The Good Gardener: Understanding the importance of the Amazonian wildfires and nature in general

It is really interesting to gauge how liberals view events like the current Amazonian wildfires as a catastrophe when in all reality they are quite a common occurrence on planet earth. Fires start all the time, especially by lightening, however these in the Amazon that are raging currently were largely set by farmers trying to clear their land and have gotten out of control. It has even gotten to the point where the new Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro is claiming that is political enemies are setting the fires on purpose to make him look bad as he is more to the conservative side of political thinking that Brazil typically has avoided, to their own detriment. So far in 2019 there have been 74,000 wildfires along the Amazon valley which is up from previous years and the blame is going to farming, and logging companies. So called “experts” which is the same as saying that people who have read the progressive National Geographic since they were kids and grew up to be college institute liberal activists, are warning that these actions “could” cause a stop to the world’s oxygen supply and begin to emit carbon and speed up climate change further. “OH NO!”

Well, all of that is garbage, there is an actual psychology to this pathological nonsense that needs to be understood before we have any real intelligent discussions on the matter. Of course by now we all can at least agree that liberals by their nature have attached climate science to their long established goals for communism and socialism using something everyone can agree on, such as climate conditions as a vehicle to launch their political ideology with urgency for action, to vote for them in office. And most of the time they believe their own arguments turning their plight into something that might make the plotline for a new Avatar movie where they are the heroes and all things capitalist are the villains.

That is after all what liberals are protesting in all wildfires is that imprint of human thought and action, farmers trying to grow crops, or industrialists wanting to turn trees into lumber to build homes and more businesses, are bad. Liberals want a world where nature rules, but the quandary to their effort is a scandal all its own, because what they are arguing for is to allow the world to remain sick when it is taken over by disease. Imagine a human body that accepted every little disease or cancer attempt where the immune system just accepted the intrusion and allowed the bodily parasites to take over and kill the whole body. That is what liberals are advocating, because in a lot of ways they see themselves as the parasites which want to thrive off all healthy activity and consume it into chaos, like the underbrush of a rainforest.

Trees are a renewable resource; they grow quite fast. Like all plant life they consume what we dispelled and what they give off, we consume. We have a wonderful symbiotic relationship with plant life as humans. And the more humans and human activity, the better it is for plant life. And following Adam Smith’s economic philosophies, forests are wonderful examples of the invisible hand and survival of the fittest. The best and most healthy plants grow and flourish where the weak and sickly perish into underbrush. It is that underbrush that occasionally needs to be burnt away from the good living life forms through forest fires. Naturally, liberals have an affinity for the underbrush because in the world of human life and functions that is what they are, and the thought of tragedy coming along to burn them all away is a constant fear for them. Every time there is a mass shooting, or an earthquake the first thing that is consumed is liberal ideas. Bravery, self-reliance, and proper philosophies for survival become the most urgent thoughts. Just as in mass forest fires, where the best rooted and strongest trees survive in some form while everything else is consumed.

Take the liberal gardener who lets plants grow everywhere and doesn’t tend to them properly. They always look like a mess. Compare that to the astute and meticulous gardener who plants certain kinds of plants here and there and trims back the dead limbs and shapes the growth of their garden with care and precision. The effort of the human influence to shape the garden makes it either esthetically pleasing or not, based on the interpretive mind of the human being. The gardener makes a choice to rid the world of undesirables like weeds and dead limbs and carves out beauty as a form of art, which is to say a way of thinking. A philosophy of thought, a value system that says some plants are beneficial to the garden, while others are detriments is critical to a good garden, or a good society. What makes a weed a weed? The value system that places it at a lower value than say a well-trimmed Japanese maple tree. A good gardener hopes that all plants do well, but once the garden grows, we must make decisions on what works and what doesn’t and change the behavior into something more conducive to a good garden.

Rainforests are messy, and hot. Life is growing everywhere, and it is unmanaged. Nature’s management is that occasional catastrophes like fires come along and clean up the mess. But ideally, mankind was born to think and make decisions to carve out nature for the best benefit, whether the need is for farming, or industry, the human mind is just another force of nature, and its disciplines are meant to create esthetic harmony by bringing nature under control for the use of higher needs, instead of some random nonsense of a bunch of animals living and dying in trees and underbrush that only are born, eat, reproduce and die. The human mind brings a higher meaning to all life and it is a force of nature in and of itself.

The typical liberal cannot see themselves in that higher plan because they know that in the great gardens of the world that they are the weeds, the underbrush, the diseases infecting a healthy body and that they must be eradicated in order for healthy conduct at life to occur. They may want to have a roll in the scheme of things but since they are parasitic in nature, their philosophies mandate that they must be destroyed in order for better things to live. That is why they cry so much when there are forest fires and try to threaten us all with a terminal life on planet earth, so to protect them from termination within the philosophy of politics and world conduct. They are the weeds and cancers fighting for their right to survive, but we know good health cannot support everything. As humans we must choose, just as our immune systems must choose healthy cells over diseased ones. To live and be healthy we must choose life sometimes over other life. A nice tree over a weed. A healthy body over a diseased one. And not to discriminate, but to discourage people from becoming weeds, from becoming liberals and help them in life find their way toward good thought and conduct. That is the most humane way to deal with political gardening. And the way to do it in the world such as along the Amazon is to burn away the garbage so the people of Brazil can use the land for something more than just decay and nonsense. Clear the land for farmland. Log for more lumber and develop the resources of that country so that people who are barely living in huts and on city streets can live better and longer for the purpose of existence which is not up for debate. Give them a better life in our world garden. The trees will grow back. But the weeds and underbrush need to go.

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

Hate Crime Legislation to Ban Guns: The Government attempting to disarm the Second Amendment to cover for their own crimes committed

One of the gun control measures that congress intends to pursue when everyone gets back in session and is being floated around more and more recently is to take guns away from people convicted for a hate crime. In fact, it was Columbia, South Carolina of all places who just enacted a first pass hate crime ordinance which is going in the same direction as what is being floated on the federal level, and it is just ridiculous. The trouble with the proposal is that it is purely reactive to the current circumstances of mass shootings, which I have said many times are the result of Democrat policies as an origin, and that it just opens the door for banning guns based on hate speech, which is entirely defined by whatever political party is in power at the time. Such a ban opens all kinds of doors toward future encouragement and abuse of the law no matter how good the intentions are of the people proposing these measures.

My brand of conservatism was common all through the twentieth century. It was the world that changed, not me, and that hard turn to the left that started really in the mid-1950s and culminated into the 60s was a bad decision based on the current condition of the world. I often say to people that I was born in 1968 as a solution to that left turn. I grew up knowing both of my farmer grandparents. Both of my parents stayed married and didn’t embark on that social experiment of divorces that was becoming so popular in the late 70s and 80s. And even more unusual, my mom was a stay at home mom, and she took all kinds of hell for doing it. She was a volunteer at my school to help the teachers with all the kid’s social events and all the other moms simply hated her, because she could be home with her children and had time during the day to do mom stuff. As a result, my view of America and Republican politics in general was not at all different from John Wayne’s America, or any of the typical westerns that were popular on television and at the movies during that period. So nothing I say is all that outlandish, only if it is compared to the screw ball politics of our current time, just as a disclosure for reference.

Hate crimes are a modern invention by Democrats to seek minority votes and to capitalize off tensions that always arise when cultures of different values are mixed together. Most of the time those tensions can be worked out with a little understanding but occasionally things get out of hand and bad things happen. Democrats especially are guilty of stoking those fires of discontent until someone snaps and thus, you have a hate crime. If everyone would just leave everyone else alone, there would be a lot less hate crime in the world. But activist politics pushes the issue and before you know it some panicked teenager raised in a house full of illiteracy is running their car through a crowd of progressive protestors committing a hate crime.

The trouble with hate crime is that it is entirely politically motivated, so that if an enemy political party wants to push your buttons as a target and you respond, you could be said to have committed a hate crime. And under these new hate crime proposals, the authorities have a right to then come and confiscate your guns. If that’s not bad enough, the natural next step is to extend that effort to hate speech, which essentially could be just about anything that President Trump says on a daily basis, because he is from the winning political party and the losers are hen pecking at him because they know of no other way to win an election. Because of that we are seeing massive amounts of banning going on social media platforms, such as Alex Jones has experienced along with many, many others. I understand shadow banning, that is certainly the case with me on Twitter and YouTube. I don’t worry about it too much, but I can see that it’s happening for sure. These are already dangerous elements in any society so we can clearly see that all this hate crime legislation opens the door for gun confiscation by whatever political party is in power, and it just can’t be allowed.

It is not radical to say that the reason we have guns, guns of all sizes and power is so that we can manage our own government. There may come a time, and it is obvious today, that we may have to take back control of our government through the use of guns. Government cannot be trusted without a check on their power, ultimately by the people of an electorate and the electoral system. Even with guns we have come perilously close to complete tyranny as the evidence of the last presidential election is testimony in itself. The FBI sought to help the Democrat party elect their presidential candidate and keep Donald Trump out of the White House, which didn’t work. But when he did, they actively played a part in subverting that election, the evidence is everywhere as revealed most explosively with the Bruce Ohr situation at the Department of Justice. That case is still unraveling, but it is very embarrassing to our government. Going back a few years we saw a similar situation involving the IRS where they targeted Tea Party groups as a way to punish them for existing, using tax laws to encumber the leadership. It was a gross abuse of power and nobody was ultimately held accountable. I was wrapped up in the middle of all that, so I saw it firsthand. It was abuse by our government, pure and simple and honestly, if I was not a gun owner, they probably would have come after me even harder. By my experience, I would say that my ownership of guns has preserved more liberty and saved more lives than if I had not had them. Let’s just say that.

As to the other proposals such as red flag laws, well the tools have always been there. Since the most recent mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, Ohio police and the FBI are finally doing their jobs and picking people up for the messages they put online about announcing their mass shooting intentions. The red flags have always been there, but police and the FBI were just too lazy to act on them. There wasn’t a political will to enforce the laws that were on the books, otherwise the El Paso shooting and the one in Dayton would not have happened. The red flags were there, but the cops were out eating donuts and thinking about something else. That is another reason we can’t trust our government; they are not consistent and driven by performance. They are mostly inspired by politics and when something is hot, they act. When things cool off, they sleep, sit in their cars looking up pornography on their computers, and they have massive affairs with each other. (I know a lot of cops or have over the years. I know what I’m talking about.) They do a good job when pressed and people are looking. But left to their own devices, they aren’t the most motivated bunch.

We can’t trust government to define hate crimes or even hate speech and we certainly can’t surrender our guns to them. The guns are there to ultimately protect us not from thieves and despots, but from the tendencies of government itself, to cover their crimes when they commit them from the burdens of history. And if someone like you or I are witnesses to that burden, we will then become the targets, which is what all this hate crime legislation is opening up as a possibility, for which we all must say no. For myself, I live by the Cowboy Way, I treat everyone no matter what their sex, color or country of origin the same and with great respect. I don’t need a government that is always trending toward criminal behavior to define for me, “fairness.” I’ll keep my guns, and if someone wants to come and take them, then that will leave no other choice but to call for a change in the government itself and return to a time when John Wayne made a lot more sense instead of the race baiters and hustlers of our current times who seek to hide their own illegal activity behind more laws and regulation.

Rich Hoffman

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

ANTIFA is a Terrorist Organization: Both White Nationalism and ANTIFA are elements of the left and stand against the American Constitution

Of course, ANTIFA should be labeled a terrorist group. That’s what they are and have been throughout history whenever an activist group like theirs comes about to promote socialist causes, whether it’s the Brownshirts of the NAZI or the Marxists of Lenin the purpose they serve is to attack the social order of their society and to replace it with anarchy and chaos so that change in their direction can take place. I would also say that regarding the recent Portland protests where members of ANTIFA and white supremacy groups clashed from the supposed “alt right” that both organizations are from the political left and are in themselves terrorist in nature. All the representation at the Portland protests were to the left of traditional conservatives in America and that is something worth discussing because we are all told to pick a side and that represents “us” as Americans, but nothing could be further from the truth.

This is not a First Amendment protection issue. Basically, in the case of the ANTIFA people, they are communists protesting the basic foundations of American life, so the First Amendment is something they are willingly giving up. And the White Supremacists that naturally spawn off these far-left groups are a natural reaction to being isolated by the progressive movement’s agenda but are in and of themselves a creation of it. Everyone knowns by now that it was Republicans who put down the white nationalists’ movements in America, who freed the slaves, and pushed for the equal treatment of all under the American flag. When they wave around the Confederate Flag at white nationalist events trying to go back to a time before the Civil War, they are too stating that they do not want to be a part of American law which considers everyone equal, no matter what skin color we have. If the issue wasn’t defined well enough when the original Constitution was signed, then it was made quite clear by the Civil War and the Amendments that followed that war. Essentially terrorism is the mode of operation of all these groups, and we need to look at them that way.

But for ANTIFA to call anybody a NAZI is to say that they are just a less severe version of Marxism. The Nazis were a socialist organization from Germany and their rise imposed themselves on the rest of the world with massive destruction and poor philosophy. The ANTIFA terrorists are even further to the political left and are pushing for harsh communism like what we’d find in modern China and North Korea—or even Iran. When they all start burning flags and spitting in the face of basic American ideas, its time to get rid of them as a terrorist organization by accepting that they are exactly that. The First Amendment can’t survive everything, and the line needs to be drawn at the American Flag. If everyone can’t at least agree to the Constitutional concepts that the flag represents, then whoever disagrees needs to be treated as a hostile foreign entity and a domestic enemy by the terms of modern citizenship.

To go further into this issue, the creation of a group like ANTIFA to begin with, we must blame the educations of these young people for arriving so far into their adult lives and thinking the things that they do which go against America. To consider that we have all paid massive amounts of money into the educations of these people only to have class curriculums teach anti-American sentiment which gives rise to this kind of radicalism is preposterous. And that even our modern media members are so stupid that they can’t even understand left from right thinking between ANTIFA, white nationalism, and normal Americans says a lot about their fundamental thought patterns created during their educations. And even so, some of them do understand, but by positioning the problem the way they have it forces normal Americans by default to endorse with their silence one side or the other even though neither side has anything to do with America as we have known it. I’m certainly nothing close to a white nationalist, and neither is the Trump administration, or anything connected to it. But once a stigma is created rather than solving the problem, we are forced to defend a narrative for which none of us ever played a part. To attach any conservative movement with the “alt right” of white nationalism is like calling a can of soda a glass of water. They may be both liquids, but they have nothing to do with each other. All white nationalists are advocating a form of socialism or fascism that were always born of liberalism, specifically the Democrat party as it evolved out of the early 20th century progressive movement in America.

Of course, a bunch of dumb kids raised poorly and educated to fail, because failure puts boots of radicalism on the streets to demand change, are going to want to fight someone. They must blame somebody for being losers in the world, and I place the blame on their educations which we all paid for and have proven to be destructive to the minds of young people. Which to me is just another form of inner bred terrorism. The white nationalists aren’t any smarter, they are looking to socialism and fascism for a reason, because they can’t think their way out of a paper bag soaked with water. So, they turn to collectivism to solve their social problems. The situation really is a mess and most people don’t have time to figure out all the players and how they became that way. Which if you look at how the media has positioned these stories to pick winners and losers both on the side of the left, the attempt against our American lives is obvious, which is yet another act of terrorism against our Constitution.

There is plenty of blame to go around, and there has been lots of unchecked terrorism that has been left to grow because law makers didn’t want to come across as harming the First Amendment. But all these characters in this play have forsaken the protections of the Constitution by spitting on the American flag in some fashion or another which is to say to the world that they don’t honor the Constitution for which it represents. In that regard declaring these groups and anybody for that matter who states that they despise the American Flag, we should then treat them as hostile to the American ideas and law for which our society demands we at least find common ground. If we don’t at least have that common ground, then what do we really have and what will be the outcome? We can’t just let ANTIFA act so badly in our city streets and bring harm to people all in the name of open communism. We do need to draw a line and I think the situation is quite clear. ANTIFA and all such organizations need to be labeled a terror group, no different from an organization like ISIS. And we need to run them off the face of the planet as domestic enemies to the American concept. And that’s the way it must be.

Rich Hoffman

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

Don’t Worry about the 10-Year Treasury Bonds: There won’t be a recession during the Trump Presidency

There are lots of ways to control people, and the flow of information that they arrive at to make decisions. Advertisers do it all the time with product placement in movies and commercials which ultimately lead a consumer to a purchase. So it’s not a conspiracy theory to suggest that all the anti-Trump forces that are out there, which also means the “establishment” from both political parties have been planting seeds for the 20/20 election that would hurt Trump. One fine example is the so called “dog whistle” that Democrats are always talking about where “agents” of our law enforcement work the message boards of chat rooms where pot smoking losers are gathering to talk politics in the “other” category for violent video games where future terrorists are recruited by pushing them over the edge in a nick of time to change a national narrative on gun control, just as Trump may be gaining momentum on the aftereffects of the Mueller investigation. People can argue whether or not these things are organized behavior, or that they are the results of carefully placed “product placement” into our news cycles which a liberal media then keys off of to discuss on all broadcast networks, even down to the entertainment press like Inside Edition, Entertainment Tonight, and the various programs that still play on MTV. It would be ignorant to assume that the smart, and very manipulative people of the human race who are not quite smart enough to be Republicans, are out there in the world trying to make things hard for President Trump to win re-election. And if they could, they would love to wreck the economy in America so that Trump couldn’t use it to win in 20/20, which is of course the origin of the story that came out this past week regarding the first inverted yield curve on 10-year Treasury bonds.

Even the Federal Reserve is in on the action, their roots into international banking that would love to see an end to Trump are slow to adjust interest rates to the market needs of the red hot American economy as many of them hope with all hope that something will sink President Trump. The stock market has done nothing but rise like a rocket since the day he was elected, and it has stayed that way since. When he was elected Dow averages were in the 18,000 range. It was considered unheard of to be in the 25-27,000 range where it is now with all the market volatility that we are experiencing as a tariff war with China is in full swing. The sad truth there is that China had been running the world as a communist nation and their hooks were in our American media because they had bought up interest on our massive debts and purchased much of it. So nobody was talking about what a mess China really was, and the American economy was supposed to be overtaken by them by now, which of course stopped the moment we elected President Trump who did not play by the rules everyone expected of him, and is the root of all the Deep State activity, and so on. America was supposed to be economically torpedoed and we averted it by electing Trump and many people behind the torpedo attempt are furious about it and want one last crack.

With the same intention that authorities wanted to see mass shootings from their liberal base, such as that loser from Dayton who heard the dog whistle from liberals on the channel that drug users all listen to subconsciously, “economists” are doing the same with reports on the 10-year treasury bonds trying to get people to pull their money out of the markets out of fears of recession as stoked by those same people. If they can convince people that there is a recession on the horizon and that they can tank the economy, they think they can stop a Trump re-election. Essentially a group called FactSet stated that the 2-year yield had dropped 4.1 basis points at 1.628 percent. Such an inversion has preceded the last seven recessions. Further they have stated that the equity market is on borrowed time after the yield curve inverts where 2-year bonds are paying more than the longer term 10-year bonds. And for that, markets should panic and move their money into a holding pattern, so they don’t get burnt as they did in 2007 ahead of the 2008 collapse. The control here is in using fear in “what ifs” to actually manipulate market conditions that instigate a self-fulfilled prophesy. Did you get all that dear reader?

The great thing about President Trump which I think will likely stick deep into this new century is that he’s rich. He made a lot of money the old-fashioned way, through brick and mortar real estate, which isn’t easy, even with a head start from his father who had already been in the business. And like most rich people he knows how wealth is created and how it is discharged through the world. Often very rich people who want to buy up something will poo poo it to the gullible public so that their price will be lowered, or they will go somewhere else to put their money so that the rich person can acquire it without a lot of fanfare giving them leverage on the purchase. For instance, someone buying a new car might do the same to a sentimental owner that wants to be paid above market value due to their attachment to the property. So the smart investor will point out all the little dents and scratches in the paint, the torn seats and the sputter on the tachometer curve over 3000 to lower the owners impression of their own asset so that a lower price can be found. By pushing all the weak investors out of the market and having the potential of getting rid of President Trump, a lot of wealthy people stand to gain a lot by driving down values and then buying them back up once sold. It’s a win win for them and not much of a conspiracy, such as the FBI working with the Democrats to elect Hillary Clinton in the last election. The same forces are at work with this economic news. But its not true.

The reason that market inversions like this are even reported is because they do cause recessions as a panicked public often responds predictably by pulling their money out of markets so that the very wealthy can then buy up assets at a low price only to sell them later at a high price. That is how rich people get rich—by either capitalizing off of value or by creating it in the first place. Fortunately for all the rest of us we decided to elect our own rich person to finally run the country who understands all these games and suddenly they aren’t working. And that is the lesson here. This is a last-ditch effort by the deep state, whatever you want to call them, to stop President Trump before the 20/20 election. But China is on a downward spiral. The Hong Kong protests are signs of their sinking ship and a lot of American companies are pulling out of the communist nation. That growth is coming back into the United States just as the rest of the world is struggling due to the strings being cut from them into North America. And now America is once again the top energy producer in the world. The effects of that are just hitting, so no, we are not going to have a recession. The forces that cause panic and the aftereffects of recession are going to find that they are helpless in their efforts, and that everything is going to be just fine. And Trump will be re-elected not just easily, but dominantly. The head to head matchups in the early polling are of the same nature as these market watch forecasts, purely politically driven in hopes of eroding away hopes and dreams. Only this time, its not going to work. The game is over.

Rich Hoffman

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

“Its Only A Flesh Wound”: The Dayton Mass Killer and his liberal, cocaine driven murders

OK, I’m happy to say I told you so dear reader. Within hours of the Dayton mass shooting rampage that has so many calling for gun control, we learned this week that the killer had cocaine in his body, he even had a bag of it on him at the time of his death after he was shot over 24 times by police, and he was on anti-anxiety medication combined with alcohol. Which is exactly what I had said happened knowing very little about the evidence at the time but understanding the condition of the murders. Yet we are supposed to believe that gun control would have averted the killings. And we are supposed to put our complete trust into a police force that put so many bullets into the dead body of the attacker that they actually shot some of the victims with their own bullets. The whole ordeal was actually and remains a mess. It was liberal philosophies that made the shooter who he was and it was state controlled law enforcement that obviously over reacted and put more people in danger due to their “training.”

The killer Betts had 52 gunshot wounds in his upper and lower torso. Many of them were exit wounds but think about it. More than twenty shots fired in any crowded area would be a potential for more people around the target to be injured, and at least 2 bullets struck other people. It is humorous that when explaining this to the public Police Chief Richard Beihl had to describe those wounds as “superficial wounds.” It kind of reminds me of the Monty Python movie The Holy Grail. “Its only a flesh wound.” Of course that police training entailed shooting at the subject so that so long as he was near his rifle that they had to keep pummeling him with rounds of fire and that each of those bullets would bounce off the pavement and be a potential projectile flying into innocent people running away from the crime. They had to make sure that Betts was dead. Ah, but they were under pressure, the police. After all, wouldn’t everyone panic under such a crises and hindsight is 20/20. Well, no, not everyone panics under those conditions.

Sure, there were lots of cops that were around late that night in Dayton patrolling the entertainment district and they engaged the shooter in 30 seconds. But with so many cops also comes the understanding that they all knew this guy was a mass killer who had just attacked people on their watch, and they wanted to make sure some of their bullets got into the body of him so they could claim credit for bringing an end to the carnage, by creating more carnage. 52 bullet holes, that is just out of control, and more about getting their name in the record books than actually stopping the crime. With so many police officers firing into the cocaine liberal Betts, nobody could have taken the next logical step and moved in to remove the weapon from the attacker while he was down, minimizing the risk to the area. I have argued and will continue to, that most CCW holders would have done a much better job and not let their adrenaline get the better of them, as the police obviously suffered from. A typical NRA member with a CCW would have been much calmer and created less carnage in stopping the bad guy.

But that’s not the story of the day, its all about how to detect mental health, and the gun control advocates desire to do background checks and have red flag laws. Would a red flag law prevented this liberal Elizabeth Warren supporter from smoking crack and mixing anti-depressant medicine with alcohol and who knows whatever else, then making a terrorist out of himself? I would argue that just calling oneself a Democrat is a kind of declaration of insanity. Should all Democrats be flagged as potential terrorists? I think historically speaking, we could make that case. Is that where all this is going? Because any time a mind is altered with intoxicants, alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, anti-depressants even, they are all potential minds for becoming killers. Most of them won’t of course. But where do you draw the line?

Just like the cops that shot their guns over 24 times into a body within the confines of a crowded street, politicians show they have even less good judgment on the matter. Most of them want illegal drugs legalized so they can get the tax money for their giveaway projects, and they don’t want to consider what those intoxicants do to our society. Maybe everyone who drinks a beer or smokes marijuana should be “red flagged.” I could live without drinking or doing any drugs. I would much rather have a society of gun owners carrying them around in public than a bunch of drunken heathens intoxicated in their spare time and thinking about dumb things. The lessen here is that no politician, especially on the Republican side where they should be leading the way, is addressing the core problem—drugs cause mental depletion, so no mental health scan under normal conditions will root out a potential killer. And we certainly have seen from the FBI to the local law enforcement that they are only human, and they panic too under duress and they may shoot you just for being nearby. So is the proposal of more government patrolling the streets viable, no. Is more government doing background checks and administering red flag laws viable, no. Would an assault weapons ban work, so that government could be the only ones with high powered weapons there to serve politicians who have a lot to hide in the world. Absolutely not!

So what are we to do? Well, first of all, lets admit to ourselves that drugs are a problem and our government should not be endorsing the practice of intoxication—of any kind. People will still want to drink their beer and whatever, but we must stop promoting that activity as normal. And we certainly must understand that endorsing cocaine, depression medicine and marijuana will lead to a less safe society. We cannot give up the Bill of Rights so that people can just sit around and get wasted. I understand that the political class likes intoxicated people who can’t think, because it makes it easier to garner their vote. But the consequences are obvious, and this Betts killer was an obvious example of when such a situation goes wrong. I think a legitimate look into every mass killer would tell a similar story as Betts. He was obviously a clear-cut case, he was a liberal likely caught up in the modern antics of political theater, and being a drug user, had lost his ability to rationalize outcomes. So, he became a mass killer with the obvious hope that it would inspire gun control, which is why he used the high capacity magazine. He was after all supportive of gun control, and his natural aim of throwing his life away, and those of many others, was to force the issue. But all those thoughts are derived from insanity provoked by drug abuse. Given our current culture which accepts that condition, there is always the potential for countless killers to emerge. And until we deal with the drug use, no law created by anybody will stop them. Obviously, we can’t count on law enforcement to save us. Apparently to them, collateral damage is a perfectly acceptable criteria so long as they stop the mass shooters when they do appear.

Rich Hoffman

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

What’s Wrong with the Fox News Poll on Gun Control: Trying to position cable news for life after 2024 with smoke and mirrors

You can clearly see the influence of Suzanne Scott, the new CEO of Fox News regarding their recent poll on gun control released recently in the wake of two mass shootings that occurred within 24 hours of each other. Fox News has moved noticeably in a more liberal direction under her leadership as opposed to Roger Ailes. Knowing that liberal gun banners have sought to push an assault weapons agenda while the NRA is on its heels in internal struggles at the top of the organization to redirect their losses in the Russian hoax story and pull Trump toward gun control to split his base and weaken his power going into the 2020 election. Fox News was happy to play along being a New York based media company in the heart of progressive society, they have moved radically to the left and their poll on guns reflects this trend.

Their headline was that most of the people they polled back gun restrictions after the most recent shootings. They also aimed to show a slipping support for Trump and the NRA. Obviously Suzanne Scott’s staff in the boardroom of Fox News is looking beyond Trump’s presidency if not for 2020, because they will want the ratings bump they get from his campaign events, ultimately the cable news outlet need to figure out who they are after 2024 and they think the country is changing in a more liberal direction, that many of the heavily college debt driven young people will not care about guns, or even family, and will be more Bernie Sanders than Donald Trump in their economic and social thinking. Suzanne Scott is clearly not Roger Ailes, and it shows.

The big number in the Fox Poll is that they say two thirds of their contacts state that they would support an “assault weapons” ban which I think is highly unlikely. I would say that is something of a suppression poll similar to the type of polls that showed Hillary Clinton beating Trump in the general election or the ones that think Joe Biden will beat Trump head to head. The numbers may be accurate if you are taking your sampling at a local liberal college, but not if you were doing so in a steel factory or a competitive shooting event. Its not so much what the numbers say, it’s the kind of people that were polled. For instance, 100% of people polled in New York City would likely reflect the Fox News sample. They are already used to a non-gun culture and lots of progressive ideas. But in Eastern Ohio or Kentucky, the results would be much different.

The sampling itself was taken between August 11th through the 13th so the material broadcast by Fox and other networks was fresh on everyone’s mind and consisted of 1,013 registered voters, 222 by a land line and 791 by cell phones randomly selected for inclusion in the survey using a probability proportionate to the size method meaning the phone numbers for each state were proportional to the number of voters in each state. That means that by dividing the number of polled recipients by the number of states and not taking into account the nature of those states, the results would tend to lead toward a favorability of gun control anyway, which of course Fox News is pushing so that they can take credit for moving the needle on gun control during President Trump’s first term in office and changing the market demographic for that five year plan which takes place after 2024.

The big flaws are in conducting recipients who still have a land line, which is to say, most people these days have cut that cord a long time ago. Land line phone owners are not a good statistical sampling of the modern electorate. Its like saying to people who ride bicycles if they prefer that mode of transportation over a car. A land line owner is probably over 60 or they are very poor, and their opinions are radically shaped by current events, like within a week old. With all the news recently from traditional networks being all about gun control, it is not surprising that these types of people would be sympathetic to such an idea. Then of course there is the cell phone sampling, where only certain types of people answer their cell phone when a number they don’t recognize comes across their screen. Again, 791 people who answered their cell phone during an unusual call across 50 states is not a good sampling of gun control sentiment among real voters. The poll method is an old model that does not represent modern trends, and that is where the rubber hits the road in detecting the motive of this Fox News Poll.

Mostly, I would say that people who read here for instance are getting their news sourcing from Fox News over to Alex Jones, OAN or even Louder with Crowder on YouTube. There is a reason that many of these modern commentators who lean to the political right have been deplatformed from social media—it’s because that was never the plan from the left. They thought Facebook, Google and Twitter would push people to the left, instead it has given people on the right more of a voice and they are cutting their cords with Fox News and the cable companies that support them and turning to streaming online. The freedom of choice has gone in the wrong direction and this has particularly upset the Google radicals who thought they understood the game.

Fox News viewers really aren’t that impressive, and they dominate the other networks by having 2.3 million viewers between the hours of 8-11 PM each night. The YouTube channel of Steven Crowder is on par with those numbers and that is just one lone personality. Given the impact of talk radio, blog sites like this one, and alternative media such as Alex Jones on his own website that is still pulling in impressive numbers despite all the effort there has been to stop him. There isn’t any real polling coming out of those audiences and it is there that the real sentiment on gun control rests. Fox News tried to have a poll by doing what they understand in an industry that is dying and they are trying to sell that off as a fact. But its just a poll taken from backwards derelicts who are out of touch with reality and are by their very nature the products of the modern news cycle for which they provide the content. But that content does not represent reality.

The shocker is that even with the Fox News poll trying to pain the picture that a majority of Americans support gun control, which they don’t, the real trick is in trying to get Republicans to play ball with Democrats to give a legislative victory that they can run on in 2020. By puffing up their feathers at Fox News with what they hope the President will be suckered into supporting, they are trying to shape policy from a New York perspective that goes against the rest of the nation, that secretly support Trump through new media. If Fox News could do that they fantasize, they may survive in the marketplace beyond 2024 because it will take the wind out of the sales of all the new media out there that is beating the crap out of traditional media. And that is where the real fight is. There is no appetite for gun control from real voters, because they see the game. But the establishment is trying to shape opinion at a critical time while they still can. Hopefully, the President won’t fall for it.

But if he does, he does. It won’t change reality.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Political Left has Ignored Our Laws on Illegal Immigration: Why would we obey their laws on gun control?

Democrats are all about compelling us to do things, which is the real reason they are so supportive of gun control and there is currently an assault weapons ban floating around the House. Take the bartender turned congresswoman and socialist activist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her opinions on the media company Barstool Sports where the owner Tweeted that he’d fire any of his employees on the spot who tried to unionize. Of course, we know now that unions, all unions, are concepts of Karl Marx and have their foundations firmly in socialist ideas, and they assume that company ownership should always be shared with the workers. That is part of their philosophy on the whole socialism versus capitalism argument, that common everyday workers who don’t work very hard at life can run a company through democratic consensus instead of hard work and risk taking.

When the owners of Barstool Sports made his declaration against a unionized workforce, he was of course appalled that such a concept would seek to take away the ownership of his company and place its management among the workers, which is a real slap in the face. And to make matters worse Cortez stated that he was likely breaking the law for which the Department of Labor rigorously defends. Government unions especially can defend the poor performance of their members such as they did with the two prison guards who let Jeffery Epstein die in jail under their care, but if a business owner says that they don’t want their company unionized, watch out! They’ll come for you in balls and chains and even some terrible words to destroy your public image in the press. Democrats love laws and they pass them any time they can so they can use the government to compel people to do things they don’t want to do through force and violence.

And just as Cortez was quick to remind Barstool Sports that they have an obligation by the Department of Labor to allow people to unionize, that is the real intent behind the assault weapons ban that is picking up steam in the Democratic controlled Congress. After two recent mass shootings, both conducted by radicals from their own party, Democrats are pushing for another assault weapons ban, and one that goes further than the ridiculous 1994 law that was created by the Clinton administration, between visits to Epstein’s Orgy Island where sex with underaged girls was always on the menu. There are currently 198 co-sponsors which is just 20 shy of the votes needed to push the bill through the lower chamber and into consideration. Given the nature of their gun grab Democrats have no interest in what actually caused the mass shootings, but only in what laws they can pass to further control all of our lives.

That brings up an interesting question, why do Democrats think they can ignore the laws that conservatives support, like marijuana illegalization, and illegal immigration, but that any of us would give a damn about their assault weapons bans and attempts to control unionization of businesses? If they are going to ignore laws to push a political position, which is what they have done and it led directly to the mass shooting in El Paso, Texas due to the push to shove immigrants into Texas from Mexico to turn it into a purple state of Democrat voters, then why would anybody think that we would change our behavior over gun control?

The thing about laws in general, especially in a society with too many laws that were hastily passed to gain political points rather than really solve problems in society is that it pushes activity underground, and that is exactly what will happen to guns if they are overly regulated. As it stands now if police want to know what kind of guns are in a household there is a data base with serial numbers that will tell them what to expect if they knock on a door to make an inquiry. I think that’s too much, but many lawmakers should consider themselves lucky to get that much. But the moment that congress starts making this and that illegal guns won’t stop existing; they will just move to an underground market that nobody in government will have any control over and things will be worse as far as gun control. The attempted ban of high capacity magazines and AR style platforms will only push them underground to a point that the police couldn’t even begin to get their arms around. And the foppish FBI can’t even stop mass shootings now, what are they going to do when all the gun related behavior goes underground? They’ll be even less effective than they are now.

For all the reasons that moonshine was pushed underground, people never stopped making it. These days you can walk down the street of Gatlinburg, Tennessee and buy all you want. The laws didn’t stop the behavior. Just as pot laws never stopped the behavior. And it is illegal to have sanctuary cities for illegal aliens, and Democrats have ignored those laws openly, and without consequence. So why would an assault weapons ban even be considered a viable option? Because Democrats want to send the clear message that they are in control and want to regulate your life in every way they can, that’s what they are about and all they really desire. They don’t care if people do break the law so long as they can pick and choose their targets to regulate vigorously, such as Cortez did in pushing Barstool Sports into shame over their anti-union sentiment.

Ultimately this is why we have the Second Amendment, because the power of politicians does go to their heads and they will try to control our lives every chance they get. And in response to their desires for gun control we are in the maker era, where we can make our own guns in our garages with technology like the Ghost Gunner from Defense Distributed. I can make an AR-15 in my garage in an afternoon. I don’t need to go to the store to buy one. Just like I could make moonshine or some other substance that might be against the law. The law is just a piece of paper that politicians pick and choose which to enforce. They want more laws so they can pick and choose from more when they think its to their political benefit. Meanwhile, the rest of us are just trying to live life, and clearly Democrats don’t want that. They want to control the flow of that life and that is the real problem.

More laws, there will obviously be more people ignoring them. More laws will not make society safer, or march any of us toward prosperity. It will only create an environment where Democrats can shoot fish in a barrel any time they want to push and pull control for some social cause that enhances their power, like relying on the Department of Labor to enforce laws against Barstool Sports just for desiring to maintain control of their business. To the socialist advocate, they are on a war path to take over industry for the “people” which in essence means the worker not invested in risks and rewards that built the business to begin with. By taking over companies the Democrats spread their philosophy of socialism to every sector of an economy and that is why they like rules, because it gives them that assault without bloodshed in the streets. But history says otherwise, and since they ignored our laws, we might as well get used to ignoring theirs’.


Rich Hoffman

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