MAGA Hats are all About Above the Line Thinking: Why the media picked on Nick Sandman but not Tommy Sotomayor

The MAGA hats were never part of the plan for below the line liberals, their intention was to rob Americans of hope through victimization techniques taught in public schools and to gradually take over the world. Literally, that has been their plan, so it was quite shocking to them when Trump ran for president and started making the MAGA hats a rally cry that robbed from liberals their hopes and dreams of a below the line life where they could hide from the glaring eyes of expectation and competency. It didn’t surprise me that the media made so much out of Nick Sandman staring down some old hippie type who called himself an Indian at a right to life rally, and tried to make the whole event into a white power type of thing to demonize the MAGA hats that Nick and his Catholic school classmates from Covington Kentucky were wearing. But what did surprise me is that over the same weekend Tommy Sotomayor, a black man wearing his MAGA hat got into an argument with a Hooters waitress and his video went viral, but none of the news stations covered it, even though YouTube had over a million hits on the video. People saw it, but the story didn’t fit the narrative that the below the line types were trying to create. Black people were not supposed to support Donald Trump, let alone run around wearing MAGA hats. And that caused problems that compounded into even more destruction for the liberal ambitions for controlling the world.

Donald Trump’s MAGA hats have become a symbol of above the line thinking, in much the way that wearing a suit and tie to a meeting filled with loser types sitting around with holes in their jeans and untucked shirts. It’s a behavioral representation of an idea for thinking above a problem rather than below. The efforts liberals have to use victimization as a means to advance a way of thinking is obvious below the line efforts and that was why that guy beating on his little drum claiming to be a “Native American” was propped up to be a victim of white privilege and due for some measure of respect just by his ancestral relationship to a group of people the left has sought to exploit to advance their below the line concepts for the entire human race. Nick Sandman because he was a white teenager from a Catholic school was instantly supposed to respect the rules of engagement and apologize for his very existence upon just seeing the Indian who moved in to confront him knowing that the progressive politics of Washington D.C. favored his intentions even if violence did break out. Nick was the villain just for existing and he had the audacity to wear a MAGA hat to a right to life rally of all things.

Tommy Sotomayor is a guy who goes around looking for controversy and he did provoke the situation at the Hooters restaurant after the black waitress confronted him about his MAGA hat. In spite of the obvious attempts at social grandstanding the point was well made, here was a black man with a group of other blacks standing up for their right to wear a MAGA hat and the effort was completely ignored by the very hateful below the line media. They couldn’t handle a black man fighting for the right to wear a MAGA hat in a story that was obviously much bigger than the one Nick Sandman was involved in. That story with the Covington Catholic kids made every news wire and radio station announcement across the country with stunning coordination, yet Tommy Sotomayor was ignored, essentially because he was a black man on the wrong side of the below the line progressive argument. It was a very interesting thing to watch.

Nick Sandman did a very good job in the aftermath of the ordeal, he is obviously a very above the line young man. He reported the death threats that his family had received since the news outbreak and other terrible threats that came his way which we all recognize as the type of bullying that our society has learned in public school where below the line victimization is taught to the masses for the obvious end result of reshaping the social structure from looking above the line toward problems, to living below. The whole narrative reverts back to the notion of white toxic masculinity being eradicated from the social sphere so that below the line thinking can be nurtured and a new power vacuum would be created for Democrats to fill as a perpetually tearful class of people crying out for more government services extracted from even higher taxation. The MAGA hats were never supposed to give young people like Nick Sandman hope just as the right to life types were supposed to have all legislation ripped out from under them and have their hopes of a society that valued life removed. These elements to the eyes of below the line Democrats and European progressives were never supposed to come to fruition. Even if a Republican did win the White House at some point in the next decade it would be someone like Jeb Bush who could easily be steam rolled over by below the line thinking. There would never have been a MAGA hat revolution otherwise.

But then there are people like Tommy Sotomayor and Kanye West who proclaim that the MAGA hats have given them power and the fortitude to stick up for themselves as individuals and as blacks. The shockwaves of that social movement is something that Democrats can’t deal with because they thought they had that whole demographic locked up into a victimization summation and that all blacks would stay there and be happy collecting their government services, and would keep voting Democrat. Instead they are wearing their MAGA hats out to Hooters and picking a fight with the establishment itself blowing the progressive narrative completely out of the water and you can know that it is very painful for them because of the silence. Progressives have no answer for it in any of the 30 to 40 people from the Democrat side of things running for president. They have nobody like Trump, and they have no message like MAGA hats to start a revolution toward above the line thinking as opposed to below.

I have several MAGA hats and I love them. They are some of the best hats that I’ve ever had because they represent to me the efforts of a president who has a desire to make America an above the line country again instead of a country of victims and despots looking for pity over every little sin in the past. The young man Nick Sandman obviously wants a shot at life-like anybody else and his MAGA hat is that hope. That same hope resides in a black man like Tommy Sotomayor and Kanye West. I’m sure there are lots of Hispanics and Indians who also love their MAGA hats because they understand that the notion of making America great again means that the country is heading above the line in its expectations instead of below where the filth and excuses reside. And that is what everyone who is below the line hates about the MAGA hats and why nobody covered Tommy’s Hooters experience. Because the truth is quite the opposite from what the media tried to create out of the Covington Catholic story. Once the facts where well-known, the evidence was not in the favor of the below the line Democrats and their ambitions for destruction all over the world.

Rich Hoffman

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

A Quiet Place: Hollywood’s disfunctional relationship with guns

I thought the 2018 movie; A Quiet Place was a really good horror film that was compelling. However, it was hard for me to sit through because if I had been in that story, I would have only have lasted about 30 seconds. In the movie the main characters revolve around a family that has survived some kind of alien invasion and the antagonists are some really terrifying creatures who are completely reliant on sound to move around. This leaves the survivors of earth to move about in complete silence to avoid being eaten by the creatures. I thought it was an interesting concept that made for an entertaining narrative experience, but I couldn’t help but ask the question, why didn’t the dad just shoot the creatures and kill them on day one? The movie would have been over in the opening scenes and many more people would have lived.

This movie reminded me why I’m not in the movie business. I had the same conversation after The Blair Witch Project came out many years ago where I asked similar questions. I never get lost so becoming lost in the woods and being hunted down by some strange monster is just something that I can’t relate to. In A Quiet Place if I had to deal with a situation like that defending my family against some strange creatures that suddenly appeared and ate people maliciously for every sound they made, I would have simply shot them with one of my big caliber guns. There was a scene at the end of The Quiet Place where I was literally jumping around my living room screaming at the television for Emily Blunt to shoot the alien creature as it had her family trapped in her basement. It was a compelling scene for anybody who isn’t used to firearms and for Emily who is a citizen of the United Kingdom she acted as if she were more terrified of the gun than the monster. All she had to do was pull the trigger and the thing would have been killed and her family would be safe.

I’ve been to some of those Santa Monica dinner parties and spent the evening with actors and actresses like Emily Blunt and listened to their diatribes about how guns are so bad and honestly, I couldn’t handle it. Associating with people like that wore me out. And I could see John Krasinski who directed the film working with the screenwriters Bryan Woods and Scott Beck to string out the narrative of the movie into a compelling two-hour event based on their experiences with the soft tissue Hollywood types that frequent those Santa Monica bars at midnight on any given day. It was just over halfway through the movie that we learned that the dad actually had a pump 12 gauge shot-gun hidden away in the house. But in reality, the dad should have had that gun with him for the entire film and been using it to kill the monsters.

Emily Blunt looked way too comfortable holding that gun on the monster at the end of the film and not pulling the trigger that it revealed so much about what is wrong with Hollywood today. The movies are made by scared, timid people who are lacking real experience with firearms, and it was pretty sad. Guns are not part of their culture so when one is put in their hands, they appeared to be more scared of the guns than the terrible monsters. But in reality, if guns were more a part of the story then the dramatic tension of the horror film itself would have been different. If a story like A Quite Place were real, people all across America would have just shot the things. There is no way those blind bastards would have taken over our country the way they did in the movie. Normal people just aren’t as terrified of guns as the Hollywood filmmakers were.

Prior to watching A Quiet Place I watched the Bruce Willis version of Death Wish, and that was a fun movie that was lacerated by the entertainment media because it was a very honest homage to the old Charles Bronson Death Wish movies. Now in those days I could have worked in Hollywood where the story tellers were not so terrified of guns, but understood them as a narrative advancement. For instance, Indiana Jones would have never have been the great character he was if not for that one scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones shoots the swordsman in cold blood just because he didn’t have time to run all over Cairo looking for his girlfriend if he was wasting it fighting him. Back then, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg were still on the outside looking in within the film industry so they could do things like that in movies. But once they were invited into the Hollywood social activist club they stopped doing those kinds of things in their movies and people gradually stopped watching. A Quiet Place walked that fine line between ultimately using the gun to solve the problem of the story but they took the entire movie to arrive there. Because the human sacrifice count was high enough the Hollywood community gave A Quiet Place a pass, but to me it was pretty disgusting. It was a movie made by Hollywood types about a world they are afraid of, but for the rest of America where guns are as common as a glass of water, the movie was a useless exercise in stupidity.

The dad played by the director was a pretty good character, but of course when he needed a weapon at the end of the movie, he didn’t have one and he was killed. If he had been carrying his shotgun around, that stupid monster would have been dead quickly, and efficiently and they all would have lived happily ever after. Guns are a huge part of American culture and when Hollywood shows their ignorance, movie goers let them know it. Even though A Quiet Place was considered a successful film critically and at the box office the real numbers show it only made $188 million domestically and $152 million internationally. $340 million is not very much money for a movie at the box office these days, the movie would have done better business if it had embraced the gun culture more instead of trying to appease the anti-gun Hollywood types.

The last scene of the movie A Quiet Place was a hoard of the alien monsters converging on the house as Emily Blunt smiled at her children with her cocked shotgun ready to shoot them all. OK, so where was that attitude at the beginning of the film? The point of the entire movie seems to be to get the parents to overcome their aversion to guns so that they can defend themselves. Because the sonic device that the deaf daughter only appeared to agitate the monsters, it didn’t kill them. Only the gun did. So that is my problem with this whole Hollywood vantage point. They literally want their cake and to eat it too. They want an anti-gun message when the gun is the only thing that people want to pay money to see. But to appease the Hollywood gods who drink too much in Santa Monica bars, the filmmakers have to avoid using the gun as much as possible, until the very end of course.

That’s the way you do it.  Death Wish was a great movie!

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

Of Course Sheriff Israel Should Have Been Suspended: Democrats fly to Puerto Rico during the government shutdown

Not to be overly simplistic but politics these days could be said to be of two representative groups, Republicans represent above the line thinking as defined in the great business book, The Oz Principle and Democrats representing below the line thinking. Of course, there are plenty of Republicans who are below the line thinkers but their social aims point in that direction, so let’s use this example to have a discussion. The issue of the new Governor DeSantis suspending the bumbling fool Scott Israel over the response during the Parkland massacre is a perfect example of what we are talking about.

In the world of a typical Democrat accountability for one’s actions are never part of the consideration, below the line thinkers are always victims who are never responsible for anything. Everything to below the line thinkers is someone else’s fault, so when Sheriff Israel was given a very expensive budget in one of Florida’s wealthiest counties to protect the people there, he blew it. The shooter who would eventually attack the school had a long-troubled past which the police knew about and when the guy finally instigated his intended violence toward the kids of Parkland High School Israel’s police force wasn’t ready and behaved less than gracious under fire. Many more people died as a result of Sheriff Israel’s incompetence than otherwise would and it was a truly sad situation.

But in the aftermath, it was Sheriff Israel who was leading the charge to have guns removed from society by attacking the NRA hoping to deflect responsibility away from him and his law enforcement department. His radicalism in advocating below the line positions was excessive and even political moderates were getting tired of the excuses from Sheriff Israel. After eight months of excuses once Governor DeSantis took the official office as Florida’s next governor, he did what most Republicans seek to do, and that is provide accountability to a situation—above the line thinking.

And that is where the real difficulty is in deciding what kind of country we want to be, because we can’t be both. Below the line thinking is easy and destructive, it is far easier to destroy than to make, so that is why Democrats with their below the line thinking and overall victimhood mentality attract so many losers and can activate them to advance on a cause so quickly, because their fear is always accountability so as long as there is chaos and blame, they are quick to hide their incompetence behind violence and mass driven protests.

Accountability is hard so its much more difficult to stand up and accept that responsibility when there is always a parade of below the line thinkers to throw more animosity in your direction deflecting that pressure away from them as much as possible. This is why it was hard for even staunch NRA defenders to advocate for sanity after the Parkland shooting because the mob of below the line thinking had taken over. There was power in the masses for below the line thinkers who shared together a fear of responsibility. There was power in victimhood, in using the death of the innocent to advance a below the line political idea, such as the confiscation of guns. Guns themselves didn’t kill people, they are tools for above the line people to take responsibility for their own safety and property. But for below the line people who would never dare use a gun to defend themselves because they don’t want the responsibility, its easy to call for the elimination of personal firearms and the expansion of the state with more laws. But in the case of Parkland there were police on the scene as the gunman was killing and they did not engage. Sheriff Israel had allowed their daily routine to become too soft they were not ready for the danger when it came. But rather than take responsibility for their ill prepared training, Scott Israel deflected all responsibly to gun possession and he helped launch a national campaign against them.

If we want an accountable, and successful nation, below the line thinking just can’t be allowed—which essentially eliminates one political party from the discussion. We can see the same example of how Democrats behaved in Mid-January after they had just returned to Capitol Hill to the House and Senate only to charter a plane to fly to Puerto Rico to watch the play Hamilton. President Trump as a businessman understands leadership and accountability so he purposely stayed at the White House as the government shutdown dragged on and debate over the border wall persisted. Democrats being below the line people devoid of personal accountability don’t want to see how their actions can have an impact on the world around them so they tried to coax Republicans into playing along, but under Trump’s leadership they stayed put. While the news stories went out that government workers weren’t getting paid due to the shutdown Trump was in the White House ready to make a deal but the Democrats just off a Christmas vacation took another luxury trip to Puerto Rico to attend a high brow play. Typically, Republicans get caught in these kinds of things trying to defend themselves from a negative position, but Trump kept the discussion on above the line topics with true leadership—leading by example.

That is truly the battle of our day, the difference between personal accountability, and below the line victimhood. Losers are known as losers because they are never responsible for anything in their life, they make themselves perpetual victims because they lack the courage of personal accountability. The reason that Democrats want to expand government so much is to cover up their notion of accountability deflection. The more people involved, the more chaotic the bureaucratic chain of decision gates, the less people know that the real game is in protecting below the line thinking so that political leaders can sneak off to a luxury play in the tropics during a government shutdown and nobody would notice. And that is exactly what Democrats did in trying to protect the incompetency of Scott Israel after the Parkland shooting. The NRA which is an organization all about above the line thinking, personal accountability and the defense of American ideas became the scape-goat by default. Above the line thinking was attacked because the masses were afraid of what role they played in the mess and would rather expand government and pay more people to stand in front of them and help redistribute the blame game to everything else.

Governor DeSantis like President Trump was making a point in suspending Sheriff Israel, the intent was to demonstrate above the line thinking, just as Trump stayed at the White House to show leadership under fire. Accountability is the key to all successful enterprises, and Democrats just don’t have it in them. By their nature they always seek below the line solutions to above the line needs, so there will never be peace and joy in politics so long as this is the case. Everyone in our nation needs to at least be working toward the same objectives. One part of the country can’t take responsibility for everything while all the below the line thinkers fly off to Puerto Rico to attend a play while bitching that the President won’t budge on his needs for border wall funding. And what Sheriff Israel did, which is typical of all below the line thinkers was reprehensible, he tried to blame the very good NRA for his own incompetence. And if he had been successful, it would have had a terrible effect. Its bad enough that many people died because of him, but what’s worse is that he refused to take responsibility. That is his crime and why he had to be suspended. He’s lucky that was all.

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

The Loser Rashida Tiaib Attempts at Impeachment: Obviuosly, she hasn’t thought things through

News flash, what does Rashida Tiaib think is going to happen if her brand of socialist radicals impeach President Trump and take over all three branches of government with their insurgents? They are going to be destroyed. It’s not going to be allowed to happen, violence will erupt and many people will die. This idea that liberals have about taking over government by force, intimidation and ANTIFA radicalism hasn’t been thought through very well. There is a reason Donald Trump was elected president. It’s not his fault, it’s the people who put him there who Rashida Tiaib should be concerned about, and calling them a bunch of white racists isn’t going to help make a case for civility either. When push comes to shove, bodies will be lying around in the streets and any fantasy of a socialist takeover will end rather fast. It’s one thing to have an ANTIFA protest on a college campus or a very liberal town full of welfare recipients who have no passions in the matter. But it’s quite another to stroll into Deadwood South Dakota and demand socialism. Uhhhh, before the mob moved one city block I’d predict about 90,000 bullet holes and some of them coming unofficially from the sheriff’s office. Any attempt to impeach President Trump, let me just say—will start a war that Rashida Tiaib isn’t prepared for—or any Democrat for that matter.

I’m at a place in my life where I want to address this problem more deeply that it just being a liberal against conservative problem. As Mitt Romney proved, and even some local people in my own town have clearly demonstrated, they are just as much losers as Democrats are. So I am thinking more these days about a more appropriate and universal understanding of the problem, designating winners and losers instead of Republicans and Democrats and here is the reason, and again I’ll refer back to The Oz Principle, everything really comes down to above the line and below the line thinking. Winners think above the line, losers think below the line. Pretty simple, right? So let’s look at this Rashida Tiaib phenomena through the lens of being a loser or a winner. Obviously, her intentions for wanting to impeach Trump is to bring victory to her party’s ambitions to take control of government. But because she is a severe case of below the line thinking she hasn’t even conceived what it might look like if that reality were to manifest—how the American people in the real world would react to it. And that is the classic problem with all below the line thinkers.

Below the line thinking essentially consists of victim hood, in explaining why someone can’t advance themselves in life. Racism under any definition is classic below the line thinking and any government that supports it, is contributing severely to a loser mindset. In any business that is trying to improve its cultural footprint organizationally, the challenge is to get more people thinking above the line than below, and that is how you essentially start getting a winning mindset across the entire organization. To put it in crayon so that everyone can understand it, this is precisely the purpose of sports within our capitalist country. We watch teams bring in certain players who are supposed to excel in whatever position they play in a particular sport and we cheer on their efforts to win more games than other cities. It’s a fun game for all of us, but the real essence of it is to find that magic combination of winners and leaders who can inspire victory. Nobody has much tolerance for a sports player who is hurt all the time or underperforms. It doesn’t matter if the fans are liberals or conservatives, most people have an open disdain for a sport figure that is not living up to the expectations that the fan base has for wins and losses.

For a lot of reasons, we have allowed as a culture way too many people who are below the line thinkers to get government jobs and to shape that employment culture in a very negative way. The government labor unions are another victimhood-based organization, full of below the line thinkers and they actually incentivize that type of culture making most government workers the type of people who are extremely inefficient. Unlike most business environments which are performance based and are always trying to look for ways to keep below the line thinking from hindering a winning culture, government looks for more below the line thinking to justify their loser attitude about everything, and to satisfy that trend they want to always grow, because that’s what losers do, they love to hide their faults in the masses so their errors aren’t so obvious.

If I were working in government as a TSA agent, or a National Park Ranger, I would make sure human resources had my number correct and would tell them to call me when funding had been restored, if ever. I would never sit around waiting for somebody else to do something so that I could pay more rent or a mortgage. I would get a second job, or even a third job and I would take care of my financial obligations. That is an example of above the line thinking, and it’s the way more people need to start thinking if we really want America to remain such a great country. Lucky for us, in the rural parts of the nation that type of thinking is quite common—particularly among farmers. When they hit a drought, or the get a flat tire on a tractor they don’t sit around crying about racism or how unfair God is to them that day, they fix the tire. And they do their best with the drought. They survive. I can say that I am an above the line thinker with the employment status example because I’ve done that before several times, went to get second and third jobs to cover my expenses. Sometimes I didn’t even have a second car, I had to ride a bicycle to work just to get there and I never bitched about it. To me that was the kind of thinking that was needed. I don’t feel sorry for a single government worker not getting a paycheck during the government shutdown. I say to them, get another job, pay your bills, and stop complaining. The airlines themselves covered their own security costs before there was ever a unionized TSA organization and it wouldn’t be hard to get back to that mode of thinking.

The fight that Rashida Tiaib is really advocating is essentially for the right to use victimhood as a calling card to the masses who are also functioning below the line to rise up and take over government. But the attitude is a loser one, you could hear it in her voice when she spoke at the bar and in the people cheering. Those weren’t people trying to win at life, those were people cheering for an excuse to remain a loser. Their hatred of Trump isn’t that he’s a bad president, but a good one that is all about setting standards and building value. But losers don’t ever think of the next steps, they only view the world below the line where they seek to join other like-minded losers to justify their lack of ambition by pointing at numbers of similar losers and declaring they are the majority and thus the pace setters for civilization. However, that is not how people think, they want to be winners even if they don’t have the personal courage and below the line thinking only destroys society, it doesn’t build it, and should Rashida ever get what she really desires in an impeachment of President Trump, she will learn rather violently how badly people love winners and hate losers.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Great Visionary President Trump: Causing his enemies to continue throwing themselves against rocks and over cliffs

It is time to have this discussion, most of our political order in the United States has been defined by idiots, everything from the lowly school board member to the President of the United States. Dumb, inefficient people have been inserted into these jobs by fools who don’t really know what they are doing. That is why it is totally ridiculous that these same people are trying to define what a successful president looks like in modern times, and that Trump to them is some kind of buffoon. Let me make something quite clear about Trump and other CEO types who come from private business and have been previously very successful as branding change agents from their own organizations, their genius is not in what they physically do, its in how they can take complex topics and bring them down to one- or two-line vision statements. In that regard President Trump will go down in history as the greatest president the United States ever experienced. Vision statements for a lot of people are one of the most difficult things to do because they lack the intelligence and imagination to do them, but Trump is great at them and that is precisely why he can do so much more with less.

Much of the world is very confused about the nature of leadership, they foolishly confuse it with management which is to say that processes are what inspire people. That is why critics of President Trump believe that a Chief of Staff or a Secretary of State are such important characters in an administration. Yet the White House is the people’s house and if its occupant can take complicated matters and communicate them to the people who really are supposed to run the government, the voters, then all that management formality is for nothing. Trump and his Tweets are the best thing to come from the modern age because it has allowed a great leader and communicator in Trump to articulate directly to voters the matters of great complication which normally befuddle most people, and it unifies the vision productively for the country.

The enemies of these methods are those of course who benefit from the current system of chaos. They like the old management structure because somewhere in their past they were taught by institutions that such things were flowed through processes of bureaucracy not through the raw leadership of simplicity. They were taught that to be successful you make lots of paperwork and coordinate lots of people through procedural interpretation rather than to rally behind the abilities of a great leader to break down complicated matters into a few sentences of vision. This is a common trait of all visionaries from Walt Disney to George Lucas, Donald Trump whether or not people like him is a great visionary and that is why the Trump Organization is such a good one. The value in Trump is not whether or not he has had affairs with women as a billionaire playboy, or whether he was a great WWE promoter at his casinos, what matters is that he was and continues to be a great leader who can simplify messaging to the masses with relative ease. If you took Trump out of the White House and put him in charge of General Motors, or Microsoft, he would be instantly successful in those companies because he can produce effective visions to all the employees involved. Most successful people have these traits, but they are rather uncommon among our population because the ability is not something that is taught well in our scholastic environments, but is an innate ability nurtured through unique character traits.

If you went to all the modern top companies, from Amazon to Pixar Entertainment you’d find similar traits among their leadership, the ability to provide vision statements to their employees which unify the efforts of the organization. In private practice we see such examples of leadership emerge out of market necessity. But in politics we have allowed and in some cases insisted on some old broken European model of aristocracy among political leaders that is not conducive to reality. Such as in Nancy Pelosi leaving Washington D.C. during a government shut down and taking a vacation in Hawaii. She is apparently clueless as to how the optics of such a thing is providing a very negative vision statement to her own party and their ability to negotiate with Trump over the border wall. She’s not even playing in the same league as Trump who stayed in Washington D.C. and continued to work through the Holiday season gaining the high ground in the matter and providing vision statements to the public that no Democrat will be able to overcome. Nancy Pelosi and her new congress will return with their standardized agenda driven by process and discover that they have no answer for the leadership Trump has already provided and they’ll stay on their heels for most of 2019 before crushing themselves under the weight of their own stupidity once they start throwing candidates for the 2020 run for presidency in the mix. They will all fail because they do not have Trump’s ability to create vision statements.

When you have raw leadership ability you do not have to have read the most books in the room, you don’t even need to be the smartest person. Intelligence contrary to popular opinion does not increase by the amount of people added to the decision-making process. The ability to create a good one liner in the form of a vision statement is far more valuable to team building than a whole room of Harvard MBAs working on a problem. All the Harvard people may be smart, but they lack leadership in its raw form. A bunch of smart people are useless if they can’t communicate what they need to do to the masses clearly so others can follow. In the rock, paper, scissors game of management hierarchy, the ability to produce vision statements is far more important than the ability to manage 10,000 people through procedural implementation. A president who can do such a thing doesn’t need a Chief of Staff or other traditional positions because he can do a lot more with less just because of the raw leadership ability of providing clear vision statements to his followers.

That is specifically why Trump is succeeding and his political enemies are just fumbling over themselves like the coyote in a classic Road Runner cartoon, or Bugs Bunny confronting the villainy of the Tasmanian Devil. Trump has the unique ability to make complex matters seem digestible and that is why he has been successful and why no matter what he does, success is there for him. It’s not luck or some magic power given from the gods, it’s just raw leadership ability in the form of powerful vision statements, such as “if you’re going to be thinking, it might as well be big.” In the role of a Commander and Chief it is obvious that the hope of the Founding Fathers was always to have someone from American society filling the presidential role like Donald Trump, but so far very few have made it through the political process to arrive at such a lofty height untouched by procedural corruption. But Trump did make it, and we should all be thankful. Because of his ability America is really thriving and there isn’t anything his political enemies can do about it. The harder they try, the more spectacularly they fail. Road Runner would be proud of Donald Trump, he is making all his enemies look as dumb as the Coyote in those old Road Runner cartoons. And the funny thing is, they keep doing it to themselves over and over again, because they don’t understand why President Trump is so successful. That is precisely why they keep launching themselves into a cliff face, or crushing themselves with a giant rock. Because they lack the natural leadership ability of a visionary, and they have nobody even close who call themselves Democrats. And that is truly funny.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Next Big Thing: Cheering on Richard Branson and his wonderful company Virgin Galactic

Putting politics aside which is hard to do because ultimately everything is political, but considering our modern conditions, those definitions are changing by the moment. I am and have always been a very excited person for everything new little thing that comes along as I am very much in love with the things that humans imagine. Nature is nice too, but I really like what humans do with the tools provided by nature and to see how civilization can advance. While many look at cell phones and the hyper communications that come with them as dangerous to the old order of doing things I think it’s all part of our natural evolution as a species accelerating toward some yet to be known destination. While everyone who knows me understands how much I love tradition particularly the American western mythologies and concepts, I am very much an achievement driven person excited for tomorrow in so many ways. And that is why despite his politics, I have been very much a fan of Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic endeavors. And according to him from the interview shown below, he still plans to get his space airline into space before Christmas of this year, which would be a great feat. I am very much hopeful that he will be successful.

It’s been coming along for a while now, but if it is considered the sheer amount of information that is coming at us so fast and furious these days as opposed to when man landed on the moon in 1969 the human race is scratching at a huge change in thought and processing. As I was catching up on what Virgin Galactic was up to and if they were going to meet their timeline one of the lead stories on the Microsoft News dashboard was the newly recorded sounds of Mars as captured by the recent rover that just landed there. Much of this past week due to the very good series on the National Geographic Channel about colonizing Mars radio broadcasts across the country were contemplating what the steps to such an act would look like and what we’d all do once we got there. Elon Musk has after all been turning up the heat for his own departure from earth to live on the ancient red planet. I see many of his antics such as the smoking pot incident on a recent podcast as his teenage moment of creating enough escape velocity for himself to make the journey. He is sabotaging his own relationship with the earth so that he can psychologically make that journey to be the first to live on Mars. Jeff Bezos of Amazon is about to unleash a series of space endeavors that are quite ambitious with his Blue Origin company. Between all these adventurous billionaires fueled by childhood loves of movies like Star Wars and Star Trek compounded by a strong deregulatory economy by the Trump administration—the primer is set for some very exciting technological breakthroughs on the frontier of space.

As I was playing Red Dead Redemption 2 by Rockstar Games on my PlayStation 4 and started messing around with the online play with many thousands of other players all over the world simultaneously, I couldn’t help but think of how subconsciously as a human species this visit to the western genre was necessary for our current age to accept what was about to happen. It’s not the safety of the herd that the human race is after, it’s the rough existence away from the support of civilization for which adventure promises great rewards and many opportunities for death. This next generation needs to be someone reckless and masochistic in order to endure the rigors of a dynamic shift in human consciousness, leaving the comfort of our earth and scratching at the unlimited barriers of space travel. Presently we call space anything over 62 miles, or anybody who travels over 50 miles and astronaut. We think of the moon as a long way away, and Mars prohibitively distant. But all those definitions are about to change just as they did in the period of American westward expansion once electricity and phone communications shrunk the world with power. The main observation I had about that great video game was that human beings needed to revisit that last period of adventure and see what it looked like so that they could take this next big journey.

I don’t really like the term “collective consciousness” because it assumes that we are all functioning out of one great well of wisdom which is not what I think is going on. Rather, there are certain rational decisions that are common to reality so it is bound to be a mathematical probability that all humans will come to similar conclusions just by the mandate of deductive reasoning. And that is why texting is more interesting than talking to an actual person for most people, the human mind to seek out the rapid communication forms that come from something like a modern smart phone as opposed to a very static conversation with one single human being is needed for the world of tomorrow, where information must be process quickly as our knowledge base explodes from what was previously understood. Young people especially will have to think much faster than humans do today and be shocked by much fewer discovers than previous generations just to keep up with all the news stories that will began to demand our attention as the frontiers of space are unzipped.

Aerospace is one of my favorite industries due to its exploratory nature. I desire to be a part of it as much as possible and to be quite honest, I love every day of my life because I am. I love to help build the vehicles that take humans to the frontiers of our imagination and I have had a front row seat to many of these new developments. So out of a love of adventure which transcends politics, I am happily cheering on the events of these coming days. Richard Branson has worked hard with his team to get into space first and if he doesn’t make it soon, Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos will overtake Virgin Galactic. So he doesn’t have all the time in the world, competition and capitalism demand results and the pressure is certainly on. If Branson can get into space by Christmas of 2018 it would be a life changing moment for many people around the world. But if Christmas comes and goes and Virgin Galactic is still mired in testing, then Blue Origin or SpaceX will get there first. This new space race isn’t between nations and governments, it between billionaires and capitalist mandates and that is redefining everything rapidly.

Humans are such conceptual creatures and once we get an idea in our heads reality has a way of growing around it. And from what I see that growth will spawn entirely new industries and lifestyles. There is great reason to be optimistic. Once space tourism is unleashed, likely by Virgin Galactic first, our conceptual knowledge will expand at such a pace that the world has never witnessed. We have been preparing ourselves for this age for years with the rapid digestion of so much information. It’s not by accident or greed, it’s all by necessity. As I’ve said many times my goal in a very busy life is to read at least one book a week, but I am even feeling the pressure to read not just one, but five. So grudgingly I have turned to audio books for some of them because by necessity I need the information coming at me faster than I could possibly read everything and still do everything else needed in an 18-hour work day which is pretty typical. We are all going through a similar transition and that’s what it takes to live and grow in an expanding economy driven by human adventure and curiosity. And much of that next phase starts when Richard Branson gets his Virgin Galactic space tourism over that 50-mile line where humans become technically astronauts.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Greatest Weapon in the World: To always endeavor to be the smartest person in the room

There is a certain mentality that you must have if you want to be able to stand up to bullies like the current F.B.I. and all the power they have, or if in general you want to be a leader of people in whatever capacity. You, as a person must endeavor to be the smartest person in the room. If you are, no tyrannical bully can ever gain the leverage of fear against you and make silly threats for which you can never deal with. This is essentially why Donald Trump is so successful in whatever he does. Being the smartest person in the room in my experience doesn’t come from genetic inheritance as much as it comes from hard work. If you put in the time to become intelligent, you will have leveraged yourself into the most fundamental position any leader needs to be in. If you are the smartest person in the room, especially in America, you will ultimately become the decision maker for a lot of people because people will naturally follow you. So in that context you never have to fear the power of a corrupt law enforcement officer or a ruthless dictator, because intelligence most of the time all by itself is enough to wipe them out.

A lot of people assume that I’m the kind of person who would start shooting up bad guys at the first sign of trouble. But honestly, I have done a lot more damage to villainous people with my mind. When things do get bad, which doesn’t happen much, but over the years happens from time to time, I seldom have to use violence to make my point. Sometimes it evolves into that because the people you are dealing with are not very smart so they have no other weapons to work with but violence. However most of the time, just being the smartest person in the room is enough to diffuse anything and advance any topic.

From personal experience I have dealt with a lot of different people, some who would claim to be the richest and most powerful in all of Cincinnati financially. Others politically. My kids and I were talking the other day about how different Over-the-Rhine was today in downtown Cincinnati than it was almost thirty years ago when I lived on the campus of the University of Cincinnati for a while and accepted a dare to walk from Central Parkway up to Bogarts by way of Vine Street, which at that time was ripe with many, many criminal elements. I did so and not a single person bothered me. A lot of people looked at me very intensely, but not a single person engaged with me the way people might think would happen by way or robbery, or some other physical assault. I felt I could deal with any problem that anybody might throw at me and it showed in my personality which nobody wanted anything to do with. It wasn’t that I was a big guy, or that I was heavily armed. In fact, I didn’t have any weapons on me during that walk. All I had was what I knew. On a separate occasion a few years earlier, I was on a date in downtown Cincinnati where I am sure the intention was a robbery. I was taking my wife to a downtown restaurant but we parked near the courthouse because I felt that was a place where vandalism might be the least but on our way a large group of very scary looking inner city dwellers covered in gold chains and all the stereotypes of a rap video blocked our passage. After a quick qualifying conversation with a very large leader of the group, easily over 6’5” he decided that we weren’t worth the trouble. He asked me for our money, I told him we didn’t have any. He said to me that you don’t have a girl like “dat” without “no” kind of money.” My response was to ask him why not. That was probably the last thing he was prepared to hear. Most people obviously just gave him the money and went about their way. The fear of being hurt by him was enough. But when I asked him why it put the burden on him to respond with his true intentions. He elected to move on with his little gang of thugs because their imaginations as to why I was confident were running wild and it wasn’t worth the risk. I could tell an even worse story about Washington D.C. when I had to go out at 2 AM in a really bad part of the city to find milk for my kids as we were staying in a hotel nearby. I got the milk but no further trouble much to the shock of the people who heard about the story later.

I have had an unusual life in that I have been to court many, many times. I’ve nearly been put in jail more times than I can count. I have personally known hit men, famous Bengal players who were major drug dealers after their playing days were over. I used to repo cars for a living and have been shot at several times but I never was consumed by that lifestyle. I always lived outside of its grip. One time when all my friends were in jail on the campus of Miami University because we got into a huge fight with the football team at a bar there I was the only one not put in jail and I managed to talk reason to the officers to get a quick release of my friends, not that they deserved it over a weekend so they didn’t have to wait for an arraignment on the following Monday. On several occasions I’ve defended myself successfully in court as my own attorney because why hire someone not as smart as you to deal with something you have a stake in. And in saying all this I’m not saying that biologically I was ever the smartest, I have been friends with people with IQs near 200, I’m thinking of at least 2 people as I write this, which is very rare. I received my intelligence the old-fashioned way, through very hard work. I started reading as a young person not yet ten. As a teenager I continued that trend more than my peers. Then as a young adult I really took off starting a habit of at least one book a week of all different topics. After a few years you discover that no matter who you are dealing with, being well read gives you an advantage in almost any conflict. I have always had a personality that challenged authority which is why I got into so much trouble. But the more books I read the less trouble I found myself in which was an interesting ratio. I kept doing it and have found that after thirty years of that behavior, you can do the math. Nobody can really fight you if you know more about things than they do. Even if they resort to physical encounters, all those things you learn I think are far more powerful weapons than any gun. I’m an advocate of concealed carry but honestly, I doubt I would ever use it since I feel that I can defeat any situation without coming to that scenario. It helps to always be the smartest person in the room and if you commit yourself to that, you’d be surprised how safe in the world you really are.

I say all that because these are scary times, obviously in the world of politics the old world of brute force and stupidity—which I’d term the Robert Mueller investigation—is fighting the election of Donald Trump and those of us who put him into office. All they have is fear to use to defend their control on the world. If you know better, all their primary weapons are worthless. If you are the smartest person in the room there is no jail they can put you in, no gun they can draw, or legalism they can use to put pressure on you to flip to save your beloved family members. I feel sorry in a lot of ways for people like Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen and even General Flynn. They were smart and powerful guys in their specific professions, but when it comes to being smart about life, they are still prone to being victimized by an F.B.I. that thinks it has intelligence leverage over them, so they can make threats and get a desired response from those witnesses because they aren’t smart enough about more topics in the world to defend themselves. But in all honesty, I can at least report that the tactics used by the F.B.I. are those of very stupid people who have no case and are no different from those street thugs I mentioned who thought about robbing me many years ago in Cincinnati. They have size, strength and weapons, but not intelligence—because intelligence takes work to nature and most people don’t do it, leaving them always at a disadvantage to those who do. If you really want to be a tough person who can stand up to anything, then read a book. And not just one, but one ever week and you will discover dear reader that will be the most powerful weapon you can ever have, and guess what—nobody in the world can take it away from you.

Rich Hoffman

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