toward the next generation of threats instead of letting people like Oliver Stone make movies like Snowden to support in an indirect way George Soros’ open border network.  Yes, it’s a complicated problem but the solution is very easy.  Make a deal with the kid and put him to work limiting his freedom for decades—and we’ll all be better off.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

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

cropped-img_0202.jpg

Saying “Yes”: ‘Ian up for Whatever’ Superbowl Bud Light commercial

Obviously, I have lived a colorful life.  I have something to say about just about anything and everything and that ability was carved out of my life experience.  Hey, it’s the Superbowl time of year—I love watching that game and the ceremonial nature that America dedicates to the event, so let’s have a little fun.  I loved several commercials during the game but I particularly enjoyed the new Bud Light commercial “Ian Up for Whatever.”  I knew from the moment that the young lady asked Ian–just a normal guy sitting in a sportsbar–that if she gave him a free Bud Light would be up for anything that followed–she was playing the role of the mythic goddess figures of the past and that Ian was in for an adventure.  There have been many times when life has asked similar questions, and my typical reaction is “YES,” because you never know what kind of adventure comes next—but to get there you always have to say “YES.”

That’s the gist of things in Bud Light’s new “Ian Up For Whatever” Super Bowl commercial—a star-studded spectacle involving hidden cameras and wave after wave of celebrity cameos.

The true star of the commercial, however, is a man named “Ian” who finds himself swept up in a sequence of wild events bordering on the unimaginable, but not quite as crazy as the uninitiated might believe.

Things begin with Ian sitting alone at a bar. He’s approached by a pretty girl named Kelly, who introduces herself and takes a seat. Within moments, Ian’s new friend holds up a Bud Light and asks a single, somewhat ominous question.

“If I give this to you, are you up for whatever happens next?” Kelly asks.

“Uh, I think so,” Ian responds, obviously thinking that Kelly was coming on to him.

That’s how it starts—a night of limousines, twin parties and more Arnold Schwarzenegger ping-pong than ever conceived possible.  Actually, that was my favorite part.

Ian receives a new jacket, courtesy of Friday Night Lights star Minka Kelly.

He also finds himself with comedian-musician Reggie Watts, who has been stuffed into a DJ booth inside the Hummer stretch limo designated to chauffeur Ian about New York for the evening.

The one prevailing tie in the commercial is the presence of Bud Light bottles, which Ian and company constantly have in hand. There’s also the omnipresent eye of the commercial’s directors and coordinators, who have the entire experience planned down to the moment and wired for video and sound.

In all, “Ian Up For Whatever” is an impressive feat of planning and videography. Any number of mishaps could’ve turned this commercial into a nightmare, but judging by the final product, things went rather swimmingly.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1943450-bud-light-releases-new-super-bowl-xlviii-ian-up-for-whatever-commercial

I could tell a number of stories where similar things have happened to me.  It is often surprising how a willingness for adventure can pave the way for the unfathomable.  Those events may not happen quite in the same way as Ian’s experience—and they may not involve such New York cultural pleasure, but they are often as outrageous and cryptically elusive to the mind of a planned individual.  The human spirit often carries events beyond conception, and the real magic of life is often beyond those borders.  I have been to such places many times—so much that nothing would shock me now.  Where Ian was amazed, I would have been much more flat lined.  The limo would not have surprised me, playing “baby tennis” with Arnold Schwarzenegger wouldn’t have been strange or finding oneself onstage with a major music group, relative to my personal life.   Crazy things do happen, and they often start with the word “Yes.”

A good lesson from that commercial is to say “yes,” a bit more often.  When your boss places before you a tough challenge……………..say, “yes.”  You’d be surprised what might happen.  When your car starts sputtering because you are almost out of gas, say “yes” and keep the petal depressed.  See what happens when you run out of fuel a mile short of a gas station.  Many adventures are likely to transpire.  When you pass by a restaurant that strikes your interest, say “yes” and pull in and try it out.  Stepping out of a routine can be very exciting.  Say “yes” more often and let adventure into your life, and you will discover that Ian’s experience is not that unique.

Good things don’t always happen, but I still say yes to many things, because I love adventure.  It is adventure that has filled my mind with so many opinions, and given voice to so many topics.  I have a story for everything when I talk to younger people because in my past I have said “yes” to many outrageous adventures even the ones that appeared to be kamikaze runs.  I always figured I was cleaver enough to avoid death, and I have been right more times than chance can take credit for.

Because of those adventures I love my life.  I love every day of it and I don’t have regrets.  Even bad decisions were part of the “saying yes” process, and the adventures that followed have led to tremendous amounts of experience which translates to personal wisdom.  In this life, wisdom is capital—more powerful capital than gold, or the perceived values of finance.  Wisdom can gain finances, but finances cannot gain wisdom.  Wisdom is by far more valuable, and wisdom can only be obtained by living life—and to live life, you have to “say yes,” to things.

A guy who reads here a lot will recognize this story immediately but I remember a trip to Panama City with him which nearly mirrored this Bud Light commercial.  It started by “saying yes” to a cold March evening, a complicated engineering problem, and a political stalemate that needed to be broken loose.  It ended hours later over a thousand miles away with me playing football on a beach after jumping off a pier from about 25 feet and breaking my ankle in the sand.   I wrapped the ankle and continued playing football anyway under the moonlight next to the ocean.  We slept with a tent half constructed next to a harbor, and solved our problem over breakfast at a Burger King.  We returned to Cincinnati within 48 hours of leaving for our next meeting and solved all our problems with a fresh perspective.  Adventure is good for building wisdom.

There are hundreds of those types of stories, but most don’t involve the kind of elements seen in that Bud Light commercial.  The Panama City one did, which is the reason for the reference.  But all such adventures lead to the ability to have wisdom—something young people don’t have until it is developed.  At the end of his adventure in the Bud Light commercial Ian was wiser than was when he simply agreed to a girl in a bar to accept whatever happened next.  Adventure happens all the time to many people, and adventure builds wisdom—but before either can be obtained a person has to be willing to “say yes.”  Lucky for Ian, he did.  But you too Dear Reader can experience adventure in the strangest places and times.  All you have to do is, “say yes.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

THE NOTHING

For years now I have wondered if Glenn Beck was getting his show topics based on my articles here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.  What he speaks about and what I write about seemed to parallel closely over a long period of time.  I know I don’t have time to watch and listen to Glenn Beck in much detail.  My exposure to Beck is usually what people send to me in the form of clips through email.  On Beck’s end, given his success over the last 5 years, I’m sure he has the same problem that I do only 100 times worse, so I doubt he has time to read my articles—unless somebody he trusts sends them to him.  But it is beyond coincidence that he has arrived at just about the same place that I have in regard to public education at virtually the same time.  The only rational explanation is that people like Glenn Beck, Judge Napolitano, John Stossel and of course myself have arrived at the same independent conclusions based on our observations of public education because logic has delivered us to truth’s door.  The conclusion of those observations that is difficult for many to hear is that if you love your child, you should take them far away from public education.  If you love your country, you should take your children out of public education.  If you love humanity, you should take your children out of public education.  In short, public education is a terribly corrosive social element that is destroying everything we are as human beings toward an aim that is beyond human comprehension.  Watch Glenn Beck state the same things I have been saying for quite a long time now:

When I first worked with No Lakota Levy to reform the cost impact of our local government school I didn’t feel so strongly until I learned how mindless the collectivism in public education truly was.  But a few years into the levy fighting efforts and three elections later which were ignored by the administrators, I began to realize that Glenn Beck’s statements above were true, and a sad realization.  It was actually hard for me to accept and I have never been a fan of public education or collective endeavors of any kind.  Even in my own school days when many of the coaches wanted me to be on their track and football teams I was always hesitant because of the collective nature of the “team” concept.  Even as a young man I never yielded my individuality to a collective endeavor—so with that position in mind it was hard for me to realize that public education needed to be scrapped in America in favor of a system that is independently competitive, and innovative.  Anything attached to government control needs to be rejected and since The Department of Education was created at the federal level in 1979, public education has quickly degraded into a propaganda arm of progressive causes.  But why is this so?

The best explanation for the degradation tendency of public education and collectivism in general cannot be found in the rally cry toward socialism or communism that comes from the political leanings of progressives—it’s a far deeper philosophical problem than those types of ideologies.  To date, the best explanation behind the type of evil that is in the wake of public education was best defined in the fantasy film The Never Ending Story which came out in the 1980s just a few years after the creation of the DOE.  The Never Ending Story is a fantasy about a young hero who must slay a fathomless enemy called The Nothing and the pursuit of the hero’s journey for the main character is to learn that it is imagination that destroys The Nothing.  The way to destroy the evil that is destroying the world is to recharge the world with imagination—(thought).

Childhood mythologies often contain within them the stories of morality that all of society needs to keep order to their own value system.  As anyone who reads me often understands, mythology is the most important ingredient that a society produces which is why I so openly support the Star Wars franchise, because the product of Lucasfilm is in the manufacturing of values society is hungry for.  The reason that fantasy is so popular culturally in movies and books is because humankind seeks to counter the effects of the mythical “Nothing” which imposes itself on their lives—as defined in The Never Ending Story.  WATCH THE BELOW CLIP to learn more about The Nothing.

When I was in the fourth grade my class went on a field trip to see the Cincinnati Pops at Music Hall play a symphonic rendition of John Williams’s music for Star Wars.  Hanging behind the orchestra was a giant projection screen which displayed slides of the movie characters during the performance and the entire building rumbled with cheers as each slide arrived in procession celebrating the movie that had taken America by storm in 1977.  Star Wars to all my young classmates from schools all over Cincinnati were being enchanted with the values of the music and the film behind the characters that contained limitless imagination and boundless energy.  I thought the experience was a wonderful one.  But later, when we returned back to the school on a silent school bus and were back in the seats of our classroom our teacher unleashed a fury of anger at how inconsiderate we were for cheering on the heroes of Star Wars and ignoring the efforts of the members of the symphony.  Even as a young fellow in the fourth grade I shook my head at the obvious ignorance of the teacher. I knew that the teacher represented The Nothing well before The Never Ending Story so accurately placed a name on the type of evil she was spewing.  Her values taught to her as an educator pursing the field of instruction through years of college thought the symphony was more valuable than the characters the music reflected—her values came from The Nothing.  She valued the collective symphony as the source of goodness behind Star Wars instead of the individual characters who were the real heroes of the afternoon.  The music only supported the plight of the heroes.  She misidentified the value system of the entire event.

Years later when I first saw The Never Ending Story I had an awwh haaa moment while watching it, and it hit me most when I was first married and had a young child of my own sitting on my lap looking for family friendly programming to show my daughter.  When the wolf explained what The Nothing was, I immediately thought of the political world in the wake of the Reagan Presidency, my personal experiences with public education, the relationship between public sector jobs and private sector and all the drama of local politics.  The situation in America was not quite as bad as it is now so the impact of The Nothing was not yet in place so obviously.  I could see The Nothing even then as clearly as can be expected for something that doesn’t exists–because even a blank space is “something.”  The Nothing can only be seen for what it destroys, not for any mass it holds.  It can only be measured by what is missing from one moment to the next.

Now, in 2013 many years after the release of The Never Ending Story following 4 years of George Bush senior, 8 years of Clinton, 8 years of Bush Jr., and now 5 years of Barack Obama as Presidents of The United States, it is easy to see that The Nothing is moving easily through the world and it uses people like the wolf did in The Never Ending Story to carry the message of The Nothing.  The Nothing seeks to destroy thinking.  It is what Ayn Rand calls “evasion” in the philosophy of Objectivism.  In mythologies like Star Wars it is called The Dark Side of the Force. But in The Never Ending Story, it is most accurately described as “The Nothing.”

The products of The Nothing are all forms of collectivism which seek to strip away individual thought and action on behalf of a greater good.  The greater good is never on behalf of individual freedom, it is always in service of The Nothing—the evil behind the evil that some cultures call The Devil, Sith Lords, demons, or any face of sinister display. The attempt to articulate such collectivism with a face only names the crime—but does not define the origin of the crime, or the tendency to succumb to it.  In public education young people are stripped away of their minds and are vehicles for The Nothing which has slowly destroyed the entire world right in front of our faces.  No one person controls The Nothing.  But individual people dance to its strings just as the wolf did in The Never Ending Story.  In that context it could be said that The Nothing is behind government seeking to increase taxes forcing parents to have two incomes to accomplish what one used to—to strip mothers away from their children leaving kids open and vulnerable to The Nothing of public education.  It is The Nothing that moves the mouth of Barack Obama seeking to place every child in America during age four into pre-school so that a mind numb teacher can begin to teach young people to turn off their thoughts, and imaginations in dedication to The Nothing.  The Nothing is often difficult to see.  But in public education, it is evident for those with eyes that are open and willing to take notice.  Public schools—government schools–are dedicated to The Nothing like a religion.  To see The Nothing speak to people and learn what is NOT there.  That is how you know The Nothing is at work.

It is The Nothing that Pink Floyd sang about in their Wall album.  Many pot smoking patrons declared that the movie The Wall could only be understood when they were “high,” (mentally impaired, intoxicated—or otherwise inebriated) which has been the running dialogue among young people for the last 30 years.  But for me, as a young man of 16, 17, and 18 years old who didn’t do drugs of any kind, I understood The Wall on my first viewing, and knew the protagonist was fighting against The Nothing ultimately.  Pot smokers could only begin to wrap their minds around freedom from The Nothing when they were “stoned” and had turned off the rules of society.  This is why people do drugs and get drunk, so they can have momentary release from the grip of The Nothing.  But when the intoxication wears off, The Nothing has them again, and the poor souls become mindless dogs lobbying for more school levies, advocating more socialism under President Obama, and seeking to expand government so that it destroys each and every individual on planet Earth.

I know that many reading this will wonder how I can connect all these dots, and may even question whether or not I am even sane—because relative to their social position, these are outlandish claims.  For many people fantasies like The Never Ending Story or Star Wars are just entertainment and the lessons of mythology contained within those stories are dead to them.  Those are the kinds of people who are the wolves in our society who help The Nothing destroy the world without knowing it.  Like the teacher from the fourth grade who represented The Nothing yelling at our class her embarrassment of students clapping and cheering the images on a slide show instead of the live collective symphony of the Cincinnati Pops, The Nothing destroys by ripping away the source of goodness through deferment.  The teacher played her role in destroying the imagination of her students year by year until the kids were less mentally than what they were when they first entered kindergarten.  Teachers like that fourth grade instructor plant the seeds of The Nothing so that the adult of 50 years of age has less of a mind than the 3-year-old, because The Nothing lives in their minds and eats their thoughts.  It doesn’t mean the 50-year-old does not have statistical knowledge.  But the ability to think independently has been destroyed in such individuals—and that is the result of The Nothing.

When Glenn Beck says to take children out of public schools he is saying the same thing that I have been saying and for the same reasons.  However, it is not just collectivism that is the ultimate threat, but it is The Nothing that is behind the collectivism that we must fight against.  The way to beat The Nothing is with thought and independent values produced by a mind free of collectivism.  That was the lesson of The Never Ending Story which never does end.  We are living the story today as we have in the past and will in the future.  It never goes away; The Nothing will always seek to destroy mankind with the obscure allure of collectivism.  It takes an imagination to see the truth and understand the shape of The Nothing.  It also takes an imagination to apply thought and mythology to the legal world of the functioning adult which is what I spend a lot of time doing here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.  Just because it is difficult for many to grapple with, does not mean the evil does not exist.  To stop that evil, every parent who claims to truly love their child should pull their children from public schools as soon as possible and find an alternative.  If parents do not do this, they will subject their children to a doomed life in service of The Nothing, which already holds the hearts and minds of 99.999999999999999999999% of the adult population.  Only a few—like Glenn Beck has managed to escape and report what is obvious to those not consumed by The Nothing—that public education is the vehicle that is used to destroy our children—and the problem is far bigger than most people are willing to accept.  But The Nothing still is there hunting us all for its collective consumption in a quest that will last all eternity if left unchecked.

It is because of what I have learned about public education that my feelings have evolved over time to seek answers for these modern problems in the myths that have built our society.  The logic of political life does not contain the answers—yet the childhood stories of our past contains the wisdom needed to understand the obscure problem of our present—why our children are growing ignorant over time instead of more intelligent and why our adults walk around like mindless zombies full of arrogance due to their years of exposure to The Nothing.  At golf courses they add up their scores over a day time beverage and whisk their children to and fro soccer practice thinking they are parents of the year—only to discover too late that they have delivered their children to the gates of doom.  The trivia of the adult, and school levy supporter who blindly believes that public education is the savior of society, are simply agents of The Nothing who reside behind all forms of collectivism and is instructed to our world population through public education universally committed to the kind of evil that only occupied the minds of childhood nightmares when the purity of youth could still tell the difference.

For the facts to sustain the assertions above click the link below:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/07/cscope-exposing-the-nations-most-controversial-public-school-curriculum-system/

That is how bad the system is.  If you have a child in public school, they are being trained by those methods.  Every child in a school district is being exposed to these things, and it is our tax money from property values that pay for it.

Rich Hoffman

“If they attack first………..blast em’!”

www.tailofthedragonbook.com