The Politics of Gun Control: Why Republicans shouldn’t give an inch to Democrats

It’s time that we talk about political strategy for a bit and where we go from hear on gun control issues regarding the Republican Party. It is obvious that the expectation from everyone after the mass shootings in Ohio and Texas recently that it is Republicans who have to come to the center and to move in a gun control direction. And I certainly understand the temptation to act on that pressure which is obvious on President Trump and the Ohio Governor Mike DeWine. In DeWine’s case, I like the guy, but he is not what I’d call a solid conservative. He’s wavered on lots of things over the years including the recent gas tax that he put forth to pay for our roads in Ohio. He’s a generally good person who wants to do something just like everyone else when a mass shooting occurs. For most people a law seems like a good idea even if it would be just a token measure. And for east coast liberals who have learned to be conservatives over the years, like President Trump and his sons, they are thinking like negotiators, where our side gives a little, then their side will give a bit too. But that’s not how this game works and we all know it, especially in the middle part of the country where I live. Rush Limbaugh gets it and he talked about it during his first hour on the show he did on August 9th, and I agree with him emphatically. President Trump and Governor DeWine should not work with liberals to pass even more background checks and to start down the path of “red flag” laws. Authorities should have been doing their jobs in the first place. More laws won’t do anything to save anybody in the future. But it will strengthen the anti-gun liberals who will control the message and for that, it will be a very negative thing for Republicans.

Remember several years ago, I’m pretty sure it was 2016 if you want to look it up in these archives that I predicted on WAAM radio the end of the Democrat Party by 2021. Well, we are right on path. I also said then that the country would split into two more political parties that would come out of the Republican side. You can see now how that party would evolve, with politicians like Mike DeWine becoming the new liberal side of the party where someone like me would be on the conservative side traditionally recognized. As Democrats move further to the left ideologically most people won’t want to go with them leaving the anarchy wing of the party to flounder with little support and an eventual collapse. Joe Biden doesn’t have a chance in spite of what polling is saying. He will struggle through the primaries and if he meets Trump head to head, he’ll implode due to his tired old nature. And he’s the best that Democrats have. When they don’t win back the presidency or the House Democrats will implode as hopeless fanatics.

Not to mention what is coming out of the Bruce Ohr 3025 release. It is going to take most people a while to digest what the FBI did against an American election that saw Trump win in 2016 in spite of their efforts. The bodies are really going to fall in liberal circles on that one because it was the FBI that had become politically active in helping elect them at the cost to Republicans. Democrats are going to have big problems as a party coming out of this next election and the legal reality of the FBI fall out. The Democrats are blowing apart so the history of any bipartisan support will fall on deaf ears. There is no reason to do it. There is nothing politically to gain by working with Democrats this year or next year. The photo opportunities will be a liability not a help and even though it makes sense to Trump and others to give a little on gun control since more than 60% of voters support some measure of it, the battlefield of politics is changing dramatically and it is quite clear that in the aftermath that 60% number won’t mean the same thing. It is far better for Republicans to push for the causes of social failure for which Democrats have played such a large part than to feed them with bipartisan debate to make them feel like they are at a table that they lost long ago.

The problem with gun control is that it is not the right of government to give or take it away. Reading recently the Ohio Constitution again, which I posted one of my favorite sections on Instagram, the right to own guns and to use them not just within my state, but the 2nd Amendment in general is to retake control of our government if it should go asunder. And when the FBI gets caught doing what it did to President Trump the evidence is obvious that we are already there. If our election system doesn’t work and the government employees for whatever reason feel that they have a right to manipulate that election and pick winners and losers abusing the vast power that we have given them, then they aren’t going to give that power back when they get caught. They are going to abuse that power to continue to use it and if they have to kick down the doors of their political enemies to do that while calling CNN so they can record the embarrassing details, as they did with the aide to the President, Roger Stone, that practice will continue and even get worse. Guns aren’t there as a right given by government. They are there to keep an honest government with the threat of taking that power away if they become corrupt. Nobody is going to leave a public office at the end of a barrel of a BB gun. No, we need the kind of guns if not more so that the military uses, because the military operates on behalf of our government that is supposed to be working for us. But if that changes, there is no other recourse but removal from office at gun point, because laws at that point fail to inspire good conduct.

Working with Democrats on gun control only feeds them political power which Republicans have no reason to surrender. I personally blame Democrats for all this violence, entirely. They are always talking about dog whistles that Trump is flashing to his base in speeches, which I understand the psychology behind it. But its not him that’s doing it. Trump reflects his base. Democrats use dog whistles all the time and usually it’s the Hollywood actor community that dispatches it into popular culture through entertainment channels, such as this whole issue on plastic straws and environmentalism in general, or the toxicity of masculinity in the culture of the sexes. It was dog whistles controlled by Democrats that set off those shooters and they know it. The chances of all three of these recent mass shootings occurring as close together as they were in time, and by the age ranges and personality types of the shooters themselves, they are creations of the political left and they heard the whistle. Not to get conspiratorial about CIA mind control devices or anything. But the kind of hateful rhetoric that came from the mouth of Democrats with no answer to Trump’s many victories is enough to push young shooters like those kids over the edge and into a mass killer category. There were plenty of red flags, but when you have an organization like the FBI willing to help Democrats, how can you trust them to do their jobs correctly when we know better now. If we don’t want to look at the evolving case of Bruce Ohr, then lets look at the San Bernadine murderers where the FBI allowed the destruction of that crime scene by the media to cover up the obvious case of domestic terrorism so that the story wouldn’t explode with even more damning evidence that would have been embarrassing to the liberal ledger. Its not just a few people at the top as hard as it is to admit, but all through the organization.

The bottom line is that things are changing, dramatically in politics. We are looking at the end of a political party and DeWine and Trump would do well to let it die. Don’t give them a little false hope by working with them on bipartisan gun control that will be Republicans giving away value where Democrats have nothing to give, and never will. They will not help with the wall, or any infrastructure. They only want to say that they forced Republicans to move on gun control against the warnings of the NRA. That’s all they care about. So forget about them, destroy them in the upcoming election, then lets see how the country settles its new political landscape. The best gun control is to improve the social aspects of our people. Stick with that, we certainly don’t need more laws that nobody cares about or respects. Don’t empower Democrats by showing the world that they still have command of anything. Let them die the death they have made for themselves, then, and only then, can we have a real conversation.

Rich Hoffman

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

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ: Understanding why America has a gun culture and to the level that it needs

Not that I ever questioned the meanings of our various constitutions, the United States one, and the one from my home state of Ohio, but it was good to read them anyway fresh off the calls for gun control that occurred recently in Texas and Ohio, even by members of the Republican Party. In some cases, it was even Trump supporters who were trying to justify new bans for “assault weapons” and mental health red flag laws. I’m glad that I particularly read the Ohio Constitution again because it is written so beautifully and is so clear on the matter. Guns were never gifted out by a nice government for target practice recreation. They are part of our constitutions both state and federal because there is likely going to occur many times in the history of our country a period where we would need guns to take back our government and instill new management. And with them controlling our military, people would need equal firepower to rise up against them and stop them. That is why there are 100 round magazines available for people to purchase and why there are silencers that sell next to beef jerky. Because we may need them to rip our government out of the hands of bad people and return it to a constitutional republic instead of some chaos driven democratic socialism that is hell bent on anarchy then total control of our way of life.

I am not one of those ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ types who are tattooing the words on my body or flying a flag in my garage warning off the government with the words “come and take it,” asking for a fight. The Greek phrase comes from the Battle of Thermopylae, which was recently popularized by the movie 300. It’s the battle where the Persian Empire of Xerxes was attacking Greece out of revenge for the previous defeat of a Persian emperor and they were met with a small force that did well as they were greatly outnumbered but ultimately fought to the death. Our modern equivalent to that statement and sentiment is “Remember the Alamo” for much the same reasons. In both of those cases the emphasis is on death and being outnumbered and I reject both of those ideas. In our present state, we outnumber them by a lot and I have no plans on dying. When you are better than they are, smarter than they are, and all other things are equal, why would we be the ones to die in such an engagement? So I am not one of those who use such phrases to articulate my position on guns. I’d rather them not come and try to take it because I wouldn’t want to hurt anybody.

However, what is being proposed by all sides of the political discourse on gun control as a result of these mass shootings is talk of government buy backs, and expanded back ground checks by the same government that obviously is doing everything it can to get rid of Donald Trump as president just aren’t on the table. For them to be we would have to trust our current government completely and just do whatever they tell us which obviously would be a dumb idea. I would argue that we are in a civil war right now. Donald Trump is the result of that war from my side against the government forces who have been making a joke of America for a long time. I prefer the election method as opposed to the armed opposition to something like what we have learned about the FBI, that they have been dirty cops picking winners and losers in the political theater, and they have been caught only because Trump was president. Many of us have known for a long time that such a thing was possible, but now we have proof. Gun control and more legislative turmoil isn’t even in the realm of consideration. We are one election away from open and hostile conflict similar to the first Civil War, the people against the government forces rather than North and South, so especially now, it is not the time to talk about gun control. We are presently fighting to keep our Republic intact from a socialist incursion. That is essentially the case of the mass shootings and why they are happening more often, the results of social decline similar to what we have seen in Venezuela. The gun violence is there to mask the Democrat failures just as Nicolas Maduro does in Venezuela.

It’s not that a liberal dog whistle was cast to inspire these Manchurian candidate type shooters to go on mass shooting rampages just hours a part in a period where Democrats are obviously losing in a big way to the Trump administration, and they needed to change the story. But all the kids who led these attacks are products of our liberalized public education system and are fringe leftists with limited intellectual development that I would consider deliberately functioning from clipped wings of brain development in our young people with bad educations, addictions to sex, and an over reliance on drugs, illegal and prescribed. Most of these modern victims won’t grow up to be mass shooters, but liberals know a certain percentage will, even if they don’t know them personally. It’s a numbers game and when those kids snap, Democrats are ready to make the tragedy an advantage for their side, and way too many Republicans are willing to share in the guilt and go along with the proposals to look like they are playing a bipartisan game. But its not about cooperation at all, its war and everyone knows that deep down inside. And if our government fails to protect our interests from internal domestic enemies, then we have to rely on our guns to hold our ground and take back what belongs to us—our country.

In my interactions with people, as I’ve said, I can read the Ohio Constitution or the federal Bill of Rights and understand the intent without a supreme court justice telling me what they mean. I get it, and I participate in the political system to keep the peace. I write on this blog and do many other things to do my part to keep things from getting out of hand, but to ensure that my side wins. And when I say my side, I mean the side of our founding documents and a rejection of progressive politics and the generalities of global liberalism. I also know that there are vast amounts of people who are tattooing ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ on their arms and across their backs and they mean it when they say, “come and take it.” Undoubtably when the police come to try to take their weapons away because they may be victims of some future “red flag” law they will turn them over without incident. But some of them will make the Waco incident and Ruby Ridge looking like a preschool coloring book project. There isn’t any outcome where America does like Australia or New Zealand, or anywhere in Europe and just gives over their guns and puts their blind trust into a government when we know better. Its just not going to happen.

What needs to happen as a result of these shootings is an educational issue, not a physical law that puts everyone back to sleep and gradually erodes the Second Amendment. Our founding documents specifically warn against just these kinds of intrusions on our liberties, especially by a political class that is so full of hatred and class warfare as the Democrats are. It was their activism that has turned up the pressure for which these shooters acted, whether we are talking about the psychedelic effects of marijuana legalization, broken homes where the mothers are married to government welfare checks instead of good, solid male role models, or failed liberal policies that have turned up the tension to the degree that potential mass shooters want to do something to help their “people” such as the Dayton shooter did. But their activism becomes our problem when one of these pimple-popping young people takes up guns and tries to kill a bunch of innocent bystanders. When that happens we have an obligation to stop them. And clearly the state is not equipped to protect us from such acts. We need expanded carry laws so that we can all defend each other on a moment’s notice. Because these killers are just getting started. I predict much more carnage rather than less, and the fault is in our education systems, not in the guns themselves. We have a failure of government and we are at a point where we need to replace it. We have taken steps to do so with Donald Trump. But that may not be enough. If that proves to be the case, we will need a lot more guns, a lot more ammunition capacity in our clips, and more power behind them.

Rich Hoffman

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


Republicans Should Stand By Candice Keller: Playing into Democrat strategies will just get more people killed

This is the problem with Republicans, they don’t stick together when there’s trouble, and they allow themselves to wear unearned guilt on things like these mass shootings that occurred this week. I certainly don’t think Candice Keller who represents the 53rd District in Ohio should step down for comments she made about the shooting on her Facebook account. We aren’t living in that world any more, if we ever were.

Comments made in the arena of free speech, the First Amendment should not be grounds for termination, which is precisely how liberals have wanted to set the stage, and any Republican who thinks they are doing good by calling for Candice to step down, are feeding a vast evil that is undoing all social order. It doesn’t matter how much you salute the flag or tout a record of public service, or how valiant you may think you are, if you are so quick to throw someone like Keller on the trash heap for saying her opinion of what the cause of the mass shootings are, then you are just as bad as the Democrats.

Keller is running for the senate in Ohio and given all the effort it takes to do such a thing, she should probably reconsider so that this whole thing doesn’t prolong deep into next year. There will be other elections, but she certainly shouldn’t give up her seat as a representative of the 53rd District. Who can argue that the cause of these increases in mass shootings are not caused by a breakdown in family structure, as Candice said, and that recreational marijuana and violent video games are not the cause? I think it is laughable that the video game industry is citing a 2018 study which says there is no connection between violence and video games. I play them, a lot—and I can call bullshit on that from personal experience. If we want to accurately discuss the cause of mass shootings, then we need to have an honest appraisal from everyone. Calling for more gun control doesn’t even begin to understand the cause it only deals with the effect of the matter, and that won’t get the job done. Many of the things that Candice said in her Facebook post were honest reflections that should be investigated as a cause of mass shootings.

As pointed out by Martha McCallum who did a piece on Fox News that showed most of the mass shooters from 1969 to the present were male and without fathers is a jarring statistic that should be at the lead of every story. Instead, we are supposed to live in a world of gender neutrality and avoid speaking of the matter which is likely the leading cause. Additionally, as I have pointed out frequently, marijuana use by itself isn’t a positive thing for our society, yet again, most of these mass shooters are users of the drug. Combine the elements of marijuana with depression medicine which is all too common these days in young people, and we have the potential for lots of disaster. Its one thing to be accepting of social experimentation such as with homosexual lifestyles and intoxication as if those were values worth defending, but when people start dying over the results of these social experiments, it’s a serious problem worth analyzing. Keller as a state representative certainly represents my point of view. It is pretty weak for other Republicans to turn on her the way they have out of fear of being critical of lifestyles that are at the center of the core issue of mass shootings.

Hillary Clinton threw her two cents on the heap as well showing exactly why she isn’t president. She pointed out on Twitter that other places in the world don’t have mass shootings like this and they have their own mentally ill people to deal with. We don’t of course know what causes people to become mentally ill in all cases, we just deal with the result that it exists. She said the difference is that we have guns in America which then let mentally ill people go on these mass shootings. Well, we are a free society where many of the places she is talking about in the world are not. Guns equal freedom and that danger is part of the cost of having that freedom. Having a good military and a police force doesn’t go far enough in protecting those freedoms. We may want to give ourselves that illusion, but in essence, it is the freedom of each and every one of us to own firearms and to use them to defend ourselves that keep freedom alive. And we use the First Amendment to debate so that we don’t have to use guns to defend our positions. Once people are fired for things they say, then we are playing into a vile strategy that Democrats have been trying to impose on us for many years. Voters will decide whether they want Candice Keller to continue to represent the 53rd District. She doesn’t need to step down out of some sacrifice to the liberal left.

Clearly the liberals of this country want to remove the Second Amendment and the First by instigating violence and public opinion that can allow them to acquire power without bloodshed. These attempts have been made all through history, often violently, and this latest period in our timeline is no different. Only liberals don’t want to take power by force, but rather by sentiment. If they can get Republicans to do their dirty work for them, they will. But what Candice did isn’t much different than the way Donald Trump became president. The Party may want to toe the line which liberals draw, but voters don’t. That’s why they elected him specifically. And that’s one of the reasons that voters voted for Candice Keller.

If we don’t deal with the real problem of mass shootings then they will continue, which I have been warning about for a long time. I would offer that the cost of all this social experimentation that has been instigated by the liberal side of the political spectrum hasn’t just been uncomfortable, its been very destructive to the developing minds of our youth. And now that those disturbed young people are all grown up, they are dangerous as free people. Guns are a part of a free culture because it gives people the right to defend themselves from others who might want to impose on them in some way, either politically, or socially. But with that comes a basic understanding of social value. If we don’t share those basic values, then we are going to have conflicts, which obviously we do. In a lot of ways, and this was certainly true of the kid who committed the mass killing in Dayton, liberals want to provoke this kind of violence because it gives them the changes they want. Secretly they want to see these deaths because it drives their agenda. 50 people died over the weekend in Chicago, but we don’t see those people plastered all over the newspapers. We only see that there were two mass shootings that combined killed 29 people. Yet every weekend in Chicago where guns are illegal, about that many people die, and nobody cares. They don’t care because it is the failure of liberalized culture that is the cause.

To continue to wear that mask, and to divert attention away from themselves, Democrats have been using the kindness of Republicans to share in the guilt of these tragedies. But conservatives had nothing to do with the violence. Even the El Paso murders were driven by left leaning ideology. President Trump has never said to kill immigrants. He has simply resisted the liberal strategy of overflowing our borders so fast that we can’t deal with the processing of them because Democrats need the votes to stay in power. Its as simple as that. Any neo-Nazi type of person that may be out there are just another version of a liberal. The media calls them the “alt-right” but that is far from accurate. No conservative believes in racism and one race rule, only Democrats. Democrats supported slavery; Republicans ended it. Hitler was a socialist, certainly not a conservative. And many of the vile things that are going on in our country now are not the fault of Republicans who stand for family values, good decent public conduct, and honor among friends and neighbors do not share the guilt on the mass shooting problem. Democrats do and I thought Candice Keller gave her thoughts on the matter accurately, which should be protected under the First Amendment. Not punished and thrown away just because Democrats want her to be. Until Republicans realize that is the game, we are all playing, they will continue to be victims, and mass shootings will continue without resolution.

Rich Hoffman

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


Want to Stop Mass Shootings: Declare Democrats as insane and unable to buy guns and make smoking pot a serious crime

Here is the problem with the mass gun shootings, for one, we have chemical problems due to intoxicants, depression medicine, pot, and other bad combinations that are altering decision making. The other is purely political and how those interpretations are interpreted by young, and inexperienced kids. Both shooters, Patrick Crusius from the El Paso incident and Connor Betts from Dayton were young people. As the mainstream media tried to focus the attention on a “white nationalist” movement they are missing the real problem. For instance, both shooters were Democrats, or at least leaning in that direction and were likely very influenced by the victimization culture uttered by the current crop of presidential candidates. In Crusius’ case, he was more of a traditional progressive. Below was a part of the manifesto left behind by Crusius:

“In the near future, America will have to initiate a basic universal income to prevent widespread poverty and civil unrest as people lose their jobs (to automation). Joblessness is in itself a source of civil unrest. The less dependents on a government welfare system, the lower the unemployment rate, the better. Achieving ambitious social projects like universal healthcare and UBI would become far more likely to succeed if tens of millions of defendants are removed.”

Connor Betts from Ohio was affiliated with an Against All Gods movement which is an atheist organization. He was also a pot smoker who wanted socialism and he wanted to vote for Elizabeth Warren. Those are all important aspects to the causes of school shootings. Obviously, the other shooter Crusius was a left leaning activist more on the side of what we might call an American Nazi, which to remind everyone is still on the political left of where the country is. The focus on racism that comes from the left on the political spectrum is exclusive to them. It has nothing to do with the conservative positions as they are known in America. What we are dealing with are kids who abuse drugs, have family issues, and have just come out of heavily liberalized educations in both public schools and college. They are very much the creations of the political policies of Democrats and have nothing to do with the Trump administration other than Democrats desperate to beat him in an election have turned up the utterances of desperation from their party likely pushing these pot smoking video game players out into the world with guns they know very little about to take matters in to their own hands.

Gun control isn’t even a consideration, first because constitutionally, it’s just not on the table. We have the Second Amendment to protect ourselves from losers like these guys. When political mismanagement occurs, which is certainly the case in producing young people like these killers, we need to be able to defend ourselves from them. While the police acted well in both shootings the fact remains that they can’t solve these problems fast enough, so the solution can never come from the state to end these problems. Only in dealing with the cause of these problems will, and blaming Donald Trump for pointing out the obvious problems that the political left have created, such as racism, socialist yearnings, (Conner Betts really wanted socialism) and the attacks against white males, can we begin to solve these problems. After all, if you are a white male and have been told that you are part of the problem, you have been trained to be a leftist in school, and are under the influence of drugs, what are you going to do, work hard to have a family, a steady job, and a house—or are you going to become a mass shooter and end your life on the earth in a blaze of glory?

Mass shootings are the result of failed public policy. When our society is failing in creating a youth that values life and American lifestyles you get losers like Patrick Crusius and Connor Betts. And there are likely thousands of them out there in a culture of millions, and any of them could be the next mass shooter. The state created these people so there is no way that the state could be expected to manage them through gun control or even mental deficiency detection. Any marijuana user who is also combining the effects of that drug with depression medication could be the next volatile bomb that will grab a gun and mass kill whoever is in their path.

But that has not been the narrative, the only thing anybody in the mainstream media wants to talk about is some law that might mask their failure in society in producing these kids in the first place, but it won’t solve the problem. Only in reestablishing a sense of morality will the problem of mass shootings be reduced. But there isn’t any hope when a kid like Connor Betts who doesn’t believe in any kind of god, our legal system has no reach for him. After all, how could he swear to tell the truth, nothing but the truth, so help him God? There is nothing to compel him to tell the truth to anybody so long as he has those kinds of beliefs, and once he takes such a radical step, there isn’t much to keep him from wanting to kill a bunch of people just to get revenge on his sister for some family dispute.

Specifically, Connor Betts was politically active indicating that he wanted people to vote blue, he supported “the squad” and he hated Donald Trump, instead he supported Elizabeth Warren. Given those criteria as we discuss the definitions of mental illness and if such a criterion should be established prior to gun sales we might as well propose that all Democrats are potential mass shooters and should not be able to purchase guns. Anybody calling themselves a Democrat based on the history of them should be considered a potential mass shooter and scrutinized as dangerous. If we really want to solve the problem of mass shooters, we need to look at the behavior that causes them and start acting on it.

What is most disappointing of all is that so many Democrats and other liberals jumped all over these mass shootings, which their policies caused, to propose more failures they want to impose. They are such a disaster as a group of people and based on their track record, should be considered a menace. What is even worse is that conservatives play into their hands by accepting guilt for the shooting that have nothing to do with reality. It is not immoral to support the Second Amendment. It is immoral to support pot smokers who are atheists and dream of destroying our entire civilization. Those people have decided they don’t want to be in America and live by its rules, they want to change it, to undo it, with either a godless value system or a universal anti-capitalist wage. And these attackers of our public gun free zones were born and bred in our education system and had their tempers poked by members of the Democratic party, and once they had been good and stoked, become the next killers to hit the news and attempt to get the dialogue on gun control which all Democrats want to see, for which they themselves are the threat.

Rich Hoffman

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

Gurpreet Singh is in the Butler County Jail for Murders in West Chester

So what makes a man want to kill his wife and her family, or even think about doing it? Well, only a lowlife functioning from sheer evil would even consider such a thing, and a generally stupid person who didn’t know how to navigate the difficulties that can take place in family politics. But that is precisely what people are wondering after the indictment of Gurpreet Singh that West Chester police say shot and killed his wife, Shalinderjit Kaur and her parents Parmiit Kaur and Hakiakat Singh and his wife’s sister Amarjit Kaur. At the time of the murders in my community of West Chester which is one of the best places to live in the world the behavior was mystifying, and nobody really knew what to think about it. The way normal people deal with family problems in an affluent community is that they go play golf or partake in any of the other wonderful things that there is to do in West Chester that can ease off the steam. But for dumb people encumbered by cultural standards that are not conducive to intelligent discourse, it appears that Singh wanted out of his marriage contract with his wife and her family, so he killed them with 18 bullet holes dispatched in their little apartment not far off RT 747 in the valley beneath Beckett Ridge.

Cold blooded killers are often good liars and con artists who can lie to your face and sound very convincing. In fact, it was Singh who called the police on that dreadful night in April 28th of 2019. When they arrived, they detained him for questioning but did not arrest him as a suspect because he was able to sell himself off as a credible victim who had found the bodies and went into a panic. But Singh seemed fishy from the start, I certainly thought it was him who had committed the murders. Of course the thing to do was to withhold judgment until the investigation fleshed out the details and those details did emerge. Many of us who live and work in West Chester took the murders as a personal offense because those kinds of things should not happen in such a nice community with nice people. But the situation appears to be an assimilation issue where he forgot that in America there are many other ways of solving disputes rather than killing your wife’s family.

But Singh was crafty and sold himself off as innocent which police considered safe the night of the murders. Then when there was a vigil for the slain family Singh was there to essentially continue selling off his innocence by participating. But he moved to Connecticut where he was arrested a month ago once all the arrows of the investigation pointed at him. On Friday of this past week he was extradited back to Ohio and booked into the Butler County Jail on charges of four accounts of murder.

That certainly isn’t the typical case of other members of the Sikh community in Cincinnati. They don’t typically kill each other when there are family disputes, but Singh obviously played this trend to his advantage by being very cooperative with police. However, in many places in the world where marriage means different things to different people, a simple divorce is not always a path out for irreparable disputes so apparently murder is the only way for their small-minded view of the world to deal with the matter. It’s a situation many of us face, even if we’d like things to be different. When you marry a person, you marry their family, otherwise the relationship would just be considered an extended date, or a roommate with benefits. Marriage is the unification of families with all different value systems with their own histories, so it can be very difficult to navigate through troubled parts of a marriage especially when the extended family is involved which in Singh’s case, they were all in his apartment. It is hard to imagine a case where a family argument would ensue that would inspire someone like Singh to grab a gun and kill them all not thinking through the implications. Then throwing that gun in the lake outside of their apartment hoping that nobody would find it. Then call the police and try to sell off his innocence. Really, only an idiot would do something like that. It’s a sad story in every case, and a real insult that the killer has hung that stupidity on our community that really doesn’t deserve it.

Of course, what’s worse is to have the job of the attorney, in this case Charlie Rittgers who had to go out yesterday and declare Singh’s innocence. What a low life job to do, to offer yourself as a voice to such an evil person. If Singh didn’t do the killings, then who did? He left motive and evidence all over the place and his body language was terrible. But in our legal system, we are supposed to give the benefit of doubt and force evidence that proves guilt, well I’m fine with what I’ve heard so far. I thought Singh was guilty that first night, probably the police did too, but needed to gather all the evidence. Now that there is enough evidence for an indictment, what a terrible job to offer yourself as an attorney to try to explain away such an evil. It really is a disgusting endeavor under even the best of circumstances.

When families don’t get along you just can’t kill them or try to hurt them. You must have at least enough mental facilities to work with them otherwise you should never get married to whomever the family is connected to. Most of us have those skills, obviously, Gurpreet Singh didn’t. Instead he used his limited intellect to attempt to pass himself off as an innocent member of the Sikh community. But that is where the real sense of justice is quite evident, because it was other members of the Sikh community who were quite convinced that the killer was Singh because there is still enough honor left in their culture, as opposed to mainstream American culture, to make judgment calls when bad behavior becomes obvious. Singh insulted us all when he tried to pass himself off as an innocent hoping that his broken English would sell him as a husband in mourning over his slain family. But his family and friends knew better and helped the police get to the real story which turns out to be just another sad domestic violence case where resolutions to the problems were out of reach of Singh’s mind.

It wouldn’t be any of our business if the killer didn’t put it in our laps with a murder that should have never occurred. I’m sure it will come out in court, but likely the people Singh killed knew he was a phony which is why he wanted to get rid of them. He came across as a phony in all his public appearances almost shining like a light bulb for a guilty plea. A tough job for Rittgers but if that’s how you decide to make a buck covering for killers, then have fun. For the rest of us, we want to see justice brought to fruition because this idiot put a stain on our community that it clearly didn’t deserve. Singh’s lack of skill and understanding in how to deal with his family should not have given our community the black eye that it did and for that, we all deserve to be more than angry about it.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Democrats Hate Profit: Working against the American Flag for change none of us want

When people ask me why I am writing a book about business, specifically about the necessity of executive culture in all places of employment, called The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, well, the debates by the Democrats that have taken place over two days during this past week tell the whole story. There are many aspects of American culture that have been pulled into this anti-profit path that was very obvious during the debates, and for those who do get it, they have forgotten why profit is important to our culture and really don’t know how to defend it from criticism. So, I feel compelled to help settle the matter any way I can. Although I have been talking about the socialist slide of Democrats for many years, and how our schools and most government interactions support the Marx theories, even I was surprised how open the Democrat candidates were to reveal themselves as socialists, perhaps even communists. Times have certainly changed and I’m not at all happy to have been proven right on the matter.

Profit is not a dirty word; it is a method of payment. Profit is how a company gets paid for services rendered, after they’ve covered all their other expenses. There needs to be something to benefit their time and energy on whatever it is they are making. If they are rich, then that means that lots of different people, or companies want to give them profit for the offerings they provide. Yet at the core of the Democrat platform that protests against the notion of profit is that very value system that points out good work from bad conduct. Bad conduct isn’t very profitable, so that value system is something that Democrats wish to get rid of, so they can continue to build a dependent class of people who will always vote them into power and if you think about it the whole notion of such a thing is disgusting.

Getting back to President Trump’s assertion that people who protest the American flag and the motives of American life should go back to wherever they came from, whether they are first generation immigrants or third, if you are not honoring the American flag and what it stands for, then probably you should go to a country that endorses your political theory. Because as American citizens we all have an obligation to at least agree on the basic foundations of American life and what they are. And what they are is that we are a for profit country that is always looking to expand as an economy. If we can’t agree on that basic thing, then we can’t be said to all love America. I don’t think people who protest the idea of profit could be said to love their country, not if all they want to do is to change it into something else.

I don’t think Democrats were always this way, I grew up around a lot of farmers and many of them were what we might call Kennedy Democrats. They were certainly flag waving Americans, they understood market prices for their crops and the needs to save up money to buy a new tractor or some chickens so they could have eggs because a fox got into the chicken coup. There may have been some of these Marxist type Democrats out there in the world, apparently in our universities and larger education system, but we didn’t see them at parades on the 4th of July and at Memorial Day festivities. This hatred for American profit is a new thing that I would say comes directly out of our education system and has been a massive failure based on how much tax money we have wasted trying to educate our next generation youth. If the result of all that money is what was on stage this week with Democrat presidential candidates, then the whole experiment has been a massive waste of time.

The debates were supposed to be a kind of job interview for an executive seat in our government to manage the country. It’s a CEO job in official function and the candidates should have treated it that way. But if you are all about anti-profit, then you really aren’t wanting to do the job as an American CEO of a high government title. You can’t have a political philosophy that wants to undo everything then turn around and declare that they deserve an equal seat at the table of consideration if what they are proposing seeks to destroy the country we all love. And that’s essentially what the Democrats want to do. Why would you want to change something that has worked so well for so many people? Their argument is that it doesn’t work for all people. Well, show me some other place in the world that does do better for all people, where so many diverse people can come together as they do in the United States and accomplish anything, let alone the most powerful economy on the planet. And the reason for all that goodness is that America is a country that supports profit, the work done by people well and are rewarded for that work in such a fashion.

Secretly what Democrats want is for the government to decide winners and losers for the power of the vote, not for the effort of hard work and good conduct. When they protest profit, they are protesting a reward system that promotes good behavior instead of a centralized authority. When the government is big and has the power to give out wages whether earned or not, we have fundamentally changed the nature of America into something else and that is a grounds for conditional action on behalf of those who love our flag as it is today.

I associate with lots of different people every day. Some of them come from all over the world and have lots of different ideas about how things should be. I talk to liberals even though they have values that seem like they belong on another world. And I know lots of people who call themselves conservatives at all places along the degrees of value. But what they all have in common which makes them so I can at least speak to them is that they understand profit and loss. None of the people on the debate stage for the Democrat representative for the Executive Branch of our government did, they were completely unrelatable and it makes you wonder if they are even aware of it. You would think they would be. But maybe they are so out of touch that they just don’t get it. And these are the best that Democrats have to offer?

It is further astonishing that this same group of people have made it so that we can’t even talk and that people like me are considered radical by their crazy definitions for things. Again, it is the education system that has paved the way for this mentality but when it comes down to real people working and living in the real world, the support doesn’t go too far for these radical ideas. So why do they have them? Because they just don’t get it? Or that they are so radical and polluted in their educations that they can’t see the forest for the trees? Or perhaps, and this is what I think, they simply hate America and want to destroy it for us all. That is the question of this election and our tolerance for it will be decided on election day.

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

We Have an Obligation to Attack Enemies, both Foreign and Domestic

I have planned to take a vacation from politics and this forum so that I could write my new book, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, which is coming along nicely. However, this recent debate between the Trump administration and the four progressive insurgents Cortez, Omar, Pressley, and Tlaib bring up an important point that Democrats are going to have to get used to. Watching and listening to their comments, and those of the other liberal presidential candidates that have come in in their defense after President Trump lacerated them at a North Carolina rally, we need to talk about a few things. Trump didn’t just act correctly in calling out the anti-American rhetoric that has been frequently discharged by the four women, and many others for that matter, but we are all expected to do as Trump has done, and in doing so, we would be by no means acting as racists, or bigots, but as people of value who love our country and are justifiably pissed off by those who show their open hostility toward the values most of us embrace as “Americans.”

It is ridiculous to suggest that we are supposed to allow people, who happen to be women, or people of color, whether or not they are American citizens or not, to trash talk our country without some retaliation. It’s just not in the realm of considerations. In no way should any of these women, or Democrats expect to get a free pass to do and say whatever they want without people getting angry about it. After all, isn’t that what they were trying to do all along? Omar, and Cortez particularly have been very bold in attempting to make as many people angry at America as possible, what did they think was going to happen, that they’d be allowed to hide behind their femininity and their race without anybody answering their challenge? When the crowd broke out chanting during the Trump rally in North Carolina to “send her back” meaning Omar, they were perfectly correct to express their opinion, just as the four progressive Democrats had. They don’t get a free pass to act because they are minorities. Why would they even think such a thing?

I have a son-in-law who came to America and gained citizenship to marry one of my daughters and I admired the work he did to go through everything. I was particularly touched during the swearing in which all politicians must go through at some point, and many others, where an oath to protect the notion of our Constitution is made. I’ve heard it a million times but during his swearing in it had hit me particularly hard, when the lines, “I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The word “domestic” rang a bell because we were seeing increased terrorist activity coming to our nation at that time, in the years before the Trump administration entered the White House and it was very obvious that some of those terrorist cells, particularly those finding refuge in ISIS were American citizens who had gone astray. Just having an American citizenship wasn’t enough to make you an American. You had to also support the way of life that being an American required. That meant capitalism. The Constitution along with all the Bills of Rights. It meant at least respecting the flag that brought all of us from all over the globe together to make America great. The freedom of speech didn’t mean you could just march around our neighborhoods burning the American flag and preaching on about Communism without someone kicking your ass. Those are the rules and we are all mandated to do so, by the Constitution when we see that domestic enemies are attacking our way of life.

I have known many media personalities over the years, and honestly, they are not the most inquisitive bunch. You won’t find them reading books about history in a Waffle House at 4 AM in the morning, the way I was when I was there age. They are more excited about talking to their friends on Facebook and finding out where the next music festival is, or some drunken orgy. Unfortunately, these are the people who interpret these events for us most of the time, so we have not been looking at people who speak against America as “domestic enemies” but they are. Nike made themselves into a domestic enemy when they picked Kaepernick’s position over the shoes of Betsy Ross. That soccer star for the women’s team completely overshadowed their great victory by using her fame to debase America life as anti-gay and racist when it was our great nation that gave her the ability to use her skills to their best effect on a world stage. Megan Rapinoe could at least have said “thank you.” Instead, she made herself into a “domestic enemy.” Her choice, but the choice was clear putting the burden on what to do about it on us all.

I just traveled the Carolinas and spent some time in Gatlinburg, Tennessee for a couple of days and even for me, I was quite taken by the patriotism displayed there. I couldn’t help but notice that no Democrats are having rallies at the convention center in Gatlinburg. But if Trump went there maybe hundreds of thousands of people would show up and pack the streets. I saw lots of Trump bumper stickers and lots of flag waving, and it was the kind of thing I have not seen represented in the news for over twenty years. I don’t know what the Democrats are thinking these days, but that span of the South from Charleston to Lexington Kentucky, and I would add, on up into Ohio and Indiana, is as pro Trump as it gets. And its not Trump himself I don’t think, but because Trump represents them Constitutionally. Rather than them having to take up arms to fight off domestic enemies who the media fails to identify for them, they are happy to support Trump to prevent the unneeded bloodshed. But yes, the situation is that serious, who would think otherwise?

Honestly, these progressive attackers, Bernie Sanders included are getting off lucky. Thankfully we have a system of government that does a pretty good job of preventing violence from happening when domestic enemies present themselves. Free speech usually defeats them when it is allowed to work. But Google, Facebook and all the media companies have involved themselves into censorship to allow a false platform to exist for these anti-American progressive ideas, because for some dumb reason, they think they can trick the system into buying into their dumb ideas. But all those actions have been anti-America because they are attacking the very foundations of American life that we are all supposed to agree on, justice for all, economic activity for all, and common decency to everyone. However, among those values are that the winner takes all because that is how the best and brightest among us elevate our entire society. An attack on that system is an attack on our way of life and we are obligated to defend it from domestic enemies when those events occur. And for their own benefit, those domestic enemies of America, they are lucky that it is only Trump calling them out during election debate. It could be much, much worse, because the people who put Trump in power are very much in the majority, and they are pretty pissed off with the attacks against their rights to guns, against their churches, their energy consumption, their basic values. And it wouldn’t take much to turn them into very angry soldiers in the streets toward justice.

Rich Hoffman

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