St. Louis Protesters Vandalize the Mayor’s Home: Lyda Krewson should have gunned down the people on her lawn

The St. Louis protests over the shooting of an alleged drug dealer during a police arrest migrated into radicals upset with the lack of prosecution by the legal system to go over to Mayor Lyda Krewson’s home and vandalize it by throwing rocks through the windows and blasting it with red paint.  In the process nine St. Louis police officers were injured, two of them seriously, one with a broken jaw, the other with a dislocated shoulder—and in my opinion the protestors crossed the line from something possibly protected under the umbrella of free speech and migrated into something where an armed defense of the mayor’s home was justified.  Lyda appears to be a nice lady who did everything she could to deescalate the situation with non-violence, but I would argue that in so doing she actually perpetuated the situation.  It would have been better to put bullets into those attackers when they came to her home and to send them to the hospital, or to the morgue at that point in time instead of taking the passive position that she did—because she only empowered them further.

I have some experience with this kind of thing and my general policy is to engage violence with more violence than the attackers can handle.  If they come to your house to throw eggs, then you should burn their cars so they can’t escape and cripple them so there is no retreat-until the police can come to make an arrest.  Playing nice with people who are willing to vandalize private property doesn’t make things better.  As the mayor said, nobody was hurt and that she can fix what was vandalized—but in all actuality people were hurt, police were hurt seriously and getting hit in the face with bricks could have easily have killed those police officers, which to me opens up the options of what should be done to those attackers to deescalate the situation in the future.

Private property is what we’re talking about here.  While Mayor Krewson’s position is the one that current law and order adheres to—it has the assumption that material things can be replaced but lives cannot-it is technically wrong.  The reason for the police, the Second Amendment and the trappings of a legal system are to protect the private property of America’s citizens.  By going to the mayor’s home and attempting to influence her where she lives the mob was purposely attempting to use fear and the destruction of private property to influence the nature of law and order.  That is not acceptable.   When those lines are crossed and a mob of insurgents arrives to your place of residence to influence your behavior in the realm of law and order, then violence in return is the only option.

Obviously the actions of Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA are open about their strategies of violence against those they disagree with, so that opens the play book to violence which can then be conducted against them.  And the battleground which gives merit to the action is in the defense of private property.  I would say to the reporters who had to endure having water bottles being thrown at them, or violence inflicted on them in any way that your personal space then becomes private property and should be defended with any means necessary.  If the attackers lose their life in the process–then so be it—they had it coming.  This is the right way to think about these matters.

I’m writing this now as a kind of qualifying statement for future behavior.  Speaking for myself, I get by most days without having to inflict violence on other people.  If it happens it’s never because I started the conflict.  I have had to be violent with people before on occasion and while doing so have in my mind the complete destruction of those people.  Most of the time things work out alright and everyone lives to see another day.  But when it comes to private property and the defense of it, we have a right as individual American citizens to defend it.  Our politics does not give those rights over to enemy insurgents to do with whatever they want.  If I were the mayor of St. Louis I would have had to engage those people after the first broken window with violence that likely would have ended their existence—because it would have been the right thing to do.  All that stands between such things is law and order and once the mob failed to be contained by law enforcement, then the next tier of defense is personal protection.  For me, I have lots of options, but firearms are part of that defense.

I always try to use other methods before reaching for the gun in this present so-called civilized world.  Someone trained in various combat methods should have various degrees of defensive persuasion to apply against villains.  But for Mayor Krewson who obviously is a nice lady who doesn’t think much about such things, machine gunning down the protesters on her lawn would have been acceptable.  Those protestors made it very clear that they were willing to fight and possibly kill the law enforcement personnel on the streets—so that means that all the rules are off the table and anything goes—essentially.  It is quite obvious that appeasing these radicals is not the best method and that our legal system does not know how to handle these matters.  The path of Mayor Krewson has only made the situation worse.  Turning your back on these types of aggressive people empowers them to do more vile acts, it doesn’t deter them.  So we must draw the line somewhere and a personal residence where your family sleeps and your possessions are kept is where that thin line of justice resides.  If anybody is willing to cross that line, then they are said to be willing to surrender their life to your protection of it.  Because you really have no way of knowing what their intentions are.  Are they there to simply scare you, or under the pressure from the mob and the politics of our times, will they simply revert to the animal nature of rape, pillaging, and death?  We must assume the worst and hope for the best, but if they cross that line, they’ve made that decision for us.

A legal system that cannot protect our private property and our pursuit of happiness is ineffective and they don’t have a right to then prosecute us, the law abiding, with the use of firearms or other things to protect our personal sovereignty—and our bodies are part of that sanctity.  People do not have a right to get in our faces, vandalize our cars, or threaten our homes in any way shape or form.  If politicians cannot get this situation under control and use the rules of law to produce a society filled with justice, then we have no other choice.  In my opinion the mayor should have gunned down those protesters and left the lifeless bodies hanging from the trees of her front yard—because that’s the only language that people corrupted with primal instincts understand.  And in the realm of value assessment private property cannot always be replaced.  It represents more than material possession—it is a token of our personal sovereignty, and if we don’t have that in American society—then we have nothing of law and order.

Rich Hoffman

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

Eliyahu M. Goldratt’s ‘The Goal’: Kathy Kennedy is doing a great job with ‘Star Wars’, and how we can prove it with proper business measurements

Before anyone says, “Oh no, he’s writing another Star Wars article,” stay with me for a bit here. What I’m about to say has some very important things in it that are very “holistic.”  They span very much into our greater lives as a human species, so put on your thinking caps and follow along.  Specifically Star Wars and in general Lucasfilm under the leadership of Kathleen Kennedy have come under great attack lately for firing four directors and twelve writers as she looks for just the right combination of people to make the new Star Wars movies just right.  The most recent news was that J.J. Abrams was coming back to direct Episode 9 which caused quite a stir and finally unleashed a major backlash from the entertainment community that was surprising, because it has revealed some extremely Marxist elements that we all know are there, but these Star Wars firings are exposing it in a measurable way.   So as a guide post to keep us all from getting lost I’d like to introduce to everyone the very good, and very popular book on business, The Goal, written in 1984.  The Goal is such a powerful book that Amazon makes its executives read it and apply the basic philosophy to their industry, which obviously works.  I also happen to know that Boeing has had their industry flow professionals read the book to improve their business climate as well, so we aren’t talking about some fringe infusion of ideas here.  The Goal is very mainstream in American business—extremely well known.   In short The Goal is to make money and to use that as the identifier of all business measurements.  If you are in business the only thing you should be concerned about is making money, it’s not to provide jobs, it’s not to just make products, and it’s certainly not to fuel a political philosophy that is not aligned with the realities of the world.   Now let’s introduce the great director John Landis whom I am a tremendous fan of but has obviously lost his mind late in life.  Read the linked article for the details, but in essence Landis has forgotten that the reason for a movie studio to exist is to make money.  Disney exists to make money.  The director’s specific job is to make money for the studio, not to sacrifice themselves for some social cause, or to have artistic, and creative freedom to let their “inner voice” speak to a mass audience. The director in the case of a movie or most anything else is there to make a product that the studio can make money off of.  It’s the only thing that matters.

Now obviously to do that the product needs to be desired by the public and in the case of Star Wars it brings a lot of joy to people who go to the movies, buy the toys and video games and in general it is those movies that keep the theater experience going so that directors can work on movies that are not Star Wars and may only appeal to 5% of the population.  Movie theater owners need to make money too just to have a place to show Hollywood products.  The industry is there for them to work because enough money was made with something like Star Wars to allow for other viewpoints in other films to be presented to mass audiences around the world.   If I had to value stream map this situation for studio executives I’d of course designate the consumer at the movie theater as the customer that the value of the product design must appeal to in order to successfully implement the strategic objectives.  These people fired from the various Star Wars projects, like Colin Trevorrow and Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, just over the last couple of months were obviously not getting the holistic reason for the Star Wars films getting made.  And what people like John Landis are now criticizing Kathy Kennedy for doing is essentially the labor union point of view from the various entertainment guilds—and that is putting money before art.

I can tell you that growing up all I wanted to be in life was a film maker and an adventurer, something between a Josh Gates and Steven Spielberg.  But when I had the opportunity to work on a few movie sets and talk to people behind the scenes I realized that most of them were Marxists openly pushing for socialism in American society.  So I had to turn away from that industry—sadly.  In the old days these liberals, like John Landis, and Ron Howard had to put up with their stars such as Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis and Clint Eastwood who were all conservative A-listers and Hollywood at least had a nice balance of product to present to the public.  However over the last few decades Hollywood producers looking to appeal to the Clintons and the Obamas in office tried to create a new generation of Marxists to replace the conservative leading men.  They tried to bring progressive ideas to their stories and they figured that if producers gave big explosions and loud music to a movie feature to help the Marxism go down easier, that audiences would stay with them, but that hasn’t happened.   People have just found other things to do.  It should say a lot that Netfllx productions like Stranger Things which is an obvious throwback to the 1980s and the HBO show Game of Thrones which is all about politics set in a kind of Medieval time where all the primal human instincts are explored, lust for power, sex, dominion over others are presented without a lot of subtle global warming messages, and the plight of the poor–the trend toward a customer experience is well-known..  The labor unions in the entertainment industry are looking at their situation and they are blaming Disney for not sticking to their Marxist goals of social reform but instead keeping their focus on “making money.”  Disney currently makes a lot of money off Star Wars and their Marvel projects.  They are giving audiences what they want and in return we give them money.  That’s the name of the game.

Disney to appease the creative labor unions does take up social causes-but it doesn’t help them at all toward The Goal.  They have nearly destroyed the ESPN network with progressive garbage nobody wants to hear tied to sports.  And Kathy Kennedy has messed with Star Wars in ways that could easily destroy it, by putting more of an emphasis on female characters. I don’t have a problem with it, but its a gamble to try to expand the market reach of Star Wars with females at the possible expense of the males. So far so good, but it is a risk worth noting.  Kathy Kennedy is not a Midwestern conservative, she is a social progressive and it shows in her projects.  But at least she understands The Goal which was written by Eliyahu M. Goldratt—and that is to make money.  To make money with Star Wars you must have merchandising—the experience must continue long after customers have left the movie theater.  That means that filmmakers have precisely two hours to create a product that will unleash countless books, comics, toys, t-shirts, bed sheets—you name it.  There isn’t room for some director to “put their own take on things,” they must follow The Goal—and that is to make money for Disney and its shareholders.  That is a very capitalist concept which pisses off the Marxists—but tough luck.  The product does not exist to make a point—it exists to make money because with that money many good things happen.

I went out on Force Friday a few weeks ago to buy a few items.  One of the things I had to get was a Rathtar from The Force Awakens movie, which was released on Force Friday specifically this year ahead of all the new The Last Jedi toys.  Even though I was very hard on The Force Awakens when it came out largely because Kathy Kennedy allowed the franchise to movie away from the line of stories I had been reading for thirty years in the novels and allowed J.J. Abrams to have the creative freedom to write a completely fresh Star Wars story changing the direction of the original novels dramatically, I have respect for the good work done on that movie.  My favorite scene from any movie in recent memory and certainly one of my top ten moments of all time is that scene from The Force Awakens when the Rathtars are introduced.  That was a lot of fun and whenever it’s on television when my grandkids are watching it, I usually stop what I’m doing to see it again.  At Force Friday there were a lot of happy people spending countless thousands of dollars on new merchandise because The Goal of the product which is Star Wars was aligned with their consumer needs.  Disney received a lot of money, which was The Goal, and the consumer got a quality product that spoke to them mythologically in ways they needed—for whatever reason.  The end result was good for all parties in that transaction.  It is not up to some Marxist Hollywood type to question The GoalThe Goal is market driven, it is up to those in the entertainment business to figure out what the consumer wants—not to change the consumer into something the artists wants—do you get what I’m saying—because this relates to virtually everything in our culture.

I have been extremely excited about the new Han Solo movie now directed by Ron Howard.  I think he’s exactly the right guy to make that movie which he had to take over from Phil Lord and Christopher Miller.  Obviously Larry Kasden who has made some of my favorite movies in the past understands The Goal of Star Wars as a screenwriter.  He may not philosophically like The Goal, but he’s hired to do the job of achieving it—and that’s the difference between professionalism and being a Marxist douche bag.  He’s the writer on this new Han Solo movie along with his son so when the young directors known for The Lego Movie were fired because they didn’t get what Larry was trying to put up on the screen, Ron Howard was brought in to fix things.  I was happy about it because it told me that Lucasfilm understood what The Goal was, and they were committed to it.  I have no doubt that the professionalism of Ron Howard will keep The Goal of the new Han Solo movie in focus and deliver a product that Lucasfilm needs and Disney can continue to use to make a lot of money—which is a wonderful thing.  But I did have to send Ron Howard a Tweet the other day reminding him that all his Donald Trump bashing he has been doing may very well draw a line between him and his audience—half of which like the job Donald Trump is doing.  By politicizing Star Wars, you risk deviating from The Goal, and that is dangerous to everyone involved.  Howard is a smart guy and a fabulous director, but it’s not his job to define The Goal. It’s his job to implement it as the director, and that’s what he was hired for.  All the below Tweets shown below are on Ron Howard’s main page.

The new Star Wars movies may be corporate productions that lack the heart of the solitary vision of George Lucas—but they do understand The Goal and that’s why they are special.  The three measurements in The Goal are throughput, inventory, and operational expense—everything for a successful implementation of a flourishing business model is contained within those three measurements.   Throughput in the case of Star Wars is the delivery of a movie on time from conception to the release date.  Inventory is the resources it takes to make the movie, like directors, writers, studio rentals, building props—all that stuff.  And of course operational expenses are the overall costs of keeping the movie franchise alive as a social mythology, the new theme park attractions, the marketing of merchandise and all the other big picture items.  There is a lot more to a movie than just paying honor to the creative instincts of the film’s directors or the writers.  There is much more to The Goal than just the vision of an artist.  Star Wars is successful because traditionally Lucasfilm understood The Goal.  The Marxist friends of George Lucas may have given him grief over it, but if George had listened, we wouldn’t have Star Wars.  And in that respect, what has John Landis done lately except complain.  He made that famous “Thriller” video like a million years ago.  And The Blues Brothers was made in the 70s.  I would say that Landis like his friend Spielberg has forgotten what The Goal was and instead have adopted that radical Marxism that they all share through their director’s guild.  And lucky for us, who are Star Wars fans, Kathy Kennedy has kept her eye on The Goal and not the socialist sentiments of her entertainment industry friends.   Sure she made the lead actors in most of these new movies a “girl” and she made a black stormtrooper, and put a Hispanic guy in as the lead hot-shot new pilot, which I’m sure made her liberal friends give her less grief over heading a giant capitalist movie studio—but at least she hasn’t forgotten The Goal.  And for that I must commend her.  If she has to fire 200 Star Wars directors she should, because it tells me she is committed to my customer satisfaction and not the social ranting of just another Hollywood Marxist, like John Landis.

Rich Hoffman

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

Why Hillary Clinton is Technically Insane: The dangers of people who are functionally crazy who seek office–like Joan Powell

I wouldn’t keep talking about it but it’s such a fascinating example of mass psychosis that we’d be doing the human race an injustice not to examine the situation. Of course I’m talking about Hillary Clinton’s book tour for her new excuse called What Happened. While doing press for the book she has said some of the most bizarre things I think I’ve ever heard as a collection of thoughts from one person in serious denial. Its equivalent to a psychiatrist conducting theory on a wife-beating alcoholic drooling from being freshly drunk with his spouse sitting next to him with blood dripping from her lips from a fresh beating and bruises all over her face and arms and for the drunk blaming the lawn mower for all the miseries in his life. Mark Dice did a pretty good video seen below on this subject, but honestly, the collection of many clips displaying the sheer insanity of Hillary Clinton is overwhelming—even for people like Dice. It is difficult for any sane mind to even grapple with the insanity it takes to pull off the Hillary Clinton case. As it turns out, she is even worse than her most vicious detractors have theorized. Hillary represents just how crazy progressives typically are and how delusional they are about the nature of the world around them. Naturally a person who cannot deal with reality in the forms for which it is presented is clinically insane and must be treated with cautiously.

Locally in my home town politicians like Joan Powell who is running for a trustee seat displays similar insanity as Hillary Clinton—because the situation isn’t specific to Clinton—it is rather indicative to a mass psychosis that emerged as a result of progressive philosophy being injected into a traditional Christian culture in America and assuming that it had a right to do so. Those who subscribed to it have had to actually ignore elements of reality to pull off the ruse—in themselves, and that process has destroyed their grip on truth as defined by the relativity of human society. I have often looked at these local politicians and their supporters—like in the case of Joan Powell and observed their craziness. But the situation is obviously even deeper than that. With Hillary Clinton representing kind of a spokeswoman for insanity, many people suffering from this condition follow her blindly and its fascinating to observe. They typically say and do the same kind of things as Hillary is exhibiting—and we might not have this observational window into their crazy minds if not for the hurt feelings of the former presidential candidate who assumed that she would win an election just because she was a woman.

I never took Hillary Clinton serious as a candidate. I thought Trump would win a full year ahead of the election and I said so much on these very pages. When it was clear that Hillary would be the Democratic nominee and not someone like Joe Biden, I knew the party had picked the wrong person and that they would be defeated. I even predicted this current situation for Democrats live on the radio just a few weeks before the election of 2016. It was clear to me what was going on not because I’m a white male with an affluent background—but because I’m dealing with reality and the rules of nature to make decisions. Hillary Clinton and her supporters are not—they deal in a kind of voodoo cult of belief, suspicion, assumptions and superstitions indicative of the early hominids of our species. For people who call themselves “progressives” they have not evolved passed observing a lunar calendar and having a party when there is a summer solstice or doing a rain dance trying to usher in water for their dried-up crops. It’s not against the law to be stupid—largely it’s a choice—and people are free to be stupid if they want. But they are not free to be stupid and rule over others—and that was exactly what Hillary Clinton and all her doppelgangers running for various offices around the United States are attempting to do. Knowing something about human nature, I never thought she had a chance even though she was sold as reality by those in the media who think they are the progenerates of truth.

It’s one thing to believe something even if it’s not there, it’s quite another to go into public and blast it from every avenue defending it which clearly indicates insanity when the values of the message do not align with reality in any way, shape or form. That is what Hillary Clinton is doing on this book tour. Anybody with a thinking mind can hear her talk and know that she is not a person people like. She is a person most people would not enjoy having a beer with unless they themselves were suffering from the same condition. The trouble with Hillary is that people just don’t like her and they never have. She’s always been Bill Clinton’s punching bag and that earned her sympathy from sadomasochists and drug addicts, but normal people found her repulsive—and she should have known that going into this whole effort. But to go to the extent to break the law like she did before the campaign ever got started was in itself a kind of mass psychosis. Only really dumb people were buying into her candidacy and her polling numbers should have shown her that—and they likely did, only she didn’t pay attention to it because she was living in her own brand of reality. But to put herself out there as a presidential candidate with the media fully at her back, the crony capitalists, the progressives, the global elites, and the entire Beltway culture trying to get her elected and still get destroyed in the Electoral College is something quite spectacular. It wasn’t racism, sexism or fear of any kind that kept her from getting elected. It all came down to the fact that she was a terrible candidate and a not very likable person.

Then to watch her go around assuming that reality is something else and to write it all down for all to study for many centuries in the future is pretty crazy. If she had even a thread of sanity she would have just retired and let people think what they wanted—but to go out into society and say the things she is shows an insanity that is actually quite troubling. There are a lot of people out there in the world who aren’t very smart who use power gained through peer pressure to cover their illness—and Hillary gives them validation and hope. What should happen in the case of people like the local politician I mentioned such as Joan Powell is that they should get medical attention. But instead, because of Hillary these insane people are kind of cosplaying at life, dressing up as normal people but playing the role of a social lunatic. And that might be fine for their domesticated lives, but when they seek the levers of power for other people, that’s when they become dangerous.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Many Problems of Joan Powell: A person 10 years behind the politics of the day


Being serious about Joan Powell, the beat up old politician from Butler County, Ohio who is running for a much dreamed about trustee seat, she has a lot of problems.  Over the years she’s simply screwed over too many people.  It’s one thing to run for a school board seat that nobody wants to do, but a trustee position is a little harder, especially when Mark Welch and George Lang have done such a good job setting into motion the finances of West Chester so wonderfully.  Mark would have to lose his seat in the election, or Lee Wong for Joan to get a chance and that’s likely not going to happen even if nobody did any campaigning.  Joan’s campaign reminds me of when Jamie Green tried to come back after five years of being out of action to become a school board member at Lakota in 2011, which I spoke about below at a public forum.  A lot of things changed in the world in just five years and Jamie Green couldn’t overcome the scrutiny and for having a pretty sizable name had a hard time breaking into fourth place in a five person election.  Joan’s situation is similar now in 2017 in West Chester.

There is simply too much dirt on Joan.  On the surface she plays a nice old lady who has some grandchildren.  But, she’s been pretty ruthless when it comes to politics and her people aren’t in charge of anything anymore.  The world has changed under her feet and she’s on the wrong side of history.  Her act is old and tired and she clearly doesn’t understand it.  What she does know is that her friends down at the hair salon think she should run because poor little Lee Wong can’t get a vote in edgewise while he’s off showing tremendously bad judgment putting his name next to Chinese traitors.   The labor unions put out the bat signal hoping to resurrect Joan essentially because they want a weak negotiator at the table instead of Mark—and that’s why she’s running.  They talked her into it thinking that she’s their best chance of getting control of the West Chester Trustees again by gaining a positive vote count during future wage negotiations.

Her reputation at Lakota while she was a school board member was despicable.  Of course the public employees loved her—she constantly voted to give them more money.  Ironically the moment she left the Lakota school board that 8th largest school district in Ohio started learning to live within their budgets and they have not sought further tax increases.  Lakota has done a much better job of managing their business with Joan Powell gone than they ever did while she was there and now with a few years to analyze the situation, its clear Joan was part of the problem at Lakota and that is the best thing she has to run on in this 2017 election—is her experience at Lakota as a board member.   Her best achievement in recent years was a 2013 tax increase she managed to ride through spending many hundreds of thousands of dollars moving the vote count a measly 4 percentage points—and that was with the help of Sheriff Jones.  Likely Jones is behind Joan’s comeback here because he knows she is a tax and spend liberal and he has family on the West Chester police department who want pay raises at the tax payer’s expense so of course they want liberal Joan Powell to rubber stamp their contracts—but Jones can’t help Powell much.  He’s come out in favor of Trump and was a big part of the campaign to get him elected in Ohio.  He’s not going to be able to publicly hold her hand in the way she’ll need this time which will make it very difficult for her—because she’s a Hillary Clinton supporter masking as a Republican to get elected in Butler County, but the party has changed a lot over the last 12 months.  It’s not the same place.

Then there is the baggage, Joan has screwed over a lot of business people.  I plan to talk a lot more about that as the election nears especially in October leading up to the final vote.  Joan got caught doing a lot of double-dealing and she didn’t make any friends from the people who count most.  Sure, Patti Alderson talks to her socially but if anyone noticed at the annual party that the West Chester socialite has at her house where Republican candidates go to be noticed and ask for money for their various fall campaigns, the Party affiliation and objectives aren’t as clear as they had been.  Sure the Butler County Republicans have wrestled away control from Tea Party conservatives like David Kern in favor of never Trumper types who gambled that John Kasich would do much better than he did.  But now the Ohio governor is on his way out and he will likely be replaced by the Republican Trump supporter Jim Renacci who is making major strides toward a powerful candidacy.  He has the right people behind him and a message that is aligned with the current White House.  Whether or not Republicans like it, Trump is running the RNC and that certainly flows into local politics for which Joan isn’t in the picture.  Patti may like her from the good ol’ days, but Patti isn’t exactly part of the inner circle any more either.  She has money to direct into political pockets as she has in the past, but she doesn’t have the philosophical persuasion that she once held either.  When Joan and Patti worked out their public campaign against me in 2012 to get their tax increase passed at Lakota by 2013 they had to play some very dirty tricks which I’ve never forgotten only to have very moderate success.  And now just four years later the political landscape is much different—not in the favor of Joan Powell.  The game has left her in the dust and people like Patti are only able to hang on because of her deep pockets.  The Party is not as friendly to RINOs as it once was.

Because of Trump business people are in, liberal tax and spenders are out—and Joan is a long way away from her business background which she had when she was a little girl.  For many years now she has simply been a social activist from the school board with one of her biggest achievements coming from the failed attempt to shut down the entire school to get on the Ellen DeGeneres Show.  You can see Joan dancing in the video below at the 7:16 mark which was a project the entire high school of Lakota East put on for the cause of Spina Bifida.  That of course was the cover story.  The real aim was to get national attention on Ellen’s show and using all the kids as a way to do it—which cost many thousands of dollars.  Joan as a member of management thought that was a good use of tax payer money and she was there dancing away at the event.  Her calculation was that the national coverage would put them over the top with public sentiment and get them a tax increase, but they failed to get on Ellen.  I ran into two of the people dancing with Joan in that video at a VIP event at the opening of Rodizio at Liberty Center in 2015 and I asked them who’s stupid idea it was to allow the entire school to make a music video with all the expense involved.  They blamed it on Joan—so that shows her decision-making ability—she’s certainly not a business minded person—and that’s what it takes to be a Republican these days especially at a trustee position.  People expect a little flamboyancy from liberal school board members; they’re more forgiving when it comes to children and social causes.  But managing how things happen where they live, that’s another matter all together.

While you can’t take anything for granted in any election—Joan will have her normal people come out to support her on election day, the union supporters who want a pay raise, the people at her hair salon and a few losers hanging out in the cracks of depravity, but she’s a Hillary Clinton supporter in a district that voted for Trump well over 10% the Ohio trend and the Republican party is much more affiliated with the new president than it was on Election Day 2016.  Joan’s record is terrible and she burnt a lot of people to achieve what she did.  She doesn’t have any people who matter in the current political structure who will go to the ends of the earth for her and Mark does.  Lee Wong doesn’t either—his biggest achievement is that he gets free meals around West Chester but he doesn’t do much else but support traitors and people who want to build sidewalks so he can walk from his house and mooch off people in the business community.  But Joan doesn’t even have that.  I’m sure she’s well funded by the old political power seeking to make a comeback, but it won’t be enough because the moment she opens her mouth people will know she doesn’t have an idea to stand on, and these days, that just won’t cut it.

Rich Hoffman

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

Don’t Discriminate Against Melania Because She’s Beautiful: Texas needed what the Trumps delivered

You would never know it from the news reports but people were very enthusiastic to see Donald Trump visit the hurricane zone in Texas. I watched Fox News most of the time that Hurricane Harvey was striking the Texas coast with historic rainfalls flooding so many people out of their homes. I thought it was extraordinary that most people held their cool and grabbed their fishing boats to rescue people from the rising waters. The people and their monster trucks, four wheelers and various aquatic craft that went from bored driveways into the action of rescue was far better than anything the federal government could do at that moment and it was private enterprise that was mostly saving lives. The National Guard and police departments of course were important, but in most cases when it came to quick action it was neighbor helping neighbor that essentially meant the different between life and death. When president Trump visited with his wife Melania they seemed to understand that fact better than anybody and they dressed to inspire those people. Melania left the White House in high heels and a bomber jacket while the President dressed as if he were about to be a test pilot for a new style of aircraft. Obviously, their approach was of defiance against the forces of nature that had inflicted so much pain and suffering, and for the people of Texas, it was the right approach.

President Trump hit just the right notes during his visit and the people loved him for it. For the media not to cover his visit in the proper context was very dishonest. Everywhere I turned for news on Tuesday 8/29/2017 it was all about Melania’s shoes as the mostly female journalists were obviously very threatened by the first lady’s grace and beauty under those tragic circumstances. I thought her approach was extraordinarily appropriate, when people are faced with misery and destruction they want to see hope and beauty. Melania went to Texas to give them that—and they loved it. Because many of the women reporting the news couldn’t compete they lashed out in hate toward the FLOTUS which was very unfair to her—it was discrimination on a vast scale. They are always telling us not to judge people based on skin color or sex—but here they were hating Melania Trump for being too beautiful. It was a new kind of discrimination that was utterly disgusting. Melania wasn’t dressing that way for the rest of the country, but for Texas. Just because there’s a tragedy it doesn’t mean we must sacrifice our style and grace. Sometimes, that’s just when such things are needed.

It was an act of defiance for the human race to build a city in Huston, and everywhere along the Texas coast. The whole area is a flood zone and will over geologic history experience many tragedies. To put cities there is in defiance of nature, not yielding to it, and people generally understand those things during tragedies. By Melania wearing those high heels on the way for the cameras to capture I took it as a reminder that part of being human is to defy nature and command it. Not to bow to it like a bunch of animals. Nature had bitten back at humans in Texas and the whole purpose of the President and FLOTUS in going there was to inspire them back to health for the long road to recovery that would be involved for years to come. Trump needed to inspire people to consider that doing such a thing was worth it even though at the moment the tragedy seemed futile. People needed inspiration more than money and that’s what Trump offered through he and his wife.

But the Left went crazy because there wasn’t enough sadness, there wasn’t enough drama to satisfy the Lifetime Channel crowd. And really, that says a lot about the people who stand against President Trump. They don’t like that Trump is a positive person who believes in selling why America is a good place—because they have dedicated their lives to complaining and selling how bad America is to them. They have expected that sour stance to solidify and destroy the last remaining superpower on earth with negativity. Yet Hurricane Harvey isn’t so much of a disaster story. Yes people died, about 20 so far, and yes, there are billions of dollars in damages that will take decades to rebuild. But look how people pulled together and faced down the villainy of Mother Nature pushing back with the hardy human inclination of survival. Think of the boats that took to the streets to rescue people as the riders ducked under street lights. It was a remarkable sight in part because many of those people had enough expendable income to buy boats in the first place—to have them just in case of such a crises. Trump didn’t do that, the people of Texas did. What they needed from Trump was an encouraging voice after days of hard work—and that’s what they got.

When Trump says that he thinks the media is the most dishonest element there is, this is what he’s talking about. The facts they choose are counter to the natural desires of the American public. Yes, people love a car wreck, yes, they love tragedy and soup operas—but they also love to persevere and they elected Trump because they wanted to feel great about their nation again. Not because they wanted to cry over every little bit of spilled milk. People want hope, they want to feel good, and they want to win. Even when a hurricane comes and destroys everything they’ve spent a lifetime building, they want to win and even strike back. They don’t want to hear about climate science and how we need to appease the gods of nature to keep such a thing from happening again. They want to dominate nature and use the human mind to overtake the sorrow in defiance of the circumstances.

That’s why it was important for Melania Trump to where those nice, tall high heels on her way to the flood zones. It is unfair to her to cast so much anger in her direction simply because she is a beautiful woman. Perhaps this is an argument against why we should have so many women in the news reporting business because if they can’t look at Melania and see the beautiful woman she is, inside and out—they can’t report stories like this. They don’t have a right to discriminate against her just because she’s beautiful. Texas needed her, and she went. That is the story and that’s what the Trumps delivered.

The hatred of Trump is pathetically small-minded and I am getting more and more resentful of that constricted thought pattern by the people committing the act day by day. As I’ve said for many years, I’ve put up with other people’s view points for a long time—and they have screwed up a lot of things. Now my guy is in office and I expect them to show him the same courtesy. If it doesn’t work out, then they can try again in some future election. But he deserves a chance to do a good job and his wife certainly shouldn’t get scrutinized just because of her looks. If Melania wants to wear high heels, then she should be able to do it. Some women love their shoes and as a fashion model I’m sure she has shoes that make her very happy to wear. Likely she needed to pump herself up a bit to have the energy to face such devastation and still put on a happy face. I know when I have to do difficult things I like to wear my favorite shirt or a hat. For her it’s probably shoes. There’s nothing wrong with that, and If I have to be honest, she looked great wearing them. She can wear them on the moon as far as I’m concerned. And that is honest reporting. Sadly, the media refused to cover this story honestly instead looking under every rock for some negative—and Texas or Trump wouldn’t give it to them. And they showed their ugly teeth in the process of something that was actually quite a good American story.

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


Transference: The woman in the kitchen

People really should read Dinesh D’Souza’s new book The Big Lie.  It’s truly well done and surprisingly packed with information. I say that because I have read a lot of these types of modern political books and I seldom learn much from them but in this one I have learned quite a lot.  I would attribute that to something that D’Souza has uncovered that is exploding before our eyes, and that is this propensity of our collective society to function from a mass psychological trauma induced onto us from our early educations and that is to function from a gross case of mass transference.  Transference psychologically speaking is when a villain claims to be the hero or vice versa and shockingly it was on full display at the C-SPAN event shown below where Dinesh debated on stage with two members of the Alinsky Institute, David Alinsky son of the infamous Saul Alinsky and Ralph Benko.  Benko in particular who claimed to be a “right winger” was using transference to sell the merit of his institute which was incredibly interesting.

On a mass scale what the Donald Trump presidency has exposed is something we all knew was there from the beginning. The villains who are really guilty of serious crimes are attempting to pass those off onto passivist Republicans which has worked for many years but because Trump won’t accept that guilt a major clash is ensuing.  This is exposing the Democratic Party because there is nowhere to hide their crimes if Republicans won’t allow them to transfer that guilt to the GOP as has been going on for over one hundred years that I can tell.  For instance, it was Democrats who supported the KKK and slavery.  I was Democrats who inspired Hitler to give rise to his Nazis.  It was Democrats that colluded with Russia.  It was Democrats that destroyed evidence.  It was Democrats that issued many terrible pardons to enemies of the United States.  It was Democrats who want to use the power of the state to control all our lives in every way imaginable.  Republicans are against all those things yet by the psychological trick of transference they have accepted the sins of their rivals because they were defenseless against the way Saul Alinsky used his tactics to take command of the entire party giving people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton power they otherwise wouldn’t have had. Watching Benko and David Alinsky not be able to defend the things Dinesh D’Souza said about Saul Alinsky was truly fascinating.  They spent most of their time trying to defend the dedication of Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals to Lucifer than in defending the acts of transference that the Democratic Party has been using to beat Republicans through the media they control by associating their guilty acts onto an innocent party using Alinsky tactics to apply it.

To put the situation in a way that most people can understand transference would be when a man who is cheating on his wife quite audaciously comes home with perfume from another woman on him, and lipstick smeared on his collar then starts yelling at his wife who is just there cooking dinner accusing her of sleeping with other men.  The woman knows she hasn’t slept with other men and that she has been busy getting food for the meal she’s preparing yet now she has to defend the accusations of her husband.  If she fails to answer her husband’s criticisms she’ll look like she’s hiding something.  If she does answer them then she gives value to the charge by acknowledging it.  Either way, she is forced to make a move of defense or silence, both of which will get her accused of the act.  It’s an old liberal trick that has been going on for a long time and it’s odd that an entire political party could use a psychological mechanism to advance such an evil.

One of the primary themes of the great American novel Atlas Shrugged is the idea of making innocent people an accomplice into mass, group evil through transference.  This is done by getting people who are the movers and shakers of the world to admit to some level of selfishness if they won’t share their gains with people in need—without addressing why people are in need.  This is essentially how Mitt Romney lost his election against Barack Obama.  Democrats painted Romney as selfish, rich, and under using women as a role under his management.  Romney in fact was far from selfish and he had a history of being very fair to women, but when Democrats put that transference application to him he couldn’t defend it because he did feel guilt about his wealth.  That hook along froze him into inaction and allowed Obama to win the presidency.

Years ago when I was doing a radio interview on a popular daytime talk show I was involved in a lot of controversy and the host was trying to get me to apologize on the air.  It was baffling to me why this person cared so much to get an apology and this is something that is going on constantly these days—where people are being encouraged to apologize for everything.  Well, I meant what I had said in spite of the public backlash, and I knew all this psychology of transference so I stuck with my guns much to virtually everyone’s professional sensitivities.  To apologize to an unidentified group of women whom I said had asses the size of car tires and diamond rings to match would be to admit guilt.  Well, I wasn’t guilty.  What I said was a factual statement in the metaphorical application of it and the circumstance for which I said it.  By apologizing because it sounded harsh or was politically incorrect as determined by the reality of Democratic transference I would have undercut my entire platform—which I wasn’t about to do.  The Republicans around me at the time instinctively wanted to apologize and wanted me to do so—which I wouldn’t so we all went our separate ways.  They should have listened to me then because a few years later Trump became president doing essentially what I had done—not allowing the transfer of guilt from one Party to the other by accepting responsibility for it.

The only thing the woman in the kitchen could do when her husband came home to accuse her of cheating was to point out that he was the one with the signs of cheating for which his only comeback from that would be to rant, rave and threaten her with violence to shut her up—and that is what the political left is doing now that Donald Trump is refusing to apologize or accept any guilt from the Democrats.  Republicans on the Hill simply don’t know how to play the game any other way.  The way to beat the political left is to not accept the transference of their guilt.  If they threaten violence, then we must be willing to crush them just like the woman who is the victim of being cheated on must do against her husband.  Whatever she must do she must implement, like having a gun, or a can of mace—something that can overtake her husband if he attempts violence against her because she won’t accept his transference of guilt.  Donald Trump understands this issue, and I have been trying to teach it to people for years—and thankfully people are starting to listen.  But even I am shocked by the level of transference articulated in D’Souza’s new book.  I suppose I never really thought much about the Nazis and why they hated the Jews, or how they have more in common with Democrats than Republicans.   But they do and the reason why is transference.  Democrats are guilty of many crimes, but Republicans have come to their rescue so many times—it has enabled such a vast evil to be unleashed through good intentions.

The way Republicans have behaved was similar to the wife in saying, “honey, no, I haven’t been with anyone.”  You can check my cell phone, you can put a camera in our room, you can ask our neighbors—I haven’t even been out of the house.”  Meanwhile the husband has naked pictures of many girls on his cell phone and his wife doesn’t even know the password—so she could never check him out.  That dysfunction has to stop for Republicans.  They should be thankful that Trump is fighting on their behalf this physiological deficiency.  Because it happens far more than most people want to believe and each occurrence is a function of evil.  By endorsing such evil through shared responsibility—Republicans perpetuate it.  The moral thing to do is not to accept any guilt, even though we were all taught from infants up to the present to do so, and to keep the blame where it belongs—on the Democratic Party and their vile soldiers of disinformation.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Many Achievements of Trump: How you know the media has been lying

How do you know they are lying? Because “they,” the mainstream media—so-called—won’t tell you all the good things that Donald Trump has so far done as president which Sean Hannity so wonderfully articulated on his television show, seen below. Hannity also showed the extreme level of hatred that the same MSM showed toward Trump’s various speeches over the last couple of weeks. I watched all those speeches and I’m hardly a right-winged lunatic and there were only good things expressed in each of them. There was nothing, “unhenged” in the contents that showed a president unfit for office or bordering on insanity. That’s how you can know the truth, because reality does not reflect what a majority of the news outlets reported, and that makes it obvious that there is something very devious going on.

Obviously I was no Obama fan. But during his first six months I had hopes that he might pull back the regulations on stem cell research and maybe cheerlead the nation a bit. I gave him a shot really for the first year. Even as the storm clouds of decent from the Tea Party started to gather in 2009 I was willing to give the guy a chance, until he proved that he was simply an Alinsky change agent looking to overthrow America from a legislative perspective. I would expect the same treatment of Trump from the political left and he’s not getting it.

Trump hasn’t been in office long enough to make any real mistakes so the rhetoric exhibited by the political left in voluminous detail by the MSN is an obvious sign that there is more to the story than just political ideology in conflict. We’re talking about long-established plans toward a different kind of America that has been rejected by voters through Trump and are crumbling in front of their faces, and they are furious about it.
I’m here to tell you that if these people are this freaked out that there is more they have been hiding that hasn’t been yet revealed, and that means to us that we thankfully elected Donald Trump at just the right time. Already Trump has done more than most presidents hope to do in four years so there will be much more to cheer on soon. But the viciousness of the media towards Trump says everything about their intentions. It’s important that we stick with the president to undo all that these insurgents have planned behind our backs for over a century.

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