Saturday Night Live is Terrible: Their hatred of Trump will be their undoing

Donald Trump has a point, Saturday Night Live is terrible lately because they have taken political satire and turned into activist aggression.  I’ve watched SNL for many years and I generally have liked it even when they don’t agree with me politically.  But since the election of Trump, they seem to have lost their minds.  We always knew they were left-winged radicals at SNL and the producers at NBC were socially liberal—but what they are doing to Donald Trump is attempting to weaponize their airwaves which of course will backfire.  But just look at this terrible production during their opening on January 14th–it was horrendous.  Terrible writing, terrible execution and the satirical attempt would need to be rooted somewhat in reality—but this skit doesn’t even resemble the actual press conference Donald Trump did just a few days prior.

It’s hard to understand the minds of these liberals.  Surely they know that now that they’ve revealed their true political radicalism typical fans of the show—like myself—will watch something else.  For instance, normally my wife and I watch SNL from our bed as we close out a Saturday.  But this week, because the previous shows since the election were so terrible, I recorded it and watched it during breakfast before my wife even got up on Sunday.  After that opening act I turned it off and deleted the rest of the show in favor of spending my time on something else.  I’m sure I wasn’t the only one.  And how can SNL afford to alienate half the country and still hope to produce stars for motion pictures and kings of the comedy world?  They are blowing it with this political theater.

The radical left wingers attempted to make Ronald Regan look stupid in their comedy back in the 80s and they are trying the same thing with Donald Trump, and Alec Baldwin’s mocking of Trump on SNL completely depends on painting the newly elected president as a complete idiot.  But, Trump isn’t stupid—he made a lot of money being smarter than other people and he’s wrote a lot of bestselling books based on his accomplishments—well before he was ever in politics.  Painting Trump as a stupid fool just won’t work with Trump and if the SNL people were really so smart, they’d know that.  But obviously, they don’t, and that will prove to be their doom.

I mean they called Trump’s kids Bevis and Butthead.  What did they think was going to happen?   Don and Eric are nothing like those idiots that used to be on MTV.  That kind of mean-spirted writing is a huge turnoff as entertainment because its not even satire–its just stupid.

Rich Hoffman


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


Picking Winners and Losers: Why Donald Trump is different than the political class

With Donald Trump’s capitalist antics infusing great optimism and wealth into America’s economy—particularly with the recent Tweet in favor of L.L. Bean—there are great concerns that the new administration is picking winners and losers. And those concerns are ridiculous.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with a president feeling optimistic about companies and if an endorsement by Trump gives a company millions in further revenue, that is a good and healthy thing.  For way too long our economy has been restricted by a lack of enthusiasm from the political class and even being victimized by radical anti-capitalist Democrats looking for a shakedown from those who are successful.  When America was conceived, such stupidity was impossible to calculate, so our Constitution didn’t address the role that a president might play in the role of public relations on a national level.  So pandering politicians have made it a practice to sell access to the Executive Branch from lobbyists—where donors give money to a White House dinner so that they can gain the ability to shake hands with the president and get their picture taken with them—and if they gave enough money—they might even gain their ear.

Politics has been a dirty business from the very beginning because the trend from the days of finding money to pay for an army to stand against Britain in 1776 has been to pay for access to the higher levels of office to leverage success against failure. And the system has been ridiculous—and corrupt the entire time.  The whole thing climaxed with Barack Obama who was the final straw in political theater leading to a capitalist loving Donald Trump to take over politics and change it forever.

Everyone knew from the beginning that Donald Trump was an optimistic person by nature, and he loves making money. Americans who voted for him wanted a cheerleader for capitalism who would infuse his natural optimism into the United States economy.  And that’s what we’ve found in Trump before he was sworn in as President of the United States. He is an optimistic person who has brought Ford, Chrysler, Carrier and many others back in the American dialogue and he isn’t afraid of speaking of his opinion in their favor.  And the impact has carried the Dow Jones to the doorstep of 20,000 and the flow of money back into America in ways that wasn’t even conceivable before.

When I first started this blog site—about 7 years ago now—many smart people I knew thought it appropriate to tell me that the American economy had changed forever and that I needed to get on board with those changes. Their contention was that the American economy was to become a service economy as the manufacturing jobs were gone forever.  This surprised me because I assumed these people were smart—and I would contend that there was no way for America to survive as a service economy.  So we’d argue, and in some cases wouldn’t speak to each other any more in a friendly way—even to this very day.

Meanwhile, I stuck to my manufacturing roots because I always knew that it was in making things that was the backbone of the red white and blue strips on the American Flag, so I never accepted the preaching that has gone on for the last twenty to thirty years advocating a move in America from manufacturing to a service based economy. I raised my kids against what they learned in public school and during my long levy fights in southern Ohio I went against the grain of the progressive trends—that manufacturing was out in America and all the future jobs would be some variation of the “Geek Squad” at Best Buy.

Guess, what—I turned out to be 100% correct, and that is a tremendous advantage to me personally, so I’m more than a little enjoying all this fall-out of Trump’s presidency and the return of manufacturing to America as a part of the expectation of what an economy in the United States should look like. And the great healer to all the sickness we’ve been experiencing as a nation has not been more rules from the political class—or the selling of influence on Capitol Hill by politicians to donors, it’s been the sheer optimism of one man—Donald Trump who for the first time in American politics has not shied away from the concept of making money and offered himself a cheerleader for American capitalism.  And we’re just getting started.

I understand Donald Trump and often offer my own experiences to explain him. Like him, I tend to become very expressive about things I care about—which is why I write so much.  If I didn’t have a means of writing what I think—I would probably do something like he has just to get the energy out.  When I see a movie, I like—I tell the world to go see it.  The same with a restaurant, or some place on earth that impresses me.  I’m not ashamed to have a childlike optimism about things—and Trump shares that trait with me.  When he loves something—he lets everyone know it.  But such traits are not illegal, they are aspects of charisma and leadership.  A person who naturally gains the affections of others exhibit traits that are similar—and optimism is one of them.

Part of Trump’s projected success as a president is that as a natural leader—things will just work better from the Executive Branch. In the past—people with less leadership charisma garnered success in other ways—by selling access to the office and using that access as leverage to control others.  But with Trump—he has something others don’t have themselves—optimism which exhumes from him naturally without effort.  So when he likes something, like L.L. Bean, or Carrier air conditioners because they listened to him—he lets the world know it.  And that will naturally increase enthusiasm for the products of Trump’s liking because half the country likes the president and is likely to purchase products he endorses—just as an athlete might sell shoes or drinks.  Only what makes Trump different is that his enthusiasm isn’t purchased, its sincere and to the Washington D.C. culture, they really don’t like that trend because they can’t compete with it.

The anger of the mainstream at Trump and their proposal that he is picking winners and losers as president is rooted in their lack of ability to compete with Trump. They are people who whore themselves out in exchange for something—just like a common prostitute.  But Trump is doing what he does out of authenticity—his genuine enjoyment of the world around him and that is a big difference.  The office of president was never designed for someone like Donald Trump—it was made for lessor people easily seduced by the temptations of power.  It wasn’t made for people who had more personal wealth than most everyone in Washington D.C. put together who still had the natural optimism toward life that a 7-year-old child has.  And that natural optimism has a place in America because it alone can fix much that has been broken, both by stupidity, and by accident.

It’s not picking winners and losers to support what someone thinks is good—it would be dishonest and a disservice to capitalism to say otherwise. Especially when the advocate isn’t being paid and has no interest in ever being paid for his opinions.  What we have in Donald Trump is literally something we’ve never had in the history of the world, and it is good to see for those who don’t make it a habit to whore themselves out in exchange purely for money—which is what the entire established culture in Washington D.C.—has always been about.  So they don’t know what to do—and for all of us, that is a great position to be in.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.cropped-img_0202.jpg


Lacy Clay’s Despicable Taste in Art: It’s not about race–it’s about personal values

Let me finally solve the mystery of the painting which won a contest in Democratic Representative from Missouri Lacy Clay’s district—which features angry black people inciting violence against police showing them as pigs—literally.  It has no place in the American system of debate—it isn’t representative of the American experience, and it’s just disgraceful.  So it should not be put up in any fashion on Capitol Hill.  It isn’t a work of free speech—it’s the work of hatred.  It is irresponsible for Lacy Clay to encourage the 18-year-old artist who made the painting because such a thing does nothing to heal the problems that we have in America regarding urban culture and suburban culture.  They don’t like each other for obvious reasons—and those reasons aren’t black and white skin colors—it is in that they share completely different values and philosophies—and nothing will be fixed in that realm until lawmakers understand that.

A controversial painting on Capitol Hill depicting a police officer as a pig was becoming the very definition of a political football Tuesday as Democratic and Republican lawmakers repeatedly passed it back and forth in a growing tit-for-tat.

Democratic lawmakers tried – twice – to put the painting back on display after a GOP colleague took it down Friday amid outrage from law enforcement groups.

But every time they did, it was taken down again. Most recently, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., took it down late Tuesday afternoon and brought it to the office of Democratic Rep. Lacy Clay, from whose Missouri district the picture came. Clay once again hung it up, saying he was “an expert at hanging artwork.” 

Rohrabacher called the painting an “insult to all police.”

It’s unclear whether House leadership or some other office will step in to resolve the dispute.

The personal values of the stereotypical urban dweller are deplorable—they are all too happy to live in tight quarters, are disrespectful to others, they dress terribly, speak horribly and don’t set their sights very high doing no justice to those around them by way of creating a competitive driver toward better self-fulfillment.  When a person who does work on dressing nicely, is respectful to others, and sets high goals for themselves encounters people of the opposite no matter what color their skin is or their gender—they won’t like them.  They won’t desire to eat with them.  They won’t want to park their cars in the presence of such loose characters.  And they won’t choose to give their money to people who they really don’t like. They won’t shop in their stores.  The suburbanite won’t seek to relish in the arts of the urban dweller because the two have nothing in common except their eating habits and desires to procreate.

Radical left leaning activists have for too long ignored the obvious problem—it’s not race that divides our nation—it’s the values of the low reaching not being compatible with the values of people who have value.  If an urban dweller is fine playing on broken glass in an alley, they won’t have much in common with the suburban kid who plays in a nice back yard with parental supervision who brings cold drinks to the children and a towel to wipe away the sweat.  America has to make a decision, does it want to be a great country that dreams great things—or do we want to play down to the most animalist ambitions of the human race—to mate, to steal from others, and to get through life doing only what is absolutely required?

There is a reason some of the great wonders of the world architecturally, and artistically feature excesses of ambition—it is because in the human race—to do more than is required is considered a noble endeavor.  When a person tries to do more—there is a quiet rebellion going on against lackluster effort.  It is the human proclamation to say—I am above the average—whether that work is the Eiffel Tower in Paris, the Great Wall of China, or a clean car neatly washed for a Saturday night on the town—putting forth the extra effort to be shinier than the other cars.  I can say from experience which I have a great deal of in dealing with both factions—the two groups just don’t go together.  Take a nicely polished Ferrari and park it at a meter three blocks north on Race Street in Cincinnati, Ohio and you will come because from the Aronoff to find it vandalized.  Park that same car in the parking lot of Target in West Chester and it will be as you found it even if left alone for six hours a night.  For all the vandals know, the driver of the Ferrari could be a black man or woman—but they don’t care.  They hate the car because it screams to others that it is above the average of other cars, and the urban dwellers around that car will seek to knock it from its perch—because they don’t want to look up at it.  They want to destroy it and bring it down to their low ambitions.  It is there that the core of racism today percolates.  It’s not about skin color, it’s about values.

Knowing that, the painting hung on Capitol Hill by Lacy Clay has no place in American culture because to display it and accept it is to yield to the values of the very average limits of urban ambition.  It’s not skin color that people are afraid of—it is the behavior of people who would rather destroy those working to be more than average.  Those who do try to be more than average aren’t going to chose to associate with those who think a conversation should be something like, “man, I lik to tap that shi.”  They would more appropriately say, “Would you like to go on a date, see a movie—then let’s see what happens.”  And the assumption of such an experience would be to go to a nice restaurant, see a nice movie, then end up in a clean bed.  What both parties have in common is the desire to procreate, but the differences are phenomenal and not even compatible. Their methods are just too different to have anything in common and a nation cannot build itself around two distinctly different approaches to the same objective.  That artistic painting which means so much to Lacy Clay does not belong in a country where people strive to make a few million dollars during their lifetimes to support their families with a few trips to Disney World sometime along the way before death finds them leaving it all to their family and friends.

The problem as suggested by that Capitol Hill painting against police isn’t whether there is discrimination of law enforcement against the black community, it is the cultural boundary which exists between urban dwellers against suburban occupants.  The law is a mechanism of the suburbanite—the educated, value filled people who want more than just an average life.  But that protector of private property—the cop—does not have much to do in a community of people who don’t care if their neighborhood is damaged with vandalism or drug dealers work every corner along their street.  So all they can do is attempt to uphold the values of the suburbanites who actually pay their salaries—because after all—he who has the gold rules—which is a human trait—not one of race.  People who refuse to participate in an open capitalist society will always have less gold and will be beaten by the very ambitious.  The lazy will always resent the hard-working.  And it will always be the people with gold who pay the cops—and the cops essentially exist to protect the rights and property of everyone.  But for the slug that sleeps on sidewalks, sells drugs, and has children with nine different women without a job to pay for any of them, those people will never like cops—so there is no way to reconcile with them.  America can only have one type of philosophy and if it really wants to be a great nation—it can’t celebrate art like the painting Lacy Clay supports.  Because it’s not about race—it’s all about value and a nation can’t have it both ways and maintain its sanity.  America has to choose.

Meryl Streep’s Pretentious Fat Ass: Hollywood’s tremendious disrespect for theater owners

Meryl Streep got on my last nerve during the 2017 Golden Globe award show recently when she used her speaking time after winning a lifetime achievement award to bash the Donald Trump presidency. As her mouth oozed liberal nonsense I thought of the many theater owners across the nation who are desperate for Hollywood to justify the massive investments they have spent creating venues for idiots like Streep to show their stupid movies—and I witnessed the ultimate in unappreciative audacity from the Hollywood left.

Streep tried to appear that she was reaching out to mainstream America by appealing to the diversity of the popular actors that had all been nominated for some kind of Golden Globe on that January 8th evening. But like the typical blabber mouth suburbanite who rattles off facts they’ve learned on daytime television, like game shows, talk shows like Oprah and Ellen, and the QVC network—Streep had such a terrible grasp on worldly events that I almost felt sorry for her. But, she spoke as if she were an authority on immigration and what it takes to have a successful economy, and NBC let her go on and on wasting valuable airtime bloviating about things she knows nothing about because it fit their political outlook and they assumed that the audiences at home would just put up with it.

Well, Meryl, the very economy that you know nothing about is putting the squeeze on the Hollywood industry that you represent. There is some intense competition nowadays against the Hollywood product and people really don’t want to listen to some fat assed old chick lecture Americans about diversity, fairness, and political ethics. We want to watch movies where things blow up, good guys beat bad guys, and women look good and act better. Get it Hollywood. We don’t want films about anti-gun arguments, or some sappy assed Indian floating around in a boat. We want action, adventure and intellectual stimulation—and if Hollywood can’t give it to us, we’ll get it somewhere else.

And don’t think for a moment that the world will continue to put up with an entire industry full of communist leftists. Meryl mentioned that if it wasn’t for them, (the actors) all we’d have for entertainment was football and fighting—otherwise testosterone driven activities. Let me say this to Meryl and all her Hollywood friends—other people can do their job easily. I know I could. I’m not in the business because I refuse to deal with their labor unions. I don’t want to be in the Screen Actors guild, I don’t want to be in the Writer’s Guild—I don’t want to deal with them in any way. But if they weren’t around—a guy like me could write, act, produce, and direct all the best of you into oblivion without even having to work at it. Instead, I do other things because honestly, I don’t want to deal with people like Meryl Streep as part of my occupation. It’s not worth the money that comes with it. And I’m not the only one—let me tell you that. What you do isn’t that hard.

Because of the labor unions the cost of making a movie is just too great and the major studios struggle to make a profit. Most studios don’t make it very long in the industry. Companies like Disney and Warner Bros. make the business model work because they have superhero franchises and science fiction properties that help them balance the books—but for everyone else—there’s not much appealing out there. Like who made the decision to make the movies Christmas Office Party and Why Him? Who in their right mind as a studio head thought that it was fair to the theater owners out there to give them those offerings over the Holiday Season of 2016? Those are movies that could have been made direct to video for Netflix or Amazon Prime for a fraction of the production budget. Why can’t the studios make more films like Star Wars which makes over a billion dollars at the global marketplace during their theater runs. If snotty actors like Meryl Streep didn’t hate money so much they’d understand that the Hollywood product and the theater owners out there in the world are in a marriage—they both need each other—and Hollywood hasn’t been doing their share of the heavy lifting. They make crappy movies about their goofy leftist philosophies then wonder why nobody goes to see them.

Has Meryl Streep went to a movie and paid $20 for a popcorn and one drink lately? I do it fairly regularly even though I can make the same at my home for about a $1.50.   I buy the popcorn at movie theaters to help the owners stay in business with their crazy overpriced food because not enough butts are in the seats watching the movies that Hollywood makes. For instance, when the great movie Raiders of the Lost Ark was made—the filmmakers knew they were making a popcorn movie for fans to support the entire movie business. But that was forty years ago now. Who is making movies like that now except for Lucasfilm? Who? If people want a message story—they can get that on Netflix. Who wants to go to the movies to see a political message except for a very small portion of a potential audience. I’m not saying that films that are shown at Sundance shouldn’t be made—I enjoy them even though I seldom agree with their politics. But a movie at the theater needs to be a big event and Hollywood should always endeavor to make a movie that generates the greatest revenue possible. Most of the movies Meryl Streep makes are movies that anymore should only appear on the cable network Lifetime or an online download service.

For instance, The Crown which did well at the Golden Globes is a far superior product than what the motion picture industry produced for movie theaters. I almost feel like I’m cheating to see such a great product at home on my giant 70” 4K television with popcorn fresh from the kitchen and a whole two liters of pop giving me instant refills any time I want it. And The Crown was around 10 hours of production versus 2 to 3 hours for a typical movie. You get a whole lot more consumer product of the Netflix produced show as opposed to the Hollywood product made for theater distribution. The same with the other major hit from Netflix—Stranger Things—which was a lot better than the 80s films it was meant to tip the hat to—like Poltergeist, E.T., and Goonies. Stranger Things doesn’t need a movie theater—viewers can just watch it anytime they want without the shared experience of other human beings touching their armrest or checking their cell phone in the middle of a movie in a darkened theater.

You see dear reader—the reason Meryl Streep is an idiot who abused her reputation and the entire Hollywood community with her rantings against Donald Trump is because it was all done at the expense of the theater owners of America—whom she might as well have just spit on during the Golden Globes. Guys like me won’t go see Meryl Streep movies which she doesn’t care about either. We can ignore each other and be perfectly happy in life. But, if I don’t go to the movies the theater own doesn’t make back their money for showing one of her stupid movies since there is other competition out there which offers often a far superior product. And Hollywood instead of making the kind of movies they need to make to compete with these changing markets and times—are imprisoned to drama queens like Streep who hide behind their labor unions to make more stupid movies they think are “art” only to sink more production companies who go out on a limb trying to bankroll their film projects.

So while all those idiots at the Golden Globes sat there clapping at what Meryl Streep was saying—the people who really suffer from the Hollywood industry’s lack of focus and business understanding were cringing stage right. And that is where people like Meryl don’t help Hollywood, they hurt it—like an overprotective, manipulative, fat assed mother hen who keeps the potential of a child locked away in a bedroom hoping to preserve her “work of art” from the realities of life. It’s business sweetheart—and you’re hurting it—most notably the theater owners who count on Hollywood to make something people can’t get with free internet porn and Netflix—something epic and truly something people only want to see the first time in a darkened movie theater—with strangers. Get with it—or you will destroy it all. Because the world will move on without your pretentious ass.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.cropped-img_0202.jpg

How Hillary Clinton Lost the Election: The Russians and why liberalism is a mental illness

Even though I am not a fan and could point previously to the hundreds of articles I personally wrote warning people about the Clintons—or the thousands of other people who did the same—it is astonishing that supposed “smart” people would ever have supported her at all.  What’s worse is that many people give even a blink of credit to the news story that the Russians hacked the DNC and specifically Hillary Clinton thus handing the presidency to Donald Trump.  The Russians in this story are irrelevant—Hillary lost because she was a terrible candidate and finally we had an alternative to the usual type of politician and people signed up for it.  The “Russians” had zero impact—it was all Hillary and her stupidity and arrogance leading up to the days of her loss.  And the reason the DNC is now facing extinction is because they clipped themselves to Hillary Clinton knowing full well that she had criminal problems that they would likely be exposed during the election.  It could have been the Russians or it could have been a 14-year-old boy from Iowa—the material that was exposed was produced by the stupidity of the DNC and their politicians—and nobody else. 

The same bad judgment that would provoke a nuclear power just to cover their failure explaining to donors, who spent millions on the Hillary Clinton campaign to get absolutely nothing in return, is the same stupidity that cannot look at itself in the mirror and even know who looks back—because they are broken people at the very core of their beings.  I haven’t said much since the election because I’m not the kind of person who rubs victories in the face of losers, but these people deserve it for their behavior and sheer audacity in the days since the election.

Liberalism is a mental illness—granted it can be a regional one.  People who grow up and live in places like California and New York have a tendency to think in favor of liberalism because their first thoughts were shaped by them.  As human children, it takes a long time to fully develop our brains—the entire purpose of our childhoods is to develop our brains outside of the womb so that we can think dynamically over our lifetimes.  We are one of the few species of mammal who do this.  A cow when born plops out on the floor of a barn or in the middle of a field and within moments stands up and can nurse from the mother for a short time before gaining the ability to live on its own.  Deer, dogs, cats and virtually every other creature on earth does much the same.  They live, they die, and their brains don’t develop very far along to know much different.  Humans on the other hand spend at least 18 years developing strong family bonds which last a lifetime and over that period—especially the first ten the human brain develops through mimicry and other forms of input until that person develops into a full functional adult.  This gestation occurs outside of the mother’s womb and is a summation of all that a child is exposed to.  If the child is lucky, they are born into a loving family full of interesting people—good at heart and not exploiting the weaknesses of children to sustain some ego based malfunction in their own minds—and those children grow up healthy physically and mentally.  However, if a child is unfortunately born into a family that is stupid—where the brains of the parents are undeveloped and dependent on the world around them in crippling ways, then the child will likely adapt those traits to its own detriment and a liberal is created. 

Liberalism is often regional, because the inputs which form it often come from the social conditions for which one is born.  For instance, I am a person that at the level of my very soul is a conservative—probably in an extraordinary way.  I had extremely conservative thoughts during my very first memories and this would have been the case if I had been born in Ohio or in San Francisco.   But in the case of San Francisco it would have been harder for me to develop properly surrounded by other liberals as opposed to the country setting of my youth which included a stay-at-home mom, two grandparents who lived a fairly long time who both had farms and taught me hard work my entire life and an upbringing that encouraged mental growth. My mom used to buy me books often hoping that I’d take to them and learn to like to read and further develop my brain.   The encouragement of a young mind by parental figures is the key to building a fully functioning adult and if that is the point of emphasis, likely a good healthy person will result.  But if a child is forced artificially to be too “dependent” on others growing up, or is put in a day care facility with other competing interests always pushing for attention the children are not getting at home, a mind will be stunted during that critical 18-year gestation period and a neurotic adult will result—most of the time one rooted in liberalism.  These screwed up people, usually not by a fault of their own, but creations of the world they grew up with—are the type of people who supported Hillary Clinton.  You could take any of her voters, any member of the media which supported her, any of the actors and corporate donors—and if you talk to them one on one, you will find that something went wrong deep in their childhood to give them the broken desire to support such a loser as Clinton just because she was a liberal.  It’s not just political ideology, its science—liberalism is a mental handicap in the same way that someone might unfortunately be born without hands or feet in a birth defect.  If a young child is born into a family of stupid people—they will unfortunately be handicapped for life lacking the ability to think—most of the time. 

It really isn’t complicated, if you go to a birthing center at any hospital you can tell which kids are going to grow up to be stupid based on the parents you see in the waiting room—those crippled with liberalism from birth.  Once they enter their first conscious moments the unprogrammed mind—which might have a wise soul within it finds that it’s tutors in life just don’t have much to offer it and its poor little mind will grow without anything really important imparted to it during those critical years out of the womb.  When nobody puts their arm around such children and teaches them anything of any value, those poor little things find themselves getting most everything they learn in day cares and public education institutions where radical liberals do the work parents should have—and as those people grow they become liberals.  If a child is really lucky when born into such families, a strong mentor might enter their life and give them something to formulate thoughts around.  If this happens sometime before age 18, a child might be saved.  If not—likely that child will struggle all its life with broken thoughts geared toward liberalism—as liberals are a collective based portion of our species which has lost the ability to think independently—as a fully functioning human being.  Liberals require other people to share responsibility of decision-making with them because as children they did not gain the ability to process data on their own.  This is why most children born and growing up on Iowa, or Kansas farms generally have the same healthy attitudes toward family where the poor little things that grew up to a welfare momma’ from the hood—within the inner-city culture of today’s urban dwelling—the child will grow up stunted and mostly forever stunted mentally.  There are exceptions—like Ben Carson, and a few others—but numerically, the odds are against those poor children if they have idiot parents who pass on their deficiencies to a hungry young mind. 

A mind and what you put into it is much like what you eat.  If all you eat is junk food—you will likely be fat and unhealthy.   If you however make a point to eat good food, and exercise a bit, your body will mostly be in good shape.  I mean you can’t expect to look like a supermodel if all you like to consume is chocolate bars and whisky shots.  The cells in your body will take on the form of the food consumption you place into your mouth.   What too you place into your mind whether it is from visual stimulation or interpersonal relationships will largely shape the type of person you become.  John Podesta—Hillary’s key person and the one who found all his emails hacked and exposed by Wikileaks participates in “spirt cooking” and other hooky practices because he does not trust himself or his mind to function on its own, so he relies always on outside influences to guide him through life.  If you were to pull him aside and get to know his childhood you’d likely discover his parents were idiots—in fact we do know that his father never graduated high school and that John grew up in Jefferson Park, in Chicago—a notoriously liberal part of the city.  He likely didn’t have a chance and by the time he went to college at a few places to eventually get a law degree he was already mentally formed.  The fine details we hope to give children in college are mostly useless if the foundation of their lives was rooted in liberalism from birth.  Putting John Podesta in charge of anything is like putting a physically handicapped person on a football field and wondering why they aren’t a star running back.  They just can’t compete in life when put up against someone without handicaps.  So it’s best to raise children with the fewest handicaps as possible.  If they unfortunately occur physically, certainly don’t do them in with mental handicaps rooted in liberal thought.   At least give a kid a chance by teaching them conservatism in the American traditional manner.  If you go through the Democratic Party what you find if you really get to know them are misfits destroyed intellectually during their 18-year gestation period outside the womb, and now they seek a political party to rectify their handicaps collectively—which simply doesn’t work.

This is why Hillary lost, not because of the Russians. She lost because she went up against a political candidate who was loved as a child, and taught to think independently.  Additionally, Donald Trump was the first person in American history to really be elected into such a high office without owing anybody anything—except the people who voted for him.  He doesn’t have to give cabinet positions based on financial contributions and elements like that—so he was an appealing candidate to enough people who really didn’t want another broken politician in the White House.  Instinctively Americans knew better, they had acted out of compassion and elected twice Barack Obama with all the baggage that American President brought to the table—coming from a broken home, growing up outside the United States and being crippled by radical leftists in college—and likely earlier.  Americans were done feeling sorry for people and electing them into important positions.  With Trump, they wanted someone who actually knew what they were doing, and that is why Hillary lost.  People had enough of the Obama liberalism that they switched parties when someone else came along that was personally confident and functioning as an independent mind that came from a healthy family environment—someone who was conservative not by some regional ideology, but by the nature of coming from a good and loving family.  That is the hidden truth as to why Hillary Clinton lost the election, and why Democrats are a passing political party.  They represent human beings with mental handicaps and finally Americans are seeing the light of that error—and they are not inclined to continue that practice in the future—especially now that they know better.  And that certainly isn’t the Russian’s fault.

Rich Hoffman


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


Celebrating Black Friday’s Capitalism: Fidel Castro dies while Donald Trump becomes a true “fountainhead” in The White House

I was enjoying the celebration of capitalism as news broke that Fidel Castro was dying in Cuba. It was after all Black Friday—an official holiday to celebrate American Capitalism so it was appropriate that the Cuban communist dictator died on that particular day.  With Trump now president there is finally an American president who could properly defend capitalism from all the socialists seeking to topple the capitalist system with overbearing altruism for the benefit of finishing what Castro started bedeviling seven American presidents during his lifetime.  Largely the immigration issue around the world, especially on America’s borders is the fault of poorly managed countries leaving dreamers with no place to go but into the United States to escape the oppression of communism, and Marxism.  The strategic goal of those global oriented governments was to deliberately overwhelm America’s financial power while forces within our government unnaturally restrained capitalism so that economic growth would be stunted for collapse.  Fidel Castro didn’t just command a Marxist regime just a few miles off the coast of Florida, but inspired communist revolutions all over Mexico, Central America and South America leaving to this very day a border surge for which the intention was always to topple our American republic during the early years of the 21st century.  So as one of my daughters was with me partaking in the festivities of American capitalism I turned on the radio to see what my old friend Doc Thompson was doing filling in on Glenn Beck’s national radio show which had been suffering because Beck had failed to get behind Donald Trump for president.  I was relieved to hear Doc promoting capitalism on the big show and with great enthusiasm.  For a change, it was good to hear something very optimistic about capitalism without the pretense of some dream–if only America could climb out from under the oppressive hands of the socialist Barack Obama, or the southern border menace Fidel Castro—the Marxist revolutionary which has been suppressing the lives of millions for most of a century.  Finally, capitalism was in fashion once again and this time America would be better prepared to defend it, and sell it to the rest of the world.  Truly, a new day was upon us, and it was something to be thankful for.

I know Doc Thompson is a lover of Ayn Rand’s novels, as I am, and for years we have promoted them over the radio and in any other way possible.  Donald Trump is really the first of his kind to ever enter the White House.  He has built an attractive brand around the world with an unyielding love for capitalism—and finally here was an American president who would defend our economic system from the Oval Office without being disarmed by Marxists and agents of Socialist International to apologize for our great economic success.  I will never forget the fine spring day on April 12th 2016 while I was having breakfast at the West Chester, Ohio McDonalds and reading USA Today which I had picked up at Barnes and Nobel with an actual hard copy paper which I was browsing through as the sun was coming up to its noon time apex.  It was an opinion article from the very liberal Democrat Kristen Powers on Donald Trump where the presidential frontrunner at the time admitted to being inspired by the Ayn Rand book The Fountainhead—which I thought was astonishing. A wild fantasy that evoked in me on that day erupted into excitement as I realized just how close an Ayn Rand type of President of the United States truly was to the White House.   At the time, Trump was easily going to beat Cruz and Kasich leaving him with only the flawed Hillary Clinton standing between him and success.  On that effort, my money was on Trump and that’s how it turned out of course.  But I thought it was astonishing that an America president would actually admit to loving Ayn Rand.

Kristen Powers and many others of course missed the point to Ayn Rand’s great literary classic—which I think is one of the greatest novels written of all time, and I include in that my favorites, such as Finnegan’s Wake by James Joyce and the Magic Mountain by Thomas Mann.  Before any of you Democrats or hard-core Ayn Rand Objectivists cry foul understand that European literature has always been mired by oppressive religious judgment and aristocracy—including Shakespeare.  Ayn Rand as a Russian immigrant was one of the first to look at New York’s sky scrapers and see the beauty of capitalism.  Not even F. Scott Fitzgerald was able to capture that optimism in his Great Gatsby which focused entirely on the paradox of new money versus old money.  Ayn Rand was a standout in thinking.  She truly saw for perhaps the first time in the history of the world that it was the captains of capitalism who were the moral benefactors of justice because it was from their minds that good things happened—the “fountainheads” for which everything came forth.  To be successful, they needed complete independence and unfettered belief in themselves.  Those traits terrify Democrats and progressives from all walks of life so they frequently fail to understand The Fountainhead for all its glory.  And those who do read it, and understand it somewhat so, are the first to put a lid on its message as pre-adolescent fantasies of a superhero adulthood which is unrealistic in the modern world—because we’ve all been trained with the premise that we are all “flawed” characters who must give up such audacity to function properly in the world.  The Fountainhead and its sequel of sorts, Atlas Shrugged, are truly American novels about the American experience and it has taken time to sink into our inherited European thinking—for which most of us adhere to.

During Doc Thompson’s short stay in Cincinnati on WLW radio he and I formed a friendship which essentially centered around Ayn Rand.  The Tea Party movement was reading Atlas Shrugged and enjoying the independent film version that began showing in theaters around the country.  It was those readers who essentially put Donald Trump into the White House because it paved the way for the type of thinking we wanted as a president—and Kristen Powers had confirmed it on the pages of USA Today.  It was one of the few rays of light that many of us in the Tea Party movement had during those dark days.  When Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan to be his VP many of us were excited that Ryan was an Ayn Rand fan—but he quickly distanced himself from that title afraid that the media would label him as a “radical.”  Interesting that liberals see Ayn Rand concepts as “Radical” yet Saul Alisnky is someone to be followed who actually wrote a silly little book that you can read during a lunch break called Rules for Radicals.  Even at the foundation of Marxism was a silly book that is even smaller called The Communist Manifesto.  Ayn Rand was writing these monstrous novels full of passion and challenges to a philosophical mode of thinking spanning back thousands of years, whereas Karl Marx was simply completing the work of Immanuel Kant—which our federal government through the imperfections of our education system had adopted as a security blanket from European literature.  While reading that USA Today article on Trump’s love for Ayn Rand I thought back even further to the time I lived on the campus of U.C. in Cincinnati.  I’d grab breakfast over in Clifton almost every day and read my books at a booth in the corner as literary students would come in and recite quotes from Ulysses pretending to be masters of the literary universe.  I’d ask them if they understood Finnegan’s Wake and they’d laugh proclaiming—“nobody did.”  But I did, and I say it’s an inferior work to Ayn Rand’s beautiful dedications to American capitalism and the morality which sprang forth.  I never thought I’d see it in my lifetime that a President of the United States would actually be in the White House who “identified” with Ayn Rand’s heroes.

At the start of the Trump campaign I was pretty good friends with quite a few die-hard Objectivists straight off the pages of Ayn Rand’s novels, and to them, Donald Trump was a monster who proposes to use the power of government to build roads, bridges, and a military which could then be turned back on us.  By the time I saw the USA Today article in April of 2016 we had stopped speaking to each other just as Doc Thompson and I stopped speaking, simply because Glenn Beck had not seen what I did in Donald Trump and it made it very hard to have conversations.  I turned completely away from The Blaze Radio because of Glenn Beck.  I saw an Ayn Rand character very similar to Howard Roark in Donald Trump.  Others saw Gail Wynand and they were freighted of such a man entering the most powerful office in the world.  But I had the opportunity to meet Trump a few times and I am a very good judge of character—extremely good in fact, and I see a Howard Roark type who shields himself from the prying eyes of the world by living like Gail Wynand.  His public persona is a Gail adoption, but in his heart, he’s certainly Howard Roark.  Trump has very nearly blown up several projects because they don’t conform to his innate vision.  But in some ways Trump has stepped beyond Rand, which as a 70-year-old man, I would expect.  We are observing a government led by a man who is accomplished and is truly a “fountainhead” in his own undefined way—and history will present that definition through actuality.

Doc Thompson’s broadcast on Glenn Beck’s Black Friday show was inspiring.  It’s something I’ve dreamed about for a long time and it was the old communists like Fidel Castro which prevented us from enjoying America’s economic system without guilt.  Our education institutions had also failed to teach capitalism and Ayn Rand to their students choosing instead to preach the virtues of Marxism to a bunch of drooling students who recited Ulysses during breakfasts at Clifton on the U.C. campus thinking they were masters of the literary world when in fact they were just unwashed college kids just learning to shave looking like bums hitchhiking for a ride during the drug induced 1970s.  They were taught the wrong things about most everything in life leaving those of us who knew better to be like Socrates being blamed for corrupting the youth of Greek society—with real innovation and a pre-Aristotelian concept of what a powerful Republic should be—as opposed to Plato’s pre-Kantian altruism.   I could have saved NASA a lot of money as directed by Barack Obama to study the contributions of Muslims to the sciences of the world and why they failed today to live up to those early promises—it was because Islam gave up Aristotle and embraced the self-sacrifice of Mohammed’s so-called visions.   And America had been failing in much the same fashion moving from a capitalist society that had built great sky scrapers in New York and across the United States and bent to the will of communists like Fidel Castro who represented the lazy intellectual needs of the worst of our society—who desired to be equal to the best only without doing all the hard work of a “fountainhead.”  Trump is a true fountainhead and the world will soon see that—and everyone will be a lot better off.  Howard Roark for President—yes, it actually happened.  Now a great novel never yet published will unfold before our eyes—and it will be very exciting.

Rich Hoffman


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


Great New Businesses in the Liberty Center Area: The wonders of capitalism in Butler County, Ohio

I continue to enjoy the Liberty Center shopping complex a year after it opened intensely.  It has been great for business, and wonderful for personal recreation.  Recently my wife and I saw Hacksaw Ridge at Cinebistro at Liberty Center which was fabulous.  The movie was great and it was wonderful to see Mel Gibson directing movies again.  Hollywood is a lot better off with Mel Gibson in it—unquestionably.  But the experience at Cinebistro is just fabulous and continues to be something I always look forward to.  If you are going to see a movie in the Cincinnati area—there isn’t anywhere better than at Cinebistro at Liberty Center.  Just a marvelous experience.  I enjoy it so much that I’d recommend coming from out-of-town to engage in the experience.

However, after a year and in speaking with a variety of vendors around the complex it appears that the public hasn’t quite figured out just how cool the Liberty Center experience is.  Most obvious is a few new places that opened recently, Go! Calenders, Games and Toys which is located near the food court on the second story of the internal mall area and Degs Flame Grilled Chicken which is adjacent to the food court near Dillards.  I think both places add needed diversity but the drawback is that people haven’t figured out that there is whole interior portion of the shopping complex.  A similar development up the highway in Dayton, The Greene Town Center is entirely an outside shopping experience, which most of Liberty Center is.  But unlike The Greene, the interior portion of the development offers a typical mall experience to accentuate the outdoor offerings.  So for a destination entertainment complex with dining and shopping as the primary drivers of interest—Liberty Center really offers diversity from one end to the other.

Just yesterday my daughter and I had dinner at BD’s Mongolian Grille across from the Rave Movie Theaters at The Greene Town Center and it was all very nice.  But Liberty Center is much better because the movie theater of Cinebistro is clearly superior to any other cinema chain.  Around that theater are four really good dining experiences, the Kona Grill, Cantina Laredo, The Rusty Bucket and Cooper’s Hawk—which is very classy and right next to the Cinebistro.   And honestly, I love the food at Cinebistro as a dining experience by itself so if you like dinner and a movie like I do, Liberty Center is just a dream.  But the indoor part of the complex at the other end combines a traditional mall experience to all the other dynamism.

So when visiting Liberty Center remember that there is an inside portion to the complex, and you should visit it.  The more foot traffic that moves into that part of the development the more businesses like Go! Toys will move in.  And that is a good thing which makes a great place ever better.   My personal aim for Liberty Center is for a bookstore to move in, which is a tall order given that Amazon makes brick and mortar stores difficult to operate.  But the one at The Green was doing very well on a Saturday afternoon giving needed intellectual presence which is missing at Liberty Center.  That could change if we support the little businesses with big dreams in a wonderful place called Liberty Center.

In addition, across the street from Liberty Center are several new restaurants that are quite good.  One is Freddey’s which is like a supped up Steak and Shake.  They have great food!  Great burgers and shakes.  They are in the parking lot of Cabela’s and at the entrance to the Wetherington residential area—which lucky for the kids living there have access to such a wonderful place.   It is just another development addition to an area that is booming with wonderful capitalist endeavor.  And that is always a good thing.

Rich Hoffman


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