Second Call Defense: George Lang, and Sean Maloney on Matt Clark’s show as I perform to applause

About the same time that I was competing in the Speed Switch contest with my bullwhip at the Annie Oakley Festival in Darke County, Ohio, several of my friends were gathered together on Matt Clark’s WAAM radio broadcast to discuss Second Call Defense. Yes, I did win. It’s a hard contest for whip artists because it requires dexterity with both hands. You have to be able to hit an equal number of targets with both hands, and most whip artists are proficient with only one. So I usually do very well with that one. But I was thinking of Matt and his two guests George Lang and Sean Maloney of Second Call Defense as I was hitting my targets. I am pretty busy these days and can’t be everywhere at once. But I’m a pretty good manager of people and resources, so I can get a lot done with a lot of plates spinning in the air. Second Call Defense, the Annie Oakley event, Matt’s radio show and all my other hobbies, projects and interests are all part of my personal exercise of cracking whips against targets in a very precise way. For me the situation is a two-fold strategic advancement—both involving promotion of the Second Amendment. Where I was people openly wore guns on their hips that were real and nobody thought a thing about the theater shooting in Louisiana where calls for more gun control broke out after a maniac shot several people for no good reason. The people I spent my weekend with were nowhere near willing to give up their guns. It was a dramatic impossibility quite evident, which I always find refreshing. Meanwhile the solution to the Louisiana shooting was to make that theater a gun zone, instead of an area where people couldn’t be armed. And for people who do carry and find themselves in a shooting, they need to call my friends at Second Call Defense. Listen to the radio broadcast with Matt Clark, George Lang and Sean Maloney here:

The key point of the discussion was over the George Zimmerman issue. Second Call Defense could have prevented the national embarrassment that the case became, and they explained why in the audio clip, which is extremely important. At my Annie Oakley event I may have been in the safest place on planet earth, and I was surrounded by more guns than some countries have in their entire arsenal. Nobody was going to pose a danger to anybody while I was cracking bullwhips in my competition. Even our announcer at the event, Gery Deer was packing a six-gun, and nobody batted an eye. Meanwhile, a gun carrier could have shot John Houser as he began shooting 11 people. If someone else in the theater could have shot back, the incident would have been a lot less bloody.

Yet the impediment to corrective action regarding the Louisiana shooting and all the others over the last few years has been a desire to use tragedy to create more gun legislation instead of the correct effort at putting more guns into the hands of the competent. In the case of Zimmerman who did shoot someone it was decided upon first inspection of the case that he did what he was supposed to do, police are not always the friends of the property owner. As stated by Sean in the audio with Matt Clark, once you fire a gun, you and your property become a crime scene and you lose your rights until you prove yourself innocent. That is not how it should be, but that’s how it is. If you pick up the phone and speak with adrenaline behind your voice, what you say can and will be held against you, even under the best of intentions. Police work for politicians, and politicians are very vulnerable to political pressure. And that’s what happened in the Zimmerman case. It became political and soon there was a desire to sacrifice Zimmerman to the wolves of racism. The whole case would have been wrapped up in a grand jury shortly after the shooting if George Zimmerman had only called Second Call Defense right after he shot Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman went several weeks without legal protection, and he gave a lot of statements thinking that he was innocent because the police initially didn’t want to file charges under the stand your ground law. But politics demanded a sacrifice and thus George Zimmerman’s life changed forever.

There are bad guys out there and they are the goons, the punks and the creeps who stand against the American Constitution. That is the best way to frame good and evil in reference to our present society. Trayvon Martin was in a place he shouldn’t have been and he acted in a hostile way when approached by someone checking him out. Private property is to be defended by the Second Amendment. The world is not owned by collective villages and communist sympathizers created by the music industry—it is owned by private investment. Gated communities are meant to keep out undesirables who don’t respect hard work and effort. It can be argued that not everyone is worthy of privilege, and that some are born into circumstances where they have a disadvantage, but in America if you want something, you can have it. And those who do have it deserve to protect it from those who might deface, or take it. Sometimes the unfortunate situation occurs where someone attempts to impose themselves on your private property, or even your life and you have to defend yourself. That’s when you’ll need Second Call Defense. It’s as American as Apple Pie.

That of course stands in stark contrast to the direction of progressive society. But that’s OK, they’re wrong in their position—clearly. They cause far more damage to people than they help with all their rules. The correct path is the one that I know well from my cowboy friends who seek to preserve the lessons learned during westward expansion. The gun in American culture is probably more important than the sword is in Japanese society. The gun made America great and I think every human being should wear one on their hip, just as they were able to in the early days of the Gold Rush. Wear them on the golf course, wear them to dinner, wear them to the shopping mall. Sell little fringe stocking accessories for guns at Victoria’s Secret for the ladies—in other words embrace more fully the gun in American culture and stop listening to these idiotic progressives. Two well armed people sitting next to John Houser in Lafayette could have put him down in about 1.2 seconds and the situation would have been over. Help could have been on the way for the first victims and a lot of trouble would have been prevented.

At 1:35 PM on Saturday July 25, 2015 I was finishing up my round of the Speed Switch contest to an applause that I never get tired of hearing. I enjoy the hot sun, the smell of popcorn and hot dogs and the sight of cotton candy in the stands held by children watching us perform. I like seeing little kids wonder how I am able to move so fast. Every year I attend that Annie Oakley event as a spectator and competitor, it renews my resolve into not just protecting the American Constitution, but in defending the Anti Federalist Papers which challenged it during the Constitutional Convention. Yes I know the young guys are gunning for me who compete with me, and they hope that I won’t show so they can win, but it’s my job to push them along—to make them want to get better. And we all get along well in the end and have a good time. I don’t always win everything. Some of the young guys are getting pretty good—and that makes me happy. But it was about that time that my friend George Lang came on WAAM with my other friend Matt Clark and as the applause abated I wondered how the show was going in Ann Arbor, Michigan. It was to me an important strategic moment as it gave even more radio coverage to something I think every American should have—Second Call Defense.

I appreciated the call out from George and Sean at the end of the broadcast. Southwestern Ohio is Overmanwarrior country, and they know what that means. A lot more people use Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom to guide them through these tough times than people would care to admit, including many very serious national personalities. My role in all that is in shaping a philosophy that is needed for a new century of American greatness—complete with magnificent innovation. There are many very important people across the nation who read every day, and I am happy to help them sort through some of these difficult tasks. Matt and George are part of that offense, and they know what to do. But for me, I get my energy in the heart of America, in places like the Annie Oakley Festival where guns are as common as stars in a clear night sky.

There was a family that I watched shoot all that day from the Single Action Shooting Society—a husband and wife team with their two teenage boys. They competed hard all day long and were really into their work. I admired their effort, and determination. At the end of the event they all walked around the other exhibits holding hands and openly showing that they loved each other. They were good people; some might say “God fearing people.” I would just say they were people of good quality. They walked with a sureness that came from knowing where they stood in the universe. And on all their hips was a fine six-shooter .45. They were unafraid because they where all highly skilled in the art of shooting, and knew they could handle anything that came their way. If they had been in the Lafayette theater it is unlikely that John Houser could have gotten off a shot once he showed himself as a threat. The father of the family was getting routine times of about .380 of a second in his draw times. Houser wouldn’t have made it past a second shot if that guy had been sitting in that theater packed with his guns. That is the solution to gun violence. And for those who use guns to defend the American Constitution, they must have Second Call Defense to protect themselves from the parasites of progressive society who don’t even know who Annie Oakley was, or where Darke County, Ohio is in the world, and why it’s so important.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Trump and Scott Walker: Dealing with bullies, and then some

Yet again Donald Trump shows why he is gaining support. I certainly support the way he conducted himself in regard to the Scott Walker campaign and the Des Moines Register leaving Amalia Nash to issue a statement after being banned from a Trump event, “We are disappointed that Mr. Trump’s campaign has taken the unusual step of excluding Register reporters from covering his campaign event in Iowa on Saturday because he was displeased with our editorial. As we previously said, the editorial has no bearing on our news coverage. We work hard to provide Iowans with coverage of all the candidates when they spend time in Iowa, and this is obviously impeding our ability to do so. We hope Mr. Trump’s campaign will revisit its decision instead of making punitive decisions because we wrote something critical of him.” That something that they wrote was that he was “a feckless blowhard who can generate headlines, name recognition and polling numbers not by provoking thought, but by provoking outrage.” Ahhhh, did the Register get its little feelings hurt? And again from one of Scott Walker’s top supporters who called Trump a “dumb, dumb” in an email—what were they thinking?

What the press is trying to invoke is that silly little game that is taught in all public schools, the peer pressure application of majority rule. The press and these other campaigns can’t fight Trump toe to toe, so they are seeking to build consensus against him with name calling and other insults hoping to paint him a certain way to slow his momentum. This is because their methods of advancement are not built around aggressive offense, but manipulative defense. The Register wants to be able to editorialize with immunity Trump’s campaign, but they don’t want to get an editorial about their behavior back. And Walker’s supporters want their man to stay in front, so they think some peer pressure insult will preserve that. We live in a world that does not expect conflict these days allowing for passive aggressive types to rule in their usual manner—through non confrontation feeding their manipulation abilities. In this way 5’ 5” runts can take down a 6’ 3” billionaire who is obviously more gifted in verbal insults and financial backing—not to mention physical presence. That is the spirit behind their insults. They don’t want peace, or a good campaign ran cleanly by all candidates. They just want to shoot without being shot back.

But Trump engages everyone he can. I’m sure he can’t get to every insult, but he gets to as many as he can, which is refreshing to see from someone who is running for a political seat. We have had to endure many years now of President Obama’s skinny little ass manipulating his way into power unchecked, largely because nobody punched him in the nose directly for the insults he casts out like water over Niagara Falls. That silly behavior goes back to all our school days where if a bunch of kids make fun of you, the implied assumption is that it is your burden to change the behavior to avoid the insult.   But that’s not the right thing to do. When someone challenges you, you have to meet that challenge with either equal force, or greater force. My policy of course is greater force. It works very effectively. When someone takes a shot at me I go well out of my way to make their life a living nightmare. If they do it with passive aggressive implementation, I’ll give it back to them 20 times over. If they do it with force, I’ll match it or surpass it. But I typically answer every insult eventually. Sometimes it’s good to play a waiting game with those challengers, to let them think you’ve forgotten and that they’re off the hook. But that’s part of the game in winning. Sometimes it takes me ten years or more to collect on a debt, but collect I always do—with interest. It’s a policy I’ve lived by all of my life. I don’t go out of my way to make trouble. I live and let live until someone takes a shot. Then the cannons turn toward that target and I’ll hunt them down until I get them and then some. 100% of the time. I’m 47 and have always been like that, and it’s not going to change now. Trump I’m happy to say is precisely the same way, and I LOVE IT!

I understand what he meant regarding Walker when Trump said “Finally I can attack,” now that the rival presidential candidate has openly made a move against him. It’s hard sometimes to know who is doing what. In the passive aggressive world that we live in it’s hard to know friend from foe, so I usually do a lot of checking before making a commitment to hunt someone down. I give them the benefit of the doubt because I know it will be hell for them, and I don’t want to do it unjustly. Walker is a good presidential candidate under regular circumstances and he did a good job in Wisconsin under hard conditions. But now that I know more about his wife, I’ll never vote for him. She’s not the kind of woman I want to see as first lady—that’s for sure. But Walker as Trump said is a fighter so that makes him worthy of consideration, and some respect. That respect can make one pause when a punch in the mouth is needed. So now that the Walker camp has been caught as not being such a nice presidential candidate, Trump can now look beyond that initial respect and unleash his fury on the Wisconsin governor. It’s a very liberating feeling to know who your enemies are, because it gives a clean target to go after.

But in this passive aggressive world that we’re living in, that’s not how people do things. So they are a little shocked when they get it back when they give it. I learned this method in public school and took those lessons into my adult life. As a kid I resisted joining with group affiliations, which seemed to be the entire point of public school. I think the facts easily support that assumption. Kids picked at me for a number of years as I studied their behavior. Instead of complying I learned how to deal with them through bullwhip training, martial arts and essentially learning to fear nothing. By the time I was a junior in high school I had a reputation of having no fear of anything under any circumstances. And when I fought someone, they didn’t get back up on their own. It started with me actually on the first day of school in kindergarten. I never complied with bullies. In the first grade I actually stabbed the biggest bully in school in the eye with a pair of scissors. He tried again to come after me in the 7th grade, many years later and I fought him in the hall so hard that I actually threw him into the principal’s office. Yes I got into a lot of trouble, but it was well worth it. Once I hit high school starting with being a freshman I was already refining myself into what I would become as an adult. By the time I was a senior, I was untouchable, it didn’t matter who or how many. The only real vulnerability was from close friends who you’d think you’d never have to fight like that, but of course, sometimes you do. By the time I was 19 and married I turned my attention not to individual bullies, but companies and politicians, which is something I’ve been involved with now for almost thirty years. I hate bullies but I love to punish them and I can give it to them any way they dish it. And it feels good to bring justice to their antics.

Trump obviously understands everything I just said and he likely has a similar background. People who avoid being broken as children make much better adults. You can tell who is who based on their behavior. Passive aggressive types are largely those who have been broken through peer pressure in the past, so they resort to those strategies to gain control in the future. They will lie right to your face, and then do something entirely different behind your back. Because they were broken at some point in their past, they resort to manipulation to rise to the top hoping that they can sneak past the other bullies with passive aggressive domination. And it works with most of the world, except for people like Trump. Being an unbroken man he has no idea what failure is, or losing to someone else-not to a level where he didn’t recover his loses in some way or another. It’s true; you can’t win everything all the time. You can’t control the success or failure of other people. They may have luck in their sails and may come out on top in a rivalry with you. But you can control your reaction to it, and if you keep the pressure on and press, and press, and press—eventually they will open up and you can take your shot.

I want a president who will take the shot. I don’t want a wimpy soothsayer, I want someone who will pursue his enemies to the ends of the earth and destroy them utterly if needed. I have no problem with that. I live by the same code and clearly understand it. The world would be filled with a lot more respect if everyone behaved like that. For instance, I don’t bother people until they bother me. I put up with a lot to give other people their individual freedom, even if I don’t agree with their choices. I do not impose myself on others. But when they impose on me, that’s it. They make enemies of me for life. I never forget, or forgive. And the more Trump talks, the more I learn that he is the same type of personality. That is why if the press and other candidates want a civil debate with Trump, they better not fire any shots toward him. He’ll thrive on their attempt and will pursue them forever. It’s in his nature. If they start something the bets are safe that he’ll finish it. If he’s like me he’ll still be thinking about such things 20 to 30 years later and will have the silent checklist in his head that he’ll only erase once they’ve departed the earth in the form of a grave.   For me, not even then. But not everyone wants to carry around grudges that long, so I wouldn’t expect that of every A type personality. But a lot of them do, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump isn’t one of them.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Skycar in the Mainstream: The future has always been now, people are just now learning about it

A long-ago Scientific American article proclaimed:

“The 21st century feels like a letdown. We were promised flying cars, space colonies and 15-hour workweeks. Robots were supposed to do our chores, except when they were organizing rebellions; children were supposed to learn about disease from history books; portable fusion reactors were supposed to be on sale at the Home Depot. Even dystopian visions of the future predicted leaps of technology and social organization that leave our era in the dust.”

I was just a little impressed that Scott Sloan from 700 WLW actually put Paul Moller on his radio show to discuss the exciting prospects of the M400 Skycar. As readers here know, I have been a fan and supporter of the Skycar for many years, going all the way back into the early 90s. I have pitched its benefits to every company I’ve worked with over the last 20 years and included it in my works of Cliffhanger fiction in both The Symposium of Justice and The Curse of Fort Seven Mile. I think it is one of the most important emerging market technologies on planet earth presently. Paul Moller is one of the good guys and has the potential to change the world as we know it. So it surprised me that Sloan put him on a very mainstream talk radio show.

When I talk about the terrible situation of the current American debt and the most primary reason I support someone like Donald Trump for president over a mainstream politician it is due to the extreme danger we are in relating to the creation of money versus the implication of monotonous debt. The only way out of the debacle is to first lower taxes, stop the bleeding in spending, and then create new markets with a global impact to infuse wealth back into our economy. There are no stable markets that can perform this task, such as oil, food, or even aviation as it traditionally is positioned in the marketplace. New wealth would have to come from markets that emerge from the ground up and touch the entire world, such as like what Microsoft did in the 90s and Apple has done in the 2000s. But those emerging markets would have to be even larger, and more profitable. Regenerative growth is one such field, but the growth there would be negated by the pharmaceutical industry decline—kind of a one-for-one trade. Skycar is the type of industry that would be the perfect infusion of a new transportation concept as revelatory as the railroad was in its opening days.

Skycar would be about more than just a transportation system that carried passengers from their homes to work, it would be a complete lifestyle change that would touch many more lives than just the owner of the vehicle. Along the skyways across the United States and throughout the world, industries would rise to support the Skycars flying along those GPS controlled routes. Fuel supply, maintenance, communications, and Skyports would all support a thriving business that presently doesn’t exist. Regular automobiles would still be valid, and used. Truck drivers would still use the American highway system to get products to and from their intended destinations. But the frequency and duration of travel for individual people would increase because of the ease of use.

Skycar initially as I’ve said before would emerge best in resort areas like Disney World where they could shuttle passengers from their hotel chain to their Disney Cruise ships at Cape Canaveral. That would build up the public confidence in the reliability of Skycar to get to and from their destinations without maintenance hazards. Eventually FedEx and UPS would move from delivery vans to personal shuttles making point to point delivery that would be much more efficient freeing up the roadways of heavy traffic by taking the activity to the air. Such delivery would speed up business and thus stimulate the effects of capitalism.

I can foresee a day where for business travel instead of dealing with the cumbersome nature of regional flights at a TSA controlled airport, that I could fly my own Skycar from the local skyport and land within a few miles of my intended destination in hours instead of wasting an entire day of travel. Business in Chicago could literally be concluded from Cincinnati in the same day bringing one home for dinner with time to spare because of the direct travel. If a person wanted to live 100 miles from their work in the middle of the country, they could live that peaceful life and still fly directly into the city to live a productive life. If his family wanted to fly into an urban area to partake in the arts, they could, and return home late by GPS sound asleep without worry of crashing. It would be a complete change in personal transportation and the options created by freedom.

Without an emerging technology that is significantly better than our current forms of travel, there will be no way to create the kind of wealth that will significantly help the United States solve its debt problems. Skycar by itself won’t be enough, but it will be a big help in the right direction. Skycar has been incorrectly considered a fringe science for at least four decades. But it was never fringe science, but instead quite legitimate, and justifiably orthodox. The hint of that legitimacy into the mainstream was what I heard on 700 WLW. I was happy for Paul Moller who has dedicated his life to the Skycar, to see his dream slowly becoming a reality. It’s not the science that is working against him, it’s the fearful resistance of the masses that does. So to that point, Scott Sloan brought the world to Moller’s doorstep in a way that enthusiasts like me have not been able to—because he represents the average and static past of a society spiraling into oblivion based on their own weak philosophies. With the Skycar, those philosophies will expand in ways that the human race craves to go. And with it, a dawn of a new age where Skycars rule the latest edge of transportation innovation.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

John Kasich Running For President: All the good things I have to say about him

As many know I have a lot to say.  Every day I write multi thousand word articles about topics that are on my mind.  So of course I have to comment on John Kasich, whom I once awarded as Warrior of the Week right here on this site.   He just announced he’s running for president of the United States.  I’ve met the guy personally, and he’s from my state.  So let me articulate all the reasons he should be president with my voluminous command of the English language and prodigious writing ability.

………………………………………I can’t think of a single good thing to say in support.  He lost Issue 2.  Gave Obama everything he wanted.  And he was one of the first to tag Ohio to Obamacare.  He shouldn’t be running for president…………………he should be running from angry voters.

Only in Washington!

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

John McCain is a “Survivor” not a “Hero”: Why Donald Trump is right yet again

I had to write the article yesterday about the Metaphysics of Quality because an understanding of that is needed before understanding why Donald Trump was right about John McCain.  I watched the full interview with Trump at the 2015 Family Leadership Summit on July 18th 2015 and saw the context of the McCain comments and I can say that they weren’t at all out of line from my own opinions.  The firestorm that followed against Trump is because he hit a particularly raw nerve in established thinking, that just because a veteran served in the military that they are automatic heroes.  But there is more to the matter and Trump boldly announced that just because John McCain was captured as a POW for 5 years during the Vietnam War that it didn’t make him an automatic hero.  Trump declared that he preferred people who weren’t captured for performance evaluation, and thus the nerve.  Watch the entire interview in the pre-pundit context.

I remember when it was fashionable to ridicule serviceman returning from Vietnam by many of the same types of people who now seek to exploit veterans for their own advances toward collectivism.  You see, here is the process, a young person joins the military—goes to boot camp—has their individual identity stamped out of them by a drill sergeant—then they are rebuilt into a team player within the chain of command structure which the government controls.  This assimilation into a collective unit is what government progressives like John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama live for.  They would like to see that happen to all Americans starting with pre-school children.  As adults this madness leads to Deming type thinkers at the back of the train.  CLICK TO REVIEW.  Old hippies and war protestors like Hillary have joined in the public praise of veterans to use them to sell collectivism as opposed to individualism.

Trump is clearly a front of the train guy—vastly different from a typical politician.  He looks at the do nothing McCain who lost the 2008 election because of his passivity and has decided he doesn’t care for the guy.  Being a veteran doesn’t give McCain a pass to be an idiot for the rest of his life living off the reputation of his 5 years spent in captivity.  To Trump’s mind, and mine as well, McCain would have been far more effective if he hadn’t been caught to begin with, because it made him a liability to the United States strategically.  McCain was a pilot who was shot down over Hanoi during a bombing mission.  He was then captured, tortured and suffered lifelong physical limitations.  To an A-type personality my first thought was that even with fractures to his right leg and both arms, he should have done what he needed to do to avoid capture—or escape by any means necessary instead of staying captive for five and a half years.  Knowing now what we do about McCain it is likely that his natural inclination toward passivity is what kept him prisoner.  An A type of personality would have escaped, or died trying—so there is reluctance to call someone a hero just because they suffered.

However, to the modern progressive, sacrifice, suffering and service to causes outside of individual motivation are what they are trying to sell to the world, and the American serviceman is ripe for that exploitation.  Not to mention a fellow progressive who is one of their members in the Republican Party who has been instrumental in bringing conservatives more to a centralist position on most social topics.  The Beltway political system is using veterans to preserve their static pattern way of life which assumes that people are heroes if they give up their thoughts and individuality in service to Capitol Hill.  Trump is questioning that rationality which set off a firestorm of controversy.  Reporters after the event lashed into Trump with a fury that defied reason—their assumption was that McCain no matter how effective he is, no matter what kind of quality person he is, is a hero because he was captured and tortured.  That all his actions for the rest of his life would be forgiven because he was a war hero, meaning that any critical assessment of McCain was off the table—that’s not how reality works.

The cause of the ridicule of McCain from Trump started because of comments the progressive senator made about the 15,000 people who attended Trump’s rally in Phoenix, Arizona.  He called the Trump supporters “crazies” which was an establishment desire to set the parameters toward acceptable behavior, because Trump’s support was growing well beyond the control of the GOP.  That is the essence of the fear that the Beltway has about Trump, which he will not be able to be controlled by anybody, because he’s already a billionaire, so he can’t be bribed by money.  So they have to try to build public consensus against him—and they started by calling his supporters “crazies.”  Standard back of the train behavior.  Trump then felt he had to defend his supporters which he did by questioning the performance of John McCain over the years, starting with his military service.

McCain pulled the ejection handle on his Skyhawk dive bomber at 500 knots breaking his right leg in the process.  He passed out and landed in a lake nearly drowning until some North Vietnamese caught him and pulled him into the center of a nearby town.  The peasants there were hollering and spitting on him kicking him when they could.  They stripped him, his leg was broken at a 90-degree angle, and they stuck a bayonet into his foot.  They interrogated him for the next four days then declared him for dead.  McCain realized he had a major infection from blood pooling in his leg that would kill him so he agreed to give the North Vietnamese military information if they’d take him to the hospital.  They declared that he was too far gone.  It was only when they realized that McCain’s father was a “big admiral” that they took him to the hospital hoping to use him for political leverage.  McCain was treated somewhat and spent the next five years in captivity.  From the point of view of an A type personality, McCain made several mistakes.  He didn’t have an escape plan during the crash.  His survival instinct told him to pull the lever, to not drown in the lake, and to say whatever he could to keep from dying of an injury to his leg.  But at his decision gates, he could have waited a bit longer to eject after scanning the ground for nearby villages.  Once captured he trusted too much in the system as he was a soldier who accepted that his fate was up to others to deal with—even wounded, he took a passive position on his own safety which then put mission command at risk adding to the list of POWs that were being held in military areas they’d otherwise like to bomb. So strategically, McCain put the command structure of the United States forces at a disadvantage because of his capture that likely caused more death because of his natural impulse toward self-preservation.  In hindsight it’s clear there were other options, but McCain didn’t use them.  He was under duress, and surely terrified.  But what made him a hero?  He just wanted to live.  That doesn’t make one a hero.

Is a kid who doesn’t know what they want to be when they grow up a hero because they are willing to trade freedom for security by joining the military as a young recruit?  Are they heroes because they show a willingness toward sacrifice—because they were taught that in their basic training?  Are they heroes because they accept orders without question letting other people do their thinking for them?  And if they get into trouble like McCain did performing a mission that some bureaucrat came up with at a command bunker, are they heroes for trying to stay alive?  These are legitimate questions.  The political class wants to believe they are heroes for serving as congressman and senators, but in reality they are ineffective leeches who enrich themselves off the political process.  McCain is one of those people.  He had an unfortunate thing that happened to him, and he’s trying to cover up the many follies of his past with the awards of his desire to stay alive—which is human and quite natural.  There’s nothing exceptional about wanting to stay alive.   But in the real world where people like Trump live, he measures success off performance, not sacrifice.  And under that lens McCain is a failure and not very heroic.  Just because something bad happens it doesn’t make you a hero.  Escaping and bringing back intelligence that would win the war would have.  But just lasting from day-to-day barely alive doesn’t.  It just makes you a survivor.

McCain all through his capture was very concerned about the other POWs who had been there longer than him getting home first.  He to his very heart and soul thought of others over himself, which is what progressive society wishes to see.  Trump wouldn’t be that way, and neither would I.  I could not have stayed in a prison for over five years waiting for the war to end.   I would have had to find some alternatives.   But McCain believes in the static systems of the political orthodox, which is still a problem with him.  He may be a good man relative to the politics of the Beltway, but is he a hero?  That is a matter of definitions and who makes them, and whether those definitions come from the back of the train, or the front.  In the end, McCain gave the communists what they were looking for, a confession of guilt that was beat out of him after years of torture.  He had hit his breaking point and nobody can really blame him.  That makes him a survivor.  But a hero—only in Washington politics could someone conclude that.  Donald Trump was right again.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Being at the Front of the Train: Comprehending a Metaphysics of Quality

Perhaps Robert Pirsig’s work on the Metaphysics of Quality was one of the greatest discoveries of the 20th Century, and I include Einstein’s Theory of Relativity in that analysis.  He refined that metaphysics in only two books, one was Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry in Values (1974), and the other was Lila: An Inquiry in Morals (1991).  Only a few very gifted individuals around the world have read and understood the first book written in 1971.  The book itself was a success, but practicing what one learned from it was far more difficult and many read it without being able to apply it to their lives. The 1991 book has an even more obscure audience—but is infinitely more complex and revelatory.  It is the work of genius without question, and tackles directly the problems we have in defining quality in any form.  I understood Pirsig easily—both books probably because I had a similar life experience as Pirsig as far as relationship to the outside world before electric shock pushed the core of his personality represented as Phaedrus deep within the author’s subconscious.  That is where he and I differ dramatically as I never have allowed myself to be abused the way he was by the static pattern system of an orthodox society.  I had one really good friend who was treated the way Pirsig was however, and I watched him go through the ordeal painfully.  However, my protection was my extreme rebelliousness, which preserved much of my youth for the benefit of my adulthood.  My work with bullwhips took me the rest of the way there and combined with the work of Ayn Rand put me in a special place that Pirsig didn’t have the advantage of.  It was hard for Pirsig to function as a genius in a world dedicated to static pattern commitment to systems defining quality as adherence to the pattern rather than intellectual assessment.  This is why I wrote the revelatory article about the ineffectiveness of Deming in business.  CLICK TO REVIEW.

Perhaps a decade from now I’ll write my own books about this Metaphysics of Quality. After all, I am in the middle of proving it applicable to modern society against the Deming addicts.  I think Deming’s work has been one of the great destroyers of capitalism instead of advancing quality, because quality is determined by a system of thought rather than a value judgment and this has afflicted perhaps 98% of the world into a sticky feet quandary of ineffectiveness.  I have been knocking on that Deming door for years looking for a way to break it down without destroying society, and I am presently undergoing that experiment.  The results will likely be reported in future books on the Metaphysics of Quality that I will write in my 50s an 60s that will be likely sequels Pirsig’s books only with an Aristotelian emphasis—instead of Plato.  Presently I am in the field with great opposition cast in my direction by those static pattern protectors of their own definitions of quality as defined by the statistician Deming.

Essentially the heart of Pirsig’s work is in his front of the train/back of the train analysis.  Deming is a back of the train guy, Pirsig is at the front.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW—otherwise you will be lost dear reader.  There is no reason to rehash all that now for the sake of review.  This is a rather advanced article so the foundation understanding of the subject should be either read for the first time, or reviewed before proceeding.  Back of the train people are slow to act and think in a sluggish manner because they wait for analysis of the contents of the entire train before acting.  This is why our political system is in such a disastrous condition, because all of the Beltway politics is built around this back of the train positioning, intellectually.  Nothing is done before Deming types look statistically at all the data collected in a train and a consensus of action is built so a decision can be made.   However, this is extremely problematic because the trains we all ride through life are always moving, and decisions must be made far in advance to keep the train moving in the direction we desire.  With a long train especially, the front of the train is far ahead of the back of the train so by the time that those in the back analyze their data the decision points for the fate of the train have come and gone.  The right place to make decisions is at the front of the train, not the back.  Those in the back serve a function—a kind of retrospect analysis that can help with future decision-making, but they will not put the train on the right track.  So I won’t say they are useless, just ineffective in providing leadership.  They can tell you the score but they can’t tell you how to score.

Most of the world is crippled by this relationship and we are raised from little children to think from the back of the train.  We wait for politicians who are always late to the conclusions—because they wait for analysis of the train’s contents before speaking—to tell us how to conduct our lives which is a mistake.  We wait for poplar social magazines like People, Time, and US to instruct us how to live—again this is after the back of the train has reported the latest fashion trends and social priorities.  So we blindly accept a quality definition determined by analysis of where the train has been, but not where it’s going—and that sums up best the problems of our age.

I have an obsession with the leading edge of the great train.  For instance, before a very important meeting recently with very important people I was riding my motorcycle like I have everyday for the last 7 years.  Another driver ran into me randomly while I was sitting in traffic totaling my precious motorcycle with $10,000 in damage.  That in itself broke my heart and I was thinking about that as I evaded danger.  I had been watching the driver as I watch everyone while driving assuming always the worst, so before the crash, I did a dive roll off the motorcycle and ended up well out of danger before the crash.  Many looking at the crash from the police, witnesses sitting around me in traffic, and the insurance people assumed that because of the speed of the crash and where it occurred on my motorcycle that I had lost a leg, or that I should have.  To move so quickly out-of-the-way was not something that anybody could attribute to any known evasive action option.  All that they could say was that I was lucky.  But I wasn’t lucky; I was living at the front of the train of decision-making, and was well aware of the dangers around me.  So well before the driver carelessly ran into me destroying my precious motorcycle I was out of danger’s grasp before the occurrence had a chance to claim a victim.  That is the difference between being at the front of the train with our daily lives and at the back.  The back of the train—the Deming approach would have been to sit there, get hit and study the data so that new rules and regulations could be created to prevent the accident in the future.  I would have lost my leg; probably my life and much more would have been lost because of my vacancy.  But, as it turned out, I walked away and still made it to my meeting and executed the tasks of that day the way I needed to, without any excuses.  That is because I live at the front of the train and I climb out on that leading edge as far as I can.

Most people by nature are back of the train types.  Those who aren’t that way naturally, become that way from improper instruction from their childhoods. When a child asks “why” and the instructor says, “because I say so,” the poor child is being put at the back of the train of thought.  By the time they get to 8 or 9 years of age, they will just accept the static patterns of their society as reported from the back of the train and trust that system even to their own demise.  It’s a very sad condition.  But if the child is taught to make decisions from the front of the train based on their observed reality, then the answer might be, “because you can see that there are rocks across the tracks ahead and that we have to switch lanes before getting there, otherwise we’ll crash.”

As I said, I put this up now as a way to maybe help one or two people improve their lives.  I’ll do more with it later after I prove out some more concepts against the theater of reality, but until then this will have to do.  If you want to improve your life immediately, get out of the back of the train and come up to the front.  There’s plenty of room, and it’s much more comfortable.  All decisions in life should be made in the front, not the back. Because by the time the information gets to those analysis driven Deming types, the danger is already history, and nobody did anything to avert from it.  Understanding that is the key to success in life in every field.  Master that, and you will master the universe.

I’m just saying…………………………………….

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

What Women Want: Why the Huffington Post is afraid of Donald Trump

If you were listening to Matt Clark on WAAM radio over the weekend, you would have heard that he had me on as a guest and our primary discussion was Donald Trump. He and I agreed mostly that Trump wasn’t the ideal man we wanted to see as president—morally, but that for the specific tasks awaiting this next president, he was uniquely qualified. We need a champion for capitalism and who better than a man with a personal value of $10 billion dollars to help the nation get back on track to positive GDP growth. Unlike fellow billionaires who have succumb to progressive pressure to embrace altruism, Trump has stayed steadfast to the roots of capitalism which made him rich to begin with, and he is an unapologetic advocate that is best poised to sell capitalism to a world in need.

Liberal circles are scared of Trump, he has the ability to dominate the presidential race with his fearless criticisms leaving the Huffington Post to declare that they would not feature Trump as a viable candidate. Instead they would regulate him to the gossip columns, and while Trump’s campaign fired back at the Post in an admirable way, I couldn’t help but think that the Huffington Post would help Trump greatly by their strategy. Young people don’t read or care about politics—but they do care about the size of Kim Kardasians ass, or what variation of sexuality Bruce Jenner is undergoing these days. So they don’t care about the blog posts by the Huffington Post and their opinions on politics. Putting Trump on the pages with Bruce Jenner would even help his campaign that much more—which is likely the strategy of Trump to begin with.


Specifically however Matt Clark and I discussed on his radio show the need for America to gain back some of its swagger. It needs a salesman to make people feel good about the product that America is once again, and to get away from this constant desire to apologize to the world for being so wonderful. I joked during the WAAM show that America needs a calendar for the world with girls in American flag bikinis taken on the White House lawn just to flaunt that women can be free and beautiful, that capitalism’s excesses improve a quality of life, and that freedom of expression are revered as the highest possible value. And it also puts out of our mind the ridiculous activism Obama started by putting rainbow colors on the White House. He made sexual preference a matter of state business, so to represent the rest of America who are heterosexual, bikini clad models would be more appropriate, and fair. In 2016 we will need a president who will declare such things and not worry about the backlash.

I understand Trump. I share with him a love of backlash. The more that people try to steer me into a direction, the more I push back. I have spent a life being pushed by very powerful forces, and I have never yielded to them, and they still try knowing that it’s a futile task. Trump is a similar “A” type personality and I know that if he is pushed and coaxed toward some collective strategy, whether it is the GOP, Democratic socialists, lobbyists, Bilderberg members, or other nations, Trump will rely on himself and only himself for counsel. He won’t sit down with his wife and say, “honey, what do you think I should do?” He’ll sit down, think about things, then act—which is the kind of man who I want in the White House. And ladies, don’t write me and tell me that’s sexist. I read the Fifty Shades of Grey books and I’ve been married for a long time. I raised two daughters and have worked with thousands of women over the years. I know what women want and what they really think. So does Trump. I don’t by the progressive women’s liberation crap—for a fraction of a second. Women are told they want to buy into that mentality, but when it comes time for the bedroom—all that goes out the window—quick. Women want a decisive man who is self confident—and one that smells good. They like a man who is self-driven, self-reliant, and who is financially independent. Women if polled during a soccer game with friends or at a sex toy convention will say that Trump is an arrogant son-of-a-bitch, and that they’ll vote for Hillary. But when they are alone in that voting booth, it will be Trump that they will punch the ticket for. Bet on it—because they want more Trump and what he has to offer.

And so does the world. They want American Swagger to give them hope that hard work will lead to something and that a value in quality is still respected. Trump represents quality—even as a billionaire. He is the modern embodiment of Robert Pirsig’s metaphysics of quality. CLICK TO REVIEW. It is in that metaphysics of quality that concepts of Marxism fail, because Karl Marx never understood that in all his life. Communists and socialists fail to understand why leadership works and how “front of the train” vision overwhelms “back of the train” analysis 100% of the time. They are completely regulated to the back of the train of all thought and are often too late to act on decisions in time to change course even when it’s obvious that there is a need. That is why modern politicians are completely unable to deal with the $18 trillion-dollar debt issue. They are trying to run the train from behind instead of at the front. The train is always moving and by the time that data reaches the back, the decision points have already passed.

Trump understands the “speed of business” and that deadlines are important. He would bring to the White House maybe for the first time a real manager who understands money. Even great presidents like Jefferson ran into financial hardship late in their lives, and so far only Jackson actually rid the nation of debt. Jackson was a Democrat and was hated by history for his treatment of Indians, but I’d take him any day for his tendency to dual others for honor, target shoot from the White House windows and hold the nation to fiscal responsibility. I don’t need a spokesman for a political party in the White House, or another socialists advocate, America needs a champion for capitalism and the money created by it—which directly improves the lives of everyone. Business is more important than emotion, because one generates money and resources; the other dictates the quality of relationships between people.   Without resources, relationships are always strained, so if resources are available, relationships improve dramatically. Capitalism makes a more peaceful world and America needs to get back in the business of selling it.

American Swagger and capitalist domination is the mandate of our times. We cannot afford one more bad election cycle with another altruist as president. We need someone who knows what they are doing, and won’t apologize for doing it. Trump will have the minority votes because as he said, he is a job creator, and people respect being given a job as opposed to the humility of a welfare check. In the vacancy of one they’ll take the other, but they will be resentful people as a result. And regarding women, they’ll vote for Trump because that’s really the kind of man they want in charge of things. And men will vote for him because Trump represents an honesty that most males respect. So he’s a dangerous candidate to the establishment. And the Huffington Post knows it.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.