The Political Spectrum: Understanding how to measure widom in a culture where free will is a motivator

I say this in all fairness, but in regards to the political spectrum, all values are not equal. Liberalism is not an equal philosophy to be debated for instance with understandings of conservativism as viewed by Americans. They are not all equal ideas depending on perspective, but ones that are in a state of evolution depending on the interpretation of the holder of those values. While regional beliefs do largely shape the politics of an individual, it is in practice that the theories of belief are tested, and in every circumstance since Sir Thomas More contemplated a Utopia, or Plato considered the implications of a Republic, liberalism fails. As an individual becomes more aware of the wisdom of life, they therefor become more what Americans call, conservative. And yes, there are right and wrong answers in life, only degrees of variability depending on one’s emotional evolution along that political spectrum. Someone may have a right to believe differently about something, but it is not the conditions of existence to bend the will of correctness to the fallibilities of philosophic understanding.

This is a topic of some great concern these days, since we can see through polling that the nation is evenly split between American Democrats and Republicans with the conservative party just barely holding out against liberalism. And there are currently great fears that socialism as it is taught in public schools might make a strong running for political domination as it has in other places around the world. I would offer that the situation is not so scary, and that if you travel around the world you will find that not everyone has the same view of what a conservative is or a liberal. So I tend to think about those things on one political spectrum that we can all agree upon, and our politics isn’t just related to regional values, but of understandings of graduation along that spectrum. For instance, a conservative in England if compared to a political spectrum to one living in the United States likely would be far to the left. I might think of a tea sipping conservative in England as a bleeding heart liberal in the states, and the cause of that is more in personal education than in a true value system. I would argue that as people gain freedoms in life away from their political and social structures, that the wiser they become in life and therefor, the more conservative they are. When given choices, they tend to move further to the right. Political beliefs on the left are rooted their by barriers to knowledge, not in choice. If given a choice to believe something different, people naturally pull to the right and become more conservative.

Conservatism is therefore more a measure of intelligence and understanding rather than sentiment. I often talk about Democrats as having mental deficiencies because many of their beliefs are rooted in paradoxes, such as declaring that a woman’s right to choose is actually a license to kill a baby. What dumb people think of as an option is in reality murder. Let’s call it what it is. The same irrational comment is put forth over gun control, we have the Second Amendment to protect our gains in society from those who screw up and let us down. In that eventuality, we may need to take back our government, but the government is the one with the military that we payed for. But since they control the law and the utilization of that military how could we remove them from power if we don’t have guns, if we’ve given them all to that government to manage? It’s a really dumb idea that is rooted on lazy trust in bureaucrats rather than in a conservative philosophy. When we talk about liberals, or people who have liberal sentiment, we are talking about people who have not come to logic yet in their life on that particular topic. They may be mentally handicapped for one reason or another to reaching those conclusions on their own, so various states of liberalism may keep them too far to the left on the political spectrum. As they learn more about the way life works, the tend to move more to the right. President Trump could tell a story about his life in this fashion. So could Ronald Reagan.

I have a lot of experience with liberal people going way back into my youth. I have been invited to their social parties and watched them upclose and with the barriers down, and can report that in all cases they were liberal due to some mental deficiency not yet gained through the experiences of life. You don’t often find people going in the other direction unless they hit some period of their lives where tragedy overtakes their logic and they become overly sentimental with failure and seek liberalism to hide their own low bar that they have adjusted in their lives to justify their intellectual status. Wherever you go around the world people are people, they want pretty much the same things. However, they may have very restrictive governments, or family structures that hold back their emotional development more to the side of liberalism, but as they gain more freedoms in life and continue to learn more, they always become more conservative. The political spectrum is not conducive to Einstein’s thoughts on relativity. Your thoughts about something do not change depending on where you are, but your understanding of the political spectrum may be limited to the knowledge you have access to. The spectrum is the spectrum, but a person’s place on it is bound by intelligence and understanding. This is true in Europe as it is in Kentucky within the United States. Regional beliefs may have started conservative or liberal depending on who your neighbors are, but those foundations may have a head start on the political spectrum based on the personal freedoms of that culture relative to the factors that allow thought to move to the right. But thought always wants to move to the right on the political spectrum. No logical person could argue otherwise.

Some will try however, to argue that liberalism is taught in our education institutions and that some of the best in the world are the caretakers of philosophy, but that would all be wrong. People can be taught to be comfortable on a particular place on a political spectrum and to stay there because their friends or neighbors have given themselves the same limits. Or even family members hold people to places of belief that they might not otherwise have. I have family members who think of themselves as very conservative who to me are extremely liberal, and the cause is not logic, its in a lack of understanding about the ways of the world, a lack of wisdom and exposure that built that wisdom more than actual belief. The more people learn about life, and the wiser they are, the further to the right of that political spectrum they become, whether they are a monk living on a mountaintop in the Himalayas, a drug dealer in Mexico, a priest in Kansas, a lottery ticket buyer in Las Vegas, or some wealthy billionaire in the middle of nowhere closed off from the world and enjoying the merits of their productivity. Regional beliefs can hold a person to a position along the political spectrum, but they don’t dictate the merits of wisdom and a person’s journey from liberal to conservative throughout their lifetimes.

In regard to the state of America and its split down the middle politically, that is because roughly half the nation has a lot more to learn. Its not that they have an equal seat at the table. What it does mean is that they need to hit the books and to learn more things about the world so that they can advance further to the right. There is no mixing of the ideas, there is only the degree from which a person functions along the proper trajectory of political thought, with the word “political” being functional with intellectual measurement, not belief. With that in mind, as we move deeper into the election season and people say what they will about what beliefs are politically, the context needs to be clear that politics is more a measure of wisdom than of sentiment. And depending on what values you vote on says a lot about the level of wisdom you have as a functioning person. So the smarter people become, the more they vote to the right. The less wise, the further to the left they will be. It may not always be their fault, but it is the true condition of their intellect.

Rich Hoffman

George Lang: One of the Hardest Workers in the Business of Politics

I really can’t say enough about how good George Lang is. Yes, I’ve known him for a long time and watched him navigate through the kind of political waters that would sink most people, but his raw optimism and hope in everyday people has really put him into a category all his own. He’s in full campaign mode now for his 4th District Senate run in Ohio as the primary is coming up in March and I just have to say that I don’t know anybody who works harder and is more honest at it than him. I tend to judge people based on how hard they work and even though his personality and beliefs are not new to me, which is why I always support George Lang in anything he does, it really has been his work ethic for this senate seat that has impressed me most recently. He has been astonishing in the work he has been willing to put into the effort, even though he is the clear front runner. He’s already in the House of Representatives representing the same essential district, so his workload is spoken for, but seeing the crowd he was able to draw at a fundraiser this past week, and the quality of his supporters would impress anybody, even those not so inclined to political tides and concerns.

The fundraiser was held at a very nice home in Liberty Township complete with its own bowling alley, which everyone seems to have these days in such a wonderful land of opportunity that has evolved in that area. The crowd that George was able to muster would impress even the most rigorous national politician, and it takes that kind of ability to play the game at that level. While most media would cover such an event with the obvious hatred toward businesspeople and the money they tend to make—purely out of jealousy—George’s pro-business platform and track record already at the state level would impress anybody. What a lot of people who don’t have bowling alleys in their basement don’t know is that business owners and investors have had a tough road to run for many decades as the political class could have cast themselves straight out of the villains of an Ayn Rand novel, and they have had to tip toe around government in all sorts of ways just to make a decent living always with a weary eye toward some government imposed audit, or regulatory tyranny. If they treat themselves to a bowling alley in their basement or a nice car nobody should begrudge them, because most of the time, those types of people work 12 to 15 hour days and worry constantly 24 hours a day to provide jobs for people and to always stay ahead in tough, competitive business markets. They need someone they can trust, and George Lang has provided them with that option, so its good to see they see that and have shown up to support him when needed.

Most politicians have to pander to the business class type of donors to some extent or another, but they don’t often openly embrace business leaders the way that George does because of the media stigma that has existed for well over a century, created by the Karl Marx types that are so openly bred in our colleges and public education institutions these days. By the way intelligentsia treats business owners and leaders its amazing that anybody even wants to try to be anything but a paycheck puncher and nothing more. For even the most ambitious people find the lack of respect that is cast against any business owner a barrier to the kind of risks and personal dedication that it takes to be a job provider. If not for those who want some trappings of wealth to enjoy as a result of the massive amount of work and worry that it takes, nobody may attempt it. Luckily in America, and especially in the 4th District of Ohio there are plenty of people still willing to do such work and George has positioned himself to represent them, as well as all the people who enjoy jobs from such an endeavor. Because if not for people like the hosts of that fundraiser for George, with the nice bowling alley serving as a podium for the ever enthusiastic Lang, Liberty Township wouldn’t be such a paradise of unemployment and wealth generation that makes even the least ambitious person living in the area one of the luckiest people on earth due to the opportunities afforded to them by the hard working and industrious.

I’ve been to these kinds of things a lot, and to be honest, the efforts usually look phony to me. Politicians are forced to play both sides of the fence, they pander to the business owner for money, then boot lick the “worker” as termed by the Marx movement that has so infected several generations of people for over a century, as if they were polar opposites. What very few politicians have ever successfully made a proper connection to is that one makes the other, not the other way around, and that George through his own hard work represents them all authentically, not in the way of the phony that other politicians have managed. Authenticity of purpose is one of the rarest commodities and its wonderful to see that so many people recognize that trait in George and have been willing to put their money where their mouth is. They can see as I do the hard work that George Lang has been willing to put into everything he does, and they see him as a good investment. Not in the way that politics has been known to purchase power and prestige by selling away access, but in getting yield and support from a representative who actually does the work and is tireless in the effort.

When businesses thrive, everything that cascades off those wonderful industries improves the lives of everyone connected. For many people waking up in the morning knowing that there is a job out there with their name on it is one of the most treasured items in their lives. That is how they raise their families, pay their mortgages, their car payments, it funds all the things they want to be and hope to achieve. But the efforts to run a business and to own a business often is one of the most overlooked elements of our culture with old prejudices well established by other elements that permeate the thoughts of even the most logical. And its so refreshing to see that George Lang sees beyond all that to the truth, and in the manner of his extremely hard work, optimistic spirit, and sheer honesty, that he is unlike most any other politician that has ever ran for office. The speeches might sound similar at times as many politicians are gifted orators, but they aren’t like George Lang who expects to be more of a representative to everyone in his district than even comes from his presentations of himself. He’s as hard of a worker as the hardest worker in any position, and he offers himself as a friend to the start of all economic activity, the business owners and industrialists who need representation to work their magic, which of course benefits everyone. In that way, George Lang’s campaign is unusually honest, and is something that even those not very interested in politics could be proud of and feel some connection to due to the authenticity and stamina of its candidate. George Lang is impressive, but that’s because what’s underneath is even better than the package.

Rich Hoffman

Lakota Alums Complain about EdChoice: School superintendents show they aren’t anything like CEOs, they just don’t have the skills

“I’m OK with choice and options for your kids. I’m not okay with public tax dollars going to the private schools,” said Matt Miller, the superintendent of Lakota Schools in reaction to this year’s expansion of Ohio’s EdChoice program. And across town at Hamilton City School’s Mike Holbrook the former Lakota principal and complainer-in-chief who is now the superintendent there, he’s back to complaining about money because this EdChoice challenges his district which has a report card of a “C” into making better decisions instead of just continuing to ask for more and more budget to fund failure. These Lakota school alums have spent some time lately complaining that the Ohio voucher program is getting more aggressive, which I have always said that it would, and its forcing them to control their budgets better, and they just don’t like it. I find their statements amazing because after all these years, we have been told that a school superintendent is like a CEO at a public school. Yet all they really have done is lobby for more money. Anybody can do anything with infinite amounts of money to work with, but only in public schools is it assumed that more money gets better results. Yet in Hamilton City and at Lakota Schools, that clearly is not the case. Those districts are not getting A+ grades and we pay them fortunes. So why not attach the state funding to children and allow competition to make everyone better? A CEO would certainly understand that, and these guys show in their statements on this EdChoice debate that they are clearly not up to the task.

This is what happens to a governing body when they are allowed to inflate their budgets with union contracts and overpay their staff without a funding model that lives within the scope of their resources. I have written about Mike Holbrook before when he was just a Lakota principal, you can see his comments after a levy defeat by clicking here. He has a long history of complaining about money, which public schools have allowed to be the role of superintendents. These guys want respect and to be treated as top managers, but they don’t want to do the work. They coddle the teacher’s union during contract negotiations and drive up their costs then expect taxpayers to bail out their failure. Hamilton certainly isn’t anything to be proud of with their “C” grade report card. But Lakota isn’t much better, and we did pass a levy in 2013 after a lot of debate, and guess what. They did just what I said they would, they gave the money to the teachers in the form of raises and performance went down. The school’s performance worsened. Paying top dollar for the so-called best teachers did not promise Lakota an A+ report card, and it should have.

The best way to secure the best scores is with vouchers, where tax money is attached to the kids. If parents don’t like the school, they should be able to take their tax money and pick another school. And if the schools want to be in business, they need to do a better job. That is the job of a CEO, to make sure that parents want to send their kids to their schools, and to make themselves that choice. They need to work at it, and if you have a six-figure income, that is your job to figure out guys. These token superintendent jobs were never intended to be levy cheerleading positions where you just spend and spend and spend and have guaranteed security due to the kinds of people living in your district. You should want to work for better kids, better parents, and better results. Not some state definition of success, but one that is market driven

.

Senator Bill Coley, whom I’ve known for a long time and who cares about this voucher issue a great deal, tried to explain it to these superintendents in ways they might understand. The school district still has tax money coming in from every home and business and those values are continuing to appreciate, the revenue continues to increase every year in an area like Butler County. What’s the problem? Well, the problem is they have gotten used to not having to manage the money. That’s the issue. They are used to it always being there and most of the problems have been solved with coffee talks. Schools like Lakota took away busing to save money. Parents have gotten used to driving their kids to school. So why wouldn’t they just drive their kid to school somewhere else if they had a choice? And why should Lakota get all their money just because that student lives in the district? If the money is for education why shouldn’t that money follow the student, and the performance that the customer expects?

Of course, we all know the answer, public schools and their labor unions depend on these fixed numbers to manage their collective bargaining agreements. But wouldn’t the unions get what they want with this EdChoice? Teachers would get smaller class sizes due to declining enrollment in failing schools, those only getting “Bs” and “Cs” are failing based on marketplace analytics. If parents want the best for their students, that would be an A+ on the report card. If a district can’t get that, get rid of the teachers and get better. Oh, you can’t do that because the union contract won’t allow it. Well, there is your problem and so long as the tax money is locked to the school, not the student, we will continue to fund failure.

Only by having such a competitive element, such as EdChoice will school superintendents be forced to do the job they were hired to do in the way that schools need to do it. The word “public” assumes that there is some community right to money and the education of kids. We have seen over the last century that public education is not the best way to teach a kid, and parents who understand that private schools are clearly better for children are already paying for that improvement. Why should their tax money go to appeasing failure? But as Senator Coley has said, Lakota will still get their money, so will Hamilton. They’ll lose a little but they’ll also lose some class size. Everyone should be happy. Property values continue to go up in this Trump economy. A CEO would understand how to make those elements work, but apparently all the Lakota alums want to do is complain that they don’t have enough.

Any real CEO of an organization would love to have the problems of these public schools, they have guaranteed income, they have nice new buildings, and they have sports programs to distract the base and keep team building exercises active in the community. It’s a dream job for anybody with half a brain so it is extremely disappointing to see these guys crying like babies. Manage your contracts, let the complainers leave with their poison to other districts because it hasn’t helped your report card anyway and pull up your bootstraps. Don’t ask for more money with levies because that’s lazy, work with what you have. And work to be better and to make yourself an EdChoice destination instead of a repellant. And if you can’t, cut your losses and be happy being a “B” or “C” player in the world. That’s life. The trend is in choice, choice in entertainment, choice in food, choice in government, and especially choice in education.

Property values unlike what people may have thought ten years ago are not so intricately linked to the public school in their districts. They are linked to choice, the kinds of jobs there are, the entertainment options, the overall quality of life. Most people in Lakota don’t even know that there are football games on Friday nights. They could care less; Netflix has all the options they need and the carryout down the road has dinner. I would suggest to these superintendents that they start acting more like the CEOs they want to believe they are instead of union stooges padding the way for continuous contract increases to their labor rates. Choice in performance will demand them to get with the program, EdChoice is just the beginning.

Rich Hoffman

Jeffrey Epstein and Democrats are all the Same: The evil of ‘Sex Island’ and Pelosi’s attempts at impeachment

In so many ways what we are learning about the Jeffrey Epstein sex island in the wake of his death, is that the Democrat Party, which was participating wildly in the orgies hosted by the New York billionaire on that island, for which many secrets are desperately being secured from the investigation, are all a lot alike. The modes of sex trafficking, which could be said to be the case everywhere in the world is psychologically very close to the way that Democrats recruit new members and attempt to hang on to their old ones. The abuse is simply more mental than physical. Of course, I have been talking about losers like Jeffrey Epstein for years, while the rest of the world is just now catching on. Better late than never I suppose. So, take it to heart that what I am saying about the way Democrats behaved during their attempted election of 2020 sabotage against President Trump was out of the same playbook as Jeffrey Epstein. Mitch McConnell did a good job on the Senate floor not in making such a comparison as I am about to, but in discovering the bad, and bizarre behavior of the Democrats after they signed the impeachment documents and attempted to apply some logic, for which there wasn’t any.

It really does sum up as attempted abuse, the entire impeachment push, from the media to the local politicians espousing the same. And none of it is any different from what Jeffrey Epstein attempted and in many cases did to young girls as young as 12 years old, as we are now discovering from the evidence retrieved from that vile island of abusive sex and partying by the powerful elite who manipulated those circumstances for their pure pleasure. The reason we consider rape and sexual abuse such a vile crime ultimately is that it robs a woman of her choices and that is what went on at those sex orgies. Epstein took away the choices of the girls, took their cell phones, took their passports, took everything until all they had left was drugs and sex to drown out the pain of it all. They were lured there with opportunities for modeling jobs and other lures of wealth, but gradually, Epstein and his officers on the isolated islands stripped the girls of all hope until they were willing participates in their own misery. Aren’t the parallels obvious?

Democrats, especially Nancy Pelosi have in the promised this, then that, especially with healthcare’s “we have to sign the bill to find out what’s in it” she has lied, we have watched it openly and studied her shaky hands attempt to manipulate us all in the same way that slime balls like Jeffrey Epstein lured young girls to his island with promises of great days ahead. Only when they get there, they discover that gradually all their freedoms are taken from them until all they have left as options are compliance to a higher authority. That is the Democrat playbook so it shouldn’t be surprising that they hung out with Epstein and enjoyed his orgies because its not just a job for them, it’s a lifestyle. They think in this abusive fashion in every aspect of their lives. The only difference in the abuse approach is that one is sex with underage girls, the other is mass abuse on a voter scale that is so massive that nobody can believe that anybody is that evil, and sinister.

I’m sure Nancey Pelosi doesn’t look in the mirror every day and think of herself as the political equivalent of Jeffrey Epstein. But I doubt that Epstein thought he was doing anything bad either. He probably convinced himself that he was giving the girls opportunities they’d never have otherwise and that they should thank him for the experience. This is typical of deranged people who lose touch with reality. Yet, what makes them all vile, evil people is that in order to function in the world, they must limit the choices of others to sustain their mental depravity. Anywhere where choices are eliminated in people, for whatever reason, we can say that the efforts involved are evil, whether or not we openly admit to the breaking of laws, or whether the evil is so vast that it defies legal parameters of understanding. To stand in front of the public and say that congress takes impeachment very seriously and to be a somber occasion, then to deliver pens from the signing on a literal silver platter and to pass them out in celebration is to celebrate an evil. They were happy to limit a choice election with some profundity that they made up to give their side an advantage. That is no different than Epstein drugging girls for sex or cutting them off from their families so he can destroy them in seclusion for the joy of his guests. Its all evil because it all celebrates limiting the choices of people in some way or fashion.

Most people struggled to find the words of why they were angry at this attempt against Trump and to watch Democrats actually celebrate the occasion with such audacity. That’s because most people aren’t evil. And most people couldn’t go to a sex island owned by Jeffrey Epstein and have sex with underaged girls who see no other way out of their situation except to cooperate. Because all their other options for hope had been taken from them. Most of us aren’t evil in these ways and we just don’t have the vocabulary to understand why our emotions find these things so repulsive. So, I’ve made the situation easy for you dear reader, I’ve named the beast. Now you can work with it now that we’ve said it. It’s the lack of choice that we find so repulsive, and how it works at many levels to add up to mass abuse. Most of us can agree that sex with minor girls is abusive and should be against the law, but we often don’t consider that the reason we find it so despicable is that the girls involved are stripped of their individual rights and robbed of choice until there is nothing left but to cooperate. And that was exactly what Nancy and the gang of congressional thugs were celebrating with their impeachment attempt, taking away choice in the upcoming election—they hope.

The behavior in both cases, with Epstein’s sex island and with Nancy Pelosi and her Democrats—they think its funny and joyous to limit choices to the point where people must turn to their captors and beg for elements of freedom. Nancy did it before with Obamacare, and many other congressional proposals. That is why all those people are against guns in society, because they don’t want people to defend themselves. That’s why Jeffrey Epstein took away the cell phones of the sex slaves on his island if they didn’t behave, because he couldn’t have them calling their parents for help, or friends back in the states. He had to isolate them, drug them with mind impairments so they would have bad judgment, then force them to look to only him as a way out of their circumstances. That is abuse in the worst way, but in all reality, it’s no different than what the modern Democrats as a whole are proposing. Its all abusive, except one is so evil that we can’t even comprehend its audacity. And that one isn’t the one involving sex.

Rich Hoffman

Trump Was Right About Iran: How political consultants have caused war and are to blame for the deaths in the Middle East

It was always disingenuous to suggest that President Trump did not have a strategy when he ordered the end of Iran’s top terrorist general. The constant suggestion of recklessness about that decision and the media emphasis that it would cause World War III was dubious at best from the outset. Wiser minds knew better. Iran is a third world country ran by small minded people who for a period of time had first world money due to their oil. They are not capable of conducting a war with the United States and everyone smart knew it. Yet there is an advisor class who make a lot of money off politicians in Washington and within the media culture who inject themselves into the situation with their take essentially to make money off of chaos. And for them to continue making money off the Iranian instability in the Middle East, they need the world to believe that Iran is more than it truly is, a real threat globally that can only be dealt with by some fictional academic elite forged from our liberal universities and who think in groups, instead of individual leadership.

In reality, Iran has barely been hanging on politically for a long time and their people are ready for another revolution. The communist one of 1979 has not worked out for them and now this new generation is thinking of better things, western influenced. Trump being one of us—people who live in the world by the merits of our own decisions—understood that by removing a person that Iran counted on with competency to inflict harm to the world, that the incompetency of the Iranian culture stagnated due to their totalitarian view of the world, would be at a loss. It is shameful to see that Iran did shoot down an airliner headed for Ukraine carrying many innocent lives out of Tehran shortly after sending a missile barrage at U.S. airbases—but not surprising. Incompetent people make mistakes when their leadership is absent. It happens in businesses, and it happens in countries—it happens everywhere that organizations suffer by a loss of leadership and they do not have a culture that inspires the next generation of leadership. So when a senior leader is removed, and there is nobody to replace them because totalitarian leaders often are getting rid of their future competition, not nurturing them, then a leadership vacuum always follows. So yes, President Trump knew exactly what he was doing, and he had a strategy. It just wasn’t a strategy that the boot lickers of our society wanted to see, because they can’t make money off Trump’s way. Its as simple as that.

Innocent people should never lose their lives due to the incompetency of their governments. However, for the lives lost due to Iran shooting down that airliner killing all onboard, the Iranian people were granted a rare admission of guilt from their government, which had no choice due to the hard position Trump had put them in, forcing their own incompetency to be revealed to the world on live television. They were provoked to attack America to save face from their embarrassments, and they overacted to the civilian airliner headed for destinations of innocence because they expected attacks from America in response. Instead, Trump played it cool, sent out a tweet saying all was well, leaving Iran to face itself with honesty for perhaps the first time in decades. The Iranian government failed to poise themselves as the grand threat on the world stage and revealed themselves to be simply a terrified regional gang. And now their people want a change.

Trump’s plan never included more troops to the region the way the boot lickers who act as consultants suggested. Killing Iran’s top general was never going to be the start of a new war. It had a plan, it just wasn’t a plan that the consultant class understood, because it didn’t mean any new work for them. Of course, they hate Trump, he doesn’t need them to consult him. He can make decisions on his own, like any great business executive can. People like Trump have real life experience that easily beats political hacks around the world and those too dependent on consultants to tell them how to proceed next. The plan was, and continues to be, to act decisively based on Trump’s experience which turns out to be superior to the consultant class. The criticism is meant to tell the opposite story, that only they have the answer which is critical to them because that’s how they make a living.

However, in many ways the lives of those poor people on that destroyed airliner shot down in Iran is the fault of that same group of people, the consultants who artificially propped up Iran to look like a first world superpower. Giving Iran false power has endangered so many people over the years, and countless people have died as a direct result. True, they are sad that Trump has solved the problem in Iran setting force a new revolution that the Iranian people will conduct on their own, without American troops to help. Any recklessness that has transpired had already occurred before Trump was even in office by the political consultants who have for so many decades made Iran feel tough, and embolden to be terrors across the world, leaving many innocent people to die needlessly. That is the real crime. Trump ended that threat with a simple decision on one guy. That has left Iran exposed for what it always was, and now lots of people are upset, and they deserve to be. Because they were cheering for the wrong side all along, for all the wrong reasons.

Unlike the show that consultants wanted to occur where proper strategy only gave them more to do, more work to whisper in the ears of their paying clients, Trump’s strategy was to solve the problem. And that’s what he has done and why Iran is now poised to stop being a threat to the entire world. Any leverage of terror they had before they shot down that airliner is now gone and forever, they will be known as a lying regime to their own people. Many of us on the outside already knew that, but the people of Iran weren’t so sure. Now they know. And so does the world. And Trump exposed them just by pressing his position and forcing Iran to act in ways they weren’t competent to respond. The pressure got to them and they made a huge international mistake that they had to admit to, since the evidence was so overwhelming. Yes, Trump had a strategy and it worked. He didn’t need a bunch of people to tell him how to do it, he already knew from hundreds if not thousands of business deals in the past. Dealing with Iran isn’t any more complicated. It may have higher stakes, but the skills in understanding the strategy are the same. That is why the world is a lot safer now than it was before Iran’s top general was killed by an American drone strike, ordered by President Trump. That is always why the world is starting to feel empowered to challenge their authoritarian governments. The results are far better than leaving billions of dollars on a runway for terror to thrive. Trump’s strategy made people much safer, and gave more people hope than ever before. Which is why he’s a great president. We are lucky to have him.

Rich Hoffman

Not Giving Domestic Enemies in the American Press a Free Pass: Making a hard decision that is required of our times

It’s time that we have a conversation about domestic enemies and their use of the First Amendment to attempt to bring tyrannical revolution to America through the guise of freedom. It’s an old trick that has now worn away into obviousness especially in light of the recent killing of Iran’s top general. The domestic enemies of America have shown themselves under the banner of free speech by proposing that America and President Trump in general was wrong in the act of defending itself from a leftist aggressor. So much was made of the stampede that occurred at the funeral of that general which left 30 dead because there were over a million people attending. But that’s not so impressive, what else were those people going to do? It’s not like Iran has a thriving economy that is keeping everyone entertained with plenty to do. In most cases the people in Iran are left with only pictures of the supreme commander to look at as they count dust blowing across their roads. So a funeral is a welcomed distraction for them, yet to many in America’s media, they sought to make more of it than was true, for all the reasons that a domestic enemy might endeavor.

When we talk about the Second Amendment many people think that all sorts of restrictions can be placed on that one. They seek to limit where we can carry guns, how many we can buy, they try to tax ammunition to discourage buying more and they look for all sorts of ways to take that right away from us. But when it comes to the First Amendment, if you are on the wrong side of the political spectrum, they seek to ban you from Google searches, YouTube and even Twitter. But for them, they can say anything about everyone anytime they wish. They call it free speech to criticize Trump’s actions against Iran, or China or even want to impeach him over a Ukrainian conversation, yet they see no problem in siding with known tyrannical regimes to weaken the United States domestically so that power players all over the globe can be emboldened. That is a real problem and they have really shown themselves in the wake of the latest Iran incident picking sides with anybody standing opposed to President Trump.

Well, we all take an oath to the American Constitution to protect it from foreign and domestic enemies and these abusers of the First Amendment are clearly acting as agents of destruction toward American ideals and we should take action against them. There is nothing wrong with it, we aren’t violating any of their Constitutional rights. They do not have a right to be a voice against American policy if their intent is not to make a vantage point stronger, but to weaken it into collapse. And if they are cheerleading an enemy against America, then we need to deal with that in the fashion it deserves.

I wouldn’t say I’m suggesting that we round these people up in the middle of the night and throw them in jail for speaking out against American ideas by supporting Iranian positions. They certainly want to do that to Second Amendment supporters, and just ask Roger Stone about illegal searches and violations against his Constitutional rights when he was arrested and thrown in jail just for knowing the President. But I am saying that we need to slap these people down and knock them off their platforms without our endorsement of subscriptions and ratings. We simply can’t let domestic enemies’ function in the open within our society and get away with it with a smug smile on their faces. We need to knock that smugness off right now.

Iran isn’t dangerous, all they have as a weapon is fear of some terrorist act. When our own media is the sheath that carries that weapon, we have a problem. Take that away, and Iran has nothing. They have no money to fight a war. They have no complicated political position, just a few tyrants who run everything as is common in any authoritarian regime. They are all paper tigers only propped up by the worlds media who desire to bring down the governments of capitalism from the preponderance of fear that any terrorist soaked in ideology might dream of. And we should not allow it to continue unchecked. Its one thing to be critical of a management style of a governing body. Its quite another to encourage enemies to appear stronger than they are so that our government makes bad decisions. This has been going on for a long time and until President Trump came along, we had entire presidential administrations who listened to these unelected domestic enemies and set policy to their opinions, and that has only made the world more dangerous, not less so. It has allowed Iran and North Korea, and many other places to believe that America is an easy target, and that has propped them up to bring harm where it otherwise wouldn’t have. That is worthy of prosecution all by itself.

Free speech isn’t free, there are consequences. Just as we have the right to bear arms, yet we can’t just carry around guns anywhere we want, we have decided as a society that there are limits. Now if we want to say there are no limits to these things, then let me know and I’ll carry a gun everywhere I want to, churches, government buildings, sporting events—everywhere. But don’t tell me that there are restrictions to one amendment, but unrestricted interpretation to all the other so long as it serves the needs of domestic enemies. We must admit to ourselves that America does have domestic enemies, and they teach our schools, they work in our government, and they run many of our networks. We are not all equal and we don’t all like being American. We are crazy if we allow domestic enemies hide behind American law while they work every opportunity to chop down our system in favor of tyrants around the world, which is precisely what has happened in the wake of the killing of Iran’s top general.

I would say that Iran is not a threat, but our domestic enemies are, they are cheering for some terrorist act to embarrass our president for purely political purposes and they are doing it to the point where they are opening the door hoping to let the insurgents in undetected. The most dangerous occurrence to come from this latest Iranian crisis is that our media reports might embolden some terrorist loser to act so that they might at least get positive press coverage upon their sacrifice. Its not that the government of Iran would organize it, because they can’t, they are incompetent. But some rogue cell of bandits and outlaws might by the encouragement of our own American press. And it wouldn’t be by accident, but on purpose. And they think they can get by with it because they are protected by the First Amendment and think they are untouchable as domestic enemies. Which is a disgrace to us all, knowing that they feel the way they do about our country and the ideas of freedom that it has always represented. This crisis demands that we take a position of making a decision between domestic enemies and Americans as a unified whole. Because they are not the same thing.

 

Rich Hoffman

Trump took out the Queen: Understanding the politics of Iran

For those not familiar with the liberal playbook they can clearly see it now. For all the things many of us said was wrong with Benghazi, where the liberals in control at the time completely handled the situation wrong and emboldened terrorist to attack the embassy, President Trump wasn’t about to allow the same to happen in Bagdad. So, he made the order when hostilities were escalating and the big general from Iran himself Maj. Gen Qassim Suleimani was in a car headed for trouble, Trump made the order to blow the guy to pieces, which is what happened. Immediately, those same people who want our society disarmed, who support the killing of millions of babies with abortion, and have been involved in attempting to use American intelligence agencies to overthrow the 2016 election, and ironically were involved in appeasing Iran, and had their fingers in the Benghazi mistake in Libya many years ago were stating that Trump just invited World War III and that we must all brace for impact.

For those who think there isn’t a plan in this attack by the United States against a very hostile foreign agent, there is, and it’s really quite brilliant. We have yet to hear much about that brilliance because apparently most people just don’t understand the situation well enough. The losers late to the party, the liberals as usual are blaming the attack on the impeachment timing saying that its purely political, which if you think about it, when are they not attacking or blaming Trump for something? When would be a good time? The accusation is laughable. Accusers are also calling it reckless, as if the liberal approach of appeasement has worked for all the past presidents involved in emboldening Iran over the years. Ali Khamenei the supposed “supreme leader” of Iran just a few days ago taunted Trump that he “can’t do anything” in the region letting it be believed that violence and mayhem would continue in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and many other places no matter what. Trump’s response was to target the leader of many of the problems that have been occurring and to stop him from doing it again at the U.S. Embassy in Bagdad.

It was liberal policies all along that have destroyed the Middle East just as they have in American cities. Ali Khamenei is just another gang leader no different than some drug dealing thug in Baltimore or Los Angeles. When the communists took over Iran back in the 70s many in our own government attempted to prop up their government just as they had been doing in Cuba and in China even up to the days before Trump’s trade war has chilled the ambitions of the largest country with the most people on earth by far, yet with very little resources to work with. Even Russia with its multi decade rule by Vladimir Putin was propped up by weak liberal policies over a large span of time. And when we say weak, we are talking about even the Bush presidents. They didn’t understand the game so they have been getting played.

This is yet another reason why we elected Trump in 2016 and will do it again in 2020. Previous presidents embarrassed us when dealing with these big regional gang leaders like Ali Khamenei. The issue really isn’t much different from the Second Amendment issue in the United States, we don’t want to be afraid of our own shadows, as the political left wants us to be. We want to carry weapons so that we don’t have to fear some regional thug that wants to break into our homes. And on the international stage, we don’t want regional thugs like those in Iran to start little fires everywhere that we have to put out. The person most responsible for that activity was Qassim Suleimani. Why not blow him up and make him no longer a threat?

The brilliance of the timing is that Kim Jong-un from North Korea has been beating on the war drums looking for attention, and this action in Iraq should give him an answer that he has been looking for. It’s not Trump’s fault that Qassium Suleimani gave him an easy target heading from the airport in Bagdad to the U.S. Embassy. When the shot comes open, take it. But Trump has needed to send a message to all those lunatics around the world who are looking to make noise as Trump goes into an election year with their allies in our own government trying to impeach him.

If they were going to make a move to get him out of office and embarrass him in front of the American people, this would be the year. So Trump took decisive action the way we hired him to. Its not that anybody is sad that Suleimani was killed and is no longer a threat in the Middle East as he has been for many years, its that now Trump will get the credit for it, which will make him more popular in the upcoming election. Not the reason that Trump did it for sure, but he will benefit from the timing. Again, it’s a liberal problem on both sides of the Atlantic. Iran’s regime are communist crusaders left over from that original revolution and that is why our American left supports them with money and regulatory policy and the only reason they have a leg to stand on.

So lets talk about retaliation, the truth of the matter is that Iran doesn’t have anything to work with. This is not a “war” that will involve troops on the ground as Nancy Pelosi has stated. It is amazing how many people are just stupid about war and strategy in general. Once you take out the king or queen in chess, the game is over. Trump took out Iran’s queen and now only pawns protect the king with no resources to speak of. The United States is now an exporter of oil leaving the Middle East to be a secondary market, taking massive amounts of power away from Iran. And the Iranian people are tired of the socialist and communist rule of their nation and have been revolting. Iran’s biggest threat is to protect itself from its own people, just as there are protestors in China’s Hong Kong wearing Trump masks and clamoring for freedom. Trump is a symbol of freedom throughout the world and he just gave all of them hope by taking out one of their greatest menaces. Even in China the rebels there have hope that if the tyrants crack down too hard to destroy them, that Trump will come to their rescue. So there is a lot more going on than just blowing up one car with one killer in it to stop an attack on the U.S. Embassy. Trump has been playing the chess game well, and after killing Soleimani the game is pretty much over.

Iran doesn’t have the resources to fight a war. Liberals want us to always fear that they must be appeased to keep nuclear weapons out of their hands which is the same strategy they want us to utilize with domestic gang leaders. Just make them happy and tip toe around their anger. Let the government protect you, don’t try to do it yourself. Trump’s message to the world is to allow people to protect themselves. He’ll use the American military to take away the threat to their lives, but its up to them to take back their government. He’s not going to do it for them. And that is the difference between Trump who has been successful in business and all the other political losers who came before him who didn’t have a clue. Changing a culture requires the people of the culture to do the work. You can’t come in and strong-arm people to get them to abide. Iran is poised for a revolution back to the kind of freedom it had before the communists took over. And that is what the political left is worried about with the killing of this Iranian terrorist. Its not cyber warfare or attacks on anything American that we should worry about. But now with their “queen” taken out, the game board is much better for the Iranians wanting change to advance and now its only a matter of time before they overthrow Ali Khamenei. And he and the political left know it.

Rich Hoffman