Ethnocentrism: The precise reasons America is the new definition for excellence in the context of history

There is a term, ethnocentrism–which postulates that a culture might consider itself superior to all others because the perspective is strictly from the vantage point of the one-sided observer.  This is generally a problem when looking back through history and assuming that a farming culture was superior to a hunting and gathering society—in that one produced more food while another may have had greater success in regards to religion.  The vantage point of supremacy usually falls on the side of history with those best able to record it—such as an ancient culture that had expanded their society to incorporate agriculture so to feed many thousands of people instead of a tribe of hunters.  Farmers might have developed a common language and ability to write for which the masses could understand–and thus record their experiences.  The modern observer would naturally think that the society that could write their thoughts down would be superior to the tribe that might only have communication skills that a small group of people understood—so the assumption would be that one was superior to the other.  That is the nature of ethnocentrism.

Modern academics try to play with words assuming that given their specialized skills that they might resonate across all platforms of thoughtful endeavor, but that is not the case. In a modern context the mode of emphasis given that so much of society these days have their own forms of communication and that the important thing to consider is the egalitarian aims of the most progressive of our world leaders.  Thus it is considered that the America first suggestions by President Trump are beneath consideration and barbaric in nature.  The world according to the academics of institutionalized thought is concerned with global equality—so these claims of a superior American culture are ethnocentric in nature and are rooted in ignorance.  After all, the Nazi’s (created by Democrats) were an ethnocentric culture—and look how “racist” they were to believe that the Aryan race should dominate the world.  But the world (lead by the United States) stood up to the Nazis and defeated them paving the way for the United Nations to bring to the world an egalitarian order which would stop all wars—and also all forms of judgment as well.  Nobody would be ethnocentric any longer—everyone would be equal.

This past week when Trump supposedly said that Haitians were not desired to be American immigrants and that talent from Norway might be more desirable a cultural rift took place that went deep into the follies of our modern age, and perspective.  I heard even Glenn Beck on his show bloviate about how racist Trump was and that he had a tendency to view superior breeding among those of his “own kind” to be more desirable over the poor from back water countries from people of different color.  And I was listening to this thinking, “so if we have daughters whom we’ve cared for since they were little girls and we’ve loved very much, we are supposed to be OK with it if they marry a drug lord from Hezbollah because the value judgment is that they are of a different color, and culture and that we should just blindly respect their intentions in spite of what we see of their culture?  Should we endorse such a marriage to a ghetto bum with gold teeth and tattoos all over their neck just because they happen to be black?  I should think not.

The fact of the matter is this, America is a superior nation—it has a culture that has better endured the challenges of diversity than any country on planet earth ever has—in the history of the world.  It is not uncommon in America to go to the grocery store and see people from all over the world from many different religious backgrounds shopping together without wanting to kill each other.  What joins them culturally is the American Constitution—which is a rather good work of philosophy that started with the Magna Carta in England along with the Scottish Enlightenment of Adam Smith’s economic theories.  It’s not like America rolled over one day and became what it is—it took a lot of time, it took debates from Plato and Aristotle, it took the yearning of the pilgrims to throw off the confines of Catholicism and to put protestant winds in the sales of the Mayflower to start a colony free of European inquisition in a far away land.  It took the warring Vikings to settle in America and to breed with immigrants from China to become the first American Indians—and to bring those Norse gods together with those of ancient China to create mythologies of war and peace for which the American cowboy ran up against during the great Westward expansion.  It took the slaves from Africa who were freed for the first time in history to mix their cultures and gods with those of the white European to settle an American south that is unlike any place on earth.  It took a lot to bring America into being, and it was born of a unified desire from everyone around the world to be free and it is safe to say that the concept of America as a superior nation is not ethnocentric—it’s a fact.

America is the first place in the history of the world to take all the mistakes made throughout the ages of mankind and to come up with a unified method for living and growing as a species of mammals that happen to think.  So it is superior to the jungle shaman who ingests opium to have a vision quest, or a communist war lord stealing wealth, raping young girls, and destroying their young boys in El Salvador, or Honduras—so they can sell drugs to America to fund their crusade of destruction.  America is superior to a bunch of penguins hopping around in Antarctica with the primary concern of breeding as their life goal.  It’s ok to look at all these societies and to have empathy for them, but they certainly aren’t equal to life in America.  There is no place better on earth than America, for no place has created the opportunities for freedom than what has occurred on the North American continent over the relatively short period of time of just the last 400 years.  It doesn’t matter who was slaughtered in the process—that the Indians lost their land to a superior culture, or that slaves were taken from their homes in Africa because in the process their freedom was started which would have never happened otherwise.  The practice of ending slavery started in America due to the foundations of thought which formed this unique nation—and the mistakes of the past were learned from, and advanced into a very diverse culture which everyone should be proud of.

When academics and political hacks consisting of lawyers, thieves, and intellectual slugs propose that the world should be more egalitarian and that the cries for nationalism are inferior suggestions by a less sophisticated and racist culture limiting their perspective to the ethnocentrism of their known ideas—they are wrong.  What makes those American enemies angry is that they still hold that old desire for segregation and chaos which ran the world before America came to the stage.  Whether it be the institutions of Europe, the communists of Asia, or the spear chuckers of Africa and South America—America is the dominate culture on planet earth and everyone should learn from it to make their countries better off for that knowledge.  We are certainly not equal.  Our daughters should not have to marry scum bags and losers with no ambition—because we love them, and that value judgment protects them from bad decisions which will ruin their lives.  And we should not teach our children to be like the topless sluts of France who will sleep with anybody anywhere just to pass the time in their dreary, boring days in a socialist country.  Nor should we feel guilty for destroying the American Indian, or for the culture of slavery which we inherited, because we did better with the land, and the people than any previous culture has in the history of the world.  As cruel as slavery was, we should all be proud that the battle for freedom was conducted on North American soil—because a whole race of people were freed in the process.  Indians were not a great and wondrous people; they were at war with each other.  If anything happened during westward expansion it was that it brought peace to regions that had for many thousands of years previously seen only war from one tribe against another.  Sure, they worshipped the earth and all its creatures—because they were too stupid to think of anything new.  But in America we did—and we did it all together for the first time in all of human history—after more than 200,000 years of trying—and it started in 1776 when the minds of mankind decided to try something different—something better, and something that would improve the lives of everyone who accepted it.  This is why America is a superior culture from any vantage point not limited to the mundane old definition of ethnocentrism.

Rich Hoffman

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

The High Crimes of the Obama Administration: From Hezbollah to the Disney Company, they all want the same thing–an end to America

For those who think my position on drugs pouring into the United States is too harsh, that drug consumption is just a personal choice of free people exercising their right to destroy their minds, than feel free to use this article for the evidence in why you are an idiot and a contributor to domestic terrorism.  Additionally there are also people—usually the same kind of people—who think that now that President Trump is now in the White House that we should forget about the past—believe all these stupid anti-Trump stories—and live happily ever after forgetting about the many prosecutions that are due to members of the Obama administration including the former president himself, his DOJ operatives—both his attorney generals who are currently involved in serious anti-Trump activity.  Hillary Clinton, CIA director John Brennan, James Clapper, and of course James Comey—they should all be on trail defending themselves from prosecutions that may take them from their freedoms for the rest of their lives—not out signing book deals.  There have been massive crimes committed under that previous administration and we either have justice, or we have chaos in a banana republic. Before I go on dear reader remember what the gun smuggling operation was all about called Fast and Furious—which had the finger prints of Eric Holder and Barack Obama on that tragedy directly.  Then consider what Oliver North featured in the video below was up to with the Iran Contra Affair and how much trouble the Reagan administration got into over that.  Then consider that this deal that Obama’s administration cut with Iran to let Hezbollah sell drugs to the United States by scaling back the arms of justice from the DEA to allow the terrorist organization to continue funding itself by poisoning the minds of American youth in the process—then tell me that we should let all this go.  The deal Obama had with Iran isn’t much different from the MO of the Fast and Furious deal—which still hasn’t been dealt with—and we are all supposed to buy into all this crime just because some of the players are minorities, blacks, women and people from other counties—and that by saying anything about the crimes they committed makes us all racists?  Hey, I have an invisible bridge to sell all the people who believe that crap.

Look, if we have no law and order in America than I’ll gladly put together a team of vigilantes to strap on some guns and attack some of these villains directly.  The only reason I haven’t yet is that I have a hope that there is some justice left in the world.  I still respect the law enough to participate in the election process.  Wasn’t it Barack Obama who told us years ago that elections had consequences?  Well, he’s right, and he’s going to have to deal with getting his hands caught in the cookie jar of the most explosive scandals and crimes ever committed from such an abuse of a high office in the history of the world.  Talk about draining the swamp, well we have found the hairy mess that has been clogging the pipes and once it is removed, you’ll be surprised how quickly all the water disappears, and you’ll also be shocked how much the water hid.  We are talking about really bad people who have been involved in these things.  It’s not just because most of them are Democrats—it’s because they are criminals who have been willing to kill and destroy anybody to protect their tentacles of injustice. What has been done demands action by the good people of America and there really isn’t any live and let live—they have forced us to make the hard decisions that are in front of us—so the fault is completely on them.

So in that context let’s consider my thoughts about how terrible drugs are for our country—I said recently that anybody who supports drug use in America—especially among our youth are participating in domestic terrorism.  I would say that many people who support the reckless use of illegal drugs—including marijuana in the United States are on a sadistic pilgrimage to destroy the next generations so that the population on earth will decrease thus preserving the planet for the future by wiping out the humans which inhabit it. If you sit down to dinner to speak to some of the richest and most powerful progressives currently in existence, when you get down to it, their intention is to use drugs as a Trojan horse to destroy the cultures of capitalism around the world so that there isn’t anyone to resist their Marxist sentiments for the world—with the ultimate goal of protecting the earth from human invention.  I would go so far to say that 100% of the villains of our modern age think some variation of that accusation.  But taken literally, most of the money made off the illegal drug trade goes to fund the terrorist activities of anti-American forces around the world.  That illegal drug transaction that takes place on so many street corners within the United States directly funds terrorism from the source countries—Hezbollah being just the tip of the iceberg.

The debate will rage on, do people have a right to destroy themselves with drugs—including alcohol if the by-product of that behavior affects the happiness of everyone else?  Should I have to put up with a couple of stupid kids vaping weed in the car in front of me at a traffic light?  I’d say no because it has an impact on my happiness because the smoke blows back toward me when the wind kicks up.  I have to breathe that air, so their action has an impact on me.  I should have the right to step up to their car window and drag them out of it beating the shit out of them until they no longer have the strength to “vape.” But that is a more complicated debate that we can all have.  What we know is that in most cases that “weed” purchase put money in the pockets of some anti-America force.  The pot advocates will say that the solution to that is to make it all legal so that we can tax it, regulate it, and create jobs in the states.  But you see, here was the objective all along—by doing so you legalize poisoning the next generation of our society which fulfils the aims of the terrorism to begin with—the bringing down of a capitalist culture.  The terrorist doesn’t care if they give the poison or if someone else does, so long as the objective of destruction occurs.  By forcing the issues, if America legalizes it they don’t need the terrorist funding, because their aim has already been accomplished—a stoned society of American kids ill prepared for the fights of tomorrow leaving the Marxists to crash the gates of our republic without anybody so much as raising a fist against them.  That is what the terrorists ultimately want—a defeated society without having to fight them directly.

And why would any terrorist organization fear America when such high crimes from the highest offices have gone unpunished?  What do they care about the might of the American military as long as they continue hiding in the caves of Afghanistan, or the slums of Mexico City?  Do you dear reader know to what extent the Chinese are willing to impose their will on the world just to remain an exclusive supplier of the world’s garlic—a legitimate crop that is in high demand in the United States?  Consider what they are willing to do with the unregulated opium that pours from their borders headed for American dance clubs filled with sex starved capitalist youth?  Don’t kid yourself.  The world is filled with bad people and they have their guns pointed at the United States—and the Obama administration with the help of MOST of the Beltway culture—including the media, opened the door to allow all that terrorism to prosper.  The executives at Disney should go back and watch their own movie, Pinocchio.   They are teaching our youth to make “asses” of themselves right now with their progressive programming at ESPN, the Disney Channel, and liberalizing every product they put up on the silver screen.  They are no longer the innocent little puppets proclaiming they “have no strings on me”, but are the stinky kids smoking and playing pool—literally turning into donkey’s before our eyes—then being sold into slavery as a result of their ill lived lives.

Hezbollah is an enemy of American ideas and Obama himself got involved in all this activity using his DOJ to put money in the pockets of the terrorist organization.  That same DOJ that met with Bill Clinton in a plane just a few days before the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton with crimes she committed so to protect all this crime committed by the Obama administration with a friendly next administration.  When that didn’t go as planned and Trump won anyway, Obama’s personal terrorists involving Brennan, Clapper, and Comey moved to unmask Trump’s campaign during the transition in a last-ditch effort to derail the new president before he could get to work in “draining the swamp.”  So they committed even more crimes with this Russian dossier and the Fusion funding of it—to produce FISA warrants to create a cover story for all the crime in case they got caught—which they did.  These are really bad people and they deserve to be punished.  They’ve given us no choice.  And it either happens “legally” or it happens in less desirable ways—but it will and must happen.  I personally won’t accept anything less.

Rich Hoffman

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

Understanding what a “shithole” country is: Trump’s brilliant strategy ahead of a scandal much larger than Watergate


Nothing is shocking any more as we learn the true nature of our government officials and witness how the game has been working against us for years.  I told you dear reader not to worry about that meeting with Trump and the Democrats on DACA.  That was never going anywhere, but Trump had to bait them into movement so they’d reveal their positions—and that’s what he did.  Trump performed a brilliant strategy, he eased their minds that there might be a deal on live television where Trump allowed the media to have access to the entire meeting—for the record–then the Democrats proposed an outlandish proposal on DACA which blew the deal out of the water.  During a heated exchange in the Oval Office Trump said things which sounded harsh to the Democrats—and the people who were most entrapped, like Dick Durbin, heard what they wanted to hear from the President in their interpretation which lead to a massive controversy.  Durbin and a few other Senators stated that they heard the president say, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?”

I doubt that Trump said those exact words.  He denies it.  I think he may have said something in the spirit of that “shithole” comment, but it really doesn’t matter. It was astonishing how quickly and with so much merit that the media reported the issue and how the world reacted.  The brilliance of it is that Trump had already provided complete openness on a previous exchange so the contents of the next meeting could afford to be complete hearsay, baiting the Democrats to add lib to the reporting as they saw fit which gave Trump two things, a message he wanted to get out to the world without him actually having to do it—and to show the Democrats as being completely painted into a corner for which they’d have to lie to get out of.  When I heard it I thought it was pretty funny, and accurate.  Who with any kind of right mind doesn’t agree?  We have been told by these globalists who were all too quick to pounce on Trump for something supposedly said in private—which was exclusively reported by a political enemy in Dick Durbin—that we are all equal in the world, so the foundations for the rebuttal among the mainstream insurgents was already in place.

Not to mention that many Democrats and a lot of Deep State officials are in big trouble over this Fusion problem regarding the Russian dossier and the FBI cover-up to help Hillary Clinton stay in the running for president when she was clearly supposed to be going to jail.  The blood is in the water on both of those explosive stories which as I’ve been saying now for years will make Watergate look like a kid’s toy.  If America went through a crises that shaped a generation with Watergate—with films like All the President’s Men, then this conspiracy by the Democrats will shape centuries of behavior, because what has happened and is about to be revealed is far, far—far worse.  It is obvious to me at this point that Hillary Clinton who worked on that Watergate case as a young woman took what she learned about the levers of power and felt invincible that she was immune to prosecution and over many years built a syndicate of power extending from the media into the highest levels of the American surveillance community—and she was confident that anything she wished, she could implement.  This included winning the presidency or having people killed whom she desired to remove from her way.  In that world, Dick Durbin is just someone trying to run a diversion campaign to keep his global friends safe from one more week of scrutiny, which is coming whether they like it or not.

But for this purpose let’s study the potential or actual “shithole” comment.  The world insists that we live in an egalitarian society, where all the first world countries and the third world countries—as well as all the people in them are functioning with equal importance in the world.  That sounds fine to the lazy loser who smokes pot all day, plays video games as their primary motivation in life, and has no ambitions in life that contribute to anything productive.  But to the person next to them who works hard, saves their money to buy braces for their children and tries to stay informed on the events of the world so to navigate a safe passage through it for their family—the pot smoker is not equal—he is an impediment.  So also goes it on the world stage where a country like America pays most of the bills, contributes all the military resources, and all the help every time a hurricane comes and washes away all their huts that the people live in.  But come time for the Olympics, or in the halls of the United Nations we are supposed to view those people as equal just because they exist, no matter what their decisions were that put them into a third world country status.

To go a few steps further, what is a “shithole” for that matter?  Who wants to spend time in a place where people shit in a hole?  If you look at the reason people are looking to immigrate from some third world place to seek work in America—it’s because where they are coming from doesn’t have much to offer.  The wonderful opportunities that come from the capitalism of America are very appealing to people from African nations and Central American regions where it is considered a real luxury to have a clean glass of water.  Metaphorically speaking, the shithole comment is intended in this spirit, where people would leave one place to move to another so that the opportunities of that second place could be enjoyed.  But why aren’t those opportunities available in the home countries?  The reason, is because they are “shitholes,” places that have a lot of mess, and not much to build a productive life with.  All countries are not equal, otherwise everyone would be successful, living in one place would be just as desirable as living in another.

Trump’s supposed comments didn’t faze me in the least and it surprised me how much the media was making out of the story which was completely based on hearsay.  However, everyone I spoke to over the last few days felt the same way I did and that isn’t because I stayed in some conservative bubble where I only associated with like-minded people.  Even those with a liberal mind look at places like Haiti and think of them as “shitholes.”  Go out to dinner in Hyde Park outside of Cincinnati, or in the Rookwood shopping district in the very liberal east Norwood region and ask people what they think about visiting some of the “shithole” countries mentioned in this Trump debate and they’ll use the exact same language. Third world countries are not equal to first world countries—they could be, but because of decisions they made and how they have managed their resources, the people are not all egalitarian. Just as the pot smoker is not equal to the business executive who works 90 hours a week to be successful.  The two types of people are not equal.  They may have been born that way, but because of the destructive decisions of the pot smoker, one person lives a “shithole” life while the other may live in a half million dollar home for which they deserve due to their efforts.

Trump didn’t have to say it, because people already think it, but the president did get his political enemies to leak those sentiments which did just the same thing—it established a further entrenched justification for an “American First” policy that sent the globalists running for cover hoping to gain a little daylight between themselves and this Hillary Clinton case which threatens to destroy so many of them.  Trump likely baited Durbin into saying more than what was actually stated, but the point was made and a majority of Americans had the issue framed in their minds sorting the confusion of the news from the reality of personal feelings in a productive way.  And it was quite a brilliant strategy.

Rich Hoffman

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

If You Support Drug Legalization You are a Domestic Terrorist: Why Jeff Sessions and the Trump administration are right on their stance against marijuana


I seldom listen to WLW anymore, but I happened to have it on the other day and heard the pot advocate Scott Sloan ramble on about how bad Attorney General Jeff Sessions was for his reversal of Obama era polices on the prosecutions of marijuana.  Essentially the Trump administration is imposing federal guidelines on pot while going against states rights—where most small government advocates find this a reprehensible situation.  I myself am a states’ rights person over federal imposition.  However, I am emphatically in support of Jeff Sessions on this issue and the Trump administration in general.  I think pot should be illegal in every way, shape, and form and I want the harshest prosecutions for anybody possessing it or selling it to anybody under any conditions.  Marijuana is poison for the mind—just as alcohol is.  For the record, I’m not a fan of any mind altering substance.   I occasionally enjoy a caffeinated beverage such as a Coke or Mello Yello, but I mostly drink either water or milk—and that’s it.  No coffee, tea, or wine. If I’m out on a special occasion, I might have a beer or two but intoxication is always off-limits for me.  I think the entire premise is stupid, of intoxication, and I certainly think it is destructive to inhale a toxic substance that alters brain activity—so under no conditions do I support pot use—not even to make a rope out of the hemp. I hate the plant and all the products that come from it.

Anybody who supports drug use in any culture is an enemy of that society.  If history is studied there isn’t any culture that survived for more than a few hundred years if they abused drugs or participated in mind altering experiments—and this includes shamans from hunting and gathering cultures.  One thing that is for certain, if you look back at the Indians of North America or the witch doctors of voodoo, mind altering substances were part of their societies and religious perspectives—and they have led in every instance to a declining culture.  There is no future in America where a society of pot smokers will build on the moon, or spread into the vastness of space with great innovations if intoxication is the aim of their leisure activity.

While libertarians like Rand Paul think of themselves as fiscally conservative, but socially liberal, point to the billions of dollars that the pot industry can produce in tax revenue their aims are shortsighted because the industrial loss to other market sectors that require intellectual ambition will decline over time.  A thriving pot industry anywhere means that it is at the expense of social ambition.  Pot is an enemy to thought, it is to surrender our natural faculties to the numbness provided by a toxic ingredient.  It is for the weak at heart and those with low ambition in life.  It is poison to any hope at sustained productivity.

History for many people is only a few decades deep and many will say that during the Prohibition period that the government created the alcohol industry by making it illegal, and there is some truth to that.  By making something a forbidden fruit, you make it enticing to the natural rebellion which makes humans, human.  The need we all have to push the barriers and to see what might happen if we do this or that is part of the fun of drug abuse for people.  But consider this, this intoxication culture that we have today is only 100 years old.  While there have been saloons and pubs for centuries they were considered something of an oddity in most family lives—something that happened in towns, and there has always been destructive attributes associated with alcohol.  Many marriages have been destroyed by alcohol and a lot of children’s lives were ruined by it—and there are arguments that any government that might want to have a productive society would want to keep its people from destroying themselves with intoxication.  But we live in a free society, so this isn’t a government problem, but an ethical one.  People shouldn’t want to become intoxicated.  In the values that we all share one of them should be a sentiment which respects thought over intoxication.  We don’t know what impact our last century will have on our future—but looking at it the seeds for destruction are already planted.  Will our society endure for another 100 years with the intoxication culture that we presently have—I’d say not?  I’d say it’s impossible to advance beyond where we are now with a culture of adults and young people who crave to destroy their minds with intoxication.  People who support pot legalization and alcohol abuse are obviously thinking in the short-term of a few hundred years where my concerns are in the thousands.

If you study any ancient culture there is always a pattern that I refer to quite a lot, the Vico cycle which is a term James Joyce used in his great work Finnegan’s Wake. That term comes from Giambattista Vico who essentially mused that all societies go through four basic phases, first as a theocracy, then an aristocracy, followed by democracy then anarchy.  We can see traces of all four of these phases around the world right now depending on the development of each society. Because of air travel and the internet we have the unusual condition of all these various stages around the world clashing at the same time with one another.  We have politicians for instance who think of themselves as an aristocracy, while we have people striving for democracy.  Then we have these ANTIFA groups of Marxists who are demanding anarchy—while we have Islamic terrorists attempting to impose a global theocracy.  Our concern in this present age should be to move beyond this vicious cycle, but we are unable to reconcile it, so we have turned to mind altering substances to come to terms with these primitive forces.  Our biology tells us to retreat into the Vico cycle, our intellects say move forward and that conflict has created the need to shut down the voices with numbness.  In so doing we will surrender our opportunity to advance and will yield to the forces of history and simply vanish to begin again as we have all over the world so many countless times.

The Trump administration understands what I’m saying and they are acting on that knowledge for good or ill.  What good is state sovereignty if there aren’t any states in a few years to be sovereign?  What good is a new industry that produces billions of dollars in new revenue if it destroys the GDP of a nation by the trillions?  How can any tattooed, dope smoking, nose piercing libertarian think that entertainment options such as pornography and pot can lead to a stable and constructive family life?   If families are not the priority of conservatives and society in general, then what’s the point?  Without families there isn’t any future, because that’s how we transfer values across the centuries, to our children, grandchildren, ad ifinitum.  All pot supporters are willing to trade the short-term fun of intoxication for the long-term aims of social structure that can endure into the future. Pot supporters don’t have vision that extends them beyond their current century, they figure they won’t be around, so who cares?  And that’s why anybody who loves America and wants to see it endure even if its unpopular to do, will ridicule pot and the practice of destroying minds just to have a little fun.  Anybody who truly loves America would take a stand against drugs of all kinds—even alcohol.  And because of that I admire Jeff Sessions and the Trump administration for doing just that.  Trump doesn’t drink and that’s part of what makes him great.  And he certainly doesn’t smoke dope.  A lot of his enemies wished he did, because it would make him easier to beat.  But because he doesn’t they can’t.  That should be a lesson for the rest of America—nobody should ever seek intoxication of any kind, and instead should feed their minds with good things that help it grow and take our civilization to the next great step for the first time in history.

Rich Hoffman

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

Trust Trump: Taking the fight to the enemy to either convert them, or destroy them

A lot of people seem worried about Donald Trump after his talk with Democrats about DACA and the announcement that the president would attend the Davos event in Switzerland. For those who don’t know much about Davos, that is the Socialist International gathering that decides strategies on how to take over the world implementing various degrees of Marxism wherever possible. Those two things happening after the Michael Wolff book about life inside the Trump White House that has caused so much consternation and destroyed the career of Steve Bannon, has people noticeably concerned—on every side of the political spectrum. But I’m not surprised by any of it. It’s all in Trump’s most famous book, The Art of the Deal. I continue to tell people that they should read Trump’s books—they’d understand a lot more about what’s going on.

We have a lot of problems to solve over the next few decades and all those problems are made worse by a generation of young people raised in the public-school system to function under socialism. That has always been a topic of great importance at past Davos meetings and knowing that George Soros himself will brag quite spectacularly that the damage is already done—America as it was is just a projection of its former self, the standard belief is that it’s too late for America. Soon it will all fall in on itself and socialism will take over as the mode of operation in the last great capitalist country on earth. Literally every corner of the world is functioning from some dysfunctional plot created by these Davos progressives because they usually entail people with huge amounts of money who essentially view themselves as modern aristocrats of European design—the ruling class by merit of their wealth reshaping the world.

Trump knows that there will be no changes to people’s support of capitalism if the fight does not go to the doorsteps of the enemy. Traditionally Republicans move away and avoid the confrontations with an encroaching leftist which is why the Saul Alinsky methods have worked traditionally. For instance, take Glenn Beck for example—with all the challenges he posed to George Soros he lost his Fox News show and then was systematically harassed everywhere he went in public—Broadway plays, shopping excursions with his family, and a noticeable attack that seemed to have really rattled him in a New York park. His response was to retreat his operations down to Texas where he started The Blaze—which has always struggled to get a foothold—essentially because he ran from liberals and sought to moderate his tone to their liking. Another notable Fox News personality, Bill O’Reilly is now on the outside looking in sending pictures of his dog every other day on Twitter when he used to be a person of great command of social dialogue. He’s been reduced to nothing essentially because he chose to run from liberals instead of engaging them. He still writes best selling books, but that is due to the overflow of his audience from when he was on Fox News. Now without that vehicle of delivery, he is a diminishing character of social shaping.

What makes Trump different from virtually everyone else is that he is battle hardened and confident in his own positions. He is not enamored by glitzy billionaires and their cars and women because he is one of them. He doesn’t have to be nice to them hoping to get campaign donations—he can work with them or around them however he sees fit. So he can go to Davos and sputter on about American first melting away the faces of the Socialist International members and walk away intact. He has no problem fighting anyone anywhere, so he can’t be forced to retreat and that makes him very special. That type of engagement is what it takes to beat the left. We are at a point where conservatism must consider not only winning elections but in selling conservative values to those who don’t presently have them, and the only way to do that is through victory. People need to see those ideas competing against those at Davos and come to the decision that they’d rather follow the America first policy rather than the globalist proposals of Socialist International. Conservatives must be willing to go into the Lion’s Den and to fight liberalism on their own homelands. That is the only way.

Fighting doesn’t always have to be contentious either. If a victory can be achieved with pleasant talks and back slapping—that is a preferred way. Take into account the remarkable efforts at talks that just took place between North and South Korea. Amazingly just a few months after the world was fearing nuclear war with the communists of the North on the Korean Peninsula now Kim Jong-un is ready to send people to the Olympics in South Korea. The North Koreans stated that their weapons were not pointed at their brethren in the South, but at the United States—which is fine. Trump understands the nature of playing good cop and bad cop and if playing the antagonist brings peace talks to the table, that is a good thing. The sanctions from China have worked, there is no power play at work to divide South Korea and the United States—there is only getting the North Koreans to participate in the world of markets without threatening to blow everyone up every five seconds—and Trump has achieved that. Without Trump being president, there would be no talks between the two Koreas, and there certainly wouldn’t be any Olympics participation between Kim Jong-un and his former rivals to the south. By giving the kid an “out” in the West to hate, Trump opened up the possibility of uniting Asia under a common need and peace will be the result. It was quite a masterful strategy.

It is ironic, but I certainly feel it. Not even 10 years ago I could go to dinner with some Hollywood people and have enough common ground with them to carry on a conversation. But liberals especially the hard-global progressives, made their bold moves during the Obama years and have made it impossible to have conservatives and liberals speak to each other. As a matter of fact, being conservative is a dirty word—I never yield to it, but if I’m talking to museum people, scientists or anybody in the teaching profession, I feel I have to explain myself as a conservative. Even traveling in Europe where everyone seems to be a little liberal there is the sentiment that there is something wrong with you if you are an American conservative—and that is just appalling. A lot of that occurred because conservatives never sat down with Democrats and forced them to talk or defend their positions—or ever challenged them except from the safety behind a fence of Party ideology. That has empowered progressives, especially the liberals at Davos. Unchallenged, the billionaires there who control most of the world’s media feel they can impose their beliefs on the rest of us making conservatives feel like an inferior and outnumbered party when the truth is far from it.

With Trump going into their places and talking to them he is taking the GOP into a realm it’s never been before, and he’s mixing ideologies in a productive way that forces the collision to produce a new tomorrow. As divisive as a president as people attribute to him—Trump will go down in history as the only one who was able to bring the world together on the bases of philosophical truth that no text book has yet discovered. To do that you can’t be afraid of the other side—you have to go into their homes and meet them where they eat and sleep, and take your position to the places they are most vulnerable—and force them to look at it. And that is precisely what Trump is doing, and I think it’s wonderful.

Rich Hoffman

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

Did you read Juanita Broaddrick’s New Book: There is no choice but to prosecute the Clintons and the Deep State that protected them

I heard a lot of backlash over the first week of 2018 regarding the obvious prosecution of Hillary Clinton and the members of the Deep State that participated in her protection.  The logic they asserted was that she lost the election and was now otherwise harmless.  Trump should move on and not prosecute a former political rival.  And on the surface among stupid people, I can understand their mode of thinking.  But we are not talking about just a political contest where Hillary lost and Trump won.  We are talking about the mechanisms of government that were used to prop up a political party which violated many laws for which the foundations of our entire society rested, and were used against the other party.  Hillary and her Democratic party broke a lot of laws, audaciously and unfortunately for her she lost anyway, and the responsibility for prosecution falls on the Trump administration.  Trump has no choice but to use the law to correct the situation, because the Democrats made it that way.  When crimes are committed punishment must follow otherwise there is no respect for the rule of law.  And the immensity of that statement couldn’t be more obvious than in the publication of one simple book just a few days into the 2018 New Year,  Juanita Broaddrick ‘s new book, You’d Better Put Some Ice On That: How I Survived Being Raped by Bill Clinton.  All the talk by the media was on the Michael Wolff book hoping to take down the White House, but Juanita’s book was ignored even though in it the claims of rape against a former United States president were much more atrocious.

I read Juanita’s book right away, and for the second consecutive week in a row I managed to read seven books—which I consider a very productive way to start the New Year.  A lot of what was in You’d Better Put Some Ice On That: How I Survived Being Raped by Bill Clinton I already knew but what was astonishing is that we are living in a time where women from four decades ago are now bringing down celebrities for their sexual exploits.  Kevin Spacey who just a few months ago was at the top of the Hollywood A-listers and after allegations of child molestation came out for which he admitted, he has had his career literally destroyed.  He’ll be lucky if he ever works again.  His top show House of Cards wrote him out of the story after halting production and Ridley Scott literally digitally removed him from the movie All the Money in the World.  He’s far from the only one, but is certainly one that illustrates this new standard, that if at any time in our past something was done wrong, then it is fair game to destroy that person in every way imaginable.  So given that definition, it forces us to look at the crimes of the Clintons and pay justice to their doorsteps.  Based just on Juanita Broaddrick’s allegations in this stunning new book about how Bill Clinton raped her in the late 1970s—bad things need to happen to the former president so that others might think twice about performing such crimes in the future.

Yet the crimes didn’t stop with Juanita—Bill’s behavior moved on for several more decades making many more people their victims—and Hillary Clinton acted as a kind of pimp for power as a mediator for her husband’s activity enabling all this evil to take place unchecked.  Instead of correcting Bill’s crimes they instead used their attorney abilities to manipulate circumstances to suit their hunger for power breaking many more laws over the next three decades openly—and quite audaciously.  I read a book in the mid-1990s called Blood Sport by James Stewart which chronicled the crimes of the Clintons on their road to the White House and I thought at that time that these people were the worst in the world.  I thought they’d never make it to a second term because the evidence was so obvious.  I accepted that some of the work by Stewart might have been politically motivated, but certainly not all of it.  There was no way the Clinton’s would survive.  But they did and went on for a second term.  Then Hillary became a Senator, then through the 90s they created the Clinton Foundation which was a pay to play scam.  Hillary went on to run for president losing to Barack Obama.  She became the Secretary of State actually selling access to her office by foreign contributors.  She had an illegal email server to hide all this activity and when she was caught the FBI actually covered for her as they placed their bets that she’d be the next president of the United States.  They did not apply equal justice under the law; instead they bent the law to suit the Clintons for what they considered the “greater good,” a move toward global initiatives where the United States gradually surrendered more sovereignty to United Nations control.  And in the process the Clinton’s became wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

Now we are all told that we are supposed to look the other way and let the Clintons live in peace?  Those same forces salivated over Michael Wolff’s book Fire and Fury putting the tabloid reporter on every news outlet they could while Juanita was ignored.  The accusers of Roy Moore in Alabama were given first class media exposure and we were told that every women was supposed to be heard no matter how outrageous the claims were, yet here was a woman claiming a former president had raped her and her pain was chronicled in a new book and everyone ignored it.  The game is obvious to everyone now—it’s no longer a conspiracy theory to suggest that the levers of government wanted the Clintons to succeed no matter what laws were broken.  Now all those people have been caught because a changing administration with different political priorities has been elected into power to reveal this banality.  On the surface we have what appeared to be an intricate system of law in order, but in practice it resembled a banana republic.  Astonishingly we saw how far our country had fallen at the hands of these Clinton supporters and now the responsibility falls on Trump’s people to fix it.

And why wouldn’t they—we are in an election year—there aren’t any real Democrats who threaten to take over the House and Senate.  Trump needs to hold his majorities in congress to get anything done over the next several years. The Clintons essentially made the Democratic Party all about them for the last thirty years so as they go down, so does the DNC.  The liberal party of progressives is trying to distance themselves from the Clintons for their own survival, but obviously the machine that supports the Clintons runs deep into every crack of the Democratic Party and into the cubicles of almost every newsroom.  The media of today were built by that Clinton machine and they are lost without their leaders. If the Clintons go down so does the Democratic Party.  That is why they are so desperate for this Russian investigation to produce something, and why they put so much hope into that Wolff book, and why they are utterly despondent that Donald Trump doesn’t seem to be fazed by anything they’ve thrown at him.  The evidence is there to put the Clintons away in jail for a long time and it has to happen.  They gave the Republicans no choice in the matter—which is how Trump had to have it.  Now early in 2018 we can see the evidence mounting and understand that it’s inevitable.  The desperation of many years of crimes now coming back to that Clinton family finally is in the air.  All Republicans need to do is pull the trigger and Democrats will be done for many years.  So do it.  And if you have any doubts as to whether it should be done or not—then read Juanita’s book.  You think you know the story until you read the pain she managed to put down on paper for all to see—if only people would have the courage to look.

Rich Hoffman

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

Why Trump is Very Mentally Stable: The poor definitions for leadership that robs so many people of success, logic, and victory

Thinking even further about the assumptions made in the anti-Trump Michael Wolff book about life in the new White House the definitions for winning, and victory are not the same from each side. Liberals clearly do not understand what “winning” means because they are not a performance based political party. Trump’s methods of negotiating are foreign to them and the means of achieving wins is as well—which is very apparent by the kinds of things that the people around Trump said about him to the fly-on-the-wall writer. Steven Bannon in particular obviously was looking at the president and thinking, “I can do this, and I should be.” But that is a common mistake made by second-hander people. What they don’t understand is that the master negotiator, and the person who often wins most of their engagements are not the types of people who spike the football in people’s faces. They are the ones who build up those around them and teach other people how to win as the residual effects migrate into the circumstances of the leader whoever they may be—in this case Donald Trump.

Trump said a lot when he said that he makes winning look easy. Winning is a skill as much as it’s a strategic result. Most people don’t know how to win, but there is no question that there are people who always find themselves knocking on the door to victory time and time again while others consider it a mystery and an opportunity given only by luck. Anyone who has read Trump’s books, especially books by Trump University like Trump 101: The Way to Success, understand that there is a lot more going on with Trump than just powering his way into beating his opponents at whatever objective he seeks to accomplish. From day one in the Trump White House—even before, this is how the new president went about his work—learning what all sides on a matter wanted, then learning how to use that knowledge to achieve his objective.

Winning is not about out powering your opponent, or even check-mating them into submission. Often when it comes to negotiations you want the other party to feel good about what they are doing—even if its losing. Winning and crushing your opponent into oblivion is not synonymous with success. Sometimes it is—but often not. Winning is about achieving your objectives while letting everyone else feel that they were a part of the process—and that is why Trump ran, and still does to a large extent, a loose White House. People need to be comfortable, so they can reveal their needs to you, so that you can use that information to help build in their minds the parameters of victory.

From its inception in the modern sense—as in from the Dark Ages to the present, occupational responsibilities in Western cultures tend to be focused on specializations. In oriental cultures it is expected that an individual will become somewhat curious about many fields, but in the West we are projected to learn one thing and to stick to that relying on the next specialization to do their job correctly and if they don’t we throw up our arms and blame that person for failing. People who constantly win however are usually good at many things in life, and are curious about many others. What they have in common is that they tend to not be overly specialized, but have developed within themselves many skills for which to use in improvisational context to solve problems and build support for their viewpoints among other people.

What we have going on regarding Donald Trump in the White House is a fear from the majority in Washington D.C. that function from a specialized trade that a multitalented businessman will forever raise the bar of expectations for them. For those who voted for Donald Trump, that is exactly what we wanted, but for those who believe in a specialized skill conducted through institutional protections, Donald Trump is a nightmare. For Washington D.C. to work the way they learned it does requires that the formula of specialization be maintained. But for Trump to do his thing he needs to be part psychologist, part inspirational speaker, part numbers cruncher, part fashion model, part strategist and to be able to recognize in everyone he speaks with what their specializations are, so he can turn them to his advantage. The way to do this is to let people have a free rein and study their behavior so that it is easy to ascertain their characteristic tendencies. Saying that Donald Trump is stupid, or insane—or anything resembling an unstable personality is more of a wish than a statement. For the institutional addicts who need the structure of specialization to be maintained Trump is “unstable” because their definition of stability is to keep personalities within the specialization of their institutional expectations. Yet Trump is results driven which does not adhere to a structure—because often the structure stands in the way of the needed results—otherwise there wouldn’t be a need to fix anything—which is what the opposition against Trump is really after.

To those who have mastered the art of just about everything they have no need for advice—at least in the traditional sense. Trump has shown that he does listen to people, but not in the way that people hope—where their specializations are respected. Trump listens to what people say then he uses his experience to make gut judgment calls based on his unique leadership skills. This is something that most people in the world do not have the ability to do—including most major presidents throughout history. It’s not that Trump did anything wrong, it’s just that our current society doesn’t understand the nature of leadership very well—and why only a very few people per capita seem inclined to proper leadership. Leadership isn’t about following the rules of an established institution, it’s about getting good results even when the institutions let us down with poor resolutions. Solving those problems isn’t about doing so within the context of institutional boundaries, it’s about discovering the correct solution and then bringing about the conditions to implement those solutions. To be free to make decisions on your own is to be able to more quickly ascertain the needed objectives. If the problem is in the people who are advising, to protect their specialized roles within the institution, then speaking with them about their opinions won’t solve the problem, and this is why Trump has achieved so much in such a short period of time. He is not hindered by the limits of other people who don’t strive so far as he does.

In the traditional sense of presidential roles within the nation of America—it is expected that the Executive Branch be treated like the Monarchy in England—as kind of a figurehead that acts as the face of the nation while the specialized experts do their thing for whatever purpose is identified on their institutional charters. But most Americans during this last election saw that the process just wasn’t working, so we voted against the institutions themselves and put a CEO in charge instead of just another political hack. To a certain extent it is understood that people will have problems with that approach because they don’t have the definitions in their lives which explain why Trump is successful. They only know that Trump does not respect the institutional parameters for which they exist. Stupidity in this regard is a matter of perspective—and as history will chronicle, it is the institutionalists who will be shown as lacking. Trump is a change, a demand in real leadership—not token sentiments meant to protect the Skull and Bones Society, or the charters of the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security. Nor the secret societies, hate groups, or ideologies of long dead philosophers. Trump was hired to solve problems and that is what he’s doing, and history will respect what he did even if it does piss everyone off. The more he does piss off, the better our nation will be in the end.

Rich Hoffman

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