Samurai Sword Cuts a Baseball in Half: Warnings about how gun control can destroy a country

One important thing about Japanese society is that they have maintained their connection to their samurai heritage. It shows, they treat most aspects of their life with some reverence toward that feudal period and the disciplines enacted through their history. So it came up while I was complaining to a few of them recently about their excessive necessity toward visual articulation on matters of importance that their tendency was rooted along with the disciplines connected directly to the life of a katana swordsman and the focus and concentration it takes to perform feats with it. I appreciate that discipline to a point. I spent several years studying the seemingly simple, yet philosophically detailed Japanese book on strategy called The Book of Five Rings. However, I’m an American and I have determined that the American gunfighter is much more poised as a national philosophy to release the wonders of capitalism than the sacrificial tendencies of the samurai. About that point in a recent conversation the video shown below was brought to my attention. In the video, a katana sword master cuts a baseball out of the air at 100 MPH. It looks pretty impressive but after watching it, I’m pretty sure I could do the same thing with just a little practice. I wasn’t that impressed, not as much as I am compared to the shooters in my Cowboy Fast Draw Association. Have a look for yourself.

As I pointed out to the propionates of samurai culture versus cowboy arts is that in Japan they wear flip-flop shoes and these little paper-thin robes and focus on applying everything through the sword. George Lucas has been so impressed with samurai cultures that he largely modeled the Jedi Knights after their role within Japan, including knocking away laser bolts from powerful guns. The assumption was that the samurai warriors were functioning so fast that their perception skills were superhuman. But not so much. Actually, the samurai warrior in that video stood next to the pitching machine and timed carefully the rate that the baseball was feeding through the projection unit and was able to measure the point in space and time that the target would move. So essentially the sword master only had to anticipate when the ball would travel through the space that his sword would be. Once the samurai drew his sword and placed it in the path of the ball. The momentum of the projectile carried it across the sharp blade making it appear as if the warrior cut it in half. In fact the momentum of the ball did all the work. It’s the same basic trick in the below video where a samurai warrior chops a BB out of the air. Once the sword master had the trajectory of the projectile memorized from practice and could anticipate the muzzle velocity, it’s not so difficult. I have a katana sword and I could do these tricks with a little practice right now.

That’s all fine for the Japanese. It’s nice that they have something in their culture that they value and connects their modern society with their heritage. But I’m not a big fan of all the paper walls, the thin robes, and the sandals. I prefer the heavy leather of the gunfighter, the large brimmed hats, the heavy jackets, durable pants, and the leather boots. In a fight between the gunfighter and the samurai, the gunfighter wins—100% of the time. It’s not even a contest. Those examples were given to me knowing I’m into the single action quick draw, but they really aren’t comparable. However, it did leave me thinking more about a topic that has bothered me quite a lot lately—how important guns are to American culture and why people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton want to take them away by watering down the Second Amendment.

You don’t hear much from the world in attacking the Japanese for their love of the samurai sword. Obama when traveling around Asia even wears the little paper outfits to show respect of those foreign cultures—which shouldn’t be surprising I suppose because he was raised in one of them. So he has no problem respecting the traditions of those cultures. Obama would not preach to their Emperor Akihito or the Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that the samurai sword is a weapon of death and that it should be eradicated from their folklore. However, which is kind of the frustration that originated the conversation; the Japanese heavily regulate the ownership of samurai swords. If you buy them, they need to be genuine Nihonto, made in Japan as knock-offs are greatly discouraged. The swords were banned during the Meiji period as the samurai were abolished. After World War II laws were written in a way to disarm the Japanese people as a conquered nation. So they Americanized themselves, but looked fondly back toward their samurai days—for which Obama wouldn’t even consider preaching against. What Obama and Clinton want to do in America is essentially take the United States on the same path. The progressives have attacked the American cowboy in the way that the Meiji period was ushered in to destroy the samurai with the fall of the Tokugawa ruler Edo in 1868.

Japan once they allowed the samurai to fall and collectively united the nation under one ruler disarming their common citizens then became an evil empire that was defeated by the United States. Then to eliminate the potential threat of restructuring back into a hostile state, the public was forced to have strict weapons confiscation and laws preventing their use. With American help, they thrived as a culture for a number of decades succeeding well in electronics and automobile manufacturing. They embraced capitalism for the most part and took a tiny island and turned it into a respectable economy at just over $4 trillion GDP. But they have their limits. Currently they are in a deep recession. At the conclusion of the third quarter of 2015 the Japanese economy shrank .8 percent. It’s not because Prime Minister Shinzo Abe ordered quantitative easing to jolt the economic back from the brink that is the cause, it’s likely because Japan’s unemployment is so low and there is no room to accommodate new growth to cover the debts of the past. That leaves the Japanese people looking back toward their most prosperous and structured days, before the Constitution of 1890 to their successful samurai days for pride which they apply to much of the work they perform. Only for them it has become a kind of Don Quixote story, and it shows. At least to me—cutting a baseball in half isn’t that impressive. It’s a trick, not a feat of great skill.

That is the primary reason I am moving more each day toward fighting the gun grabbers of our modern time. Obama, Hillary and their progressive infusion of maniacal anti-gun diatribes want to write a new constitution in America—one that reflects the global trend toward centralization of authority and disarming the public. Likely the goal behind the current Syrian immigration is that within those young people will be insurgents who will invoke violence within the decade that will mandate gun control in the future. Those three-year olds that Obama is talking about today will likely be like he was as a boy which is why he’s sympathetic to them. Orphans who lost their fathers to ISIS, or because they joined ISIS and were killed in an American air raid, or some other activity will be at risk of seeking revenge through jihad at some unfortunate date—then with each act of violence will be progressive activists seeking stricter gun control laws until finally the Second Amendment is abolished and progressives can get a constitution more like what Japan currently has.

That would be a mistake. They are nice people, but they are obviously disconnected from their heritage and can only touch it through daily tasks. The swords that grandparents used to keep on the walls passed from family to family are now gone and collected by a mass confiscation program started first by the Japanese government then by American occupying forces. In many ways I feel sorry for them that they think cutting a baseball in half with a samurai sword is a big deal. It’s not. America would be wise to avoid the fate of the samurai. They need to stand by their guns in the face of the gun grabbers to avoid the stalemate that Japan finds itself in, largely due to their government centralization of their micromanaged society. America really is the last place on earth that is still free, and weapons are a large reason why. When the samurai were banned, the government took control and World War II happened. And the country never really has recovered since. They have enough pride to keep trying, but they have a limit on their abilities because of their micromanaged society.

Thankfully, because of my hobbies and personal experience I can see through the haze of fascination. The sword cutting trick appeases the people of that country for their heritage by also making it look so difficult that nobody could possible achieve such a thing except for a “specialist.” But in the United States I know about two dozen people who could practice with me in an afternoon and do exactly the same thing. And that’s because we play with weapons all the time, and collect them as well. And when it comes time to solve real problems in real-time, we know how to fix things without falling for the simple tricks. We know better largely because we are an armed society and under those conditions, we are still free to think. Which is the key to all things in life—it is the Second Amendment that sits at the roots of American exceptionalism—and we better start protecting it a whole lot better than we are now. We are currently $19 trillion dollars in debt on an economy that only produces slightly over $17 trillion. The gun grabbers who have mismanaged the situation don’t want you to have guns when you realize that the only way they’ve staved off complete financial breakdowns in the United States is through quantitative easing. History tells us where all this leads and when it happens, you’ll want your guns on the wall and in your closet, because you’re going to need them. We don’t want to lose our gunfighters the way that Japan lost their samurai. Because you may never get it back again. They certainly didn’t.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Pot Users and Insects: How they are one and the same

One of the biggest problems with the way the marijuana push to legalize it within the state of Ohio was displayed clearly in the ballot language itself, shown below. The emphasis of protection from “weed” use and sales was placed on “public” places, such as public schools, churches, parks and libraries. But what were completely ignored are residences and especially home schoolers. What if a neighbor is smoking pot in their backyard in full view of a family who happens to be home schooling their children? Issue 3 and the recreational push for marijuana across the country completely ignore this issue which is probably the most devastating imposition of the proposal. Here is how the ballot languages was presented—notice that the emphasis of the entire legislation is on public protection, not private individuals.

The official ballot text was as follows:[1]

Issue 3

Grants a monopoly for the commercial production and sale of marijuana for recreational and medicinal purposes

Proposed Constitutional Amendment

Proposed by Initiative Petition

To add Section 12 of Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Ohio.

A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass.

The proposed amendment would:

Endow exclusive rights for commercial marijuana growth, cultivation, and extraction to self-designated landowners who own ten predetermined parcels of land in Butler, Clermont, Franklin, Hamilton, Licking, Lorain, Lucas, Delaware, Stark, and Summit Counties. One additional location may be allowed for in four years only if existing facilities cannot meet consumer demand.

Permit retail sale of recreational marijuana at approximately 1,100 locations statewide. Such retail establishments must have a state license that may be obtained only if the electors of the precinct where the store will be located approve the use of the location for such purpose at a local option election.

Legalize the production of marijuana-infused products, including edible products, concentrates, sprays, ointments and tinctures by marijuana product manufacturing facilities.

Allow each person, 21 years of age or older, to, grow, cultivate, use, possess, and share up to eight ounces of usable homegrown marijuana plus four flowering marijuana plants if the person holds a valid state license. Allow each person, 21 years of age or older, to purchase, possess, transport, use, and share up to 1 ounce of marijuana for recreational use. Authorize the use of medical marijuana by any person, regardless of age, who has a certification for a debilitating medical condition.

Prohibit marijuana establishments within 1,000 feet of a house of worship, public library, public or chartered elementary or secondary school, state-licensed day-care center, or public playground, however: after a certain date, a new day-care, library, etc., cannot force a preexisting marijuana establishment to relocate by opening a new location within 1,000 feet of the business.

Prohibit any local or state law, including zoning laws, from being applied to prohibit the development or operation of marijuana growth, cultivation, and extraction facilities, retail marijuana stores, and medical marijuana dispensaries unless the area is zoned exclusively residential as of January 1, 2015 or as of the date that an application for a license is first filed for a marijuana establishment.

Create a special tax rate limited to 15% on gross revenue of each marijuana growth, cultivation, and extraction facility and marijuana product manufacturing facility and a special tax rate limited to 5% on gross revenue of each retail marijuana store. Revenues from the tax go to a municipal and township government fund, a strong county fund, and the marijuana control commission fund.

Create a marijuana incubator in Cuyahoga County to promote growth and development of the marijuana industry and locate marijuana testing facilities near colleges and universities in Athens, Cuyahoga, Lorain, Mahoning, Scioto and Wood Counties, at a minimum.

Limit the ability of the legislature and local governments from regulating the manufacture, sales, distribution, and use of marijuana and marijuana products. Create a new state government agency called the marijuana control commission (with limited authority) to regulate the industry, comprised of seven Ohio residents appointed by the Governor, including a physician, a law enforcement officer, an administrative law attorney, a patient advocate, a resident experienced in owning, developing, managing and operating businesses, a resident with experience in the legal marijuana industry, and a member of the public.[5],_Issue_3_(2015)

After the measure was defeated on Election night 2015 a pot supporter wrote me on Twitter to advocate that pot was so similar to alcohol that it was an unfair prohibition. Well, I’m rather sick of that argument. It is not the same, and for the record, I don’t like to look over the fence into a neighbor’s backyard and see a bunch of drunks drinking beer and carrying on. If they stay to themselves, it’s a personal freedom issue, but if that carries over into my life, it’s something else that intrudes on me. Intoxication in all forms is disgusting and is something I don’t want children I care about to see as their young minds are building hope for their futures.

I saw two young people smoking dope in the car next to me at a traffic light just the other day, a West Chester cop sitting behind both of us watching smoke pour out of the windows. The kids probably anticipating the mood of the nation and potential of Issue 3 to pass had an arrogance about them that I’ve only seen recently. Just five years ago with a cop car behind them, those same types of kids would be stuffing that pot under their seats afraid of being caught. Now dope smoking millennials have been led to believe that marijuana is acceptable in public due to the massive amounts of money that has been spent promoting it by progressive groups. When I was a kid it was actors like Harrison Ford and Clint Eastwood who were the stars of cinema and they didn’t smoke pot on-screen. There are reports that Ford smoked it with the cast and crew of the Star Wars films, but that was kept tightly under wraps until the present time, because it used to be shameful. Now young people have Seth Rogen, Seth MacFarlane, and several others who openly advocate pot use. Kids today don’t have a chance as their role models are dead head pot scum. They don’t care about the current laws because they’ve been convinced that its equivalent to the prohibition movement of a century ago.

But pot is different; it’s a mind altering drug that stays in the fat cells of your body way too long. With alcohol, there is a natural regulator, it takes a toll on your body to consume too much—so there is a natural risk and reward element to it. If you drink too much, the next day there will be a price to pay. Marijuana steps around that issue and gives all the fun about “losing your mind” without the negative effects which provides too much of an incentive for a country to be weak-willed and lack luster. Progressives are obviously behind the pot push to change the country from a conservative one into a liberal one in the same fashion that Indians were easily conquered by getting them addicted to alcohol. The same is happening to our youth.

I’ve been to rock concerts and parties where there was a lot of pot smoked, and I have always felt the way I do about it. I never took it and I never will and I always looked down on people who did it. It’s a weak and pathetic substance that isn’t good for the human mind in any fashion. And I shouldn’t have to smell it in my back yard. Kids shouldn’t have to see it in a car at a traffic light. And I shouldn’t have to walk down the road and see a pot store next to anything. As it stands right now, I don’t see pot. It may be easy to get, but so are insects. If I want to find them, I can. But I typically don’t notice them out in the open. Drugs and insects have that in common. What pot users want is to function out in the open, and that is an insult to me and people like me.

The next step for the pot people is to try again with medical marijuana as a gateway to public acceptance. They won’t go away. They will be back just like insects are when you leave food out too long. Their parasitic nature will mandate it. What they want is for their vile behavior to be accepted—legally, and if we allow that to happen, it won’t just be arrogant kids in cars smoking weed—they’ll be in out in the open everywhere, because the stigma will have been removed. And once that happens, it’s over. You can’t get back to a time when pot heads, losers, and scum bags hid themselves form the sight of the righteous. Once pot is legal in any way, the insects of our existence will have a foothold into the world of goodness, and will seek with every effort they have to ruin our lives with their presence.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Was Bush at Fault for 9/11: Is Trump right to ask the question?

Another thing that I like about Trump is that he isn’t afraid to call out a tough issue—even if it’s controversial—such as the county’s reaction to post 9/11. There has been a lot proven that there are discrepancies in the whole event, the destruction of the World Trade Center, the allocated blame, and aftermath of the destruction—the deficit spending it created, the expansion of government with the Department of Homeland Security and many other fallacies that could have been averted if people had just done their jobs pre 9/11. When Trump said the event probably wouldn’t have happened on his watch, he’s talking about a level of management competency that only people used to positions of power understand. George W. Bush had barely won a hard election against Al Gore, was over his head with a lot of the management aspects of the job as President, and clearly wanted to right wrongs issued against his family from the first Iraq War. Judgments were clouded and decision gates not attended by the best minds—clearly. Conspiracy theories abound regarding the destruction of the World Trade Center—and subsequent buildings in the area—and those conspiracies are created by minds adding up the facts and noticing holes. So there is merit to Trump’s criticism.

But more telling is the response from brother Jeb Bush who is actually pleading big warm blanket progressive government in defense of George W. Bush. Trump is talking about competency of government; Jeb is talking about sentimentality instead of hindsight 20/20 analysis. If many of the follies of modern American patriotism could be traced back to a single event, 9/11 is it.   Hatred of George W. Bush brought us essentially the socialist Barack Obama and the tremendous debt we currently hold. It gave rise to the Tea Party movement 8 years later as a direct reaction to the mismanagement and rapid expansion of government since 9/11. It launched the second Iraq War and eventually put ISIS into power by 2014. It lowered the respect of the American brand around the world—so from Trump’s position, the criticism of 9/11 is perfectly valid. But the Bush family expects no questions to be asked about such an event because George W. Bush made America safe.

How did 9/11 make America safe, and is safety worth what we lost with the creation of the TSA, DOH, and the general overreaction of just about every government agency that was caught sleeping on that bright sunny day in September prior to open terrorist insurrection against the United States on American soil? It wasn’t the first time of course, and that point was made during a defense of the Bush family by some political pundits angry at Trump. It was mentioned that Trump’s criticism of George W. Bush is as ridiculous as assuming that FDR knew that Pearl Harbor would be bombed by the Japanese and that 9/11 would assume that Bush the younger as president allowed the World Trade Center to be bombed so that a war with Iraq could be provoked—and thus get revenge on a long time family rival. Well, that idea is not so crazy; in fact, there is likely some truth to that conspiracy about Pearl Harbor.

We know that FDR supported the clandestine activity of the AVG Flying Tigers over China against Japan leading up to World War II. He supplied outdated planes to General Claire Lee Chennault to lead the effort of defending China to keep Japan from gaining access to the natural resources of that country so to slowly choke off the military of the Rising Sun from a long sustained fight in the Pacific. All of this was unofficial of course. There are also reports that Japan in retaliation against FDR was planning to bomb Pearl Harbor and that the President knew about it. So outdated battleships were lined up in the harbor while the valuable carriers were out to sea—in safety. The conspiracy suggests that FDR knew that if the Japanese attacked it would unite the nation behind the war effort, which was inevitable anyway. So the valuable assets were removed and disposable collateral assets were put conveniently in place for the Sunday bombing run which to everyone else was a surprise.

Guess what happened next, the nation united behind the war effort, defeated the Japanese and FDR was able to usher in many of the socialist policies he had been working on, including an update to the League of Nations first proposed by President Woodrow Wilson called the United Nations. All that happened because of World War II and the obvious patriotism behind the war effort as a natural reaction of anger toward a recognized enemy uniting the country under a flag of malice. Many Constitutional liberties were trampled on as a result including the gathering up of American/Japanese citizens into prison camps for the “safety” of all Americans.

Did FDR know about the bombing of Pearl Harbor before hand? I think history indicates that he did and I also think he did what he did thinking it was good for the greatest number of people. He thought that a sacrifice was needed to unite the country and that a terrible thing he wished hadn’t happened did on December 7th 1941. But he was awfully well prepared for the speech he gave which launched America into the war.

During 9/11 a lot of very stupid people let a lot of things slide through the cracks to allow a bunch of terrorists to attack the symbol of American economic power around the world. Americans united behind the effort and Iraq was crushed into dust—government expanded, and spending against the United States GDP sent our economy into an eventual collapse culminating in a 2008 recession and the reckless antics of the years since. Do I think that George W. Bush screwed up, that he ignored reports of clandestine activity emerging from Florida—from pilots training to fly, but not to land? Yes, I don’t think he was as stupid as he looked in that event. I think that there was a political desire to unite the country behind a tragedy while evidence that needed to be destroyed was in the devastation that followed. I believe Presidents of the United States can justify a fight for the greater good by accepting collateral damage as a reality of their job—and their desensitization and lack of professional training in these kinds of philosophic matters make them easy to steer by manipulative CIA directors and power-hungry domestic insurgents all with their focus on a global prize. After all, George W. Bush was an owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team. He didn’t have to make these kinds of life and death decisions when they decided to trade a pitcher. So he was probably incompetent at that stage of his presidency to think properly on the matter. That is Trump’s complaint.

Logic and emotion are not equal in the defense of an issue. Bush defends his family name with emotion when logic shows that his brother made serious mistakes obvious in hindsight. And this is what has fueled the conspiracy theories. Did Bush and his team plan the 9/11 bombing—probably not, but did they secretly hope in the back of their minds that something would happen to unify the country behind their desired tactical goals? And when those goals were implemented, and proven failures, how do you cover the burden for the bad decision? Bush in that case tossed money at the situation to cover the embarrassment—which threw us into a massive deficit and gave Republicans Barack Obama for eight years as punishment for their incompetence. Trump has a spectacular point and it should be covered. Bush doesn’t get off the hook just because George W. Bush kept us safe for a few years. How did he keep us safe if he expanded the size of government and threw us further into debt just because he couldn’t deal with some towel headed terrorists? The answer is he didn’t, he just used money to hide the real issue, that the government failed under his watch and that is why there was a tragedy, because people didn’t do their jobs either deliberately, or by accident—but regardless, his administration was too loose and ill prepared.

Trump is right again, and nobody else will dare say it—but him. No wonder he is the Republican front-runner after everything else that has occurred.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Stop Being Afraid of Guns: Matt Clark and Rich Hoffman talk about gun free zones on WAAM radio

Matt Clark had me on his WAAM radio show in Ann Arbor, Michigan recently to discuss some of the hot stories of October 2015. There was enough to cover to last a lifetime of live radio—the stories and their frequency are exponentially increasing by the moment, and it’s a lot to keep track of. Without talk radio, it would be nearly impossible for the average person to follow everything. That’s why I’ve always been a fan of talk radio, because you can get a lot of news provided to you as other tasks are done, such as driving, changing the oil, and installing new hot water heaters. Talk radio is miraculous in its ability to cover a lot of ground quickly, and on Matt’s show, he is one of the best. Typically in a short hour, he can hit a lot of topics in a very fluid manner—and when he has me on with him—we really hit the topics in a furious fashion. That broadcast can be heard below.

Toward the end of the broadcast there were a couple of callers that Matt wanted to get on the air. I am typically sympathetic to callers because it takes a lot of guts to call into a radio show, to sit on hold for up to an hour not knowing when the host will put you on the air to millions of potential listeners.   If the callers are respectful I typically don’t interrupt them because it’s important to get their view points out on the table. A police offer took issue with my proposal that regarding gun control, my more guns are best approach was something he had a problem with. Matt and I let him talk which directed him to the real point he was trying to make—but it was near the end of the show, and we didn’t have time to expand down that line of thought. The cop of course felt that civilians were not as equipped to handle a crises situation as compared to law enforcement. As Matt and I had been talking about gun free zones needing more independently armed citizens to keep things in check, the officer wanted more police on staff to protect schools from violence.

Well, more cops won’t work because they are too expensive. There is a cost for safety and security, and if it does incur too much of a burden, there needs to be other alternatives. The solution to gun violence is not more gun control laws, or more cops patrolling the streets and schools—its more armed citizens who will do the work for free not in a reactionary way, but a proactive way. A cop in the school in Oregon would not have stopped that violence. A well armed student could have. More cops working off tax payer funds are not the answer in almost every situation. We do need the police, but more for the report that happens when violence occurs so that courts have evidence to look at. So I don’t agree with the nice guy who called into Matt’s show. From his point of view, more cops in schools make sense—because he doesn’t care how much police cost an area in increased taxes. To his mind taxes can be perpetually raised so long as safety is the focus. But that’s just stupid.

There is always a danger when tragedies occur for the timid minded to seek out more government to provide security. More cops in schools are an expansion of government. Whereas a more open gun carrying society would provoke cheaper and more direct security in a laissez-faire kind of way which big government types simply don’t understand. If progressive minded people are not tampering with the lives of other people, they don’t feel secure themselves, so my typical laissez-faire style of security is something that drives them crazy. Gun laws in America should essentially be the same as the laws that govern business and commerce. Less laws and more responsibility invoked at the point of contact driven by self-preservation.

There was a lot right that occurred during the “Wild West” period in America of which guns were such a part of the mythology of western expansion. To consider the effort it took for Americans to load up in covered wagons and head west for up to a year of travel at roughly 20 miles per day with all the dangers that such a journey provoked, and that within 100 years of that type of settlement, there were railroads, cars and airplanes invented that could connect all that open space seamlessly is quite a miracle. Forget about who the Native Americans were—whether they were caretakers of Mother Earth’s land, migrant Chinese people, left-over Viking warriors, or a lost tribe from Israel, the effort of frontiersman is one of the great stories of human innovation and tenacity ever conducted by free people. Guns evolved from muzzle loaders at the start of western expansion and ended as a pretty significant technological innovation resulting in lever-action repeaters and the Colt .45s that tamed the West into one of the freest land masses on the face of the planet. Progressives hated the Wild West because it was a period of history where laissez-faire lifestyles provoked hopes through capitalism and innovation that has never been repeated at any other time in known history. For all the barbarity of frontier life, it paved the way for a wonderful country that exploded upon the world an immense economy. Without the gun, none of that would have happened.

I am of a mind that Americans shouldn’t even have concealed carry anymore; they should make guns a part of their fashion. It should be as common to see a gun on the hip of a person as it is to see a business suit now. The American gun is a tribute to our heritage and a reminder of what a laissez-faire approach to legislation, and justice can provide a free people. As a society, we have to get away from this crap of being afraid of guns. We have to stop putting orange indicators on toy guns at Wal-Mart so not to scare some pansy police officer with a happy trigger finger willing to shoot anything that they might consider a threat. It ruins the experience for a kid of pretending that guns are real when they play with those toys. Schools need to stop trying to keep kids from playing shoot-em-up at recess by making fake guns out of their hands. Playing with guns is good for kids—they should do a lot more of it—especially boys. Avoiding guns is making our society into a bunch of wimps and it’s getting worse year by year. That’s what happens when you take advice from people like that caller into Matt’s show. More government employees and more gun laws turn our society into a much more regressive one. Aside from the obvious expensive nature of continuing to add government employees at tax payer expense, micromanaging society is an even more cost incursion that has detrimental effects on social responsibility. The 100 years where America operated as a much more laissez-faire society between the War of 1812 and the rise of the progressive era with Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 America became a global superpower. Under progressive influence, America has regressed steadily from 1912 to 2012.

2012 will be viewed as a pivotal year in American politics. Obama won a second term, Ohio’s governor Kasich lost his battle with the unions, and many of those who refused to hold their nose and vote for Mitt Romney as a Republican presidential nominee decided they had enough of politics as usual. Since 2012 the American people have started to turn more toward a desire for a laissez-faire approach to all things related to government which will increase as millenials realize that most of their educations during the first twenty years of their lives were a complete farce—they learned all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons. It is among them that they watch the big government reaction to all these failed progressive problems and are starting to consider other options. Of those options I believe we will see a new trend that guns will become more open and accepted. They should be, they are an important aspect of American culture.

As Matt and I closed out his show it was obvious that the government has well overplayed its hand in this card game called politics, and police officers have seen the last of the days where panicked parents and squishy minded voters just increased taxes and threw more bodies at every danger that presented itself. We are dealing with a whole new age in a new century, and if America is to survive, it will only do so with an overall political approach that is laissez-faire toward everything—starting with guns. Once more guns are injected into our society with more frequency, and openness–then all things related to our commerce will reflect that less restricted approach. It’s a mentality that we are missing in America that goes or comes based on how our society maintains its relationship to the gun. A laissez-faire approach to firearms is not an extreme position with equal measure against the gun grabbing liberals on the opposite side of some political spectrum. It’s not up for debate with a high low bar between positions where left and right politics meet in the middle. Guns are a part of America and there should be no apology in wanting them, carrying them, or using them. If America had that attitude presently, a lot fewer people would be dying in these mass shootings. The shootings themselves are caused by failed policies and an overly cautions society that is so afraid of guns that they can’t even allow a child to have a toy unless it’s colored in some way so not to scare other people into believing its real. Nobody should be such a bunch of wimps as to be scared of guns. Our education system has made our society that way—to our own detriment. And now its time to stop being afraid.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Teddy Roosevelt and Donald Trump: Destroying party politics for the better–or worse

Glenn Beck makes some good points in the following video regarding Trump’s position against Ford Motor Company building a plant in Mexico. Beck brings up that Ronald Reagan promoted free trade and that Trump is wrong to suggest beating Ford into submission with tariffs for taking American jobs out of the country. Beck is speaking on behalf of free market capitalism and if Mexico has the best offerings and lowest wages, then they should get the manufacturing plant. It is essentially the same argument that I made in favor of Boeing moving one of their large manufacturing facilities from Washington State to South Carolina—to a right to work region so that they can hedge against work stoppages from labor strikes every couple of years. The Mexican people have a reputation for hard work so I can’t blame Ford for wanting to avoid the dope smoking line workers they have in Detroit for the hard-working Mexicans for half the cost. There are a lot of factors at play, and under the basic premise of Beck’s argument, Ford should have the free ability to move wherever they want—because it is currently too expensive to do business in America.

Trump reminds me a lot of Teddy Roosevelt—which is dangerous, because it was basically a beef with the Republican Party that pushed Teddy to start the Progressive movement, which ended up being detrimental to global politics. Progressivism and the hatred of wealth and capitalism has made it too expensive to do business in the United States so to make it beneficial for international corporations to move their plants to destinations like Mexico and China. The policies that make business in America expensive by progressives are purposeful attacks against capitalism and wealth to redistribute those assets to countries that don’t have them. So for Beck’s premise to be correct, you’d have to remove all progressives from the federal government and start with an even playing field. That’s where Trump comes in.

In spite of the current thinking, Trump is not a big government guy, but he is a top down implementation boss. As a president he will take charge and twist arms to get what he wants, and that will likely make the Teddy Roosevelt presidency look like seven years of mediocrity. Trump will go on a war path, and from my perspective it’s the only way to put out the fires of D.C. politics. Sometimes when a raging fire is ablaze, water is not enough. The best thing to do is to cut off the fuel, but in this case the fire is propelled by stolen tax payer resources, so there is no way to stop the inferno that way. That leaves an explosion so violent that everything gets decimated putting out the fire and destroying the fuel that fans the flames at the same time. That’s what Trump brings to the table not as a Republican or a Democrat, but as a “Trumpian.” Roosevelt was not really a hard-core Republican. His great weakness was that he didn’t really understand money, and he picked on the wealthy with a populist anti-trust crusade which really formed the foundations of progressivism. As much as I liked Roosevelt as a Rough Rider and as a cowboy president, he stepped all over the Constitution with an A type personality that resonated throughout the country for an entire century. He did a lot more bad in the long run than he did good. Trump has the potential to eclipse Roosevelt’s activism. But is that really a bad thing?

If things are left the way they are now, we’ll lose everything in America. Playing nice will not get the job done. And the two-party systems are so far divided that it’s impossible to bring 50% of the country to the table to on anything. It’s just not possible. The party system is so bad that reform of any kind is just not possible. It’s as big as a stalemate as the education system is under union prevention. Nothing can happen in education to make it better because of the labor unions. And nothing can happen in national politics to make it better so long as the party machines run it under collective influence. Case in point, the collectivism that protects John Boehner from challengers in Butler County, Ohio is the central committee—in this case a lady name Judy Shelton. She essentially knocks down challengers to Boehner before there are primaries and protects his seat from any viable challenge. Recently Lindsey Graham challenged Trump to come to South Carolina where he has full control of the committee chairs in his home district and proclaimed that he’d “kick his ass.” Tough talk for a progressive moderate Republican, Lindsey trusts that his political machine can withstand his protective mechanisms from a challenge and that despite what the polls suggest, Graham could fend off any challenge, even if it comes from what he thinks is only 25% of a radical right angry mob. Boehner doesn’t worry about his seat in Butler County because Shelton and her political machine protect him from challenges.

Roosevelt knew what was against him. The party bosses didn’t want him as a prominent Republican. They tried to give him silly little roles and even tried to appease him with a vice presidential role—really just to keep a gag on his mouth. Roosevelt knew it and much of his war against the rich as an anti-trust buster was derived from his hatred for the Republican Party machine. When McKinley died in office, Roosevelt much to the horror of the Republican Party at the time went on a rampage of revenge against the party bosses and nobody ever forgot it. Roosevelt did some really good things like the Panama Canal and some really destructive things—especially along the lines of anti-trust and over the years become more and more liberal until he eventually launched the Progressive Party. That was created out of a war with his former friend, William Howard Taft finally severing his ties to Republicans for the rest of his life. Much of the evil that resulted in all that activity came out of party politics as opposed to the will of the people, or free market opinion. The system was corrupt from the very start. Roosevelt fought against it the way he thought was best. The Constitution was the biggest victim of his presidency which was overlooked because much of what Roosevelt did had lasting, and meaningful impacts on the world in a very good way. That doesn’t make what he did right, but much of what he did do was good. That would have never happened without someone like Roosevelt who would break all the rules which inadvertently propelled society forward.

Trump is of the same type of mind, only he does understand money. He knows that the first thing he needs to do with Ford and other companies thinking of leaving America for some NAFTA refuge saving massive amounts of money from The Department of Labor lawsuits, and ridiculous wage expectations from a society that demands a minimum wage of $15 dollars an hour, is to re-make the American brand into something that has value again. By making citizenship a valued option and making the American flag mean something on products shipped to other countries representing respect, Trump is looking to create a brand similar to what he’s done with his own name, and that would benefit every single human being on earth indirectly.   That danger is that Trump wouldn’t know when to stop once he gets going, and America could end up with another dictator on its hands.

However, I believe Trump is smarter than Teddy Roosevelt. I’ve read his books, grown up with him and feel I know the guy pretty well. He does a lot of things in his life that I wouldn’t do. But he doesn’t believe in drugs or alcohol, sets high standards for his family, and is a generally good person. He’s an authentically strong person whereas Teddy Roosevelt because of illnesses he had when he was younger always felt he had to overcome his personal demons. I don’t think Trump actually has any demons. So could he be trusted as a strong manager of American resources to blow up party politics for the next century, for the good of everyone? I think so. We live in a very screwed up world and it will take someone like a Donald Trump to get things in order again with mass destruction of party politics on both sides.

Glenn Beck has lost his audience to Donald Trump essentially. The same people who went to Beck’s 8/28 rally in Washington during 2010 are those who are now supporting Trump because they wanted to see a fighter. Beck was selling himself as a fighter at the time, and people loved him for it. But then he showed up on stage with a bullet proof vest and starting spouting off about God, he lost those fighters slowly over the next few years. And if you really peel back the layers of what Beck is saying about Trump, you’ll find a Glenn Beck who really still wishes he was like the old Glenn Beck. But now that he’s told the world he’s a better man now than he was back then—he can’t very well backtrack. People see what the problems are and they inheritably know that nothing will happen so long as there are party machines controlling politics. It’s as bad on the right as it is on the left. Trump is offering a way to break that system down. The downside to Trump would be more of the same—an arrogant president who thinks he’s an emperor. We had that with Teddy Roosevelt and we certainly have that in Barack Obama. But if Trump is actually smarter than Roosevelt he may just be successful both as an economically activist president who can pull the country back from the brink and establish once again a republic that is Constitutional in its nature. But that’s a long view plan. On the other hand Trump may become a ruthless dictator who declares himself emperor. That is a risk that if left unchecked, Teddy Roosevelt may have done. But the real trouble is with party politics. If left as it is now, it is destroying America anyway. I see nothing wrong with blowing up the whole system for a fresh start. Just as under the present conditions I see nothing wrong with closing the American borders and giving strong financial incentives to keep American companies within those borders—so that the brand of America can be rebuilt. Without those companies, there isn’t anything to rebuild and the intentions of progressives to destroy the economic engine of free enterprise will be re-distributed to a far away lands. So we will have to fight to keep them here, first with force, then with incentive—but the political mechanisms are already in motion and cannot be stopped—expect with a major explosion that levels everything in the political field. It is of course the last resort for our times.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Throwing Off the Cloak of a Coward: French collectivism, Islamic radicalism, European socialism–still American heroes emerge

For some bizarre reason French President Hollende called President Obama to think him for the heroics of the three American passengers on a high-speed train in Belgium who stopped a knuckle-dragging Islamic radical from committing terrorism.  At the first sign of trouble French employees on the train locked that particular car to isolate the terrorist essentially imprisoning all the people in that part of the train.  Alek Skarlatos and Spencer Stone took immediate action to subdue the slug and their childhood friend Anthony Sadler helped beat the terrorist into unconsciousness.  That type of bravado is common in people born free in a society that advocates that kind of behavior.  Stone additionally had military training in the Air Force whereas Skarlatos was from the National Guard.  But their heroics was home-grown in spite of President Obama’s attempts over the years to turn America more into France with collectivist endeavor and passive approaches to danger.

Obama if he had things his way would have done as the French employees did, and that would have been to sacrifice the members of that particular train car so to save the rest of the passengers—which is a collectivist mentality.  Hollende is an open socialist who somehow believed that Obama had something to do with the heroics by some American policy, just as he spoke on behalf of all France for thanking the three American heroes from saving their progressive country from their own failed policies.  Europe is breeding these terrorist idiots because of their lack of a philosophy that is centered on individuality.  A collective based society, which France is, is not far off ideologically from the collectivism of radical Islam, so these young religious fanatics like this terrorist on the train can feed off society’s passivity.  In this case it was 26 year-old Ayoub El-Khazzani from Morocco who had been on a French intelligence watch list since February of 2014.  Somebody obviously missed the fact that the Islamic terrorist had bought a ticket for the high-speed train complete with bags of weapons.  Not a very effective watch list.  El-Khazzani had been radicalized in the southern Spanish city of Algecians at a mosque which had been under surveillance due to its extremist teachings.

Obviously there were a lot of fails, El-Khazzani slipped through security, the French employees on the train behaved like a bunch of wimps leaving a couple of American guys trying to have a good time in Europe to quell all the failures with their bravado.  The heroic actions are something to feel good about for all Americans—but I would remind everyone that it’s also expected.  That’s not to take anything away from what they did, it’s just that America shouldn’t be the only culture on earth with some testicular fortitude left in its up and coming heroes.  This kind of thing should be a lot more common—specifically, somebody should have kicked the snot out of Ayoub El-Khazzani way back in Spain well before he ever got on a train in Amsterdam.

Collectivism in every aspect breeds the kind of cowardly behavior that made Ayoub El-Khazzani possible and put him on a train to inflict danger to innocent people.  France, and essentially all of Europe functions under that same brand of collectivism as a culture believing that the needs of the few must be sacrificed for the benefit of the many.  That’s why French employees isolated that train car—to protect the rest of the train.  Such people make easy targets which empowers radicals seeking to impose their version of collectivism on the masses.  Lucky for the French in this case, there were Americans nearby to stop the furtherance of such terror.

This brings us back around to why the socialist President Hollende would even call Obama.  I can understand him thanking the guys who stopped the terrorist attack.  But why would he even think to call Obama—as if the American president had done anything to contribute to the endeavor.  That is an insult to the heroics of the young men.  Rather, they behaved heroically in spite of Obama’s efforts in creating a socialist utopia hell-bent on extreme leftist political positions.  Those young men went to American schools which teach socialism these days, but thankfully they had a love for American film and had in their minds a little heroics put there by an art that still relishes individualism.  I saw a picture of one of the boys with their mom which featured Clint Eastwood from the Fist Full of Dollars films.  Probably not a coincidence.

It is good to see the young men so happy after they discovered that they wouldn’t die from their heroics.  I’m sure Spencer Stone would not trade his nearly severed thumb right now for a comfortable night in a Paris hotel, and without question Alek Skarlatos is proud of the blood on his shirt and may never wash it again just so he can remember it.  This is something that President Hollende and Obama do not understand about this terrorist attack.  Sure the young men saved lives, yes the terrorist son-of-a-bitch nearly shot Stone and luckily the gun was jammed.  But those young men are happy to have proven themselves under duress and that is something they will live with for the rest of their lives—and it will carry them all to lofty highest for which no amount of money can ever provide.  The injuries Stone endured he will tell this story proudly each time he gets the opportunity. Most young men would trade these three, even with the possibility of death, for a chance to feel what they are feeling right now—and that is a foreign concept to Hollende—obviously.  Those guys didn’t attack that terrorist thug for any other reason than raw heroics—the need to do what was right.  They didn’t do it to save France from the embarrassment of another terrorist attack by Islamic radicals.  They did it because it felt good to act heroically rather than cower like a chicken in a seat trapped by French employees to seal their fate awaiting an afterlife—totally at the mercy of a 26-year-old Moroccan who wanted to kill innocents in the name of Allah.   Being a hero is the best feeling in the world.  It’s worth doing even if death is the result—because no young man wants to be condemned to a lifetime of suffering knowing they were too wimpy to face down danger when it presented itself.

I’m proud of those boys, but they didn’t do it for me, America, or France.  They did the right thing because it felt good to do.  All it took was for Alek Skarlatos to tell his friend to get the terrorist, and those guys in that moment got the monkey off their back which plagues all young men—the nagging question of whether or not under a dangerous situation they would have the courage to act heroically.  And thanks to a radical Islamic terrorist, those American heroes can now carry with them a badge of honor that will last a lifetime.  And they deserve to be proud of it.  Because in American culture we still have as a standard that an individual life lived under the cloak of a coward is far worse than death.  And young men, and old in America because of their focus on individuality—still know that when such an opportunity presents itself—you do what you have to in order to remove that cloak from personal identification forever.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Butler County’s Judy Shelton and her Contributions Toward Donald Trump: Meet ‘The Viewers’–keys to expanding the Republican Party base

Many times I have pointed out the burgeoning issue of how weak establishment Republicans are. They are holding the party down creating an insurrection within the GOP that has directly led to the present circumstances. Here in Butler County, Ohio, considered by many to be one of the strongest bastions of Republicanism in the country, I have been extremely displeased with the GOP. Judy Shelton and her kind on the Central Committee have purposely attempted to push Tea Party elements out while dragging donors to the political middle of the debate—away from capitalism more toward socialism. So long as area Republicans receive their invite to the socialite Patti Alderson’s latest charity event, most have been willing to play along—except for 25-30% of the party. For them, they get left behind, and people like Judy will declare publicly, that it was her goal all along. Those dissidents can either go along to get along—or they won’t have a seat at the table. What those short-sighted thinkers have always missed is not that they needed to move to the political left to cater to voters—the Bernie Sanders socialists—but to pick up voters in that 25-30% range who often just refuse to vote for Republican losers. Case in point is the two women below who emphatically are showing their support for Donald Trump. These are voter demographics that are untapped by current Republican strategies.

After the GOP Debate on Fox News and the fallout thereafter toward Donald Trump by establishment types, mystification engulfed the party in a similar way that has been evident in Butler County by Shelton and Alderson. Pundits loyal to Republicans just don’t understand what all the hype toward Trump is. Even Glenn Beck—who just recently attacked Grover Norquist and declared that he was done with the Republican Party has been extremely critical of Trump. Apparently Beck wants a Jesus Christ type figure who will soft talk the nation from the brink—which is about as realistic as hoping that Peter Pan will teach us all to fly. There is no basis in reality for such a hope. It makes a fine fantasy, but is not very practical in the realm of strategy.

I am certainly part of that 25-30% who will vote against Republicans if they are not conservative enough. As Beck has pointed out before, during the American Revolution, less than 30% of the population advocated in favor of the elements of the War of Independence. Yet America earned its way on the backs of that minority, and the same holds true today. The masses do not know the best answers. It usually comes from the minority—the clear thinking, and passionate. Republicans do not need so much a big tent pandered to every special interest group—blacks, women, Hispanics, gays, etc., it needs to reach within those groups those 30% who just want to win. Clearly by the evidence of the two Trump advocates in the above video, there are two demographics present that are very passionate about Donald Trump. Republicans could have those voters if only they’d embrace the possibility of being a winner.

This should be easy. What happens to the local NFL team when they have several seasons of losing efforts? That team usually has a hard time selling-out tickets—because people in America have a hard time supporting losing efforts. They will be loyal to a certain point, but clearly want to see a winner on the football field. The moment that an NFL team turns it all around and becomes a winner again, fans go crazy. Fans will do just about anything to be near a winner—and they will spend their money emphatically on winning efforts. When an NFL team is winning, ticket sales are up, beer and hotdogs concessions are through the roof, and memorabilia jumps off the racks in retail outlets. Winning is very good for an NFL team’s achievement of financial success.

Republicans have not been winners. They make promises but are weak to follow through. They have a reputation of being like Yosemite Sam in the old Bugs Bunny cartoons continually outmaneuvered by a Democratic rascally rabbit. They have been made fools of since the days of Ronald Reagan, and they wonder why they don’t have more supporters. You have to win something to maintain enthusiasm in the Party. Elections aren’t enough. Currently Republicans have the House and Senate and what have they done with it? Nothing. Republican leaders on Capital Hill are still being outmaneuvered by Barack Obama—and that doesn’t sit well with the elements of the Republican Party who want to support a winner.

Judy Shelton in my home town has manipulated the Central Committee with manipulation by busing in voters for hard votes and worked against that hard-line 30% with open harassment and extortion to protect John Boehner from internal challenges within the GOP. That is as stupid as telling a football player on an NFL team that their job is secure, all they have to do is show up on Sunday and collect a pay check, win, lose or draw. That is not how things work in reality. Performance is expected, and the Republicans for two decades have done little else but talk.

Donald Trump may be a lot of things. He may be all over the map politically. He may have liberal views and some Alex Jones level conspiracy beliefs. As I’ve said, he’s not a conservative in the way that I am, that is for sure. But—who is? I like Carly Fiorina, I like Ted Cruz, I like Scott Walker. I’d vote for Ben Carson in less than a second, as he best represents my own political philosophy. I love that guy. But in this aggressive global environment with all the political theater going on, who of that bunch has a chance of withstanding the onslaught of harassment so evident throughout the world encapsulated by Socialist International. Bernie Sanders is filling stadiums and pushing for open socialism. Who among the Republicans can take that on but an unapologetic capitalist who is driven by a self-centered desire for narcissism? Narcissism and vanity are considered faults by the Republican Party, particularly local apologists like Judy Shelton. But winners tend to embody some elements of narcissism—because it is that which often propels them toward perfection—or at least an attempt to be better day after day.

Republicans like Judy Shelton work so hard behind the scenes with the assumption that the Party is bigger than the individual, which actually goes against the premise of conservative values. No wonder there are splinter groups erupting behind the establishment—she should have known better. Instead of acknowledging that trend, she has fought against it doubling down within the party ranks and insisting on unyielding support of John Boehner who has done nothing in his time as Speaker of the House but lose to Obama. It’s an insane premise that could only be constructed by establishment politicians who are way too comfortable with their social role within that system. Because of people like Shelton, and there are many like her all across America, particularly within the Beltway, voters often just stay at home unwilling to cast a vote for a loser—whether they are Republicans or Democrats (socialists). CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW and clarification. Judy Shelton’s support for Boehner with a track record of failure, and also of John Kasich who has turned toward big government and declared that St. Peter will welcome good Republicans in heaven because they have pandered to the poor as a party will not win anything but elections in the future. Republicans are do nothing losers who have been beaten in policy by Democrats over and over again, and are defeated people—politically.

Americans love winners and they will support a winner even if the circumstances around the victor are shady. Of course a clean winner is always best, but look at the apologists for Tom Brady. Nobody wants to believe he or the Patriots cheated their way to so many Superbowl victories because people love a winner—however they win. Nobody wants to wait until they die to have victory—which is the public policy essentially of John Kasich. People want a winner now or sooner, especially Americans. So it should not be a mystery to the political pundits that Trump is doing so well even with all the usual tricks used to knock him off his pedestal. He’s a winner and people are willing to overlook his faults because of it. What Republicans would discover if they stopped listening to loyalists like Judy Shelton from Butler County, Ohio is that new voters, perhaps even some from the other side would vote for Trump as a Republican just because he has a reputation as a winner. New demographics would be created in the wake of such a move, many of them very passionate about their representative, such as the two women above. Nobody is doing videos like that for John Boehner, or John Kasich. Judy Shelton is only able to keep support for those two by twisting people’s arms behind their backs and busing in degenerates with the promise of a free meal during Central Committee meetings. For those who accuse Trump of smoke and mirrors tapped off with dishonest diatribes against the establishment, it is the suspicion that worse is occurring behind the scenes, and they’d be correct. Those 25-30% of Republican voters have not been passionate about the Republican Party for years. They are passionate now, because they sense a winner in Trump, and they want to see victory for a change—not just in elections won, but in action taken day-to-day. Trump represents victory and for a large percentage of the Republican voter base, a sleeping giant is erupting that people like Judy Shelton didn’t even know about. Because those Republicans want victory more than a free meal to buy their vote in Butler County.

Rich Hoffman  CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.