ISIS Guilt in Chris Harper Mercer’s Violence: What Obama didn’t say caused the Oregon shootings–but he should have

There is certainly enough smoke to point toward an inconceivable fire if its proved to be true, that the Oregon shooter, Chris Harper Mercer wasn’t just the usual loner, the poor boy who couldn’t get a date and sought to put himself into history’s remembrances even as a villain after committing overwhelming violence. He appears to be more ideologically motivated. There are three things that give away the real story, and it’s likely that all three are connected. But if any of them were to hold up to the truth of proper investigating by real journalists, then there are a lot of people who should be immediately fired for the cover-up—because if these mass shootings really are to be stopped, the correct cause must be identified, not just the effect. Death was the effect, but guns were not the cause. Behavior was, and what motivated that behavior is the point of this discussion.

Not long ago Alek Skarlatos and his friends coming back from some ruckus boyish festivities in Amsterdam put a stop to an Islamic radical who attempted to take over a train in Belgium on its way to Paris. Skarlatos led the effort and has been since touring the world as a hero for stopping the possible terrible crime. Skarlatos would have been at the Umpqua Community College the day that Mercer showed up armed to kill Christians specifically, but the young hero was training for Dancing with the Stars down in Hollywood for the television show, enjoying rightfully his new-found celebrity. Now there are a lot of community colleges in the United States, so it’s just a bit odd that this attack happened to occur at the exact college of Alek Skarlatos just a matter of weeks after stopping the Belgium shooter. Initially when the Belgium shooter was stopped, the radical ties to Islam acquired during a time that the attempted murderer was in Spain had been suppressed with a cover story that the violence was not related to religious motivations. Remember that.

Apparently the FSB, (Federal Security Services in Russia) tried to warn the American CIA that a black-Islamist terror suspect had tried to gain passage to Syria through Turkey during the first week of September in 2015. That terrorist suspect was listed as Chris Harper Mercer and was on a list of 87,000 people they were watching, and was identified as being an Islamic State adherent after the attempt to get into Syria—all this flagged by the Foreign Intelligence Service, (SVR). Now, it’s possible that these agencies were just trying to make a name for themselves in the wake of the Oregon shooting, but what this congers up for remembrance is the Boston Marathon bombing by the radicalized Islamic terrorists there tipped off to us again by foreign intelligence agencies as our own Homeland Security failed to notice. Even with all the intrusions that the NSA is conducting on Americans they have shown themselves to be utterly incompetent so far in stopping terror from occurring—because the evidence is certainly present that these young kids—such as Mercer—where behaving in a way that indicating coming violence.

Third, just as in Benghazi where Chris Stevens was killed by a September 11th plot to sack the American embassy there, just a few months before President Obama’s re-election—were overeager reports that the violence had been caused by an anti-Islamic video. This time Obama himself took to the podium immediately after the incident in Oregon to call for more gun control. Even Chris Harper Mercer’s own father jumped on the train of anti-gun sentiment to show his shock that his son had owned 13 guns and declared that if his boy had not had the guns, the murders never would have happened. Everyone connected to the story was way too quick to blame the gun instead of the behaviors leading to Mercer wanting to kill specifically Christian people. For instance, Chris was coming from broken home, the father did not live with the mother—which is likely a much more telling tale of why the shooter had emotional problems and was unadjusted to social life. The root cause of young Mercer’s issues likely would reside between the dad and the mom because they did a bad job raising their son. Blaming guns is easy for the father, but the real cause of the Oregon deaths was that as a father he failed to give his son proper values to live life by. That left the young kid to bounce around aimlessly for several years before befriending some people on an online site called the “beta boys.” I have written extensively about the problems associated with “beta males” so the irony is not lost. Mercer had problems likely caused by his parents which should have been investigated before any press conference was conducted about the cause of the violence.

Even worse than all this—and at this point there is no way to really know—but there are several reports that the same agency that tipped off the CIA leaked information into the Russian publication Reedus indicating that Mercer’s online profile in The Red Room was changed from his original identify as an ISIS terror supporter to being a “white conservative Republican” immediately after the Oregon mass shooting. It was there that Mercer (supposedly) had warned the people he liked in that online forum to stay away from colleges in the Northwest because something was going to happen. Again, it’s possible that Russian intelligence agencies were just trying to make America look bad in a public relations battle taking place around the globe presently. So if it’s all untrue, Obama just has to say it—or perhaps his various security experts. Just give a press conference telling us that all this information is bogus and that there isn’t a grain of truth to it. That would put the issue to rest—because if any of this is true, there is some serious explaining to do—like why wasn’t it immediately revealed to the public that just like the shooter in Belgium, Mercer was motivated by Islamic radicalism—which would explain why he asked if potential victims were Christians. We don’t yet know what happened if potential victims indicated that they were Muslim. Apparently the father didn’t know Chris enough to understand if he had lost his son to radical Islamists—he didn’t even know he had guns. Unfortunately much of this information is coming from independent journalists and blog sites. More can be read at the following link, but much of the information could be cleared up by CNN, Fox and many other outlets if they would do a little digging and either shoot down the theories, or support them with hard evidence. But a failure to address these issues indicates more guilt, not less.

Then of course is the mysterious push for this shooter to remain anonymous, as if by not applying a name to Mercer will prevent other screw-balls like him from doing something similar. The parts of the story that backed this line of thought have conveniently been released while other aspects were completely ignored and this behavior was done in odd choreography with local and national law enforcement. The decision to put a lid on the kid’s story was made within hours of the shooting with unusual clarity by law enforcement. There is just way too much that doesn’t add up.

Literally on the other side of the world relative to the Oregon shooting a Moroccan nationalist on the radar screen by counterterrorism agencies for his radical jhadist views tried to kill people on a speeding train about a 100 miles north of Paris. Apparently young Chris Harper Mercer admired people like that shooter because they gained instant celebrity through the acts of violence. ISIS as a terrorist group has seen a lot of disjointed young people trying to join their cause. Most of them come from broken homes and are awkward socially for one reason or another and are attracted to the power of terrorism advanced by the terrorist group. There are always people out there who love the villains in a story—because the bad guys often have power that is envied by those who inwardly feel most powerless to express themselves against a tapestry of social orthodox. You don’t see otherwise nice young girls leaving comfortable middle-class homes in Britain to join the UAE or the Israeli army. They are fleeing toward ISIS and radical Islam because at least there they can see a structure that their lives are lacking. Weak people like the bad guys, because it gives them an association with instant strength that they don’t inwardly have. Whether Chris Harper Mercer was one of these types remains to be seen. Much of what I have written here was provided to me by readers of Overmanwarrrior’s Wisdom and I have spent the last 24 hours doing what research was possible at this early stage.

There is certainly more to the story than what we have so far been told. But the root cause of the violence was not the gun. It started with bad parenting followed up by a failed education system. Then the community failed to turn that “beta boy” into an alpha by placing an incorrect emphasis on masculine necessity that is crucial to the biological urges that young men need to build their self-identity with. And to correct all that, it is likely that Chris Harper Mercer was attracted to the violence of ISIS and that his actions were more influenced by them, than by the convenience of a gun. That is the real story and is the reason that the Obama administration was so fervent to get out in front of this story. Because Chris Harper Mercer was and is a product of the failures of Obama’s terms as president—Obama gave rise to ISIS through his passivity, he has advanced the failures of progressive educations and social engineering and he has mastered the art of laying blame everywhere but at the true source. So when it is asked why there are so many people like Chris Harper Mercer emerging these days to create mass terror—all Obama needs to do is look in the mirror. Under his leadership, the situation has exploded, and it has nothing to do with guns.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Carl Icahn’s ‘Danger Ahead’: Why Trump University failed but the billionaire would succeed as president

DOk course I daily keep up with a wide range of subjects and read heavily on them—which is quite a task if I were to think about it. It’s for no other reason than I have a lot of passion for many things. For instance, I forgot to sleep over the past weekend for both Friday and Saturday nights because there wasn’t enough time to do everything I wanted to do on those days. Sleep was not an option. But of those things I have not read lately much in the financial journals. You might remember my alarm while buying a car recently at the extremely low-interest rates. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. I have been thinking about other things, so didn’t really hear the loud voices coming from people like Carl Icahn about low-interest rates. However, as a Trump supporter for president, I did notice the Icahn had endorsed Trump and his tax package for reasons that I had noted centering on interest rates. Icahn is one of the most respected investors in the world so I felt a little pride at recognizing something that he was uttering which should concern every American immensely. Icahn put his thoughts together in a video called Danger Ahead that should explicitly encourage people to favor Donald Trump. The situation is dire and requires immediate attention. I’ve been warning about this phase in the American economy for a long time, but now that it’s here, we have to take action to solve the problem as we are well beyond the point of no return.

Icahn has done several such videos and doesn’t just stop on the corporate inversion concerns mixed with extremely low-interest rates. He goes further and addresses the other major crises present in America, which is so grossly obvious in politics and in business—our society has lost the quality of its people to do basic business. As a supporter of unfettered capitalism, the only way to keep everything in reasonable check is for people to function from a distinct cultural morality. For instance, as Icahn points out, many of today’s CEOs, and Board of Directors along with hedge fund investors are morally bankrupt so they invite snake oil salesman in the form of politicians to induce unneeded regulation on economic matters further restricting the free flow of financial expansion. Icahn has specifically pointed to a particularly low quality breed of manager class that has emerged in America which is proving to be catastrophic to our ability to deal with the financial crises that is coming.

To be a good manager a person has to function from a general foundation of ethical behavior. If a manager has hidden deep within their psychosis insecurities and didactic desires, they are likely unequipped to be good managers. Even worse, in the chain-of-command structure of most American business managers are reluctant to put second-in-commands to nip at their heels challenging their authority with anybody competent. So the incompetent are often the types who find promotions. The best and the brightest are most of the time left to die in some corner of a manufacturing environment as the worst and weakest thrive. This is a trend that has been going on for a long time—so it’s nothing new. But it’s beginning to have an effect on our national GDP that is measurable.

I can say from experience that the world is dying in regard to management. It’s really bad in the United States—most people on the other end of the phone or on an email are completely incompetent for their positions. They are culturally destroyed so that they are not equipped to function in a modern business environment. Good management is becoming a serious lost art in America, but it’s not limited to our borders—it’s the world over. The primary fault of these phenomena is our education systems which have been heavily influenced by politicians who know next to nothing about money. There is serious knuckle-dragging going on in modern business, when the issue should be reversed. Considering what is spent on modern education we should have the opposite problem. So the blame is on our educations system.

There is some criticism of Donald Trump and his Trump University that was in operation during the last decade. Essentially, Trump wanted to create a new generation of business leaders with his education institution infused with his perpetual optimism. It was a failed enterprise, so many in the media are pointing toward that failure to hang on Trump the selling of false promises as if the whole thing had been a scam—and why the billionaire would be a failed president. But where Trump would succeed as president but not as the head of a university is due to the Metaphysics of Quality which I’ve talked about extensively before. CLICK TO REVIEW. Trump as a president is largely a salesman for all things Americana whereas institutional learning cannot teach people to think from the front of the train of thought. Leaders are a special breed. As president, Trump can help create an environment for leaders to emerge, but education institutions cannot make poor managers into good forward thinking people. It just doesn’t work for the masses. Trump tried, but not everyone was ready for the effort of leadership, and this is what’s essentially wrong with all education institutions—even ones infused with optimism of Donald Trump. It takes great leadership to create good managers, and leadership is not the criteria used to invoke promotions. Instead, we have created a system of brown-nosing and schmoozing to accomplish promotions—and that doesn’t automatically create leaders. Leadership cannot be bought with the price of tuition, it has to emerge from within individuals who have value and know how to spot it in others.

Trump and Icahn are free to say what they think because they are rich. They don’t have to worry about making anybody above them angry with their opinions—which most smart people in the world are very concerned about—because their upward mobility depends on it. If they show up their boss—who may well be an incompetent loser, they may not be able to buy that house next year, or a new car. I’ve had the opportunity to do a lot of hiring over the years and a common question I ask of new employees is how hungry they are to perform the task they are being hired for. I say to them that I expect them to challenge me for my job—that I want them to bring their best to the game table. I don’t want ass-kissers, or appeasers of any kind. I want people who will challenge themselves every day and look beyond me for their opportunity. I never worry about somebody down talking me to someone else because my reputation speaks for itself. All people who are involved in management should feel that way. But they don’t. They watch with fearful eyes always over their shoulders worried that somebody might notice that they are incompetent—because they have been taught that having faults and being not so good at things was a virtue rather than a detriment that it truly is. Trump and Icahn at their senior ages can afford to be critical. They may not have felt so comfortable saying these things 20 years ago, but now they are because the evidence is so grossly obvious. For the record though, I have always said these types of things, so it’s nice to see others joining the party especially people like Carl Icahn.

The net result of this present debacle is due to the failed philosophy of power within the collective instead of the value of individual merit. When Icahn says that the unions are somewhat at fault for the situation, he means that good managers have thrown up their hands and tossed the meat to the dogs instead of sticking around to fight it out. Those who do tend to stick around these days are the suck asses and losers who are more interested in titles than in the merit of their positions. As low quality people, they look toward the position of their office for social value leaving them little intellectually to provide the masses by way of leadership. So America has destroyed one of its valued commodities—the breeding of good hard-nosed leaders of which people like Trump and Icahn are a dying breed. They are both looking for one last shot at fixing the world starting with America—because both are old men who I believe want to leave the earth better than when they found it. And right now, the risk is that they will leave it far worse—not because of them—but in spite of their efforts.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Communist Dreams: Shutting down the government over guns

When the anti-gun forces point to the far-right as their primary opposition to the national banning of weapons their perspective is relative to their current political positions which are essentially the type of communists that founded the U.S.S.R. They call themselves progressives now instead of communists but their message and strategy are extremely similar to the turn-of-the-century communists that seized Europe prior to World War II. In America to avoid the communist stigma they changed their name to progressive and are seeking to implement the type of centralized control that is common under communist regimes. So let’s get that little disclaimer out-of-the-way before proceeding.   When they speak with hatred at the “far right” they mean capitalists, traditionalists and religious conservatives—essentially the majority of the American nation. They speak the name with a bit of scorn hoping to push people down into shells of security from speaking publicly and affirming that the progressives are in fact the majority hoping to transform the nation into the semblance of a communist state. To accomplish that task the must remove guns from American culture.

In delivering the eulogy Saturday for an aide killed by a stray bullet on a New York City street, Gov. Andrew Cuomo stepped up his calls for national gun control toward the progressive aim of accomplishing that task by saying:

“If the far right is willing to shut down the government because they don’t get a tax cut for the rich, then our people should have the same resolve and threaten to shut down the government if they don’t get a real gun control law to stop killing of their innocents,” he said.

You see how this works dear reader. If Republicans were not trying to do the responsible thing and shut down the government because of extremely irresponsible spending at the federal level, by both sides of the House and Senate, then progressives would be shutting it down for the same radicalism only from the political left’s position. Aside from the threat of shutting down the portions of the government because the bill for it is simply too high amok with inefficiencies, the services rendered are constantly and forever going to be used to extort action from one side or the other. So it would be best to get used to not wanting those services so that they can’t be used to force action upon the voting public. Government shut downs are a responsible action. It is irresponsible of the government to use National Parks as extortion pieces to hurt travelers from visiting national treasures and refusing local law enforcement help to keep those parks open, as they did during the last government shut down—of which the Republicans were supposedly blamed, but still managed to take control of the House and Senate. The American public supported Republican efforts in spite of what progressives said of the action in the media.

And now here is Andrew Cuomo attempting to use tragedy to advance a progressive agenda obsessed with gun control—and thereby control over the public at large as a centralized authority. The purpose of guns in America is to protect private property either from individual theft, or governments out of control if the terrible should ever take place and the courts fail completely—as they presently are near in status. There are occasionally tests by the government of their authority against people they consider radical gun-nuts, and gun fights do sometimes erupt—but the threat of violence currently keeps government at bay in all but the most extreme cases. To put things simply, guns are intended to keep activist progressives like Andrew Cuomo from spreading like a disease across the nation as an activist politician allowing government to seize private property for the purpose of extorting its use back to us—such as what happens when there is government shut downs. The National Parks are shut down to hurt the people who want to use them.   The federal government is essentially fighting for the right to purposely mismanage their assignments for the sole propose of maintaining control to advance progressive strategies which almost always involve over spending on federal budgets for causes that are anti-traditional in American value.

There are many of us on the “far right” who are looking around and wondering where our country went—and we don’t like it. Every day there is more legislation created by nut-cases like Andrew Cuomo for the purpose of advancing progressive strategies—and there is always money attached to them. For Cuomo and his kind, removing guns from society is the ultimate dream because they would no longer have to fear imposing their desires as a collective parasite upon the free people of America. They don’t think anything of using every tragedy from lives lost toward that objective because they don’t see value in individuals—but only if they can use them to build a collective sentiment toward mass disregard for a particular topic they are against—in this case guns.

These same tricksters will give a eulogy for a fallen victim on one afternoon then turn right around and defend the mass murder of millions of babies to abortion under the same breath. Their purpose is the spread of evil upon the earth as communists—their brethren from the past. And to continue that spread, they require the removal of guns from society so that there is no defense to protect that majority “far right” within America from the aggressive intentions of the typical progressive. The undercurrent of Andrew Cuomo is aggression through the disguise of peace. Progressives have no problem assaulting individuals so long as the can bring peace to the “greater good” as defined by them. Pacifists who surrender to the authority of the state, in the mind of the progressive, are the ways forward to a society’s desire for justice. But that definition is strictly one from the “far left.” The “far right” and the “far left” are a long way off. Andrew Cuomo is a long way away from someone like me in regard to political philosophy. One philosophy is built by the values of something like the Rocky Horror Picture Show, while mine might be built by years of John Wayne movies. The values are not compatible and it is not going to be possible to convince me to surrender my sanctity to the big government efforts of the Andrew Cuomo’s progressive mentality. Frustrations will abound. When the government shuts down due to political battles—I’m happy because I don’t want to pay for a lot of the offerings that the government provides. I don’t want them in charge of National Parks; I don’t want them in our schools, or in the typical government positions that are so common in the Beltway culture.   However, when those methods of politics fail and progressives still haven’t obtained their true objective, they must turn to force as the last resort. And when they do, they have to know and respect that the American guns of private ownership are there to meet their insurrection.   That is what the real issue behind Cuomo’s utterance. If Republicans didn’t threaten to shut down the government Democrats would try the same but for different reasons. That is a fact we all better get used to because government spending is too high and there is no way to slow it down now without pain. When politicians realize that they can’t live with that pain they will turn to force—and when they do, we better have plenty of guns in as many homes as possible. Because there is no other recourse when legislative justice breaks down due to political idealism—the only way to stay free is through gun ownership. It is the key to American civilization, and it needs to be less stringent instead of more so.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.


Sticking to our Guns: Why you should join the NRA today

Over the weekend Dana Loesch stirred up controversy against the anti-gun progressive insurgents with a controversial new ad. It was quite effective prompting a Twitter war with radical anti-Second Amendment nut cases. And to her credit for every negative Tweet she received, she donated to the NRA in that person’s name and bought herself a box of ammunition. Her spunk should be greatly admired because besides the national debt, protecting the Second Amendment is the key strategic objective of all right thinking Americans in eroding away the terrible damage to our country that progressives have invoked presently.

If you are not a member of the NRA dear reader—what’s stopping you? In a town of lobbyists in Washington, the NRA is probably the only one that I support—and you have to. Without them, the Second Amendment would have been gone a long time ago by progressive, communist sympathizers who want to disarm society and put the government in charge of everything. What they don’t tell you about their gun grabbing tendencies is that their ultimate objective besides wealth redistribution is the eradication of private property. They do this through many progressive taxes—especially property taxes which are of course directly attached to public schools using our community’s children as hostages toward that objective. The gun in America through the Second Amendment is established to protect private property from enemies foreign and domestic and to uphold the Constitution with something besides a sling shot. Governments cannot be trusted, so the only way that progressives can implement their strategic objectives is by removing guns from society.

Guns are the key to a free society and the rest of the world would be a lot better off if they’d learn that very simple truth. Every single human being on planet earth, man, woman and child under parental supervision should possess a gun. There would be a lot less violence in the world if guns were more readily available than there are now. ISIS would have far less control over the Middle East, Islamic radicals in Africa would quickly loose their ability to terrorize innocent people—the communist governments in China, North Korea and elsewhere would lose their ability to abuse their own citizens and it would keep everyone honest. The only reason government doesn’t fly out of complete control in America is because of the ever-present knowledge that Americans are heavily armed and if government steps out of line, there will be trouble. So let’s get that straight before we discuss anything more. Any liberal who stands against the Second Amendment, any religious figure, and any body of government whatsoever is essentially attacking the American way of life and should be considered an insurgent against the Constitution. There is no debate with some “other side.” There is no touchy feely testimony about some terrible crime that occurs which should move America off defending the Second Amendment that justifies any such proposal. Bad things happen—nothing is perfect, but guns for the essence of individual freedom in the modern world are essential to our survival as a country. The rest of the world should copy the American way of life for their own betterment and the sooner they get that through their thick skulls, the better.

I have written many millions of words and conducted many speeches against public education. It is proven that government schools are liberal recruiting centers designed to undo private property through progressive taxation—and the whole system needs to be scrapped and redone. I have been very passionate about the issue. But there comes a time when you’ve made your point and the new strategy of the day needs to be addressed, because when it comes to liberalism they provide moving targets. I will always cover education issues, but I am going to shift my passion toward defending the Second Amendment with my considerable talents being put to full use. The reason is that it’s time now for those voices to add to what’s always been out there—which is the NRA. They have held down the fort for a long time, and its time they get some reinforcements because the progressive aspects of society are shifting their depleting resources into that direction for one last ridiculous push toward communism—their secret dreams which sing them to sleep at night often under the influence of drugs, and alcohol while listening to Miley Cyrus grind her crotch against a Teddy bear.   Liberals are parasitic animals and their attempts at attacking the Second Amendment need to be met for the intentions always established by the political left.

Of those new voices Dana Loesch is one of those great new talents who are helping the NRA change-up their marketing, which is essential to their continued success. I plan to add to those voices for the strategic implementation of that task with my own talents-which will of course be unique. I wouldn’t have it any other way. Because the time is now to expand the reach of the NRA’s base of support to the new markets of the Millennials and other middle-grounders that have been on the fence and only know about guns from television shows like CSI. Hollywood used to help spread the message of the NRA, but since that valley town of entertainment is nearly all liberalized these days, the marketing efforts that have been needed to keep the NRA expanding require more creative voices from unlikely sources—of which Dana is one.

Largely I have left many of the efforts toward defending the Second Amendment to the committed voices that have been out there. But over the last few years a few things have changed for me. First, I watched how much radicalism there was toward the two Discovery Channel shows, Son’s of Guns and American Gun, which I liked quite a lot. Both were pulled off the air and the main male leads in both were put under scrutiny legally. Some was justified; some was due to their cable reality shows featuring guns. Another change for me was that I had grand children. When I first did the YouTube video A Whip Trick to Save America some of the negative feedback toward me was to discredit my love of traditional western arts. They called me a “hillbilly” and “trailer trash” because I wore a cowboy hat in the video. Their assertion was that anything less than New York fashion would do—but to me that fashion was heavily progressive. I love old westerns and the values they exhibited. For myself I can live among progressives and not have my position challenged, but I worry about my grandchildren. They deserve to have the kind of America I grew up with and as I look around at the possible male role-models, I’m really the only one who has held firm to those traditions. So I’m not going to let that progressive America ruin my grandchildren. It’s not going to happen, let me put it that way. Because of the negative feedback I received about my whip work during the education reform debates, I took note and decided to make some adjustments for the present crusades.

Additionally, at the time a few years ago I had a publisher and some novels that I was planning to promote in the traditional way—through New York—which is heavily anti-gun. My thoughts were that since my character of Cliffhanger used bullwhips instead of guns that it might be more acceptable to them for mass market reasons. However, it wasn’t. Cliffhanger was far too traditional for publisher heads, so it didn’t really matter. My decision since has been to just do what I feel like doing and let the chips fall where they may. I have given up on the New York and Santa Monica creative class in working with them to produce content that America is looking for—they aren’t interested, even if they make a lot of money in the effort. They are far too radicalized politically for that collaboration so I’m at a point in my life where I no longer care. Those who support the Second Amendment in America need to be proud of their position. They shouldn’t feel like they have to hide their love of guns underground—which is what has been happening. Guns should be main stream, so anything I can do to help that I’m going to. It’s just that simple. I do not support the present direction of the country. So why avoid promoting gun ownership just to appease a few publishers? To hell with them.

I know that if I felt that pressure to not flamboyantly advance the gun culture in America, then it’s probably twenty times worse for the average person, so its time to change that—and to stop apologizing. It was only a few years ago when westerns were just about all that was on television which entertained the Greatest Generation after World War II with the first programming provided to the new television format. While I’m looking forward to Tarentino’s new western The Hateful Eight I don’t have a lot of faith that it will have a lot of the traditional values shown in westerns, but will just be a bloody gun fight typical of the new age director. The production company putting out the film is hopelessly progressive, so I can only look forward to it so much—but in the realm of westerns, that’s all there is. Star Wars is a modern western replacing spaceships for horses, but the values are very similar. Other than those influences however there’s not much for the modern gun lover to get their heels into. Progressives are waiting for the old timers who were raised on westerns to die off so the modern progressive kids brainwashed against guns in public school can become the dominate voting class—and when that happens even the NRA will be overwhelmed. So the good ol’ NRA needs a little help. I plan to help them and obviously Dana Loesch is doing her part. And if we all do, we can help shape the future in the proper way. A conservative future must have at the center of it a love for the gun, because everything else emerges from it—primarily economic freedom and personal liberty.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.





The Real Reason John Boehner Left Congress: How evil hides behind institutionalism

I don’t plan to bash John Boehner into the ground forever. As much of a nice guy as I think he is, nice doesn’t mean a person is immune to criticism, especially when they hold very public government positions—yet John said something that was very insightful within his announcement speech of leaving congress ahead of some serious controversy. The cause of his effect—his desire to step down as Speaker of the House and to leave congress all together by his words is to protect the institution of his office intending to offer that the individual sacrifice themselves to the higher concept so to preserve it. In Boehner’s case, he is specifically indicating the minority of his political party who are rebel rousing constitutional purists, and are going to fight him at every step in future key issues, such as the funding of Planned Parenthood, the debt limit and the inevitable fiscal cliff that we are all facing as a nation. Boehner proposed that the institution was greater than the individual which explains immensely what is wrong with American government in 2015.

Even though Boehner and his wife just bought last year an $835,000 condo in Marco Island, Florida that in itself is not a case of alarm other than it’s a bit expensive for a guy who only makes $223,500 per year as speaker. For one, $835,000 doesn’t get you much of a condo in Florida, that’s nothing too crazy over-the-top even though socialist leaning despots have tried to make an issue of the purchase. That’s not a lot of money for the private sector—but it is for a government official who is supposed to be doing the business of the people who elected him. For Boehner to spend that kind of money on a second home in Florida indicates that he intends to become a lobbyist sooner than later where he will easily be able to make a seven-figure salary twisting the arms of his former friends for favors. Boehner is 65 years hold presently. The rules dictate that all members of congress take one year off to cool their former connections—but at precisely November 1st of 2016 at the age of 66 look for John Boehner to have an office on K-Street as a means to pay for that expensive condo in Florida and to rake in the money for about a 10 year career at that lofty sum. Boehner will become rich off the “institution” he holds in such high regard and he will have done it without really bringing any real value to the table of philosophy and republic preservation. He will have done it just to enrich himself behind a mask of “sacrifice” like every other loser who has left office and found employment as a lobbyist.

It seems like a long time ago but remember Trent Lott, the former Senate Majority Leader in 2008? Well, he and ex-Louisiana Senator John Breaux opened up a lobbying firm and took in $30.8 million dollars over a three-year period after they left office. They now work for Squire Patton Boggs who does lobbying work for Amazon. Their job was to twist the arms of people like John Boehner into doing what they needed for their clients. Boehner was often the monkey in the middle who had Trent Lott beating on his door over some issue or another—a guy who obviously helped pave the way for Boehner to emerge as an obscure Ohio congressman to the eventual leadership role of Speaker of the House by working things behind the scenes. Well when those favors are called in what’s John supposed to do, keep the door closed on Trent? Or is Boehner supposed to listen to the twenty raucous Constitutional purists who demanded that Boehner act out of integrity instead of lobbying dollars. Boehner decided that if he wanted to cash in on the “institutional” scheme of government employment then he’d better do it while he was relatively young. So he sang, zippity do da, and announced his resignation—while he still could cash in on his “sacrifice” within congress for 25 years. For him it makes sense, play golf at his new Florida condo for a year while the House drowns in squabbles that have no easy answer, and then return for Christmas of 2016 as a millionaire to close out his years and family fortune by providing access to corporate America the halls of congressional power. So much for the value of the “institution.”

But what was most sickening about Boehner’s announcement was his social proclamation about institutionalism—as if he truly believed that the House of Congress was so sacred that he needed to remove himself from the situation so to preserve it. That is just ridiculous—manically so. Boehner’s presentation of the assumption was meant to throw people off the trail of his true intentions with a long nurtured social illness that poses that institutions—collections of people brought together under the umbrella of common belief are more powerful than the individuals who formulate the beliefs that the masses collect under. The assumption is that sacrifice erases the need for individual logic so long as that individual is willing to surrender their mind to the collective whole of an institution. The media and virtually everyone watching instantly forgave Boehner for his vagina-like approach to exiting Congress at a critical time because he evoked to the public that his individual needs to avoid the coming conflict was not about himself, it was to preserve the “institution.”

When I am critical of the church and religion in general it is because it trains the masses to think in this fashion, which is one of the greatest evils offered to our modern modes of thinking. I would never propose that being an atheist was the correct approach either. I am of the thinking that the correct approach to these complicated problems has not yet been invented. There is no philosopher from the past who has provided a map to navigate by—that map still needs to be created. But putting the individual in a subservient position to institutional value is false. On the other hand, you cannot have mass anarchy either, where individuals live hedonistic lives indulging at every impulse—evil and otherwise. A code of behavior is needed to hold individuals together so that proper conduct at life can be achieved. Yet allowing an institution to define those guidelines surrenders the individual to the impulses of mass collectivism.   Not a smart idea because what it does is allow for an institution to wear a mask of holiness, whether that institution is Congress or something like the Catholic Church and allows the value of behavior to be applied to the collective efforts of the institution instead of the individual behavior of its members.

For instance, you might remember dear reader the situation of Jerry Sandusky of the Penn State football program.   Jerry was part of a group of well-known and powerful campus personalities who routinely raped children. The behavior was hidden behind the institution of Penn State—the institution was greater than the sum of the individual, so Penn State would live on while Jerry went to jail for his behavior. Yet Jerry was allowed to molest children under the cover of the institution—by using its mass and authority to give him leverage, and access to many young boys. The Catholic Church is known to have conducted themselves in the very same fashion—yet the church itself continues on as a symbol of piety even though it provides a shield to hide the individual behavior of the criminally insane. Congress does the same thing; it hides the individual behavior of its members under the greater good of institutionalism. So if Boehner decides to work the system to his benefit, then its forgiven because he has surrendered individual thought to the yearnings of institutional preservation. But in reality it has nothing to do with the institution so long as Boehner can pay for his Florida condo with the lobby power of K-Street.

Institutionalism is not superior to individual will. Society still has to figure out how to merge good behavior with a code of conduct that is rightly generated by the inner needs of every individual—but surrendering thought to institutional control is not the best option. And neither is the notion of sacrifice. You would think that after many thousands of years of sacrificial emphasis within our institutions—whether it’s sacrificing your life for a job, a family, or a god, that we would have learned to recognize the farce. When a public official like John Boehner says such a thing in a very public statement, you are listening to a ruse—likely in his case—one that he believes himself, especially as a devoted Catholic. Don’t pay attention to the individual misbehaviors of the people who make up the institution, so long as the value of the collective entity is preserved with immunity. Do you see what’s going on dear reader and why we have such a poor philosophy? It allows evil to work its desires behind collective enterprise without the worry of individual value—and this is how poor conduct spreads itself through institutions. With that known, Boehner isn’t just leaving to save himself the future embarrassments that have been headed his way as the leader of the Congressional “institution.” He’s leaving to get rich—while he still can. And that’s the real story.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Meaning of Trump Tower: Dealing with the most important aspect of the 2016 election

For me, the most significant revelation of the now famous Trump town hall meeting that caused so much controversy was not the Muslim comments which soaked up all the news, it was the announcement that the billionaire would refuse to draw a salary as President. He’s rich, he makes over $400 million per year in a salary anyway, so what does he need a few hundred thousand more dollars for? Most people in congress, the senate, or even the current president, a six figure salary is a tremendous appeal to receive as a public servant. But to a guy like Trump, such a salary is nothing—literally. This puts Trump in an entirely different category as a presidential contender. I want a person in the White House who could care less about what he gets from the office, and who has the potential to bring to the table the kind of mentality where even millions of dollars is no problem to generate. The number one problem in America right now is no other issue but the health and potential of the economy. That has to be fixed before any other issue is tackled. If people have money in their pocket, their morality becomes much more robust—and society improves dramatically. Nothing else matters more than the money coming in and going out of the United States. With that in mind, Trump is the only option and his attitude toward the salary of the office is a perfect affirmation of that assumption.

More stunning is that the media is so desperately keen to talk about everything BUT the economy. And more and more, I see Trump getting pulled into the vortex of commonality which is so represented by those who make up the collective body of the media. Arguing with Carly Fiorina over business experience when she was terminated by a board of directors simply isn’t a comparison when it comes to Trump. Like Trump or hate him for his bombastic style, nobody can take away his vast success in the real estate market. Some failed casinos in Atlantic City and a few other places do nothing to quell the massive success Trump had in building Trump Tower at a time in his life when it was quite a large gamble. With all that was against him, he managed where many, many others would have failed. Trump Tower is in fact a President Trump’s greatest resume highlight. He should force everyone to focus on that because when he gets in these petty squibs with average people, he diminishes him and is accomplishments to something equal with a Fiorina or a Rubio—an average person trying to get into an extraordinary office where a six figure salary has some meaning.

Trump has always been above the fray, and that’s where he should stay. He’s not a politician so he doesn’t need to do politician things. If he gives stump speeches, he doesn’t need to pretend to know every Arab in the world by name, or recite the Chinese alphabet. All he needs to do is be Trump and force the world to look at his marvelous tower in Midtown and comprehend that building such a thing is greater than building just about anything in the world. It’s not like Trump Tower was built by a whole bunch of people in a corporation, it was built literally by him for his own use. That is very important–one individual man was able to garner together the resources all by himself to build the tower.

Now of course Trump didn’t actually build the tower, it took teams of people from all walks of life to make it happen, but Trump was undeniably in charge. It’s an example of what he would be able to do if given all the resources of the United States at his back. The possibilities are really unlimited when it comes to him. With his energy and ability to pull people together, he really is the best option there is out there.

Of his debate performance, it should be interesting to note that he was able to turn extreme negatives around on that stage and to get rivals to high-five him with sheer magnetism. That’s not a skill that the media understands, but then again, nobody in the media could have built Trump Tower. In negotiations you always hit hard to feel out an opponent, and then once you have them, it’s OK to be nice and to build an alliance. That’s the way negotiations work. But it takes a powerful personality to come out on top of that exchange, and up to this point, Trump really hasn’t exploited that skill. He’s been trying to mold himself to the political establishment instead of playing the game his way.

Trump has a chance to redefine the whole political process, including setting a very high bar in not taking any public money for his work. What does Trump and his wife gain by living in the White House? For Barack Obama, it’s like moving into a palace. But Trump lives in Trump Tower—and it’s a lot nicer than the White House. There is nothing for Trump in Washington. All he gets out of the deal is a chance to create and build with the nation’s resources. He could build walls, roads, and revive the economy I think pretty easily whereas everyone else would struggle to do just one thing. For Trump, I think he could be president for 8 years effortlessly building the nation back into a powerhouse—and I think at the end of it he would have lots of bipartisan support.

Trump is a doer, so it’s hard for him to articulate to a bunch of know-nothings why he is so skilled. It is a case of the Metaphysics of Quality where Trump is at the front of the train and everyone else is clearly in the back, and presidential debates, even polling is taken from the back. Trump is and has always been on the cutting edge, whether its real estate, WWE wrestling, or golf courses, he built his wealth the old-fashioned way and that is precisely what America needs to solve the economic issues.

I get invited almost every day to some business seminar on how to improve investments, how to hire the right kind of people and how to increase yield and profit margins. The sad reality to those classes is that there is nothing any of those people can teach me. I could teach them, but they have nothing they can teach me. So I stopped going to them years ago. When it comes to hiring and finding the right people for a job, I’m really good at it. I can often read things about people just by the way they walk down the street, so it is easy for me to fill job openings with a raw instinct that nobody can teach in any class, anywhere. Trump has that same instinct and he knows that the secret of management is not in doing the work himself, but in putting the right people in place to do the work for him. That’s the essential core of what a President of the United States is supposed to be doing. But Trump can’t explain any of that to the media, just as I couldn’t. People who live in the back of the train don’t and will never understand—until they come up to the front.

Trump Tower is an American representation of what happens at the front of the train, when s superior manager is left in charge of their wildest imagination. When resources are plentiful there is no limit to what they can do. The Trump presidency is not something that can be summed up by a Muslim comment, or an emphasis on women’s empowerment, or even a political party. His is an opportunity to have something that nobody has ever been able to see before. He doesn’t need to get mad at Fox News or anybody else—he’s Trump and his tower is just a physical manifestation of what the power of imagination, hard work and an indomitable spirit can achieve when it’s unleashed. And really, Trump should be president just because of that one accomplishment. He’d be crazy not to more fully utilize it.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

A Muslim in the White House: The history and reason why not

If there was any doubt ever about the depth of the corruption of our federal government by forces not committed to traditional America, the Muslim issue smoking off of Donald Trump’s recent town hall meeting is all the evidence anybody needs. A person at that town hall asked a question about Obama’s Islamic faith, which was a conclusion that Obama himself has fostered with his actions—particularly with NASA and his position regarding the Middle East where he favors Palestinian and Iranian positions over those of Israel and even Egypt. Trump listened politely. He had questions about Obama’s birth certificate in the past, which still are unanswered, as the document Obama eventually provided under pressure from Trump turned out to be computer generated—as proven by Sheriff Arpaio of Arizona.

So the issue never was settled, but the national and international media was quick to accept it so that they could move on to another issue—mysteriously. They called Trump a birther and the Department of Justice sued Arpaio for his border enforcement techniques which was obvious harassment as a direct result of the birth certificate investigation. The rest of the world moved on leaving lots of questions unanswered, propelling conspiracy theories which a significant portion of the American public are now asking, the guy at Trump’s town hall being one of them.   Trump didn’t fan the flames, but he didn’t quell them either, because anybody with any reasonable mind knows something is wrong on the issue—but at this point it’s no longer relevant. The condemnation from the political right and left was truly baffling. It was the lead story for four consecutive days propelled mostly by Republicans. It was evidence of just how far off the rocker we have all fallen as a nation.

Then over the weekend, Ben Carson got into all kinds of trouble by saying that a Muslim should not be elected president, which started a firestorm of its own. Carson’s position is a logical one, the Islamic faith is producing much of the violence seen throughout the world, and America doesn’t need to accelerate that violence by putting a Muslim in the White House. Maybe someday when terrorists aren’t using the Koran to justify beheading infidels—but until there is a good century of violent free behavior, a Muslim in an American White House empowering the radicals fueling terrorism in the Middle East even more is not a good idea. This is something any rational, well-educated mind should understand—easily.

Then on every channel, more than usual was a real hatred of Donald Trump. The endearing nurturing of his candidacy was gone. No longer was he a thorn in the side of Jeb Bush and other establishment Republicans—Trump had suddenly become a threat to everything every progressive had built a public dialogue around. Without Trump’s town hall, nobody would have thought to press Ben Carson, about what he said about Muslims in the White House. Now the cat of distrust about the Islamic faith is out of the bag on a national forum, and establishment types from all walks of life in unison are flustered and acting well out of accordance of what should be American interests.

I’ve known a fair share of Muslims. They are generally peaceful. Their need to pray to Mecca each day gets irritating, but as long as it doesn’t interfere with what I want to do, I’m fine with it. It’s weird to me, but so are a lot of things. Religion should be a private thing and people are free to practice whatever they want.   But like all religions, including the Catholic one, they have elements of collectivism that is dangerous to our republic style of government. The current Pope is using global warming and other aspects of the church he heads to spread a socialist agenda he learned from his home country of Argentina. If the current Pope who is touring America right now is the representation of God on planet earth, then that God is an idiot—because the Pope is not a friend of capitalism or the American way of life. If an American president were excessively Catholic and wanted to turn over the White House to the Pope for guidance, I would have a big problem with that as well. So it’s not just the Muslim faith. It’s any radical religious type who thinks through the collectivism of the church instead of their own free—individual will. We don’t elect religious nut cases in the White House—at least we shouldn’t. We need in America self guided, philosophically sound, individuals who are capable of leadership. We don’t always get that, but we at least have attempted to strive for that objective.

Occasionally I deal with some of the mysteries of Pre-Columbian archaeology and the discrepancies that investigative science casts against a historical record as defined by religion. There has been a lot of violent history regarding religious faith from just about every denomination. While we want an American president who respects the premise of religious value which established the United States, we don’t want a leader of the free world who blindly accepts a dialogue that can be controlled by an unholy relationship between the church and politics. We need a president who asks questions and we need a media who distrusts what a president might say—to question everything even if religion offers an opinion and attempts to use the hand of God as a justification for some evil performed. When barbarians destroyed the Library of Alexandria a terrible crime was committed and there is no way to recover what was lost during that tragedy. The great novel Finnegans Wake may be all that’s left of that period of history before the Roman Empire, and Halloween all that’s left of the strange rituals of that pre-history period.   The world is covered with mysterious artifacts that don’t fit with current scientific or religious understanding. There is a lot of pre-history that existed, but there is no accounting for it. So it’s dangerous and illogical to accept anything blindly—especially Islamic faith. As I’ve pointed out before without Aristotle, there would be no Islamic faith and without Zoroastrian religion there wouldn’t be any Christian or Muslim belief as those are the foundations of both. The mystery is what came before Aristotilian philosophy and Zoroastrian faith. Given that many in the media are highly educated, they should know all this, but they don’t. Instead, they are too quick to accept blind faith and false documents. They are OK to accept whatever President Obama says—even though the evidence is quite mysterious, and the fervor over just a question speaks to the same reckless agenda type of diatribe which burned down the library I referred to in Alexandria. CLICK TO REVIEW. Now you know dear reader why I support Trump so much. As a free man he is unshackled to ask the right questions without fearing upsetting the orthodox thinking, which these days is far too concerned with putting a woman in the White House, or people of different faiths, people of different sexual orientation, and anybody but the right person for the job. That is a strange value for a collective species to have. I can understand that view-point from a fanatical group, but not the entire establishment. That should send alarms to every sane mind who hears it.

Trump said all the right things in the wake and is fully aware of the challenge he posses. But I don’t think even he understood the depths of the sinister persuasion of what he terms a “dishonest media.” The media is dishonest because they are too concerned with bending logic to fit the story of their establishment. In this case their story is that Muslims are a peaceful people not prone to radicalized behavior. Yet the truth is that it is from that specific group of religious lunatics that most terrorism stems. Even radical Christians and the worst Bible thumpers are docile compared to the terrorist groups spawned from Islamic faith and their assumption that their religion is the only one of value. For instance, on the Cartoon Network late at night on Fridays is a show called Black Jesus. Such a show would never be produced called “Black Muhammad.” There would be death threats and probably someone would lose their life in response. It is because of that reality that Ben Carson said he was uneasy with a Muslim in the White House. And that is also why a question about such radicalism was asked at a Trump event. Denouncing the question as all the pundits suggested Trump should have done does not solve the problem. Ignoring the question is not what good journalism should be doing. It should be the media asking those questions, not some dude at a Trump rally. The reason why the media isn’t is why Trump says the media is dishonest, and why Republicans are supporting outsiders for the White House. Because people know something is wrong, and often the truth is hidden behind religion and the media that doesn’t cover the real facts. Among those facts are that the religions of our day are softened versions of a long forgotten pagan past. What they share in common with those distant relatives is a desire to sacrifice life essence to undefined spiritual entities. In the Catholic Church, that sacrifice is most notable during Lent and the ritual of communion. In Islamic faith, it is too often interpreted these days with the actual taking of human life, much the way the Maya, Aztec and countless head hunter cultures have for centuries. An American president needs to be free of this desire to sacrifice our country to the wishes of the uncharted, and unseen. And that is the million dollar desire of our day and the type of provocation that only Donald Trump is free to bring forth. That’s also why his poll numbers are so high because too many people are asking questions these days that nobody else will dare answer.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.