Beto O’Rourke Says He Will Take Our Guns: Yeah, he’s smoking crack

I already know what its like to go to heaven, I was in heaven Thursday night while the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were playing the Carolina Panthers on one television and I was watching the loser Democrats on another TV. Then to fulfill my needs I was reading the latest Star Wars book, The Black Spire Outpost while I answered professional emails on two different computers. It doesn’t get any better than that. I was as happy as I ever get for about three hours until the Bucs finally won late in the early morning hours. However, something did get my dander up, it was the pot smoking skateboarder Beto O’Rourke who said during the Democrat debates that he was going to confiscate all AR-15s and I’ll have to say, it pissed me off considerably.

I’ve heard it before, that making declarations of violence against government officials who come to our homes to confiscate our guns is considered radical, and even criminal. Well, no its not. The law that I acknowledge is that we have a right to own guns not just for our own protection, but to maintain the stability of government. My position is that we can’t completely trust government, ever, certainly not with our lives. So when I hear a politician even assume that they will ever get that kind of power, to send police door to door to collect our firearms, it makes me just a little angry. And I don’t consider it controversial to say that I’m not going to comply. Any government that supports the legalization of drugs, and the confiscation of privately-owned guns is a government that needs to be overthrown and reorganized. And that’s all there is to it.

I want and expect a good and stable law enforcement to do the work of maintaining peace. But have no illusions, even under the best of circumstances, there are always dirty cops and corrupt government officials, we will never be able to trust some altruistic government to lead us into some utopian future. The way to have a good future is to keep government looking over their shoulders at their bosses, the people who elect them into power. If they abuse that power, we must have some kind of recourse to take that power away from them, such as the Second Amendment.

Another thing that wasn’t talked about much on such an active Thursday night with so many exciting things going on was that the Department of Justice had rejected the former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s appeal to avoid facing prosecution for his role in the Russian conspiracy against President Trump. We talk about the FBI being the top law enforcement agency in the world, and that may be true. But we also have seen that it can be very much a corrupt organization whether or not the problem was only at the top, or if it was the regular agents who work in our neighborhoods. Most of them are probably good people, but there will always be some bad cops out there and we never want to be defenseless when they go rogue.

I’ll go further than that, I have too many experiences with police who were very bad to ever trust them completely, even if the president I put in office with my vote is all about the thin blue line. I’m not anti-cop, but I tend to be weary of people who dedicate their lives to having authority over others and at best I think they need to fear the people behind the doors they might be tasked to break down. I’ve never been arrested, but I’ve been in a lot of trouble on many occasions and I’ve seen the way authority treats people when they think the story is one sided. For my roles, I’ve always been unquestionably the good guy so I’ve never had violence with police. But if they manhandled me the way I’ve seen them do people I’ve been near, I can’t say that things would go well for them. I don’t give anybody the authority to treat me roughly, or to force me into some mode of “submission.” If that ever were to happen, I would anticipate a major conflict, let’s just say that. I know more about how much corruption there is in our local police departments to understand mathematically that the situation only gets worse with more power as they get up to the federal level. And to that I would say we are all kidding ourselves if we don’t think there are major issues.

Yet having police is better than anarchy and radical chaos. I’d rather have a police force that has the good guys in it doing the hard work of maintaining that thin blue line. I would tell that stupid politician Beto O’Rourke that the only thing that keeps police in check from letting the power go to their heads is an armed public, that its critical to keeping the balance of power in check. For instance, my community doesn’t even have its own police force. The county sheriff handles everything, we don’t need that extra tax burden. But I also live in an affluent community where people generally don’t commit crimes against each other, and most homes have some form of gun. Nobody shoots each other. People wave to each other when they cut their grass. Life is good. Gun violence is indicative of personal values and behavior, and low-lifes who deal drugs and are too lazy to work tend to be the ones committing violence, and with them comes gun violence and police who like to use that chaos to overreact with antagonism of their own.

I don’t consider it radical to warn authorities that I’m not going to put up with politicians like Beto O’Rourke or the gun grabbing Democrats. They will never have a right to confiscate our guns. The guns are a right for a reason, because we know from history that we cannot trust authorities under any conditions. If left unchecked with power there will always be a certain percentage of law enforcement who will go bad and become part of the criminal element, like Andrew McCabe and James Comey. Comey was in charge of the entire FBI and we know now, that he was a very dangerous person drunk with power, so much so that he thought he was one of the good guys.

Guns are the best way to sort out justice from those who would be tempted to abuse power and those who might become victims of it. Nobody ever wants to shoot someone trying to break into their home, whether it be a criminal element or a law enforcement officer using their power for malicious reasons against the American property owner. Its not controversial to stick up for yourself or to maintain the means to keep power in check, when our election system fails, and bad people use that power to abuse us all for their own entertainment. Owning the guns and letting them know what will happen if they abuse their power is the nicest way to keep things from getting out of hand and is the key to social civility. However, if they cross over beyond that civility, we will unfortunately have to answer that challenge, and violence must be the consequence. I wouldn’t like it, but you must draw the line somewhere, and for me, grabbing guns by any government is simply too far.

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

The Latest Mass Shooter Seth Ator: Where liberalism has failed, they always call for gun control

It took nearly 24 hours after another gunman identified the 36 years old Texan Seth Ator as the Odessa mass shooter which led to many conspiracy theories right after the tragedy. What was different from this event was that the killer was pulled over by police and shot at as they approached his vehicle. It wasn’t necessarily a preplanned massacre as others have been, while using an AR platformed weapon to invoke mass destruction on innocent people. This time the guy was just doing his thing and when he was engaged by law enforcement that broke up whatever activity he was doing, it set him off into a volatile rage that turned deadly quick.

It was sad that immediately after there were already calls for gun control, and this time it was a bit different also. Anti-gun people revealed more what their intentions were, since it was obvious that Seth Ator had a bit of a criminal record. Just like with health care it was the Obama part of it that was sold with the intention of going to a public option and complete socialist takeover. Well, the red flag laws that have been proposed, as well as the background checks are just the beginning. Gun grabbers and solid political leftists want guns removed from society. They quickly were using this case as one where open carry wouldn’t have worked, and tried immediately to apply the shooters “white guy” status to support their attempts at gun control. Its all been part of their overall story, angry white guys are dangerous, racist and that they created America and all that needs to be erased from history. But to do that, of course they have to take away the guns because that’s what keeps such a rebellion from happening.

However, as I have said, and from what we know is directly applicable to this case, failed parental structures are what is causing these mass shootings, the values these kids are not getting in their families is far more destructive than any other element. Then as has been the case with every shooter lately, we are still learning about this one, but drugs both legal and illegal have played a part in altering the consciousness of the attackers. All those elements are foundations of liberal policy in the failed experiments of replacing the family with government and the results are exploding on our streets now that many of the basic foundations of proper behavior have been eroded away into this anarchy movement that we see everywhere these days.

There were early reports that this guy was on meth and was an Antifa member which I stated wouldn’t have surprised me at all. To be honest, at 36 he’s a little old for Antifa terrorism, but it would be closer to a reality than to say he was a good Christian kid from Odessa that just freaked out one day and killed a bunch of people at a traffic stop. Liberals want to remove guns from our society because they have made kids like this killer with their social policies and they are determined to use every tragedy that occurs to attack America’s gun culture, and they truly expect everyone to just take it, and go along with implied guilt for things they had nothing to do with. But the left did. As is typical of all these recent shooters, Ator came from a divorced home. While divorce has been around for a while, it only became common in our society over the last few decades. There was a stigma against it in the 70s and 80s. If a woman became pregnant prior to that period, you got married and you forced yourself to live happily ever after so that you could grow a family. And when you got older and couldn’t stand each other anymore, you still stayed married because it was the right thing to do for the kids. Because kids psychologically need parental structure, no matter how much they rebel. They need the structure of a father and a mother, and when that is replaced with something else, such as a government welfare check, a student loan program, or any form of handout that replaces a father as head of a family, we see trouble in the products of that family, the children.

Not that every young person who has a dad that lives across town and must watch their parents date other people and spend Thanksgivings with their new boyfriends and girlfriends, they don’t go out and shoot a bunch of people just for the hell of it. But it is a problem among a large portion of our population, just as heavy marijuana use is an indicator of psychotic behavior in a minority of their users. Not everyone who smokes pot becomes a killer just as not everyone growing up without a dad does, but it is certainly an indicator of future violent behavior.

I will be the first to say that the kind of world I want to live in, where we openly carry our guns, everywhere, that such a society would require the best of what our culture could produce. People in such a society would be well educated, would not abuse drugs and alcohol, and would come from solid families with loving backgrounds. The only reason we don’t have such a society is because left leaning activists want all the bad things, broken families, reckless—inconsequential sex, drug abuse, and an ignorant population. And to have those things, they don’t want guns so everyone can kill each other. They want the deviant behavior and they don’t want consequences. That is the real issue and no law proposed could fix that.

The anti-police stance of Antifa likely did have more to do with Seth Ator opening fire on the police as they approached his vehicle after a traffic stop. The solution for the political left is to take away all guns so that Seth Ator wouldn’t have had the opportunity to do such a thing. But of course the ignorance of that proposal is that it does nothing to correct the desire to shoot a cop in the first place. After the initial attack against the police, Ator drove around killing random people, but there clearly wasn’t a plan. It was behavior driven and the elements that created that behavior that was the real cause. If it wasn’t guns, it would have been something else. Killers and lunatics will use anything to invoke a menace on a population if they are unhappy, which is why guns are needed to keep such things from getting out of control. In an open carry environment, he would have been shot by a good guy with a gun sooner, but this was different because he was in a car driving around before people could really get a sense of what was going on.

Without question these shootings are more political than demanding a legal mandate because no law proposed, background checks, red flag laws, or even illegal drug enforcement will change these occurrences. They are the results of liberalism injected into an otherwise conservative society and the conflict that is the natural biproduct. At the very least in this case was the lack of a biological family that was stable and secure. Mom and dad were divorced, and some people just can’t handle that. Their anger may project outward to innocent members of society, but the root cause is the broken family and the disappointments of a child that was robbed of that basic security. We would do better to make divorce illegal than guns. But to admit such a thing, liberals would have to admit that their social experiment of removing dads from homes and attacking the core values of American life has been a failure. And they certainly won’t do that. They’d rather blame guns.

Rich Hoffman

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

Where in the World is Jeffrey Epstein: We will never know, or will we trust the answer

Nothing about the Jeffrey Epstein case surprises me, including the conspiracy theory that the whole suicide by hanging himself was a fake to get out of prison and to hide for the rest of his life on some island somewhere so that the state didn’t have a case against him to proceed forward. Epstein had a lot of money and that can buy justice. A lot of people would be willing to turn the other way for lifetime wealth that paid off their houses and let them live free of occupational burden. It was only Friday that court documents were unsealed proving what I’ve said about the guy was true, that unveiled high profile friends who were part of Epstein’s underaged sex ring, people like New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, investment banker Glenn Dubin, Britain’s Prince Andrew, Senator George Mitchell, MIT professor Marvin Minsky, and even Bill Clinton. There were a lot of heads to roll and one of the victims now all grown up, Virginia Gluffre was naming names and they all point to many of the leaders of the modern progressive political circles that extend well into our court system. Jeffrey Epstein was the key testimony that would bring a lot of people down so they had to get rid of him.

The body that the ME Office in downtown New York had could have been anybody. It would only require a few people at the jail to play along with a body switch and coroners are unlikely to do any DNA testing on such a presentation. Their only job would be to pronounce Jeffery Epstein dead. So such a body switch is probably more likely given the money involved and the conditions of the case than someone getting into the jail to kill Epstein. Whatever the case, it was just too costly to allow Epstein to provide any testimony on a reduced sentence that would embarrass most of the financial contributors of the Robin Hood Foundation and the social circles that have spawned off it.

I pointed out the Epstein case many years ago, decades, so my position has been consistent. I’m glad he has been taken off the streets even if he is dead, or just pushed into hiding for the rest of his life to avoid embarrassing testimony. So many people’s lives would be ruined, even if they deserve it. The conspiracy theories that have spawned off this case are natural. People don’t trust the authorities who are in charge. We don’t trust the government to give us a straight story, even when they try to. Who in their right mind is going to believe that a high profile billionaire who is in jail and has the dirt on so many people is just going to hang himself in solitary confinement when he had been on suicide watch, especially one day after damning court documents were produced, and that the security camera would “malfunction” leaving no evidence of what happened, and nobody was apparently looking? People aren’t stupid, but authorities think they are, which is why there is no trust. People smell a rat, and it isn’t in Baltimore.

We are essentially talking about the same people who were involved in getting the FBI to alter an election in favor of Hillary Clinton which had its roots deep into the Justice Department, even the Obama White House. People are still trying to get their minds around that story which is unraveling as we speak. The proof of their corruption is out, and we know the names. The trouble is the people who would normally prosecute such a case are the ones guilty so at this point, legal action has not occurred. Knowing all that, it wouldn’t be surprising to learn that Epstein was either killed or taken away never to be seen again to live on some island in the middle of nowhere. A better deal for him rather than spending the rest of his life in jail. He has the money to make that deal and once this case started getting traction in court that would embarrass so many liberal leaders, I’m sure they were looking to make a deal.

After all, if you are Epstein and have a major sex addiction that only underaged girls could satisfy at least 3 times a day, the best security to enjoying that activity is to get powerful people to indulge in the activity with you. Once there is shared guilt, there is security in it for someone like Epstein which is leverage. When you get as many powerful people involved as he did, that is guaranteed leverage for the rest of his life. Its less likely that he would trade that leverage away by killing himself with the cameras turned off. Its more likely that his friends would produce a body that looked like him, they’d switch it out, and they’d all win by taking away the testimony of the man himself. Epstein of course would never be able to participate in any kind of societal function again. He’d have to hide away forever on an island perhaps in the Caribbean, but that’s better than jail. The plan before a week or so ago was to beat the whole thing and get out of jail. When Virginia Giuffre and other young women from the Epstein sex island experience persisted, somehow the pressure had to be taken away, and that was the central figure in all the testimony, Epstein himself. He had the money and the leverage to make a deal that would alleviate a lot of embarrassment for New York’s liberal high society, leaving them all glad to be complicit.

The main question remains, who, and why. What we know is that the key to the Epstein case is now no longer available, no matter what conspiracy theory one might subscribe to. The central figure of all this evil has been removed. Yet we aren’t just talking about sexual perversion with these issues, and massive problems with sex trafficking where intense sexual appetites were being shared with social circles that are at the center of our entire society. Young girls from all over the world were being purchased from their families and brought into the sex ring not just for Epstein to enjoy, but many in the top tier of political power, so the story doesn’t die with Epstein. He was just the glue that held it all together. The desire to commit the evil is what is at the core of this whole story. If it wasn’t Epstein who did it, it would have been someone else.

The whole thing plays out badly, it makes rich people look bad, it makes politicians look bad, and it certainly is an embarrassment to our entire legal system. Where is the justice for these poor young girls who are now young women? Well, I think we can see clearly why Democrats and other progressives are always trying to participate in social engineering and telling us how moral they are by advocating for open borders, drug legalization, and high taxes to build a big bureaucratic state, it’s to run cover for their intense sexual appetite and excessive social perversions. And they never plan to get caught, and when they do, they always get away with it because they control the legal system. Their commitment to gay rights and women’s issues is only to serve as a mask for their sexual exploits that they hope to conceal behind their good tidings. And when there is a risk, they find a way to make a deal to keep the embarrassment off the front page of the newspapers. Don’t be surprised if 20 years from now as an 80 year old man, some fishing boat doesn’t run aground in the Caribbean and find Jeffery Epstein in a hammock sipping on a mixed drink, and enjoying life to the fullest far away from Manhattan society and the news culture of the United States. Nobody else in the world will care, and that is the best mask of all.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Democrats Can’t Win in 2020, Which is Why They are Worried

There are two reasons that Democrats are so obstinate regarding the failure of the Mueller Report to give them a smoking gun regarding the Trump administration, the first are the reasons I mentioned on Easter Sunday, the classic control mechanisms of institutionalism. The second is much more immediate. The Democrats just don’t have an answer to Trump for the upcoming election. Their leading contenders are Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden, both men in their middle 70s who even if they did win would be in their 80s after their first term. Everyone else is a lunatic of fringe socialism with no message but more victimization and administrational control, which is not an appealing message. But its all they have, and they know it. So all they could really do is pray over this false accusation, which they have been doing to Republicans for years. What makes Trump great is that he refuses to play along, which has exposed this whole game for what it always was and there isn’t a single Democrat who is going to be able to go head to head with Trump in a general election. The Democrats knew it during 2016, they can’t win an election without cheating, and they certainly can’t beat Trump, so all they had was the hope that the Mueller investigation might find something that might end Trump for them. And when it didn’t come, they panicked, which has now erupted into an all out mental breakdown, collectively. The world is changing away from their controls, and they are terrified.

Like politics I out grew religion a long time ago. It’s not that I find either of them useless, but the current definitions are designed by people not very intellectually curious. They’d rather talk about the new grill they bought at Home Depot for backyard cookouts than to talk about whether the Gnostic books of the Bible should have been included into the official Bible of the Christian religions during the 1st and 2nd century A.D. As a person I don’t waste time on the dumb stuff, and most people are addicted to dumb stuff. I only am really interested on the big scale epic ideas about the nature of existence and I write about those types of things every day in hopes that it might inspire others to think about big things too. And it takes understanding big things to understand President Trump and his value. There isn’t anybody on this earth that I find deserves worship or following. I don’t need someone to follow in my life, I do all the leading. What I need out of a president is a proper chess piece. He or she doesn’t need to be a moral character. Everyone fails my expectations, so I don’t even include them when I vote for someone. I just want someone who will stand against the levers of control that have been with us since the beginning, the desire of power to manipulate those who don’t have it.

Someone reading an article of mine a few days ago referred to it as a piece of Nazi propaganda, which of course is all kinds of wrong. I’m about as far from a Nazi as anybody could get. Nazi’s were socialists and big government guys. They were way to the political left of where I am and only modern interpretations made by stupid people could even attempt to draw a line connecting those positions. But I saw in the person an individual who was trying to understand things, so I didn’t get all bent up out of shape over it. People come to the truth in their own ways and must overcome all their own personal demons. They assume that they need institutions to function, so they need all these checks and balances that are in place to keep everyone honest. There are people believe it or not who think that Bob Mueller and James Comey were card-carrying Republicans. Yet what is missed is that those definitions were created by the conquered, those who were willing to carry the sins of all mankind on their backs as a political party and allow Democrats to have a seat at the big table, and allow socialism to become part of the American way. My brand of conservatism isn’t even on a chart anywhere. I certainly wouldn’t call it “right winged” or “alt right.” I would simply call it normal, and of the type of minds who wrote the Constitution. I do not see advancements of human thought and achievement as progressing in politics, I have watched it regress into this laughable condition. I see advancements in the sciences and in art, but those attributes have not yet made it into our political world. That is why when the Nazi party did come along, the western world didn’t know what to do with it. Neville Chamberlain and his globalist tea drinkers didn’t know what to do with this popular socialist who used the ten-thousand-year-old symbol of a swastika to attempt to bring in a new age of humanity. They were too busy talking about dumb stuff, like what the name of a particular wine was and what part of France that it came from rather than understanding how dangerously left leaning the politics of Hitler was and how to stop him. Modern Republicans have had the same problem as Neville Chamberlain. Mitt Romney was a joke in 2012. John Boehner, who lives down the road from me and talks to a lot of the same friends as I do was far from a conviction driven conservative. He was a terrible Speaker of the House, just as Paul Ryan was. Boehner is now a pot advocate which is all types of bad news for me. These are not people who share my values, that’s for sure, they are way, way, way too far to the political left for me.

So where does that put President Trump, he’s certainly not somebody who will win awards for good morality but what does make him good and someone worth having in the White House is that he gets one important ingredient that is desperately needed in politics. He gets using the Executive Branch to push people above the line, which is so critical to any sort of change agency. Rather than making excuses for why our people and politics reside below the line, Trump insists that everything stay above it. And the line is that invisible set of targets we all set for ourselves. If we are below it, we accept various attributes of victimization, and if we are above, we are taking responsibility for ourselves and our role in the universe.

For me the line stops at the basic foundations of our Constitution which I view as a work of art that took about three thousand years of western civilization to develop. When after the Mueller Report came out that there were some on the Democrat side of things who still wanted to impeach the guy I helped put in office, well that’s where the line was crossed. I’m not going to put up with any below the line stuff. I’m just not going to do it. I don’t want to return to a political world where it is run by a bunch of Neville Chamberlain types who empower Democrats with their lack of will to fight. I will take Trump flaws and all because at least he gets the above the line needs of the Executive Branch. He wears a suit and tie every day. He has a good-looking wife. He doesn’t apologize for whatever wealth he has acquired. He likes gold. He likes golf and runs wonderful golf courses. He’s an above the line guy who doesn’t feel guilt or a need to apologize for it, and that makes him the best president possible in this day and age, and Democrats can’t beat him because they must appeal to below the line thinking to have a shot and if given a choice, people will aspire to above the line needs most of the time—if someone will lead them there. And yes, it is that simple.

Rich Hoffman

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

Liberals Should Consider Themselves Lucky

Just a little note to the enemies of America, the liberals who value killing babies, the worship of mother earth over the advancement of science, and crushing taxation for all so that the worst and most lazy among our society can mooch off the rest of us—isn’t President Trump’s speech at the 2019 CPAC more preferable than guns in the street and outright violence to protect our Constitution? I think so, I would consider yourselves lucky that we have a mechanism in government where a 72-year-old man fresh off a 20-hour flight from Vietnam where he was on a mission for world peace could speak for over 2 hours on a Saturday afternoon to give those angry at liberalism something to cheer for instead of taking to the streets in pursuit of violence. Because to liberal reviewers of Trump’s speech, that is what is at stake, those are the options.

What a good speech from Trump, he captured very nicely the sentiment of his base which is looking pretty scary right now. We’re not talking about the 30% whom have always supported him no matter what was going on. I can count myself among that number. I always thought that it was better to elect Trump than to stage an open rebellion against liberalism, because that has been a strong sentiment on my mind for many years. It wouldn’t take much for me to organize such a thing. But I’d rather elect a president like Trump to pursue a less deadly means of establishing justice. I was very surprised that Trump brought Hayden Williams up on the stage after a brutal attack he had to endure at Berkley when Zachary Greenberg ruthlessly attacked the young Trump supporter maliciously over and over again. To his credit, Hayden took the punches without hitting back and did a pretty good imitation of Jesus that day. Eventually Greenberg was arrested and now justice can occur legally, and as President Trump indicated, Hayden can now sue everyone involved for a lot of money, which needs to happen. As violent as the attack was Berkeley itself had fostered the environment that encouraged Greenberg to attack Williams so a major lawsuit is mandated. Otherwise we have to take up arms and pursue justice that way. An unanswered response simply isn’t permissible. Just as the Nick Sandman case against the Washington Post is now underway, if this is the way of combat in modern times, conservatives must fight back in the courts and give the law a chance to redeem honor to these circumstances. Otherwise physical violence is the only next step, because we can’t take it, that’s for sure. I can’t say that I would have stood there and taken a punch the way Williams did. So it was great that President Trump singled him out and honored him properly. The young man deserved it.

But what I found most perplexing was the CNN coverage right after the speech. They were among the first to put up highlights on YouTube around four hours later and I was curious as to what they would say, so I watched it, which I normally wouldn’t. They were talking about the North Korea situation as if Trump failed in his trip. Even as they were saying such a thing Kim Jong Un indicated that he wanted to have a third meeting with President Trump to continue their talks. All the back and forth between Trump and Kim Jong Un is simply negotiating. You would think that the CNN people with their freshly provided college degrees would understand that. This stuff is like freshman year business teaching, the very basics of negotiating. Everyone does it at all levels of business. It’s just in this case that the organization is a communist country that is 6000 miles away, so face to face meetings aren’t so easy. But Trump is doing the necessary personal contact to accomplish the feat. Nothing mysterious there, yet CNN was talking about the negotiations as if they were failures. A year and a half ago the border at the DMZ was one of the coldest in the world, no information passed between the two countries there, but now its quite common. That all by itself makes Trump’s efforts far better than any other American leader in history. The CNN coverage was dripping with hate for President Trump and after his CPAC speech they were literally speechless as to what to say.

That’s when I think I really realized how lucky the political left is to be functioning under the American Constitution. They really didn’t understand what kind of fight they were in. They have vastly underestimated us in the core of the country. Liberalism is a very self-centered view of the world ironically, its followers are generally stupid and lazy by inherit design, so they have a hard time seeing the larger picture. They only see what is good for them, so they have ignored the option that if they push too far that they are going to get their asses kicked in some fashion or another. Trump’s election was a peaceful ass kicking, and liberals should be happy that our side isn’t out there punching people in the face aggressively. It does happen from time to time, but largely the violence is instigated by the political left, not the right. But the threats of violence or else have not worked out to the political left’s favor and they obviously thought that it would.

The attempt to frame that Trump went against American intelligence in his discussions with Kim Jong Un, and has not taken the bait on throwing anger at Russia’s President Putin is an attempt by the political left to cast sentiment behind our institutions, not the actions they have provided. However, in the case against the Trump election of 2016 our FBI and many other “institutions” such as the DOJ were hostile agents against American values. They tried to overthrow an American election. In that regard Kim Jong Un was far less dangerous than the FBI, so why would Trump trust wat American intelligence agencies said about Russia and North Korea? They want war to cover their own illegal behavior enacted as American institutions and Trump understands it because he has been the direct victim of it. The Mueller investigation which Trump pointed out in his speech was a political witch hunt. The enemy that is hiding on American soil behind tax payer funded institutions is far more dangerous than some kid propped up by China to be the straw man in international trade agreements. Kim Jong Un isn’t dangerous, the system that put him in place and made him a threat to global peace is, and obviously the CIA, FBI and many enemies of America working in our own government are to blame. They don’t want Trump to broker peace with North Korea because they need the cover for their own criminal conduct.

For a change people who know these things and have been thinking of taking back the American government with violence have a champion in the White House who can give speeches like the one that Trump gave at CPAC. So there is hope that these issues can be resolved without violence and I think that’s great. The political left should consider themselves lucky, at least they get to live to see another day and maybe find some happiness in their lives because Trump is in the White House. If he wasn’t, things would be much, much worse. I don’t think the political left understands that yet, but perhaps they are starting to get the picture. Trump is not only good for his political base, he’s good for those like Zachary Greenberg. Instead of violence, we are getting justice. But one way or the other, a fight is a fight worth having in whatever means needed. And so far Trump has made the need for physical violence a second option, because the first is working quite well.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Enemy

You have to understand that one of my good friends was just killed by a train in Texas. I’m still very twisted over the arrest of Roger Stone, the investigations of President Trump, and the obvious malice of the F.B.I. attempting to tilt the table in favor of Democrats during the 2016 election so regarding affairs of the “republic” I’m not in a very good mood. If it wasn’t so funny I would be even angrier over the proposed Green New Deal. I thought the old New Deal by FDR was one of the most destructive elements of a free thinking society and should have been eradicated long ago, yet here are political elements who want to go much further, so obviously its time to have a hard talk about when its time to have a real civil war again within the United States where violence is the only way to settle disputes, because the intellectual goals of the two sides are just too far apart. I think now is the time to do so, and I offer this article of opinion as a foundation for any legal issues that might take place later. Because personally speaking, I have reached my limit. I’m ready to defend the Constitution with force now, and that means that its time to define who the enemy is and understand why they are such. From now on I’m not going to rationalize how two sides can live together in debate as the republic was designed because the enemy as defined here doesn’t wish to have a discussion, or find truth in debate. They want to destroy us as Americans, and as men of family, and they don’t care who they have to hurt to get there which is why I now refer to them as “The Enemy.”

Many years ago when I first started this “blog” site I did so inspired by two of my favorite literary classics, The Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers which were collections of essays written for newspaper publication around the time of the Federal Convention to hash out the details of what an American Constitution should be and what it should do to not only hold the country together, but still maintain the spirit of the Revolution so that individual rights could be maintained. It didn’t matter if the Constitution had been written now or 2000 years ago, what occurred in the newly formed United States which at the time was only 13 states was a giant leap in human thought, the idea of self-rule when for the entire known history of civilization people where always ruled by someone no matter where in the world someone may have traveled. Such a concept was worth the bloodshed of a future Civil War, the eradication of the Indian Nations, or any countries that might have tried to stand in the way, because the effort itself was captured during the formation of The United States and gave rise to a world power unlike anything that had ever occurred in all of history. And the philosophical foundations of this effort were captured in the debates of the Constitutional Conventions expressed in The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers. I devoured both as the Tea Party movement emerged in late 2008 and 2009 and found that I was much more of an Anti-Federalist than a Federalist and that for the coming decade I would offer my thoughts on these pages for others to consider in much the same fashion.

It was obvious to me that our modern society had declined to the point where intelligent debate was necessary, so I did my part and I hoped to inspire enough people to seek wisdom from debate to avoid violence. In that regard the modern Tea Party movement was very successful, the revolution was fought as it should be, through education followed by good elections. On the conservative side of things we rooted out the modern versions of Benedict Arnold, politicians like John Boehner and John Kasich from my home state of Ohio and we replaced them with the Republican Party of Donald Trump, which was very peaceful, lawful, and have launched the country into an era of prosperity that is unequivocal in our young country and have forced the world to look at themselves and make peaceful adjustments just to mitigate the risk of becoming globally irrelevant. Taking the long view, the Tea Party movement in the United States from 2009 to 2015 is the way that revolutions should take place, and it is certainly a testament to the strength of the American philosophy that was formed in The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers.

Nothing ever devastates me, I’ve been through everything and seen the worst that people can offer under the worst conditions. So when I found out about the death of my friend Doc Thompson I wouldn’t say that it changed my life or sent me into some shell of sadness. I accept tragedy as part of life and simply moved on to the next thing which for me was an oversea call with some important people. Later that evening after a 20-hour work day was completed I sorted out my thoughts on the matter and decided to re-read for probably the 25th to 26th time in a ten-year period The Anti-Federalist Papers, which took me about 11 hours stopping to eat twice. Doc Thompson I saw was a person who really believed in the American ideas created by the Constitution. As an authentic person it led to his eventual death, not by conspiracy as he was hit by a train, but by the fact that the world of media for which he wanted to work had closed its doors to him and his boss Glenn Beck and they were on the short end of a world that was changing by what I will call the Enemy for the sake of literary distinction.

The Enemy wanted to change the nature of the American Constitution and since Doc was a purist, he was on the outside looking in always trying hard to find a way to get his voice out to speak in favor of Constitutional principles. Unlike his friend Glenn Beck who had made a lot of money in his early Tea Party years at Fox News and was living well off it, Doc had never hit a substantial sum of money and was the living embodiment of what the Founding Fathers would have went through had America not prevailed during the Revolution, English society would have castigated them out of existence. But what occurred to me was that Doc wasn’t supposed to have those effects, none of us were. We had the Constitution and these modern efforts by the Enemy were not supposed to have the impact to our legal and moral system that they were. As I closed the book to The Anti-Federalist Papers for the latest time I realized that violence was inevitable in order to protect The Constitution that was born from that philosophic text written during that critical period of American contemplation.

One thing that really makes me sad however is that when reading those works, The Anti-Federalist Papers and The Federalist Papers it is clear that as a society people are not as intelligent as they once were, our education system has failed, our civilization under guidance of the Enemy has had a destructive influence over our children and neighbors and it really is a tragedy that must be rectified. The Enemy therefore doesn’t just deserve a day in court, they need to be eradicated from existence because they have shown themselves to be a menace. The Enemy are those who want to change the Constitution of America from a document that protects individual liberty to a means of empowering a larger central government to distribute collective salvation even to those who don’t deserve it. Through the actions of the enemy it naturally weakens the strength of The United States as the best light the world has to yearn for and is therefore up to malice that is not forgivable by civil discourse. So from that perspective the Enemy must be destroyed and removed from the political theater and the future of this site will make that case hopefully before bullets start flying. But likely the bullets will be discharged before all is well again because such a measure will be needed to protect the Constitution from domestic enemies who are trying to destroy us all by attacking the philosophic foundations of our very existence.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Great Speech by Teflon Don: It’s not an insult that nothing sticks, because the President is just too good at what he does

Well, that was a great State of the Union speech. By now most reading this would have seen it or heard it for themselves and have likely been exposed to various opinions. But I don’t think any speech Ronald Reagan gave was better or more poised against a hostile audience than the one President Trump gave on February 5th, 2019. Trump was relaxed, funny, compassionate, and a real visionary as his speech went well beyond what I was expecting. It was hard for anybody to not like what was delivered regarding a State of America’s Union. The speech itself was a remarkable exhibition of leadership, because only a leader could have pulled off such a feat. Even the protestors who wore white in the audience to represent women’s issues were up dancing around due to the natural enthusiasm generated during the hour and a half delivery.

Trump was firm, funny, hauntingly reflective, fatherly, and tenaciously optimistic all at the same time. His speech addressed many things that nobody usually talks about, particularly regarding the concerns of socialism that has emerged in the Democratic party recently quite openly. In truth, America has never been more prosperous, unemployment is low, the economy is very strong but for the first time the world is not a threat to us. North Korea is coming to the table to negotiate further avenues of peace. China’s once ominous economy has been revealed to have been a fraud, artificially propped up by the media to look like a villain we all want to become, not just avoid. Russia is a non-factor in the affairs of the world. They can’t hardly afford to make bread let alone buzz American planes in the Baltic Sea. Iran is in the same boat, they don’t have the money to go to war. America is now the largest oil provider in the world essentially robbing them of any global leverage. They are headed to the same place Venezuela is now. Their number one product is now made and exported out of the United States leaving their bank accounts empty, and therefore ability to make war. President Trump has done something in just two years that nobody else could have, he has brought peace to the world by making the United States once again the top economy with the best prospects of success going forward.

The President made a great case for border security which Democrats are only against because they have signed up for the borderless world advocates vision, which is now long dead. People see what’s going on and they aren’t happy about it. To really understand why there is so much criticism of President Trump by way of investigations, bad media, and even internal leaks by the establishment caucus it’s because those elements feared that Trump might at some point give a speech like this State of the Union. They didn’t want him to name names and articulate the real strengths of the American idea, but in spite of all that they have thrown at him over the last few years, and the level of betrayal that has occurred, Trump gave the speech as if he had been doing it for a century and like a Superman who had all the bullets shot at him falling harmlessly to the ground with a smile on his face. For a Deep State that is used to frightening off presidents in the past from going too far, Trump has stood strong and even seems to be enjoying himself, and that was quite clear during the speech which I didn’t hear many of the professional pundits point out in the aftermath.

Even with all the effort Trump went into the speech with a Rasmussen poll that showed him at 48% approval, which is extraordinary considering there was just a government shutdown which was largely blamed on him. In truth things look very scary if you watch the news, most of the people directly related to helping the President have gone to jail or are in the process of defending themselves from having to go. Media types who supported President Trump from the beginning like Alex Jones and Bill O’Reilly are no longer players in the industry and have been removed from their audiences in an obvious move at censorship. There is a lot to be bitter about if you are a Trump supporter. But in all honesty, nobody is watching television any more, and they don’t read newspapers. The media does not have the power they once had and President Trump understands that. The Drudge Report and Trump’s Twitter feed alone has far more power and it drives everyone crazy, but its part of our changing world. We are in the 21st Century, things are supposed to be different from what they were in the past, and they’ll be even more so in the future.

While announcing the approval rating for the President The Drudge Report mentioned that Donald Trump was a “Teflon Don” in its headline which is to say that nothing bad seems to stick to him. Well, that term has been applied to me many times in my life so it garners some examination. When an enemy says about you that you are a Teflon person, meaning that all their schemes and attempts at malice fail the reason is that if you are an above the line person of great value, the world is desperate for your services, so the intentions of malice that generally control the world do not work. That is why Trump is a popular president even after 95% bad news coverage. What’s 95% of nothing essentially, when people don’t care or aren’t watching traditional forms of media, who cares what the percentage is. People tend to point out that all these new media companies are liberal, but in the marketplace of ideas capitalism has put them in the positions they enjoy, and they need Trump far more than he needs them. Twitter may not like Trump but he is one of their biggest users and the President has been able to reach people directly without a media filter for the first time in human history—and the effects were obvious at the speech. Popular and unafraid the United States had a President that gave a speech of optimism and warning in a way that has never been done previously, and it is what people will remember as they turn back to their lives after such a large political affair happening two days after a Super Bowl.

When people say about you that you are “Teflon” they are expressing their frustration that punishment doesn’t come to your doorstep the way it would them because as an individual you have too many valuable things to bring to the table than to have punishment expressed so to rob the world of your gifts. When you are an above the line person, people desperately want what you have to offer because often it’s their only hope out of their position. The rules of the rest of the world do not work on people who by their very nature contribute so much more than average people and that is what made the President’s speech so incredible. Even after all that’s happened, Trump was able to stand up there at the podium in Congress in front of so many political enemies and be just as relaxed as if he were wearing slippers in his home with his favorite pajamas perched comfortably in front of a roaring fire in his private residence. He was unfazed by the political turmoil that has been roaring and people saw it during his speech. Making his offering at greatness much more appealing than anything else any political figure has offered since the inception of our Republic.

Rich Hoffman

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

Abortion is Murder: Killing, death, and hate is what the entire feminist movement stands for

I heard some of the evilest things this week in regard to abortion, as we all did which necessitates some conversation about its role in our society. As a man, a white one at that, I am about as open and supportive of women as anybody can get, but I am also very traditional. My wife is a house wife who would not be out-of-place in 1870s America. We support each other’s roles within our family and we both work very hard, but our emphasis has always been and remains a strong desire to create a good strong family that is supportive of its members. As a house wife she is always there for our children and grandchildren. As a man, I am always a go to pillar who holds the whole thing up structurally and emotionally a rock that can be counted on no matter what is going on in the world. Anyone who would attack my way of life as toxic masculinity and my wife’s as detrimental to the feminist movement to our eyes is an anti-family insurgent out for no good. While I am open to other people’s choices and lifestyles nobody will ever convince me that traditional methods of raising a family, where the man goes out into the world to gather resources while the woman uses those resources domestically for the good of the family is not the best method of social structure. I’d say the evidence is overwhelming that the traditional American family structure is the best the world has ever seen and should be applied to everything we do as humans to procreate our species.

The context to all this is that it is expected that once as parents we decide to bring a life into this world, which that decision is arrived upon during the act of sex, that we are responsible for those lives our entire lives. It is a very above the line position to take, life requires the commitment of parental life to support in every way imaginable, and to my view 99% of all people fail at this very basic task. If you don’t want to use your life to pump life into your offspring and don’t plan to be committed to that all hours of the day for the rest of your life, then you shouldn’t have kids. To have kids then expect the state to raise them through the public education system or other methods is reckless and disingenuous to the child. I have often said that it is better to have an abortion and to not have a child than to bring a child into the world of an unloving family, because the death is much shorter than a long drawn out disappointing life when the family unit is not there to help sustain the continued growth all through their lives that children require. So I am not a cut and dry pro-lifer, but my personal views are much more conservative than the typical anti-abortion activist. I think strong masculinity plays a very important role in all family lives and that all mothers are the hub of the wheel that makes everything work and they should be protected and respected by all members in a godlike manner. That’s how it is in my house and how I think it should be everywhere in the world.

Given my commitment to family life and views of how things should be done domestically in regards to women and children most of my interactions with people disappoint me. But I respect other people’s decisions enough to give them autonomy in how they approach life. I don’t seek to impose myself on them, I simply offer answers if they would life to fix something in their life. So I am quite used to people like Monica Klein who appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show this past week to defend full term abortions and the ridiculous statements made by the Virginia governor about actually murdering babies once they were born. For a professional activist her comments were horrendous and show to what extent the feminist movement is really about hate and destruction. As women they have built up a no judge position about everything in their lives, the right to work a job and be treated equally as a man, the right to participate in the political world and the right to their own selfish needs all their life in exchange for the desire to murder people under the flag of personal health for a woman’s body, as if everything “woman” was more sacred than the emergence of a life that is supposed to come from it. Monica’s comments were remarkably honest which was good. She had no real answers for Tucker once it was put on the table what the pro-abortion crowd was really after, the right to murder human beings for the convenience of a woman’s life.

I’ve always thought of the women’s movement as the most anti-family position that anybody could take and is destructive to any society. By changing the roles of the women in a society, enemies of that society benefit from the eventual destruction of the people of that culture because the off-spring is unprepared for the world and are easy to conquer, which is precisely what we are seeing in modern-day America. The argument is not whether women should be paid equally for a man’s work, or whether they should be able to vote and participate at life in any manner. Of course they should. The question is who is tending to the children, grandchildren, and other aspects of a family and making sure that everyone has the physical and emotional support they need to navigate around the world knowing that mom and dad love them and are there for them whenever needed. Behind the nasty comments of Monica Klein regarding murderous feminism is the complete lack of responsibility for anything regarding family life so that a woman can have sex free of concern, do whatever she wants with her body whenever she wants to and is not held accountable for any of her actions. Feminism is the argument that women can behave as reckless as they want in life without any consequences even to the point that they have the right to commit murder of new human beings being brought into the world even to the point of leaving the womb. That is what we are talking about, outright murder.

The entire argument is below the line and is as destructive as anybody could get. Because of it I think abortion should be illegal, not because it is sometimes needed, but because the Roe v Wade argument has essentially destroyed the integrity of our culture, allowing women to migrate below the line in their thinking when families obviously need them above the line. If a woman isn’t ready to bring life to the world, they shouldn’t be having sex. The same with men. Having sex is not more important than creating and raising a family and that is the whole argument behind the feminist movement. By attacking toxic masculinity and the desires women have to head and maintain their families with love and endurance over many generations, the modern abortion feminist is essentially arguing for murder to preserve their own rights to live below the line in everything they do. That makes people like Monica Klein one of the ugliest people on earth, because she actually tried to make the claim that feminism was more important than the life of a child and that murder is an option just to preserve the below the line traits of women’s rights, which are obviously pointless if all it really creates is a society of murders and sexualized perverts. It’s not masculinity that’s toxic, its feminists like Monica Klein who simply want all the barriers removed that keeps them from murdering children that they recklessly conceived and are too irresponsible to nurture into a lifelong commitment they are not equipped to provide. And that is a real problem that I have serious issues with. Murder is not acceptable no matter what the age of the person, especially if that person is only one day old. Abortion is murder. I might argue that the child is better off not being born to someone like Monica Klein so murder might be a better option. But murder is still murder and that is what is behind the entire feminist movement. They are anti-family and pro murder, and there is no other way to slice it.

Rich Hoffman

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There is No Such Thing as Universal Health Care for All: It’s a dumb idea created by dumb, lazy people hungry to control us all

When we are born there is no right to healthcare. Other people are not burdened with our support for life, and there is no guarantee that, that industry will even be around for our lifetime. The socialist fantasy of universal healthcare like a universal living wage are ridiculous notions born of lazy, below the line thinking. The problems of course are that people cannot be compelled just because they live to care for other people other than themselves. But more than anything, the healthcare industry itself is a changing business model and in its current state needs a lot of work. There is more to the fantasy alignment of socialism politically and socialism in medicine. One thing about modern medicine is that it is a very socialist enterprise and I personally despise it. Demanding funding to fill that monster isn’t a good idea and that is truly at the heart of the matter.

I am normally a very healthy person. One of my best features that I am very proud of is my immune system. As a kid I had perfect attendance for years in school and was seldom ever sick. As an adult I almost never miss work for anything and bounce back quickly when something major does happen. But I am over 50 now and that brings with it new challenges to a body that is beyond its reproductive usefulness. Nature has a way of rejecting bodies it no longer needs and as we age we all deal with the consequences of this effect. The world has little need for a human body that is no longer reproductive or seeking to be, so disease and degradation are facts of life for any aging person. But I still don’t accept that I am powerless to not determine my own fate so I found myself deathly sick for about three weeks at the end of 2018 and wondering the aisles of Wal-Mart at 6:30 AM seeking a way to combat my multiple ailments. I was highly suspicious that I may have ingested some government formed mutation of the flu designed to kill me because I just couldn’t shake this sickness and there were moments when I wondered if I was actually going to die.

My children were very worried, and as we moved into the New Year there was pressure to get over the sickness, so I could resume my life and all the people who need me to do my thing for their own benefit. So I won’t get into the details of what I had to do to fix myself. It certainly didn’t involve illegal drugs which I would never do under any circumstance. But I’m not going to give any of my enemies any knowledge of what I know about medicine and how to overcome attacks to my body from either genetically modified viruses or nanotechnology, let’s just say that. But I know more than most people could imagine and that condition will remain. However, for a while, I was concerned and actually considered that if I got it wrong, I may have ended up dead. So things got pretty serious. Yet when faced with the worst of it, going to the doctor was not an option, for contextual purposes.

There are times and places for doctors, but the system is so corrupt that I will avoid going even in life and death circumstances. I would trust myself more to come up with a solution than a doctor. Doctors as they are now are designed to take a sickness and extend it so that people lose their individuality and independence turning to drugs instead of their own immune systems and that is the dark little secret to the medical profession and why Democrats and other progressives want universal healthcare. They don’t want to fix people, they want to make more people’s lives dependent on the healthcare industry for which government seeks to control. It’s a very malicious plan.

As I explained to my daughters at the height of my own sickness, if a doctor had the ability to diagnose my condition then they would find prostate problems, cancer cell counts that were high, spinal alignment trouble, heart pressure problems and many other factors for which they would attempt to advise prescriptions to remedy. Most people would follow their recommendations to their own graves. As I told my kids I wasn’t ready to surrender any of my personal independence to drug companies and would rather die in the process, which I almost did a few times. But that’s how serious I was about it. As I have said many times the entire medical industry is turning toward regenerative growth, and it is there that I turned to solve my own problems, and likely always will. It works, it’s not a bunch of hippie science but in using what our bodies have their entire lives to stay healthy. I trust my immune system to fight off anything. If unusually genetically modified assailants come in contact with it, then sometimes that immune system needs a boost, but ultimately, that immune system needs to stay fighting ready all the time, and to be healthy. Our modern healthcare industry unfortunately seeks to destroy that trend and make adults more dependent on drugs than their own systems and that is the real terror that is behind the progressive universal care fantasy that is being championed by today’s Democrats.

By accepting universal healthcare for all it would be like accepting a dial-up telephone as the end of technical innovation for the medical industry. Instead of pushing for the next iPhone in technical breakthroughs where people weren’t just treated for being sick, but to restore them to complete health so that doctors and medicine didn’t have a monopoly of control on their lives is the trend that is trying to be born. With more political involvement the desire from Democrats is to prevent that opportunity because their ultimate desire is to use the medical industry to control the population, because like open borders, when they control whether or not people will live or die, that tends to have an effect on the ballot box and so far I haven’t heard anybody talk about that aspect of this argument. The Democrats don’t want to save people with universal healthcare, they want to control them.

As I provided in my personal example, I’d literally rather die than give up that personal freedom. I do not trust the medical industry to have my best health in mind when advising me on critical health issues. I’d rather take care of it myself which should say a lot. I’m by far a paranoid person, but I see a trend in medicine which indicates very below the line thinking. As an employer I am not impressed with a doctor’s note from an employee that does not come to work. I have to honor it legally, but it certainly changes how I feel about the employee as an option of investment for the future. And I exercise my rights to have such an opinion. Doctor’s don’t run my life in any way, they don’t tell me what drugs to take, what surgeries to have, or how productive I’ll be. And I am certainly not open to giving them more power with a guaranteed government backing for their industry with universal healthcare. I think that is the dumbest idea in the history of ideas for an industry that needs much less bureaucratic elements and much more innovation. People need to be restored to health not dependent on more government and the current health care industry does not fix people properly, and that is the heart of the conversation, not a right to something that is bad for you to begin with.

Rich Hoffman

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