Bad Parenting and the Products Who Crave Socialism

Of course, I’m against socialism and why I support the Republican party. I’m a very hard worker and a persistent overachiever, relative to the rest of the world. Obviously, I wouldn’t support any form of government or economic system that encourages lazy people to mooch off my efforts for the rest of their lives. Such a thing is complete insanity from my perspective and is precisely why socialism will never work in America so long as people like me are in it, and I’m not going anywhere. The basic premise of socialism is to attach people together into a kind of symbiotic relationship, but the failure always occurs when the lazy refuse to do their part, and that’s when things always break down in a socialist society. Its kind of like that moment when the teacher in a class asks a question and everyone knows the answer but nobody wants to be the first person to raise their hand, so nobody does. That is why socialist countries fail because nobody raises their hand to solve problems or make things that can count toward a GDP. They are waiting for someone else to do it and that someone never comes along.

In American society we have built our Constitution and entire means of government to empower those individuals to raise their hands and to act on their own, which is the key to why economic growth in America has always been good. Yes, that could go way in an instant and there is a real danger of that happening over the next 20 years because of the many physiological problems that people have due to their improper upbringings and tendency toward drags to numb their minds from resolving the impact of problems. When I say the Democrat party is filled with people who are functionally insane, I mean it quite literally. And to cover that insanity they need to partner up with someone who has it together which is why socialism is on the rise. But that isn’t fair to a person like me who works really hard, takes care of my own personal responsibilities, and is always looking to improve the world around me. It is not right or just to expect me to do all the work and let everyone else mooch off my efforts. So naturally I am against socialism and liberalism in general. It doesn’t benefit me in any way and from the eyes of a sane person it doesn’t help society at large to give them a hand out when what they really need is a hand up.

More young people are migrating toward socialism these days largely due to their public educations, but more specifically because of the lack of proper fathers in their lives. The roles that government plays into the lives of its citizens is directly correlated to their parental experience at home during their childhoods. There is a running joke among men about women, if a woman has a good relationship with her father, she won’t be easy to bag and tag as a sexual conquest. You won’t find many Vegas showgirls, prostitutes, and strippers who go to their parent’s house on the weekends for dinner and talk to their dads about the origin of the universe. But you will find a dad who molested the kids when they were young of and broke their trust bond at some point in the past. The same holds true between liberals and conservatives. Strong positive family experiences tend to make conservative children who grow up into Republican adults who work hard all their lives and are self-reliant. Dysfunctional homes tend to breed Democrats—people who look toward government to be that parental figure they have always craved in their lives but never had.

The role that fathers play in a family is that they teach children to separate over time from their mothers tendency to overly coddle them over every little boo, boo. Father’s are the gateway toward a child’s personal independence and mothers aren’t always happy about it. But the relationships are necessary. Moms traditionally provide the home care nurturing that is needed to live life as a child. Fathers are there to provide a path toward independence, to show children how to ride their first bicycle, how to fix a car, or how to manage the stress of a difficult situation on their own. Eventually if the father is successful the child will leave the constant nurturing of the mother and will seek to live their own kind of life in their own kind of way. The mother needs the father as well because if everything is left to her, she will have the kids living in the basement for the rest of their lives. That is how a liberal is created, because the roles of parental influences become muddied and dysfunctional. Of course, there are exceptions, fathers can be nurturing and mothers can play the role of disconnector, but biologically these are the rules of humanity and there is a cost in changing them.

No society can expect to be successful if the people in that society are functioning from a mental illness and clearly that is the problem with anybody who calls themselves a liberal. Empathy is a fine emotion but if a political party is built off a victimization model, then no amount of success can ever be expected. Those elements just don’t add up and no amount of fuzzy liberal math can make it so. I’m not saying that we throw liberals into a deep well and bury them forever, but they can’t be allowed to believe they are equal contributors to society when they are actually lazy ass losers seeking to mooch off hard workers all of their lives. That is essentially their political platform, to encourage the lazy to mooch off the hard-working, so obviously any sane hard-working person would be opposed to such a thing.

With fathers pushed out of the lives of most families these days, and this was a plan from day one of the progressive movement around the world, to replace parental influences with government ones, children never learned to leave their mothers and thus they grown into adults looking for that lost parental structure for which government is promised to be. But of course, that never happens, government never replaces good parents. And socialism never makes good people from children into adults. Any fluke occurrence is purely by the randomization of the universe in producing occasionally positive results, but not to the degree that statistically the numbers mean anything. Socialism is a stupid idea by a stupid guy in Karl Marx who clearly had intellectual problems. But their problems are not the problems of the rest of us who do the right things and work hard to do so. We can sympathize with their lack of resources but we can’t bend our society to their weaknesses. It’s up to them to overcome these weaknesses, not to weaken the rest of us because someone has to do the work of building a country and they aren’t the ones who do.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

If Manafort is Going to Jail, then why not Comey and Mueller, they have defrauded the American treasury of far larger sums of money

OK, so let’s get this straight, the government prosecuted President Trump’s campaign manager from the 2016 election for denying the IRS $6 million of revenue by not reporting $16 million in income and for that he has to go to jail for 47 months as a 69-year-old man stripped of essentially everything he has built over a lifetime only to beg and plea like a dog in the end so that he won’t die in prison. There’s a little bit more to the Manafort case but essentially, he was busted just because of his association with President Trump by a FBI investigation in search of a crime. When they couldn’t find one that implicated President Trump they prosecuted him for what they did find, issues that would have went uncharged had Paul Manafort never been involved as a campaign manager for the future president. However, that same FBI under the care of special investigator Robert Mueller who had just recently been denied the job as Director of the FBI was able to spend more than $25 million on a political witch hunt to go after Manafort and many other Trump associates kicking down the doors to Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal lawyer, running General Flynn through a career ruining process as well as many others, yet no jail time is proposed to Mueller for the same type of fraud that the courts against Manafort proposed. Why is that?

Of course, we all know the rhetorical answer, the entire Manafort case is a gross abuse of power by a government that is out of control. The FBI had become weaponized to protect a below the line status quo and the intention was to ruin the Trump presidency and spit in the face of half the nation that legitimately elected him by creating a false narrative and blaming a hostile country with the GDP of a rattlesnake, as if Russia could do anything on the world stage that might actually be harmful, with no money to perform the task. The FBI and their accomplices didn’t care if they started WWIII with hostile nations like Russia, Iran or North Korea so long as President Trump was pushed out of office so they could still have their hour-long lunch breaks and 30% more pay raises over civilian markets by keeping any sort of change away from them.

I say it all the time and will continue to do so, if Manafort is the bench mark for who should go to jail for crimes, then everyone from Robert Mueller to Hillary Clinton should be going to jail for the same. Certainly, at the very least FBI chiefs such as Rod Rosenstein, Andrew McCabe, and James Comey should—it was their work to blatantly push for the $25 million special prosecution in the first place to fulfil a purely political objective and tamper with an American election in favor of their wives’ sensibilities. In Comey’s case as a typical beta male, his wife runs his household and she was a Hillary Clinton supporter. So to make her happy and his network of socialites within the Beltway culture he acted against the nature of America’s political system to overthrow an election by abusing his office. Who thinks that Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok acted alone in their own crimes? Hillary Clinton was guilty beyond doubt yet under the care of Peter Strzok evidence was destroyed, immunities given and illegal spying and witness tampering was going on. And his bosses knew about it, that is why James Comey was fired by Trump as the Director.

Millions and millions of dollars were wasted not only on the Mueller investigation which was completely politically motivated, but on hiding the crimes of the FBI aligning themselves with the Democrat party to get Hillary Clinton elected. There seems to be an assumption among all those government employees that they are not guilty because so many of them participated in the crime. That the only difference between them and Paul Manafort is that he was an individual and they were a collective and that their crime is hidden behind the sheer numbers of participants. The assumption that they can’t be busted because they themselves are the government and there are simply too many people to prosecute is at the core of their behavior. That accounts for the smugness of these government criminals, they don’t believe that they can be prosecuted and their actions show their raw arrogance and disregard for justice, or the money they wasted in the process.

Remember Lois Lerner who as a big chief at the IRS used that agencies collection powers to strong-arm Tea Party groups. I remember that case well because I was drug into it myself. If the IRS could have found any dirt on me you can bet I would have received the Paul Manafort treatment just through my associations with the Liberty Township Tea Party that was at the center of that case and my friend Justin Binik-Thomas. Yeah, I’ve tried these shoes on before so I have quite clear clarity on the matter. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen the federal government grossly abuse its power and the resources they have confiscated from the electorate to manipulate the political tide of our nation. I’m not in jail because I live a squeaky-clean life and if people abuse my freedom, I have a tendency toward violence. So I’m not as easy of a target as Paul Manafort who did live a checkered life that was easy to prosecute. But the ideas are the same, if Manafort hadn’t helped Trump in the summer of 2016 win the delegate count ahead of the RNC convention, he wouldn’t be in jail now. He’d just be another white-collar criminal like most of the Beltway culture is, and he’d still be invited to Washington D.C. parties on Friday nights to mingle with the other social butterflies.

What happened to Paul Manafort and the government’s ability to toss him into jail for 47 long months is a gross abuse of power. It’s a shame that it was even allowed to happen. Paul Manafort may have defrauded the IRS and the government of money they expected to receive just by the sheer power of their offices, but they have abused the system far worse and wasted far more money than he did, yet they are not going to jail. Why the hell not? So what if 20 to 30 of the top players involved in trying to remove President Trump from office did go to jail? Would the system collapse on itself from the revelation that so many government officials are just dirty cops and massive abusers of power? Would knowing such a thing wreck our system of government far into the future? I don’t think so. Rather I would argue that by not prosecuting them far greater damage is being inflicted and that is the real crime here—not acting when its obvious that we must. Just in the case of Robert Mueller, he has defrauded the American treasury of over $25 million on a political witch hunt, completely motivated by political theater than the pursuit of justice. Why wouldn’t we treat him the same. The answer is, we should!

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Most Dangerious Thing in the World is Stupidity, not Fictional Global Warming

The enemy as I call them these days, because they are anti-Constitutionalists keep saying that global warming is the greatest threat to our future survival. They are wrong, the greatest threat to our existence is stupidity which was quite evident regarding the exchange between Dianne Feinstein and radicalized students who confronted her at her office. As hard to believe as it may be, Feinstein came out sounding like the rational person among all the leftists engaged in the discussion over global warming and the artificial deadline created by that part of the political spectrum to lend credence to their short-term objectives of world domination. The sad truth of the whole exchange was that the little children involved were entirely too young to be driven to such passions, they were there because of their mind-numbing educations which feature instruction in all things liberal. It was their teachers who were the real radicals hiding behind the children for which Diane Feinstein had to defend herself.

There is a very good book called Anthem by Ayn Rand that describes the process that at least the political left is following, and eventually in that book society forgets everything it ever knew and the big event in the novel is that mankind rediscovered how to use a lightbulb. It’s a work of fiction of course but it describes well the process for which human beings regress intellectually if they allow themselves to think the wrong things in their culture. In this case, global warming is one of those stupid things that actually lowers the general IQ of society because it is completely rooted in falsehoods and political theater. The poor children at Diane Feinstein’s office have no way of knowing any better, their teachers were the ones who programmed in their minds the things they said. And that is precisely the danger to us all, the greatest danger. Our education system doesn’t teach kids how to think, they teach them what to think.

I would propose that the ability to think is the most important attribute that human beings have, and it makes us all much more unique than any environmental issue. At the core of all environmentalism is the assumption that humans are bad because what they produce while thinking damages the world instead of leaving the world to conduct itself in accordance to nature. However, humans by thinking and changing the world are acting in accordance to their own nature, the same as a volcano erupting, or a forest fire burning appears to have a destructive effect, the longevity of the action turns out to be very good for everything in the grand scheme of the universe. Understanding that, humans can think whereas everything else in nature, including animals can’t. There is nothing more important in the world or anywhere than thought, so thinking more should be encouraged, not demonized.

But we can see the effects of many years of radicalized left leaning public education where children have been taught all the global warming nonsense, and to believe it they have been taught not to think, but to accept as reality whatever the adults in their care instructed them to. And even the extremely liberal senator Diane Feinstein from California understands how bad it is. The collectivist goo that the children were functioning from actually had the audacity to think they were more important than the life work of the California senator and she took offense to it. The teachers there with the kids sounded like Ocasio-Cortez idiots, young people who themselves were forced to drink the Jim Jones Kool-Aid, or the Manson family cult doctrine. Instead of killing other people however their liberal cult is simply out to kill capitalism. That is their only objective.

There is only one objective to the global warming advocates, it is the destruction of capitalism and the products of mankind’s thoughts. The expectation is to place all human beings into a subservient role to the god of mother nature so to evoke in them a superiority that unites the world to something greater than the human being. But it ignores the question, and the reality, what if the human being were superior to nature? A thinking person looks at the world as tools to work with to create new things. It doesn’t just bend to the wills of nature, it asks what could be more, which is a very creative experience, something every artist in the world could sympathize with. Nobody would think to alter the creative output of Pablo Picasso, he is celebrated for his rebellious forms of art expression, which is to say, his inheritably human application to creativity. Yet during the war in the fascism of Europe where people could only pick the socialism of the Nazi, the fascism of Italy or the communism of eastern Europe the ideas of freedom from political tentacles were nonexistent. As an extremely creative person he had to pick one since he was at the top of the art world in order to survive socially. That is essentially what the New Green Deal has done to many of these liberals, it’s the new communism for which everyone must choose to unite under otherwise their network channels into society will be cut off for them. It is just a new kind of tyranny and was the theme to Ayn Rand’s book, how humans forget everything they ever knew just so they can survive in the theater of bad ideas and circumstance.

What is being taught in our public schools is stupidity, which is an odd thing to say considering that the entire effort of public education is supposed to be intelligence. Yet the products of public education, for which we are all a part of in some way or another, is to accept orders from the culture, to memorize what “they” tell you, and to not develop critical thinking on your own. That is the only way a hoax like climate change could be accepted among a population the size of North America or Europe, is if all the means of education were exploited in the same global way, so that everyone suffered with equal paralysis the effects. But the danger to that system of thought, especially in the United States where people are very autonomous and thrive to have options in their lives, for those left who can and do think on their own, they see very quickly the hoax for what it is. And Diane Feinstein isn’t the only one insulted with this new breed of young people who repeat what they’ve been taught but are unable to think on their own completely dependent on the system of education that created them.

The evidence is in the young people who were in Feinstein’s office, they were too young to have an opinion, yet they were sent there by the adults to evoke news headlines and drive the climate change narrative deeper into our culture from the mouths of innocent little children. It is the ultimate, non-thinking exploitation. But there is real evil in it because for it all to work humans have to give up what it is they are the most valuable at extracting, intelligence and creative thought from the world. Instead, the suggestion is that we are to yield to a power that is not superior but is instead regressive so that the political left can gain power by exploiting stupidity and fears. And that is the tragedy of our times, because too many of our youth are already ruined, and until we change the nature and focus of public education, that evil of non-thinking will continue.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Public Education in America is a Disaster, Worthless and Filled with Elements of Communism

Every time I see one of these teacher strikes it makes me sick. What a bunch of lowlifes! The public education system itself is a joke in the United States. As many know, I have a long history with this subject and my attitude toward it has become more negative the more I’ve learned. My modern impression of public education is that it’s a worthless exercise and so are the teachers. What good is a teacher if they teach your kids all the wrong things. I honestly think children would learn more and do better in life playing video games rather than learn in the modern public education environment. The instruction on display is socialism and communism, and anti-American propaganda and we’d be better off as a nation if we just did away with it. The idea of a society which teaches its children as a first world country how to live in the world is a noble one, but the results have been an unmitigated disaster. Public education is a joke, kids aren’t learning the right things and the teachers are about as worthless as a fast food worker. They are lazy, pretentious and a big part of the problem is that our youth are growing up in the world without knowing what to do or how to do it.

Of course, there are always exceptions, there are good teachers and good people in the profession, but you can’t keep a massive brain drain, tax eating parasite just because a few people find good in it, or it may help a few students. I am of the mind that no public-school teacher should belong to a union. If people want to enter that profession, let the free market determine the results. No school should be attached to a zip code. Parents should never have to send their kids to a school that is not effective, they should always have a choice. And the curriculum that kids are learning should not contain any socialist concepts—at all. Kids should learn Constitutional ideas and American history from the point of view of exceptionalism only. They can ask questions about the merits of it later, when they are adults, but for their intellectual foundations, kids need to be learning about how America works, not how Marxist labor union teachers want America to be, which has been happening now for half a century—and the results clearly show in our society.

In my own background education is very important to me. I don’t think American citizens are smart enough. I don’t think people in general are yearning to be as smart as they should be. I would propose to every human being on the face of planet earth to read at least one book every week for all their lives, because the process of reading even trash is good for evoking proper thought alignments about basic concepts in any social structure. Our education system doesn’t go near far enough for me, and I am quite used to dealing with people every day with Master’s degrees and Doctorates. To me those indicators are not sufficient in establishing successful and complete people. Education should be more than that, but it always disappoints me to learn just how stupid most people are. It’s not that they couldn’t be, it’s that they put too much trust in the institutions of education and what they end up with is a bad product that they carry with them all the rest of their existence and it’s a shame. Most people are shells of what they should be because the education system let them down from pre-school to their sixth or eighth year of college once they produce their final doctoral thesis to some liberal loser who has no right or real authority to judge such things.

And we keep hearing that the teaching profession does not have enough people in it, and that there’s a shortage that must be filled with new bright-eyed participants. “Who wants to be a teacher when the pay is so bad” we keep hearing. Well, I’d argue that the pay isn’t bad and that we should be doing a lot more with less. We live in the age of autonomy where kids can learn so much more so quickly, that class sizes should be increasing not decreasing down to something less than 25 students per class. Anything along the lines of smaller class sizes and high employment needs for any district is the socialist labor unions talking. In the case of Denver, which is the latest strike the teachers are parading around with their “red for ed” t-shirts, which is to say that red stands for communism, because it is precisely what they are after, and they are declaring that they love their children so much that if only they can get a pay raise, they can get back to work. CNN shows on television that the kids joined in the protests and were fighting for their beloved teachers. What is happening is purely anti-American. The teachers do not love the children, they want too much money and the children would be better off homeless and in a street gutter than learning the system of communism that the teachers themselves are revealing. The lies and protests that are so common with unionized teachers isn’t worth paying for let alone the damage they put into the minds of our children and if we really cared as a society, we’d stop pouring so much money into that corrupt and useless system.

There are many ways to get an education, especially these days. The public-school route is probably the worst. It’s not a matter of funding, its whether we should even be talking about money, because the product is so bad. If there is anything good about public education it is gone the moment kids learn to read. Once they can do that, education should become much more autonomous than it is now and the adults involved should not be part of any collective bargaining agreements attached to tax revenue. Education should be an individual experience, not one the state is concerned with. The state’s original claim was that society needed to be taught how to be productive in the world but in the age of illegal immigration into America, employers are happy to get people who show up for work, let alone know how to read and speak in complete sentences. Anybody can have a job in the modern world if they grow up with parents who give them a work ethic. Kids aren’t learning how to have a work ethic in school so what’s the point?

It’s about time we come to terms with this diabolical menace which is the public education system. The subject itself is like talking about a public toilet, a public water fountain, a public park, a public library, a public anything. The sentiment is nice as a concept but the reality is never good. The idea that the public owns education, or land, or the means of an economy are just preposterous. The public doesn’t own anything but the right to rule themselves as individuals. They certainly don’t own our children’s minds, and it’s not up to the public to provide free baby sitting for lazy, pretentious, modern parents who don’t really want to do the job of raising children. And it’s not our job to help lazy real estate agents make money off good schools attached to zip codes when the real value of a community is in the offerings it has, schools being only one of them. The whole system is a disaster that needs to be rethought and every time I see a teacher’s strike like the one in Denver it reminds me of it.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

What I Think of the Green New Deal: The Old New Deal was a travesty, violance will likely be the only option in the future

Speaking from the perspective that I have as an Anti-Federalist kind of guy the old New Deal from FDR was pure socialism and should have never happened. It weakened our country greatly and it shows today in the people of our nation. So this New Green New Deal that socialist Democrats are proposing using panic driven climate change to create artificial necessity for communist oriented legislation is nothing but a pipe dream going nowhere fast. But I think its only fair to warn those people what will happen to them should they manage any level of success, such as winning enough seats of power to implement their ideas in the future, after all, there are many Ocasio-Cortez socialists coming out of our public education system, because that was their goal from the beginning. When Democrats put a kid like her out in front of an idea to propose socialism openly and aggressively, then we must all consider the eventual fate of a future congress and senate that my actually try such a thing sincerely and not as a circus stunt. And should that day arrive we who are sane and still free are required by the Constitution to defend it from them even if violence becomes necessary.

To make something like their Green New Deal the nature of the American Constitution would have to change from protecting individual rights, the way it is now, to something that morphs into the rights of planet earth and group associations as a collective whole. The nature of the Constitution would change, which if you talk to the kid Ocasio-Cortez, is precisely what she and her generation are looking to do. That puts the burden of sense on the rest of us who know better, even if we end up in the minority regarding public sentiment. Presently we have in our republic lots of older people some who lived during the World War II period so they have seen what America is supposed to be, if only for a short period in their lives, and they vote accordingly. The beat-up kids of today coming from broken families, rap culture music and socialist training in public schools do not have such history to draw from making them susceptible to the socialists who have taken over the Democrat party. They can’t read the ingredient label on a beer let alone read and understand the Constitution. That means that there will likely come a time when law and order will no longer protect the Constitution from those elements and we will have to turn toward violence to maintain the sanity of our nation.

We don’t have the Second Amendment to hunt rabbits or to shoot at cans on a fence post. We have it to protect the American Constitution from insurgents who want to make things like the Green New Deal into law and to take away the individual rights of Americans in favor of some nebulous religion built on superstition and liberal fantasies. Guns are the safety valve of our culture because it keeps bands of protestors such as Ocasio-Cortez might think to organize at a safe distance and away from our homes. In gun free zones such as New York City or the streets of Washington D.C. it is safe for them to express themselves with the kind of force they are implying to even propose a Green New Deal—a removal of individual rights in favor of global rights meant to protect the earth and not the people living on it. Should our government be taken over by such characters then the rest of us will have to protect the nature of our country unfortunately with violence because there would be no other option at that point and we will need weapons better or at least equal to what that government would send to our homes to enforce compliance.

Reading the reaction to the insanity of Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal it is obvious that there are many people her age working in media today and that they are advocating for open socialism and communism across the world. I remember when I first started this blog over a decade ago and people thought my statements about the goals of public education were extreme and hate filled, because I insisted that we were breeding socialists in them and it was dangerous to our future. People like Ocasio-Cortez and the writers of The Guardian and Huffington Post currently were little kids back then being taught by left leaning radicals that things like the Green New Deal were needed, to hell with the Constitution. To them the Constitution was a living document which needed to represent the necessities of modern times, and from their perspective it needed to shift from protecting individual rights to protecting collective rights. So I am saying now that ten years from now when people like Ocasio-Cortez can run for president and actually sign insane bills like the Green New Deal that the Constitution may require violence to defend, because at that point our courts will be loaded with liberal activists and the House and Senate will fall to what we used to term, communist sentiment. Green is of course the new communism. Most of the young kids promoting the Green New Deal don’t have a good enough understanding of history to have context, but their objective is certainly radical and should they gain power by their sheer numbers, then it will fall on us in the minority to defend the Constitution, because they are seeking to change it into something else.

That leads to fair warning now so that we can all understand what that new world will look like. At that point guns would have long been made illegal because that is the only way a government can gain the kind of power Ocasio-Cortez wants to give it to enforce such a monstrosity as the Green New Deal. I personally think that the Trump presidency will hold and bring about another 16 years of Republican ownership of the White House, because people tend to vote for their own prosperity. The economy is great and in the end people are not going to vote against their best interests. But the threat is certainly there as proposed by members of the new congress with their insane Green New Deal. All the warnings that Ayn Rand provided in great books like Return of the Primitive are clearly evident. These are the products of the Woodstock generation who would rather dance naked and mindless in the mud rather than reach for the stars during the moon landing. The two visions are on the extreme opposite and cannot be reconciled together under one nation. The sentiments just don’t fit together. And should those radicals take over our government it will be up to us to take it back from them with violence. With guns and force. The words of the Constitution are only written, they require action to preserve. And when ideas like the Green New Deal are proposed we must come to terms with the intentions of the people who wrote them and understand that they mean violence to advance such a thing. So we must have in our minds the same, because it will be the victor of such a conflict that decides the way the world of tomorrow really looks. Peace with the radicals does not protect the Constitution or the nature of American citizenship. So it is not peace that is part of our future, but violence.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Four Officers Shot in Houston: When the state abuses property rights and things go wrong–more consideration of Roger Stone’s case

There are a number of things that still bother me about the arrest of Roger Stone at his home before dawn a few days before this writing. When police officers where shot trying to enter the home of some bad guys the day that Stone was set to appear in court to make a plea, four were wounded by gunfire and even Laura Ingraham on Fox News contemplated how bad it was that often residents have more firepower in their homes than the police. The police officers after all were just doing their jobs and serving a narcotics warrant. For a while there was wall to wall coverage of the action but the key issue was not discussed. What right did the police have to enter the home of suspects? Who decides who bad guys are and how can the state impose itself on the individual rights of its citizens with the assumption that everything the state touches can be taken away in a moment’s notice if that state decides that the greater good is in jeopardy?

I am of the thinking that Roger Stone should have held his ground and retaliated against the FBI agents who assaulted him in the early morning hours. After all, we know the FBI is corrupt so what good is any warrant that they issue. The Bob Mueller investigation is an attempted insurrection of an American President. They are bending the law to use as a weapon against political enemies, so why should Roger Stone go quietly upon being assaulted. He had no record of firearm ownership and there was no reason to attack him the way the FBI did in a predawn raid to show that the “state” had power over the individual which was the real message. It was a forceful exchange to show who was the boss, even over presidents of the United States.

In Houston, Texas neighbors had reported the sale from a home of black tar heroin so the police came to arrest the suspects. Now I’m not a guy who has any tolerance for drugs or their sale. I think drug dealers should be prosecuted for attempted murder, even for the sale of marijuana, so I am not lax in my judgement on drug use and sales. But our own CIA has been very actively involved in pushing drugs into cultures for control reasons, so what makes the two guys who opened fire on the invading police any different from world governments who also sell drugs? Not much in my book, they are all bad people. So with that off the table of consideration what gave the police the right to break down the front door and enter the home of these people in Houston? The shots weren’t fired until the police entered the home. Why would anybody expect any other result?

It was obvious to me that Laura Ingraham on Fox News was a mixed bag of emotions. I had just appeared on one of her shows just last week over the Covington Catholic case and I know she is a very hard-core conservative, but it was she who suggested that it was a shame that bad guys in homes often have better weapons than the police and that its sad that police are sometimes shot just for doing their jobs. Well, doing jobs doesn’t give a free pass to an abusive state government that has forgotten that the purpose of the Constitution is to protect individual rights and property is one of the centerpieces of that argument.

The same approach is used when getting pulled over by a police officer, they shine that bright light on you and approach the vehicle as if they owned it and you inside are required to be a compliant citizen. You are expected to recognize that your rights are subject to the judgment of law enforcement and their protection of the “greater good.” Well, none of that “greater good” talk is in the Constitution. I would argue that law enforcement officers are not capable of such judgments, they are not philosophically equipped and are illiterate in the matter. So what gives them the right to confiscate private property and to kick down doors to homes just because a neighbor called in a report?

I couldn’t help but think that the news coverage of the shooting was part of the problem, immediately the news was reported with a tinge of sadness at how dangerous police work was and how you never know what’s on the other side of a door to a house. That same assumption was made by the FBI in how they set up Roger Stone with an embarrassing CNN recording of the actual raid of his home. Of course, the FBI hoped to tap into people’s ingrained sense of yielding to authorities as they watched Stone be handcuffed and taken into custody. The message of course if it can happen to Stone it can happen to all of us, so you better answer the door and yield to authorities when they come for you. And when the Houston shootings occurred even Fox News jumped on the bandwagon of state rule and decided that the police were sad victims of violence without really knowing the details. Oddly enough, the news story was almost completely gone just 10 hours later.

The Bill of Rights in the American Constitution does not indicate that we must all yield to the authority of the state. The employees of the state make mistakes all the time and just because they issue a warrant against you that does not give them the right to enter your home and arrest you on your property. They do not have the right to take your car if they suspect you of some crime and they certainly don’t have the right to spy on you maliciously. The safety of the state does not supersede our rights as individuals. Only lawyers and judges over time have muddied the waters on Constitutional interpretation with loose case-law that has created a belief that the police have such rights of intrusion. But in reality, they don’t. The police who kick down doors to serve paperwork from the state are just as bad as the drug dealers who generate suspicion to generate such paperwork. Just because police officers have a warrant for an arrest it doesn’t give them the right to kick down doors and confiscate property and rights. Warrants can be served without violence, yet the state requires violence on occasion to build up the public perception of conformity, and that is not the spirit of the American Constitution.

As much as people don’t like President Trump, while I am a very loyal supporter, he certainly is a centrist especially in regard to police and military use. I disagree with him very much when it comes to police and elements of state control of law enforcement. As I’ve said many times, I am very much of an Anti-Federalist mindset when it comes to law and order. I don’t trust people to make the right decisions about their peers. If police kick down the door to your house or violate your independence within your car while traveling about in the realm of commerce, then you have a right to defend yourself, pure and simple. And when that doesn’t happen, arrogant bastards like Robert Mueller get cocky and think they can get away with arresting big names like Roger Stone to not only punish him, but to send a message to all of us—resistance is futile. Obey the state. And that is precisely where our modern times have gone wrong.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

What To Do About the State of the Union Speech: Government workers should find another job and get on with their life

I’m assuming that the Democrats will stall on their three week deal and that President Trump will have to shut the government down again.  I think he thinks he needs to appear to move toward a deal for which the Democrats will blow it.  President Trump can obviously do what he wants about the State of the Union speech he is supposed to give to Congress. However, it would be my advice to him that he give his speech anyway, but to a MAGA rally to show the Washington establishment that life goes on with or without the government endorsement of activity. Nancy Pelosi cannot be allowed to have the kind of power she is trying to display in stopping the State of the Union speech. The halls of congress are not that valuable, especially if they are infested with socialists, as they are presently. The State of the Union speech is a phony affair full of kingly assumptions and is something that should be reinvented anyway. So why not take the speech directly to the people instead of playing the Beltway game? If Trump had a State of the Union rally which filled up the seats with MAGA hats and an overflow crowd, the optics would be quite terrifying to the Democrats and the national media at how much power and persuasion the president really did have even after the last election, and would go a long way to really solving the problems we currently have in government, so why not break with tradition and do it that way? I certainly would.

Of the 800,000 federal workers not receiving a paycheck for the second period in a row due to the government shutdown, around 57,000 are from the TSA which is a recently created branch of government that was only unionized around 2012. It’s not like they have a deep history of employment in America. Previously airlines were responsible for their own security so all the sob stories about the poor TSA workers is a moot point in my book. They shouldn’t be government employees, but airport employees and they shouldn’t be unionized. It’s that simple. I’m not a fan of the TSA, I hate dealing with them at airports—especially Chicago and Atlanta. They are a terrible creation created by panic driven politicians overreacting to global terrorism which is the fault of the political class anyway, for failing to really deal with the causes of terrorism to begin with. We don’t need more TSA agents, more security, and more government unions. We need a lot less.

If it were me in that 800,000 who weren’t getting a check from the government, I can promise that I wouldn’t be waiting around for the shutdown to break loose. I’d work another job to cover my bills. I would have done that after the first day of the shutdown. There is no way in the world that I would put my family at risk by sitting around waiting for a bunch of politicians to resolve the government shutdown. In fact, not all government workers are sitting around waiting for the situation to be resolved, Michael Mateos, a graphic designer and contractor for the federal government has been selling Star Wars models as extra income generating a few thousand dollars a month, which is a great idea. His story is what I’d consider a distinctly American one, and one I can support. People like him are what our country is all about, not a bunch of parasites sitting around waiting for the world to call them back to work.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-furloughed-employee-found-a-unique-way-to-make-money-during-the-shutdown-2019-01-16

I can be sure to say that I would not be one of the 800,000 because I’ve been around a few years and can report that I’ve seen many disappointing work situations that resulted in layoffs, terminations, or greatly reduced hours—and I have never ever in my life a single day not received a pay check. I have at times worked three jobs at a time all days of the week to make sure my family had what they needed and I still work 12 to 16 hours ever single day toward successful implementation of occupational goals to ensure that I do what needs to be done to keep that trend alive, and that’s the kind of mindset all Americans should have in my book. I don’t understand and will never understand a person who gets a check from one job who sits around waiting for that job to be resolved. I don’t understand the teacher who will strike and hold up classes for little kids then go back to work after they get a 3% collective bargaining agreement and only then declare how much they love the kids while their fat asses were previously in the streets protesting the tax payers for more money. And I surely don’t understand the federal worker sitting around crying about their two missing paychecks when we have the hottest economy in the world and everyone is hiring. I’d get another job either temporarily or permanently, but I wouldn’t be waiting.

Nancy Pelosi indicated that the State of the Union speech wasn’t important anyway, essentially saying that President Trump wasn’t important, and that we should hold up everything until the shutdown is over. Well, I think we should lay off all 800,000 of those workers and privatize their positions. And Trump’s border wall is a must, and if he can’t get the money from Congress, then he needs to do it another way and run right over them. Obviously, the Democrats are all about changing America from a capitalist zone into a socialist one, and they do not have our best interests in mind. So who cares what they think? Trump should show them that life goes on, the speech gets done whether or not its at congress and the government workers aren’t that important, especially at the newly created TSA.

This is a time that I disagree with Sean Hannity over the State of the Union speech, who cares if President Trump is announced in the halls of congress, “Mrs Speaker, I present the President of the United States.” I don’t want to see Trump shaking hands with Nancy Pelosi, not now and not six months from now. Honestly, I’d like to see him body slam her in a WWF ring, and I say that with a sensitivity to equal rights. I’m fine with treating women equally to men, including in a cage match in front of 100,000 people. I don’t like Nancy Pelosi, I don’t want my president to work with her. Democrats have shown their hatred of my presidential pick and they have unleashed the forces of the FBI to attempt to change the election, and they are spying on us and trying to use that information to destroy our capitalist society, then lecturing us on the way we should all live, I don’t feel a need to be nice to those people and I certainly don’t want Trump to make nice with them at a State of the Union speech. In essence, the State of the Union is that we are at war as a nation, so we might as well admit that to ourselves. Forget the pomp of a speech in Congress with Nancy Pelosi standing in the background. Just have the speech as a MAGA rally and take it directly to the people and let the world see that life goes on without government workers and corrupt politicians. If I was Trump that is what I would do and I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s not what ended up happening. Change is good, especially when it takes power away from people like Nancy Pelosi. And as far as the government shutdown goes, I don’t care if they miss the next 50 pay checks. I’d say to them, find another job and get on with your life.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.