Malcolm Glazer: The world will miss him–one of the best people on earth

Even though his health had been failing since 2006 after a series of strokes left him partially disabled, Malcolm Glazer’s death is truly a sad loss for the entire world. The Tampa Bay billionaire was instrumental in upgrading the quality of life for the popular Florida city and has poured millions of dollars into charitable organizations that they wouldn’t have had otherwise—if not for his industriousness, and productivity. He is one of the people in the world that I admire the most and I came to know of him through his ownership of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers NFL team. But he was much more than that and is truly a great human being. After his passing Jon Gruden had this to say about the loss of his former boss.

He was a friend and a trailblazer. I’ll miss him and I thank him for believing in me. My condolences to the Glazer family and to the Bucs organization.”

ESPN Monday Night        ✔@ESPNMondayNight

5:44 PM – 28 May 2014

See more reactions from around the world at the following link:

Malcolm Glazer’s history by Bucs Nation Blog The Buccaneers’ announce Malcolm Glazer’s passing earlier today. (May 28, 2014) The Buccaneers have announced that the second owner in franchise history, Malcolm Glazer, passed away at the age of 85. After a period under Hugh Culverhouse’s ownership that was marked with ill feeling between players and the owner, Glazer’s purchase of the team saw a huge turnaround in the team’s fortunes. Under his ownership, the Bucs went from the worst team in the sport by a considerable margin, to Super Bowl champions in just seven seasons. Below is the Buccaneers’ statement in full: The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are saddened to announce the passing of Owner/President Malcolm Glazer earlier this morning at the age of 85. A dynamic business leader, Glazer helped mold the Buccaneers into a model franchise and one respected league-wide. Since being purchased by Glazer in 1995, the Buccaneers franchise has earned seven playoff berths, five playoff wins, and captured its first Super Bowl championship in 2002. Known among his league peers as a pioneering thinker, Glazer infused his team and employees with the determination and dedication to be the best in the NFL. Glazer’s commitment to building a championship organization has provided the foundation for continued success, on and off the field. Glazer’s input was instrumental on the league level as well, as evidenced by his time serving on the NFL’s Finance Committee. He also played a major role in Tampa becoming a host for the Super Bowl on several occasions. In 1999, Glazer launched the Glazer Family Foundation, which is dedicated to assisting charitable and educational causes in the Tampa Bay community, highlighted by the opening of the Glazer Children’s Museum in 2010. In its 15 years of existence, the Foundation has donated millions in programs, tickets, grants and in-kind contributions. In 2005, Glazer purchased Manchester United. Since then, the club captured five Premier League titles (2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 and 2013), as well as the 2008 Champions League title. Born in Rochester, New York as one of seven children, Glazer took over the family watch-parts business at age 15 following the death of his father and then continued his foray into the professional world, investing in other businesses. Glazer owned or was a substantial shareholder of a diverse portfolio of international holdings and public companies, including: First Allied, Zapata Corporation, Houlihan’s Restaurant Chain, Harley Davidson, Formica, Tonka, Specialty Equipment and Omega Protein. A resident of Palm Beach, Florida, Glazer leaves behind his wife, Linda, six children and 14 grandchildren. Mr. Glazer’s long established estate succession plan has assured the Buccaneers will remain with the Glazer family for generations to come. Linda Glazer, along with their five sons and daughter, will continue to own and operate the team as they have throughout the family’s ownership. A private family funeral service will be held for Mr.Glazer. The opportunity for others to remember and celebrate Mr. Glazer’s life will be announced at a future date. In lieu of flowers, donations can be made in his memory to All Children’s Hospital, St. Joseph’s Children’s Hospital, and Shriners Hospitals for Children – Tampa.

What few people have acknowledged is that if Glazer had just been happy with the family watch parts business at the age of 15 and had not moved into other investments and risky business ventures, it is likely his family would have struggled all their life to make ends meet, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers would still be looking for a winning season, and the city of Tampa would be an armpit of strip joints and seasonal condo owners serving a fishing community. Glazer literally put the city of Tampa on his back and carried it with his innovation, and self generated wealth.

He will be missed………………………………..

Rich Hoffman


INTOLERABLE: How the TEA Party was started and why

It took me a few weeks to get around to it, but I finally had the opportunity to watch the new documentary by my old friend Doc Thompson featuring the origins and validation of the TEA Party movement which began during the Bush administration and exploded under President Obama. Now 14 years of deficit spending that is a train wreck in American history the TEA Party has risen as a direct response to the irresponsible nature of government. The documentary is very good and even better, it is free. Doc and his producer Skip LeCombe put a lot of effort into the enterprise and are offering it for mass viewing. They are asking for donations, but the heartfelt documentary can be seen in its entirety at the following link:

Or, you can see the movie right here:

Written and produced by Matt Roman, along with Doc Thompson and Skip LaCombe, Intolerable was released on Tuesday May 6th featuring original music and material marking the inaugural project of File 55 Productions. It was an ambitious effort that certainly caught the eye of Glenn Beck and was featured on his radio show.

Glenn had been encouraging his audience to stop thinking and start acting when it comes to following through on various passions and projects. The Blaze Radio Network’s Doc Thompson and Skip LaCombe personified that advice.

Glenn asked Doc and Skip to talk a little bit about the purpose of the documentary.

“You know the misconceptions about the TEA Party that’s been pushed out there. I got really frustrated after our tour, and I said, ‘Let’s tell the truth about the TEA Party, so people can share it and save their friends and neighbors,’” Doc explained. “[That] is what it really is: It’s good, hard-working Americans that share your same values… You’re going to watch this. You’re going to get good information. And you’re going leave feeling good. You’ve going to have some direction for the future.”

“We offered it for free because we want as many people to see it as possible, but we’re also capitalists,” Doc said. “And then from here, some of the donations we get, we’re going to put the money toward a whole lot of other projects that we have rolling out. We have about 15 things we’re going to do in the next couple of years… We’ve got a bunch of good stories.”

As I watched the film I thought back in time a bit and remembered how the Republican Party tried to cozy up to me during this TEA Party rise. Actual candidates and the people who finance them expected me to be pulled into their web. The Republicans rode the wave of the TEA Party making it their own, and around 2012 turned on it all together. The establishment began taking drastic steps into the other direction, back toward the progressive middle. I remember well the difficult conversations I personally had with high level local Republicans in my town who hoped and prayed that I would play along nicely—which of course I didn’t.

Of course this is how they play the game in Washington and why people like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are such bad people—at least as politicians.   They talk tough on the stump speeches, but behind the scenes, where the money gets raised—it’s a different story and they expect that the friendships established will make good people overlook bad things for the good of the Party. TEA Party supporters of course didn’t go for this and stood against the establishment which is the cause of a kind of civil war in modern America. The result is that only the strongest people of the TEA Party movement are still actively involved. Gone are the crowds shown in Doc’s documentary, but we all knew even back then that the momentum would not last.

My personal crises came as Judge Napolitano was pulled off the Fox Business Channel, and my friend Doc Thompson was fired from 700 WLW radio within days of each other. Doc was being attacked for his beliefs and the company he was working for hid the termination behind a ratings drain—which wasn’t the case.   And my Republican friends wanted to pull me into their world of charity events and careful politicking that was sensitive to progressive issues—which I personally have no sympathy for. I made my stand, pissed off a lot of people and relationships were fractured forever. When the smoke cleared, I was still a TEA Party supporter and my friends were left without the benefits of my friendship. It was foreign to them that a man would stand on principles and that realization made me very angry.

Many people have pointed out that my articles from the start to the present have changed over time. I can understand that. In the beginning I had hope for people like Governor Kasich, Governor Christy, Paul Ryan, even John Boehner—but after just a few years, they have all failed to hold their moral ground. They proved to be a lot of talk, but way too willing to make a deal just to stay in power. I have watched the NDAA get passed in the middle of New Years Eve, and watched Obamacare shoved down people’s throats. I have watched the Justice Department commit crimes and get away with it because they are the law. With each story, my hope for the preservation of the system as it is currently has evaporated. So the tone of my articles has evolved with that sentiment.

Doc Thompson could have just given up after he was terminated from 700 WLW and his home station in Richmond, Virginia. But he didn’t.   After a lot of fighting, he become employed by Glenn Beck and has excelled from there. Most people would be happy with just a gig like that—but Doc is taking things several steps further and this new documentary is just the start. I am proud to see the documentary Intolerable be released. There is a defiance in it that is healthy for America. Anyone who watches this film and thinks the TEA Party is a bunch of racist radicals is the actual villains of society. Nobody can watch Intolerable and then turn around and say the TEA Party is not the last beacon of light for the freedom that is unique to America—unless they are part of the undoing of it.

Doc and Skip did a great job of representing the TEA Party and getting to the truth of the movement and providing context to the rhetoric that is against it. It is a documentary that has been needed, and now it can be seen by anyone anywhere who has an internet connection. So there is no excuse to not see it. So watch it, learn from it, and spread the word around. Doc Thompson has done the hard work of making it. The least you can do dear reader is give it an audience.

Rich Hoffman


Ann Becker and Libertarian Girl: New weapons of the freedom movement……….sex

Ann Becker has been President of the Cincinnati Tea Party and was at the core of arranging the Tax Day Rally in Eastgate, Ohio on April 15th 2014. As is typical of her position she is heavily involved with the liberty movement and has teamed up with another powerhouse for freedom—Libertarian Girl. The two of late have been inseparable, and are deeply involved in a carefully planned strategy which has establishment Republicans terrified. It is unlikely that there is anywhere else in America where the types of people who Ann and Libertarian Girl are reside together toward the strategic goals that is resonating throughout the world. It is for that reason that Matt Clark of WAAM radio came down from Ann Arbor, Michigan to cover the event organized by Ann. I knew that putting these two girls on the radio would be a great interview—and it was. The radio segment featured below is a battle plan that should be shared with every member of every liberty front member throughout the country. Matt did a good job of getting out of the two girls a very concise interview that has some real power to it. Have a listen.

You can see part of how that interview looked in person with the next video. The audio wasn’t very good, but you can see what Ann and Libertarian Girl looked like so that there are faces to go with the voice. Essentially what the girls said was that they are currently involved in a similar movement of infiltrating the Republican Party in the opposite way that communists infiltrated the Democrat Party back in the 1950s. Libertarians are attacking the foundations of Republicans with conservatism pulling it away from the progressive middle ground from which it currently resides—and there really isn’t anything machine politics can do about it. A few years ago, Ann likely wouldn’t have been so loose with her tongue, and Libertarian Girl was just creating her online persona. But now, it’s too late. Sure machine politics will still win in the short run, but over time, people like Ann and Libertarian Girl are pulling Republicans away from the middle, and back to the right. The current middle has been established by progressives who allowed communists to pull the political left so far in that direction. The new middle is where hard Democrats used to be in the 50s and 60s and the old political “center” is now considered extreme radical right-winged. What Ann is talking about doing is pulling the political right back to the old center where the current left would be forced to place their centrist views at the current right.

And how will this be done? Well, that’s no secret either. Libertarian Girl uses sex to bring people to her message, and she doesn’t apologize for it—and why should she? Sex sells, and Libertarian Girl is selling freedom. How many men would follow Libertarian Girl just to have a chance to talk to her? For the answer, check out her Facebook page.

She has a lot of fans, and they often hinge on her every word. She is smart, she knows how to explain things simply, she is very articulate, and she has Barbie Doll proportions that simply melt men like a stick of butter on a hot ear of corn at an August picnic. If she is selling freedom, 8 out of 10 men are buying it—and 6 out of 10 women also buy it just because they don’t want to appear insecure. Libertarian Girl is dangerous to the political left. Watch this video by her explaining beer—which reaches over 80% of the population with a political metaphor that makes sense.

What the freedom movement is doing now has been done in a similar fashion. It doesn’t happen over night, but often takes generations to pull off. After all communists began their infiltration of the Democratic Party as far back as the 1930s—it wasn’t until the 60s that they recruited Jane Fonda to be their spokeswoman. It is incalculable how many men became young socialists because they admired Jane Fonda’s breasts and enjoyed her nudity in the film Barbarella. The political left has been using sex appeal for years to convince testosterone driven men to the voting booth and setting the social parameters for other women. It was a smart strategy; after all, a lot of men are perfectly willing to squander their values just to get laid. Heck, many middle-aged men who are very successful still spend most of their time making money, buying cars and trying to hide their baldness exclusively to have opportunities to bed young 22-year-old women—so sex is a powerful ally in politics. Communists in America used sex to take of the political edge in the 60s and now most young Hollywood actresses advocate worship of Mother Earth—which is essentially the new version of communism—large government managing virtually everything—for the good of “nature.”

Most men once they’ve spoken to Libertarian Girl strive to read books so they can converse with her and vote for Libertarian candidates to win her approval and have a chance to talk to her again.  I’ve been around her while this process was happening, and it is truly amazing. People want to have their picture taken next to her, and when it comes to voting, they will listen to her 100% of the time over some stuffy square-faced progressive. Once other pretty people see how successful Libertarian Girl has been, they will copy off her and thus join the party of freedom. Within the next couple of decades more mainstream beautiful people will join Libertarian Girl, and her mission will then be fulfilled. It’s actually happening right now—there are several actresses and spokeswomen who are jumping away from the progressive establishment and onto the freedom loving bandwagon. After all, Fox News set its roots in the media by hiring attractive women. They do have the highest ratings of all cable news—and it’s not because people want to look at Bill O’Reilly.

Ann and Libertarian Girl are at the heart of Southern Ohio politics and there isn’t a damn thing progressives from the Right and Left can do about it. They don’t have a similar offering in their established parties to match Libertarian Girl so all they can do is curse her—and Ann for their effectiveness. Because the secret is not just that Libertarian Girl is just another pretty face—she’s also smart—very smart. Once she gets older—and not so pretty—she will still have her mind and that is a dangerous combination. She’ll have years of experience by then and will only get better over time.

The point is that freedom lovers aren’t going to surrender ground to progressive big government types any longer. We’re going to hit back, and we’ll do it more often and better than the left has now for five decades. They have pretty much had unfettered access to America during that whole time—until about five years ago when the Tea Party groups began popping up—and with them Ann Becker and Libertarian Girl who came up with an approach to politics that would swing the pendulum the other way. And one proven way to do such a thing is through long legs, platinum blond hair and flawless female features—with a mind behind it–that combination is more powerful than millions of rounds of ammunition at the point of a gun. Progressives have lost the ability to appeal to average people, because they have lost the sexual edge. Madonna kissing Brittney Spears no longer raises eyebrows, Jane Fonda is an old lady, and Hillary Clinton looks like somebody’s 60 year old alligator purse lost as luggage in a Brazilian airport. In a game of beauty where Hollywood puts up their latest topless A-List actresses against people like Libertarian Girl, voters will follow the later over the former because in the end brains trump stupidity when breast sizes and long legs are equal.

Rich Hoffman


The Emcee Doc Thompson: Future film and documentary production

It was kind of a funny story that took place at the 2014 Cincinnati Tea Party Tax Day Rally in Eastgate, Ohio.  Doc Thompson was brought in to perform as emcee, however, when the event began he was outside the crowd filled room on the radio with Matt Clark leaving Ann Becker standing at the podium waiting.  So I had to get Doc off the radio and fill in for him during the broadcast so he could begin the ceremony.  You can hear that exchange below as Doc and Matt were involved in an interview for WAAM Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Doc as usual came in and did several segments of ad lib, with no notes to speak of.  He didn’t even know that he was emcee for the event as he had just returned from Dallas, Texas where he was hanging out with Glenn Beck’s group at The Blaze—where they are moving into film and television production.  Doc and his radio partner Skip LeCombe had just finished the post production duties for a new documentary they are producing about the effectiveness of the Tea Party over the last five years—and are planning many more projects.  Glenn Beck is in production on three motion pictures at his Dallas studios, so things are moving quickly for Doc Thompson.  He came to the Cincinnati event on a whirlwind fresh off an airplane and didn’t know that Ann had slotted him to be emcee.  When I told him that he was the emcee he was surprised, but happy to fill the role.  Then he forgot about again it during his radio segment with Matt Clark.

As can be seen below, Doc doesn’t need notes.  He does so much radio every day from 6 AM to 9 AM on The Blaze Radio Network that he can just rattle off statistics and current events from memory.  He occasionally does television on The Blaze, so he has become very proficient at public speaking.  He was always good at it, but now it’s effortless for him.

During Doc’s radio segment with Matt he hit on something that is at the core of a huge modern problem.  Doc is moving beyond just providing radio commentary.  If you are a conservative, there are not film production venues out there that can currently represent our viewpoints.  Not that long ago in Hollywood conservatives like John Wayne and Clint Eastwood were openly attending Republican conventions in Los Angeles—but now, a Republican cannot be found in mainstream Hollywood—until very recently.  One of the reasons the Atlas Production Company had to be formed was to actually produce the novel, Atlas Shrugged—because Hollywood was not interested.

I have been to film festivals and at those events, there are seldom openly conservative films because it is well-known that projects with those kinds of messages will not get play—there is nowhere to distribute those types of creations—until now.  Prior to Glenn Beck’s Blaze television station, there was not a single conservative distribution outlet for a conservative project.  Anyone who wanted to make such a thing these days had to invent not just the product, but the production company as well, making funding of those types of projects even more difficult.  For instance, when my novel Tail of the Dragon hit the market the people who read it all agreed that it would make a great movie, it had product placement tie-ins, a strong NASCAR type storyline, and had its roots in traditional American film.  I would thank them, but in the back of my mind was—who would make it—Warner Brothers, 20th Century Fox, Paramount……………Amblin, would Harvey Weinstein at Miramax make a movie of the novel—of course not.  As a progressive Harvey would be repulsed by my material.  Not even Jerry Bruckheimer was able to overcome the hatred of conservative values in Hollywood with the Disney backed The Lone Ranger starring Johnny Depp.  The Hollywood machine hated the ideal of a modern western taking America back to the good ol’ days, so they attacked the film out of the gate.  It is nearly impossible to produce conservative projects like movies and documentaries unless a production company is created to make them.  Even then, distribution outlets are even scarcer—until now.  Perhaps Depp’s heart is changing with time and wisdom, his new fiancé is Amber Heard, who is a bisexual and would otherwise be touted among the Hollywood elite with welcome arms—except that she is a huge Ayn Rand fan.  That represents part of an emerging undercurrent that cannot be stopped and Hollywood is not happy about it.

Among conservatives like Doc, Beck, the Atlas Shrugged guys, and me we are all approaching our projects from the ground level.  The Steven Spielberg’s of our day are not able to provide the kind of mentorship that he had learning from Hitchcock and other notable directors from the past, because they are afraid to be associated with conservatives—for fear of blacklisting.  Some great filmmakers like Gerald Molen have broken loose from Hollywood and are now associating with Glenn Beck’s studios—and more are on the way.  But things are now changing because technology has given power to conservatives to bypass the studio system if they can figure out the distribution issue—and now that Doc has The Blaze at his back, he is making his move.

A few years ago I had the very grim realization that only I could make a project I had written into the kind of movie I wanted to see.  I had worked with selling to Hollywood for years but they never understood what I was trying to do.  I was sitting with some very notable Hollywood types at a restaurant in Glendale where belly dancers were performing and everyone wanted to think of themselves as very worldly.  The women were dressed in the latest fashion all perfumed up, and the men looked cut from the pages of GQ.  I had on camouflage pants and my outback hat with Gargoyle sunglasses and they accepted me well enough.  I cracked my whips in front of a movie theater on Brand Blvd and cut targets out of people’s mouths and everyone was having a delightful time—until someone brought up politics.  I voiced my opinion and that was the end of a productive evening.  They didn’t want to understand my Midwestern sensibilities, my position against public education, my views on small government, my hatred of Marxism, and my love of traditional westerns.

It’s not that people didn’t agree with me—often they do—but in a town run by progressive labor unions, and Hollywood is, it is hard to get work unless you are properly politically aligned.  And it is nearly impossible to even make a movie unless Hollywood is backing the project at least through distribution.  I have never known a single independent filmmaker who didn’t enter a film at Sundance or some other place like the Cannes Film Festival and hope that Hollywood picked up the project for distribution.  A Tea Party documentary is not the way to get distribution in Hollywood, and neither is a western.  Even though Disney has the power and money to produce a film like that, and even distribute it—the town of Hollywood attacked it through their critics and trade magazines to preserve their industry.  The same thing happened to the Atlas Shrugged films.

When I watch the Atlas films, or the Dinesh D’Souza’s documentaries, or even Glenn Beck’s documentaries there is something unpolished about them—even though the filmmakers are often industry professionals.  I attribute a lot of this to the fresh perspective of conservatism being represented once again in the film industry more than any lack of experience in film production.  But the key to reaching a public is through those methods and unless conservatives retake the film industry, the plight of traditional values returning to mainstream America is nearly impossible.

Doc is now moving into that realm.  His Tea Party documentary is just the first step.  He and I are planning to work on a project together, and I am planning things of my own.  It has taken time for me to assemble my thoughts on the matter, but I’m nearly there.  Like a lot of things, I had to go through a process of unlearning what was taught to me and that is matching up with the magnificent tools that are now at the disposal of anybody who dares to use them.

As usual, it was good to see Doc, and this year had a different feel to it than in times past—where a sense of desperation was ever-present.  This time we all had a presence of veterans who had been around and done most everything before.  Like I said on the air with Matt while sitting in for Doc Thompson as he went to emcee the Tea Party event, conservatives are getting better at putting our message out—and that is something that the other side is significantly terrified of.  In the future, there will be a lot more conservative competition in visual arts than there has been, and that is something to be very excited about.

Rich Hoffman


America in Decline: Why the white guys are angry–a progressive travesty

There is no question that Bill O’Reilly is the best news guy in the business today. However, for my tastes he is way too close to the progressive point of view.  He is too cozy with the kind of people who are wrecking our country so I usually watch him the way I would a disconnected parent from another generation who is out of touch with the reality of our times.  The reason I do is because he is simply the best that there is—which says everything that needs to be determined.  Bill O’Reilly tells the truth without spectacle and fanfare.  So it should be quite shocking to many to watch his Talking Points Memo shown below from a few days ago titled, “America in Decline.” I understand the reason he does what he does with the progressive left, he wants to be a good reporter just after the facts, and he feels he will reach more people if he’s fair and balanced.  Largely he is right, he is a bestselling author, he has excellent ratings on his top rated news program on Fox and his stage shows around the country routinely sell out.  By most people’s definitions Bill O’Reilly is the epitome of American success, so they should listen to what he has to say.  If you have not seen this, please do watch it and send it along to a friend.  If you have, watch it again, and again and again.  It’s all true and then some and every point made must be corrected in American culture within the decade, otherwise, we will not survive.  It is that simple. 

To those who say that Bill and those who think like he does is just a bunch of angry white guys spewing hate, it’s time to can it.  Those are exactly the kind of people who have delivered us to this precipice.  The angry white guys are “angry” because they have been kind, and fair, and open—and progressives have done all of the above to our country—and we don’t like it.  It is kind of like telling a teenage kid not to have a party while we go on vacation, but while gone, the kid does just that, and when we returned, the house is destroyed.  We will be angry!  It only adds insult to the injury when the stupid kid tells us not to be angry!

All the things Bill mentioned have been done either intentionally, or through severe corruption and outright stupidity.  This is where Bill and I are very different; he is willing to give progressives the benefit of the doubt where I think they have been quite purposeful.  Bill being a strict Catholic guy believes in turning the other cheek to those who vilify him—where I do not.  I think it is more appropriate to cut off the cheek of the villain and feed it to them for what they’ve done.  But we both agree that things cannot continue as they have.

America has been attacked in the same manner that it was during the Pearl Harbor invasion, or the 9/11 World Trade Center terrorist plot.  It has been threatened in a similar way as the Cuban Missile Crises was designed to invoke and has been quite literal.  The trouble is that most Americans did not define what was happening as an attack because guns and hostilities were not openly declared in the traditional sense—so much of what took America to the place it currently is, went unchallenged.

Now we are part of a country that has had its wealth redistributed to unproductive corners of the world, where fairness has been used as a club to crush enterprise, and stylish feelings have overtaken logic.  Probably the biggest sign of the foul play which is amiss is the concluding statements in Bill’s Talking Points, where Lois Lerner testified before Congress yet again and took the Fifth multiple times so not to implicate herself.  Lerner being a high-ranking member of the IRS has refused to answer questions as to Washington’s involvement in the IRS scandal that is at this point much, much, larger than Watergate ever was—and nobody in the media, or the Beltway culture have the courage to face down the obvious evil which is taking place.  If the IRS will do what they have done to conservative groups, they’ll do it to anyone who stands in their way in the future no matter what the political affiliation.  The Lerner corruption at the IRS is testimony in its own way and confirmation that everything so-called radicals like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and many others have been saying is 100% true.   It is true until people like Lerner proves otherwise.  They can’t have it both ways, use American laws of innocent before proven guilty, and then use the cover of bureaucracy to commit crimes against America.  That is nothing short of terrorism and the evidence has proven that Lerner is guilty of it.

But what’s worse than what Lerner has done with the IRS, or the major newspapers who refused to cover the story out of ideological commitment to the kind of change they are trying to impose on the rest of us—is that we’ve let them do it.  We’ve been kind, accommodating, and docile allowing them to take the “Fifth” when we know they are hiding something, or lying to us over Benghazi, or the reasoning that energy prices are so high, or taxes are going up, or our health care system has been tampered with, or our jobs are shoved overseas so to “redistribute” them to the gutters of Italy to balance things out with the European Union which has mismanaged itself to the brink of oblivion.  We’ve been nice, and we have been taken advantage of.

O’Reilly isn’t inflating the situation in his broadcast on Fox. He’s point for point being excessively factual. The situation is every bit as bad has he stated and if corrections are not made, we are done as a nation—and it will have been on purpose by the enemies of the nation working within our system of government.   We have been compromised, and we have a right to be angry about it.  Very angry!

Rich Hoffman


D’Souza’s ‘America': Taking on Noam Chomsky and the progressive assertion of theft

The central premise of the progressive argument which has been the undercurrent of communism for all of the 20th Century, emerging in popular culture during the 1960s—is that The United States was built on theft.  The argument by progressives like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Noam Chomsky is that America stole their land from the “Native Americans,” that it stole its labor from the African slaves, and that it stole its wealth from Middle Eastern oil.  But the real attack is an old one that was most spectacularly on display during the Russian Revolution of 1917 and was conducted much more subtly in The United States—it is a frontal assault against capitalism hoping to destroy the economic engine of prosperity which progressives stood vehemently against.  Progressivism shaped the mind of Barack Obama and others like him; it was not them who shaped progressivism.  Like termites they believe that their view of the world is the right one and their collective efforts were larger than their individual will—and their aim from day one of their acceptance of progressivism has been to burrow out America into a hollow shell to give back to the world what was stolen from them by capitalism.  This is the premise of the new film by Dinesh D’Souza called America, which will be released on July 4th 2014, and promises to do something that has not yet been done before—take on directly the premise of progressivism in a film by high-profile Hollywood talent—most specifically the great Gerald R. Molen.  Molen has turned from producing Steven Spielberg films to dedicating his talents by producing films which question the basis behind progressivism the way only Hollywood can—and is one of the first obvious defectors from the movie machine in California.

I’m not going to lie, I knew five years ago after attending a film festival that things needed to change.  I had written a few very conservative novels.  My Symposium of Justice opened with a serial rapist being bullwhipped to near death for the deliberate staging of a sexual assault by the city police in order to win more support from the public.  Not exactly the kind of material a 2004 reading public was ready to deal with.  My 2012 novel Tail of the Dragon was about an open civil war against statism done against the backdrop of the great car chase films of the past like Vanishing Point and Smokey and the Bandit.  Readers of my blog loved the novel, but the general public wasn’t sure how to feel about it—as it went against everything most people were trained to consider acceptable.  After a film I worked on in 2008 and understanding the Hollywood culture up-close and personal I changed direction in my life not to fit the times, but to the times I knew that were coming.  Creative people where emerging from their hiding places, people like Glenn Beck, Hollywood defectors like Gerald R. Molen, and Harmon Kaslow.  John Aglialoro went into production on the Ayn Rand classic Atlas Shrugged, and of course Dinesh D’Souza started making movies leading up to 2012: Obama’s America.  The Batman films by Christopher Nolan were certainly making arguments against progressivism on a huge scale.  I saw in Hollywood that progressivism was about to go to court, California had spent itself into oblivion, several American cities were on the edge of bankruptcy, and a radical progressive president had just been elected.  Times were changing and as the people in position to usher in those changes, the masses would need more details to explain to them what went wrong and how they could come out of it.  This has led to the blog site you are now reading which has over 2 million words worth of my opinions, history, and strategy on how to defeat progressivism.  I knew as people like Molen, D’Souza, and Kaslow produced films that would wake up people to the slow cannibalizing of their country by progressivism, that people would need support for their personal journey while coming out of that deep sleep.  So I started Overmanwarror’s Wisdom to help them with the difficult journey of waking up from the terrible sleep imposed upon them for years by respected progressives such as Noam Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky had already written several bestselling books over many years which have been pushed like intoxicants into American students through universities thoroughly corrupting the minds of millions for several decades toward progressivism—really to the doom of American capitalism.  Chomsky’s essential philosophical premise of Universalism is that “we are choosing to live in a world of comforting illusion,” alluding that the truth of American imperialism is theft of other people’s resources exploited by the evil West.  He has sold progressivism with the argument that America should “apply the same ethical principles that we apply to other governments to our own.”  In this way, he and others in intelligentsia have paralyzed conservative America into a defensive posture when attack was the needed strategy.  That paralysis has lasted for at least four decades, but in 2008, the cracks were forming and a collapse was about to occur.  So I determined to help with the transition.

Many wonder why I don’t try to sell my work done here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.  The reason is that I am fighting to preserve America so that the intellect of the buying public is not lost to progressivism forever.  It won’t do any good to sell my work to a bunch of mindless drones and I’m not interested in writing for a drone driven public.  A Wilshire Blvd talent scout told me about 15 years ago, “Mr. Hoffman, your work is too hard-edged, too political, too violent, and too judgmental.  Loosen up a bit, and put some occasional tits in your stories, everybody likes boobies.”  This was a female agent from one of the big firms.  She was telling me how to sell my work so that it would be marketable to the masses.  But that just wasn’t interesting.  What good was a condo in Florida, and a Lamborghini, if America failed?  So I stopped writing for other people and started writing what I wanted to.  And on this blog site, I write what I damn well please at whatever cost.  Because the casualties are strategic objectives that will help pave the way for the other media to gain more of an audience—such as D’Souza’s new film, or the Atlas films by Kaslow and Aglialoro.

In the upcoming film by D’Souza, called America, he will take on directly the premise of Noam Chomsky’s arguments, which for the left is like attacking Jesus Christ.  Chomsky is forbidden territory that has been beyond refuting, and question.  D’Souza will attack the basic foundations of Chomsky and his roots into Immanuel Kant going all the way back to 1785 when the roots of progressivism were forming in Europe.  While Immanuel Kant was publishing his works Critique of Pure Reason, (1781) the Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) the Critique of Practical Reason (1788) and the Critique of Judgment (1790) America was working through the difficulties of becoming the first nation on earth to have a free people driven by capitalism protected by a Constitution rooted in Aristotelian logic.   Over the next three centuries countries who followed the lead of America succeeded wonderfully, while those who followed after Kant have suffered under the terrible weight of poverty.  This is where Noam Chomsky gets his foundation arguments about progressivism which have done so much damage.

On July 4th, the progressive left, and right will be very outraged by Dinesh D’Souza’s latest film, but the time has come, and I knew it would for a long time.  My goal was to have thousands of articles available to viewers of these new movies to combat directly the swarms of progressive propaganda that currently exists.  Even with my millions of words produced in defense of free markets and capitalism, there are literally trillions and trillions of words in favor of progressivism.  But the big difference is that there are severe holes in their theory and it has always been the progressives who have conducted the theft—like Robin Hood, where they intend openly to steal from the rich and give to the poor.  The grim reality that Chomsky refuses to see with his Kantian mindset is that the Middle East sat on their giant oil fields for generations, and did nothing with it.  It was capitalism that found a use for it, and made the families of Saudi Arabia wealthy beyond measure.  Without the West buying their oil, the wealth that pours into the Middle East would dry up like a torrential downpour in the desert.  It would evaporate as quickly as it came.   It was America who taught the Japanese how to have one of the world’s most powerful economies, and it is America who buys most of what China produces.  It is America who keeps dictators from overrunning the entire world and it is still NASA technology that makes space travel in Russia possible as our astronauts have been forced by the progressive Obama into hitching a ride with a contentious enemy all in the name of “progressive peace.”  The American Indian, the so-called “Native American” lived life as nomads for centuries regulating themselves to begging the gods for rain so that crops would grow.  The American had science which could help them produce more food under adverse conditions than anyplace on earth.  America has produced so much food that going hungry in America is a choice instead of a random option.   Within two centuries of the mystic Native American dances around campfires asking the gods to bring food to their tribe, McDonald’s restaurants sprung up every 50 miles across America and NEVER run out of food.  It is inconceivable to stop by a McDonald’s and find that they don’t have meat for a hamburger.  Noam Chomsky and other progressives think that the Native Americans had the right approach to life and that McDonald’s is a vile construct of capitalism creating a consumer based culture, and the premise of progressivism is to destroy it forever—preserving the earth with a foolish notion of tribal tribute to ancient gods and human reason being troubled by questions it cannot dismiss, but also cannot answer.  The American seeks to answer all questions and overcome all obstacles as progressives see such behavior as theft—theft of resources that are finite and not renewable by human ingenuity—in the same way that Indians believed Buffalo kills were spiritual gifts, and rain was given because of a stupid dance.

As the rest of the world learns of these falsehoods they have been taught all their lives, it is my intention to give them a safe place to find the answers with a simple Google search.  There are so many articles now on the World Wide Web from me that people all over the world are reading for the first time and having their epiphany moments.  Most of the articles are long, and if I charged money for them, people would skip reading in favor of some pornographic material.  So I offer them for free so that people will be encouraged to study them.  And when people see films like D’Souza’s America, or Aglialoro’s Atlas, or Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar, people enlightened will do their Google search and get the details here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.  They’ll learn how they have been scammed by people like Noam Chomsky, and Barack Obama—for a very, very long time.  A new rebellion of intellectual thought is emerging, and it is the opposite of the one that Nom Chomsky has been a part of for so many years.  The time has come, and not a moment too soon.  But the next step will be the hardest.  It is one thing to have filmmakers like D’Souza make wonderful films; it is another to understand what to do with that information.  For that, I have dedicated myself, and my fortune.  I have been on strike so to speak for several years now, and it has been expensive.  But well worth it, because the fight is not just for wealth, but the quality of minds needed to have commerce with.  Without quality people in America to conduct business with, the quality of the capitalist experience is greatly diminished, which has been the ultimate reason for the progressive attempt to dumb down America through public education.  For them, it was always about attacking capitalism—at any cost—even people’s minds.

Rich Hoffman


The Pronoun “I”: Communist infiltration of America by Perestroika Deception

This may be the most important document that you’ll ever read and contains some of the most potent videos you’ll ever see.  Give yourself time with this topic and brace yourself.  If you do the research properly and let the evidence take you to the ultimate conclusion eventually the road runs out.  Eventually, you will discover what was always hidden right in front of all our faces—a realization that is so troubling, and sinister, that nobody will want to believe it.  But it’s true, and dear reader, what I’m about to tell you will bring great harm to your mind and make your sleep difficult.   If you care even a little bit about the matters of the world around you, what you will read in the oncoming paragraphs will invite demons into your dreams to haunt you for eternity.  The demons however where always there—but you will now be aware of them.

I was there in the final days of the Reagan Presidency and saw the Berlin Wall coming down.  I watched the Sean Connery interview where he declared that Gorbachev “is the man of the 20th Century,” while the country was coming apart at the seams promoting his film The Russia House. In that same interview he spoke about his first visit to the country during a movie 21 years earlier called The Red Tent that he stared in where he said, the Soviet Union seemed impregnable.  “It was just so potent, with this enormous army, and you felt if they were going to do something they’d do it.  And nobody’d do it better.”  Then suddenly without warning Gorbachaev seemed to be leaning toward peace and “democracy.”  The Soviet Union surprisingly “tapped out” on the mat and begin to embrace western ways letting film crews like Connery’s come to the country to film in Moscow—behind the Iron Curtain.   Something about all that never seemed right to me…………………it was mysteriously odd to be so concerned about the Soviet Union for all of my childhood and suddenly they were our friends welcoming the West into their culture and breaking their nation into small republics all seeking United Nations membership.

The more research I have done into education funding, origins of labor unions, and global socialism all these paths have led to a glaring fact that has now touched the lives of virtually every human being on planet earth.  The intentions of the communists in the Soviet Union—which can be seen in all their glory in the magnificent novel, We The Living by Ayn Rand have come to fruition with a strategy invoked in a method only collectivists could utilize—people not concerned with the pronoun “I” but with collective salvation that would take over a century to fulfill, global world-wide communism. That was always the stated goal of the Soviet Union and they had President Franklin Roosevelt’s ear reaching an agreement with him on November 15, 1933.

Almost immediately upon taking office, President Roosevelt moved to establish formal diplomatic relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. His reasons for doing so were complex, but the decision was based on several primary factors. Roosevelt hoped that recognition of the Soviet Union would serve U.S. strategic interests by limiting Japanese expansionism into Asia, and he believed that full diplomatic recognition would serve American commercial interests in the Soviet Union, a matter of some concern to an Administration grappling with the effects of the Great Depression. Finally, the United States was the only major power that continued to withhold official diplomatic recognition from the Soviet Union.  It also helped that Roosevelt was from the same family as former President Teddy Roosevelt who helped create the Progressive Party in the United States and were trying to do with less violence what the Bolshevik’s had done in Russia overthrowing the Tsarist regime.  Being a Democrat, the Soviet Union was not all that different from progressive stated social progress goals, prompting Roosevelt to introduce Social Security and other government safety net programs into American politics so to take the edge off communist pressure during the Red Decade—the 1930s.  Communists and Democrats were not that dissimilar.  The big difference was that the Soviet Union was participating in major social purges where the United States at that time wouldn’t consider such things.

President Roosevelt decided to approach the Soviets in October 1933 through two personal intermediaries: Henry Morgenthau (then head of the Farm Credit Administration and Acting Secretary of the Treasury) and William C. Bullitt (a former diplomat who, as a Special Assistant to the Secretary of State, was informally serving as one of Roosevelt’s chief foreign policy advisers). The two approached Boris Shvirsky, the Soviet Union’s unofficial representative in Washington, with an unsigned letter from Roosevelt to the Soviet Union’s official head of state, Chairman of the Central Executive Committee, Mikhail Kalinin. The letter intimated that the U.S. Government would be willing to negotiate the terms for recognizing the Soviet Union, and requested that Kalinin dispatch an emissary to Washington. In response, Commissar for Foreign Affairs Litvinov journeyed to Washington in November 1933 in order to begin talks.

Initially, the talks made little headway due to several outstanding issues: the unpaid debt owed by the Soviet Union to the United States, the restriction of religious freedoms and legal rights of U.S. citizens living in the Soviet Union, and Soviet involvement in Communist subversion and propaganda within the United States. Following a series of one-on-one negotiations known as the “Roosevelt-Litvinov Conversations,” however, Litvinov and the President worked out a “gentleman’s agreement” on November 15, 1933, that overcame the major obstacles blocking recognition.

According to the terms of the Roosevelt-Litvinov agreements, the Soviets pledged to participate in future talks to settle their outstanding financial debt to the United States. Four days earlier, after another private meeting with Litvinov, Roosevelt also managed to secure guarantees that the Soviet Government would refrain from interfering in American domestic affairs (i.e. aiding the American Communist Party), and would grant certain religious and legal rights for U.S. citizens living in the Soviet Union. Following the conclusion of these agreements, President Roosevelt appointed William C. Bullitt as the first U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union.

Unfortunately, the cooperative spirit embodied in the Roosevelt-Litvinov agreements proved to be short-lived. Shortly after his arrival in Moscow in December 1933, Bullitt became disillusioned with the Soviets as an agreement on the issue of debt repayment failed to materialize. Moreover, evidence emerged that the Soviet Government had violated its pledge not to interfere in American domestic affairs. Finally, the killing of the Leningrad Communist Party boss, Sergey Kirov, launched the first of the “Great Purges” that led to the death or imprisonment of millions of Soviet citizens as the Stalinist regime liquidated any potential critics of the government. The wide scope and public nature of the purges horrified both American diplomatic personnel stationed in the Soviet Union, and the world at large.  The Soviet Union proceeded to pursue an all out infiltration of American politics at virtually every level using KGB agents to set the stage for the counter-culture movements in Europe and The United States by infiltrating the colleges in both areas and slowly breeding communist sympathizers.  Again the details are spelled out explicitly in We The Living.  In 1979 when America created the Department of Education, the internal goal was to usher in communism to every child in America one mind at a time.  Between 1908 and 1975 130 bills were introduced to congress to create The Department of Education. They all failed–every one of them.  So why suddenly did the 1979 bill succeed, it is because, it was created by communist infiltrators into the American government by sympathizers to the communist cause on the heels of the Cuban Missile Crises, and Kennedy assassination.  These infiltrators worked through the labor unions, specifically the National Education Association.  The validity of this claim can be confirmed by Charlotte Iserbyt, who was the Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, and The U.S. Department of Education.  She reported directly to Ronald Reagan who used his acting skills to help make America feel good about itself while the Cold War tore at the internal workings of government in full knowledge by him.  He fired Iserbyt when she started leaking what she discovered about the communist plot within The Department of Education.  Meanwhile Reagan who had sympathized with communists in the past, had been a leading member of United World Federalists, and a charter member of Americans for Democratic Action and tried to win the Cold War with the Soviet Union with lessons he learned from GE when he was a spokesman for them in the 60s.  Reagan turned to advertising propaganda, and charm.  Reagan outspent Soviet Russia into oblivion forcing the Soviet Union to collapse economically.  But ideologically they had already penetrated all their targets fulfilling many of their 45 planks of communism outlined in the book The Naked Communist outlined extensively here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.  Communism had infiltrated the colleges, the public schools, the media, the movie industry, the Democratic Party, large parts of the Republican Party and now that the Soviets were pretending to break up and collapse, new members of the United Nations were being admitted so to gain voting power and fulfill another communist plank, infiltration of the United Nations, which was created ironically by Franklin Roosevelt.  This new, less obvious strategy was called The Perestroika Deception.

Anatoliy Mikhaylovich Golitsyn CBE (Russian: Анатолий Михайлович Голицын; born August 25, 1926) was a Soviet KGB defector and author of two books about the long-term deception strategy of the KGB leadership which was intended to be implemented during this period of the early 1990s.  He was born in PiryatinUkrainian SSR and provided “a wide range of intelligence to the CIA on the operations of most of the ‘Lines’ (departments) at the Helsinki and other residencies, as well as KGB methods of recruiting and running agents.”[1] He is an Honorary Commander of the Order of the British Empire(CBE) and, as late as 1984, was an American citizen.[2]

He has been the repeated target of KGB assassination attempts.  Current President of Russia, Vladimir Putin was a 16 year officer in the KGB holding a rank of Lieutenant Colonel before retiring in 1991, about the same time as The Perestroika Deception was set to take place and go underground.  The movie mentioned regarding Sean Connery, The Russia House was the first film to be allowed into Russia and filmed in Moscow and St. Petersburg.  For those not proficient at geography, St. Petersburg is Petrograd in the Ayn Rand novel referred.   St. Petersburg was renamed to the current which had been changed in 1914 to Petrograd in 1991.  Remember that date.  The novel The Russia House was written by John le Carre, otherwise known as David John Moore Cornwell who was a former intelligence officer for MI5 and MI6 in Great Britain.  The KGB was well aware of what The Russia House could mean to their plot to begin The Perestroika Deception and implementing an overall strategy by a popular actor from Europe in Sean Connery, a beautiful American actress in Michelle Pfeiffer—playing a Russian woman, and a platform to announce to the world how Russia is a good country who suddenly wanted peace.  The project of course was funneled through the SAG union in California from the Communist Party USA advocating the novel on the fast track for film studio production.  No studio in America would pass up the opportunity to be the first American film shot behind the Iron Curtain.  But what many of them didn’t know was that they were all pawns in The Perestroika Deception.

Anatoliy Mikhaylovich Golitsyn  wrote a book called The Perestroika Deception which was published in 1995 and claimed:

  • “The [Soviet] strategists are concealing the secret coordination that exists and will continue between Moscow and the ‘nationalist’ leaders of [the] ‘independent’ republics.”
  • “The power of the KGB remains as great as ever… Talk of cosmetic changes in the KGB and its supervision is deliberately publicized to support the myth of ‘democratization’ of the Soviet political system.”
  • “Scratch these new, instant Soviet ‘democrats,’ ‘anti-Communists,’ and ‘nationalists’ who have sprouted out of nowhere, and underneath will be found secret Party members or KGB agents.”

In his previous book, Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, Golitsyn said President Gorbachev stated outright, “Perestroika is closely connected with socialism as a system.”[7]  Answering those asking, “Are we giving up socialism?” Gorbachev replied, “Every part of our program of perestroika…is fully based on the principles of more socialism….”[8]  Gorbachev has even been as blunt as calling perestroika a “continuation of the October Revolution.”

The “perestroika deception” worked like a charm.  American leaders were all too eager to pronounce the end of the Cold War.  Then President George H. W. Bush declared, “We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an idea — the final chapter of the Communist experiment.”[9]  President Bush went on to spearhead a guns-to-butter policy resulting from this “peace dividend,” culminating in a massive diversion of military spending to social programs.  From 1989-2004, military spending as a percent of GDP dropped from 6.2 percent to a scant 2.9 percent.  Over the same period, entitlement spending went from 28 percent of federal outlays to nearly 40 percent. 

US military cuts have been so drastic that former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger has said, “The simple reality today is that we cannot fight two MRC’s [Major Regional Contingencies] more or less simultaneously.”

For more on this, please do read this very good article in American Thinker from way back in 2009.

Now fast forward to this current time of 2014 where within one week America and Great Britain announced major cuts to the military and their world-wide occupation of far away countries, the libertarian push to put up walls to the world and live and let die other nations, and the Russians attacking Ukraine for its involvement in attempting to join the European Union by rebelling against the Russian puppet president of Ukraine.  The people desperately want freedom from Russia as one of those false Republics which were supposedly set up to preserve “democracy.”  But they’ve had too much taste of freedom, and now want the real thing—and Russia doesn’t like it.

I received a note the other day from George Soros advising me that now was the time to invest in the Ukraine—as he has all along been involved in planting the seeds of discontent in that country, as he has been doing all over the world on behalf of his progressive sponsored groups, directly connected to Socialist International so that the economy of Ukraine will collapse.  Up until a few days ago when Ukraine reached out for international financial help, their currency slid 18% just in February of 2014.  As all investors know, such devaluations are ripe pickings for quick returns on investments because they are driven by market turbulence.  So people like Soros are often found playing two sides against each other to provoke such devaluations.  The same thing that has happened to Ukraine is currently underway in The United States.  If you will read the letter from Soros below dear reader you will see that George began his involvement in Ukraine in 1990, the same year that The Russia House was released, and one year before Vladimir Putin supposedly retired from the KGB and decided to run for political office eventually making a fool of Barack Obama and the rest of America at every turn as the world does not yet want to admit that they have all been deceived by the “perestroika deception.

Dear Friends and Colleagues:

George writes persuasively about the need for Europe to reach out to assist Ukraine and at the same time not alienate Russia. See his Op-Ed in The Guardian and in German in Süddeutsche.

All best,

Michael Vachon

Sustaining Ukraine’s Breakthrough

By George Soros

Following a crescendo of terrifying violence, the Ukrainian uprising has had a surprisingly positive outcome. Contrary to all rational expectations, a group of citizens armed with not much more than sticks and shields made of cardboard boxes and metal garbage-can lids overwhelmed a police force firing live ammunition. There were many casualties, but the citizens prevailed. This was one of those historic moments that leave a lasting imprint on a society’s collective memory.

How could such a thing happen? Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics offers a fitting metaphor. According to Heisenberg, subatomic phenomena can manifest themselves as particles or waves; similarly, human beings may alternate between behaving as individual particles or as components of a larger wave. In other words, the unpredictability of historical events like those in Ukraine has to do with an element of uncertainty in human identity.

People’s identity is made up of individual elements and elements of larger units to which they belong, and peoples’ impact on reality depends on which elements dominate their behavior. When civilians launched a suicidal attack on an armed force in Kyiv on February 20, their sense of representing “the nation” far outweighed their concern with their individual mortality. The result was to swing a deeply divided society from the verge of civil war to an unprecedented sense of unity.

Whether that unity endures will depend on how Europe responds. Ukrainians have demonstrated their allegiance to a European Union that is itself hopelessly divided, with the euro crisis pitting creditor and debtor countries against one another. That is why the EU was hopelessly outmaneuvered by Russia in the negotiations with Ukraine over an Association Agreement.

True to form, the EU under German leadership offered far too little and demanded far too much from Ukraine. Now, after the Ukrainian people’s commitment to closer ties with Europe fueled a successful popular insurrection, the EU, along with the International Monetary Fund, is putting together a multibillion-dollar rescue package to save the country from financial collapse. But that will not be sufficient to sustain the national unity that Ukraine will need in the coming years.

I established the Renaissance Foundation in Ukraine in 1990 – before the country achieved independence. The foundation did not participate in the recent uprising, but it did serve as a defender of those targeted by official repression. The foundation is now ready to support Ukrainians’ strongly felt desire to establish resilient democratic institutions (above all, an independent and professional judiciary). But Ukraine will need outside assistance that only the EU can provide: management expertise and access to markets.

In the remarkable transformation of Central Europe’s economies in the 1990’s, management expertise and market access resulted from massive investments by German and other EU-based companies, which integrated local producers into their global value chains. Ukraine, with its high-quality human capital and diversified economy, is a potentially attractive investment destination. But realizing this potential requires improving the business climate across the economy as a whole and within individual sectors – particularly by addressing the endemic corruption and weak rule of law that are deterring foreign and domestic investors alike.

In addition to encouraging foreign direct investment, the EU could provide support to train local companies’ managers and help them develop their business strategies, with service providers remunerated by equity stakes or profit-sharing. An effective way to roll out such support to a large number of companies would be to combine it with credit lines provided by commercial banks. To encourage participation, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) could invest in companies alongside foreign and local investors, as it did in Central Europe.

Ukraine would thus open its domestic market to goods manufactured or assembled by European companies’ wholly- or partly-owned subsidiaries, while the EU would increase market access for Ukrainian companies and help them integrate into global markets.

I hope and trust that Europe under German leadership will rise to the occasion. I have been arguing for several years that Germany should accept the responsibilities and liabilities of its dominant position in Europe. Today, Ukraine needs a modern-day equivalent of the Marshall Plan, by which the United States helped to reconstruct Europe after World War II. Germany ought to play the same role today as the US did then.

I must, however, end with a word of caution. The Marshall Plan did not include the Soviet bloc, thereby reinforcing the Cold War division of Europe. A replay of the Cold War would cause immense damage to both Russia and Europe, and most of all to Ukraine, which is situated between them. Ukraine depends on Russian gas, and it needs access to European markets for its products; it must have good relations with both sides.

Here, too, Germany should take the lead. Chancellor Angela Merkel must reach out to President Vladimir Putin to ensure that Russia is a partner, not an opponent, in the Ukrainian renaissance.

Source: Project Syndicate

Do you see the source of the trouble here dear reader?  Do you see what’s happened?  Ukraine is representative of all of us the world over.  They are caught between Russia and its dedicated allegiance to worldwide communism declared to President Roosevelt in 1933 when he sought peace with them before war broke out.  The European Union is built on socialism.  The Soviet Union, the European Union, the Screen Actors Guild Union, the National Education Association Union, the National Auto Workers Union, EVERY UNION is involved in this god damn communist plot, and if you support a labor union you have been helping the “perestroika deception” a KGB strategy to spread communism to every corner of the world and rule as a one world government.  Out of all the countries in the world that George Soros could have involved himself with, why did he establish the Renaissance Foundation in Ukraine in 1990?  Because Soros knew about the perestroika deception.  That’s why he funds the Open Society Foundations.  Ukraine does not have a choice between American capitalism, or Ayn Rand’s Objectivism.  They are not being offered anything close to an American Constitution—they are offered an alliance between one communist union and one socialist union and freedom isn’t even in the cards.  That same fate is intended for us, made more complicated because of the free nature of America, and the amount of money and invention which has been generated on a relatively small land mass, compared to the communist work of a massive Russian nation and the still very communist China.  China has kept Hong Kong a capitalist sector so not to disturb the markets that have been generated there, which communist China now enjoys instead of Great Britain, but that is simply a hook in the water to snag up Western investment while these communist forces disguised as progressives seek to destroy the American currency—forcing America into a North American Union which will ultimately be controlled by communists already in place, especially in Mexico, Central America, and South America—specifically Venezuela and Brazil.

The situation is actually far worse than even the most controversial radio talk show host has sputtered about.  The “perestroika deception” is more sinister than Glenn Beck or even Alex Jones has suggested.  The attack has been more flagrant than anything Ted Nugent has uttered, or Rush Limbaugh has espoused.  All those characters have talked around the problem to the results without really getting to the bottom line of what the root cause is for all these things.  I have made a good living identifying problems well before anybody knew there was a problem and fixing things that other people have struggled with.  When I asked years ago what is wrong with American schools, and I sought an answer, this is where it has taken me.  The answer is that communism is alive and well, and still a major threat to the world.  America did not win the Cold War.  The surrender by Russia was a ruse designed to get America to lay down its defenses, and it worked.  Actually, it’s far worse than anybody thought, because America allowed itself to be sung to sleep by the KGB quite on purpose.  Once we let down our defenses, they entered our children’s minds through various labor unions and went to work turning them against the hard-working generations of the past—so that in the future, those children would be easy to conquer as adults.  Once the generations who built America died off, the new generation of complacent union trained idiots would be easy to dispose of, which was always the plan—from the very beginning of the “perestroika deception.”

People in the west, which is both their strength and weakness, have a firm reliance on the pronoun “I.”  The word “I” indicates responsibility and self-worth, and is the primary reason that Americans invent so many things and are so industrious leaving the rest of the world to only copy off us.  Collectivist societies in every single fashion lack the ability to generate anything new.  It is the pronoun “I” that allows for innovation, technological revolution, and advances in free will, increased human capacity and improved lifestyles.  But it is also a weakness, because those functioning under the pronoun “I” cannot understand a group of people who would happily sacrifice their life for the greater good of some stupid ideal—like the spread of communism over the entire planet.  They cannot understand living one’s entire life for the good of the collective whole—where once they perish, the work they pursued can be picked up and continued for another generation.  The communist because they do not function from the pronoun “I” can happily not see their objectives met within their lifetime.  They can wait for 100 years, or 200 years—whatever it takes to get where they want to go—because they lack the value of the word, “I.”  Americans because the pronoun “I” is so pronounced have been exposed by the KGB and manipulated by a scam that takes place outside of the lifetimes of the participants.  Americans have not been able to see the perestroika deception because the plan takes place over several generations and the career changes of many America media personalities, union officials, politicians, and celebrities.  The average influential years of most Americans is about 15 years.  Most people functioning from the pronoun “I” spend a number of years climbing the ladders of success, and once they arrive, they have a seat at the table for about 15 years before they retire and move on to a peaceful life enjoying the fruits of their labor.  The KGB knew this and exploited it in grand fashion hatching a destruction upon America that would unite the world under communism for all known eternity—at least for the human race—and they did it with the “perestroika deception.”

Watch all the videos included in this article to learn more.  If you want to read the book The Perestroika Deception, it is out of print and very hard to get.  But you can download it online by CLICKING HERE.

Rich Hoffman