Melania Trump as First Lady: After watching these videos lets have the election right now!

America, you know I support Donald Trump—for a 100 million and one reasons. But did you happen to see the Barbra Walters interview of the entire Trump family recently on 20/20? Forget about Donald Trump and all his potential success. America, you could finally have a supermodel for President and a smart one at that. If you missed it, watch it for yourself below. After years of feminism pushing to have dumpy looking vestiges of a man’s beer gut as first ladies residing from our White House finally America could have a proper model to represent the only real superpower on planet earth. Melania is gorgeous physically and intellectually and I personally want her representing America’s image in every way, shape and form. She is my kind of America.

But wait, what about Trump’s kids? Well, meet them here. Can you imagine these kids as part of a Trump government?

This is a beautiful, all American family and they are winners. They are winners in every category of being human beings. After so many past embarrassments as president, its time to feel good about ourselves once again—vote for Donald Trump and get a successful business leader and put him in charge of fixing the many problems that we have in 2016. But as a bonus, get a supermodel wife as the best possible spokesman for everything that America has to offer. Let’s have the election today. Melania for First Lady!

I want the White House calendar for 2017 featuring her. And so would every red-blooded American of all sexes and ages. Having her after Michelle Obama and Laura Bush would be like drinking a very fine glass of wine after accidentally swallowing raw sewage.

Do yourself a favor; send this article to a potential Trump supporter, someone who’s on the fence so they can watch for themselves what comes with the Trump package. And Melania is the best part of it.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Rodizio at Lunch in Liberty Center: Only $19.99 and defining the Metaphysics of Quality

It might be because I believe that advanced civilizations first erupted in South America a long time ago that I find the Rodizio at Liberty Center, Ohio so enchanting, but I love the place. It has become a personal refuge for me of late because I love the atmosphere, the enthusiasm, and the food—and I love the location. I previously wrote about a VIP night that I was a part of which can be seen by clicking here. But that was at night where the price per person was $33 dollars for the all you can eat full Rodizio experience—where they bring skewers of meat to your table in a very theatrical way and you eat as much as you want or can. Well, I wanted to try it out for lunch so I brought some people important to me to the place to see if the lunch was as magical as the dinner—and sure enough it was.

The night before I watched the very exciting Battle of Ohio at Paul Brown Stadium where the Bengals continued to have an impressive season. It was Thursday Night Football and the nation was watching. The night was long and the crowd was rowdy, but it was enchanting to watch the game from the Club section with the same demographic type of people who will enjoy the new Liberty Center. However, once the game was over, I shared with tens of thousands of other people a strong desire to get back to our cars and get on the road—which clogged up I-75 all the way back to West Chester. The highway really didn’t begin to move until we moved north passed the I-275 bridge. We were all going home from the Bengal game to the same place. It was well passed midnight and we just wanted to get to our beds. That was a persistent thought that I had all evening during the football game. Take away the Bengals, the Reds, the museum and an occasional theater play and there isn’t much that downtown Cincinnati has to offer. Sure they have nice dinner options, but downtown is such a pain in the neck to travel around. For the people who can afford it, such as the people in the Club section at the Bengal game, once the fun was over, they wanted to get back to their homes—north of Cincinnati in the suburbs of West Chester, Liberty Township and Mason.

For years I have enjoyed going downtown for the exotic experiences that you can have there, but have more than once been dismayed at how trashy it was. For instance, when you’re walking around with your date in front of Fountain Square with the Westin Hotel in the background, you want to enjoy the luxury and options of the setting, but then some dude walks by with his pants half down cursing up a storm looking like he just crawled out of the gutter—which most of the time he has, it tends to alter an otherwise good mood. You may have just spent $400 at Ruby’s Steakhouse and had an otherwise nice time until something like that happens. Cincinnati, because of the environment they’ve allowed to percolate just wasted your money on the experience you were trying to have. At the Bengal game, money flowed better so long as there was a set-up that allowed people who wanted to enjoy the game without a lot of ruckus to do so with a pretty decent guarantee that the exchange would be worth it. Those same people didn’t want to spend much time not getting to their car and were eager to get back to friendlier territory as soon as the drama of the game was done. So much of the imagery shown on the television of the downtown cityscape was an illusion, it wasn’t real. Downtown was dead because the people best able to support it wanted to get as far away as possible once it came down to putting money on the table for a nice evening. Snobby, sure it is and there is nothing wrong with that. People of value enjoy association with other people of value. If other people don’t share those values, then there will be tension, and in this day and age where political correctness is choking off our opinions, people vote with their wallets.

That brings us back to the wonderful Liberty Center downtown that is privately managed by the Steiner group which essentially gives people the Club option of shopping and dining. It has the same appeal as going to an NFL game in the Club and Box seats—it puts everything on a pedestal, keeps the riff raff at bay, and ensures that the money you spend will be worth as much as possible. And so far, I have discovered that the Rodizio is the best value of all those elements. It’s just a top class place—it reminds me of the type of place you’d find in South America without the language barriers, the sweaty hotels with half working air conditioning units, and the modern socialism that is crippling their current economy. When I walk into Rodizio each time, I think of the ancient cultures which seeded planet earth well before any established religion laid claim to history. There is an ancient truth to the place that first appealed to me. Now I find it sustaining to attend their salad bar which is only $12.99 for lunch including all the hot dishes, and pick from some very healthy selections of food prepared by a kitchen staff that really cares. But for lunch at only $19.99 you can have the whole Rodizio experience which is a business lunch bargain. So I had to try it out with those thoughts of the Bengal game fresh on my mind.

Yes Captain Hook was there and he personally cared for our table. We were very happy and the management at the Rodizio made it a very memorable experience.  Our waitress, Crystal was exceptionally professional and poured a lot of passion into our experience.  I had stated previously that I considered Rodizio a great business lunch option and it has certainly lived up to that assessment. This wasn’t a VIP evening, this was an actual business day in what I consider paradise—a well managed downtown where I don’t have to worry about my car, or nasty people ruining my investment dollars with degradation.  To say anything less would be dishonest just for the stylishness of being politically correct. Thus far, I don’t have to worry about wasting money at Liberty Center or Rodizio. If you are taking clients or associates out to lunch to impress them, you need the whole experience, the food, the atmosphere, the people—everything that your senses perceive. It all has to work or really you are just wasting your money.

The Rodizio crew understands that investment which is why I am so glowingly supportive of them. If Liberty Center were the kind of shopping destination that John Galt would have built from the novel Atlas Shrugged, then Rodizio is one of the unique places that would belong on the pages of that classic story for all the right reasons within it. It’s better than reality, which is what I feel each time I visit the Rodizio Grill. They do a good job of caring for their customers with an experience that is better than the reality of the outside world—the world beyond the parking lot of Liberty Center.

It’s not being snobby to enjoy nice things. For me it’s all about the Metaphysics of Quality. I love a quality experience and when variables create mundane results, I often resent whatever investment I’ve put into the endeavor—whether that may by time, money, or emotion. I don’t like to waste resources—so if I do something, I like to see a return on that investment in a quality experience. When I get that I do enjoying talking about it. There is nothing wrong with setting the bar high for yourself. There is nothing wrong with playing above your head, because it can make you a better person. And there is nothing wrong with eating the best food that you can for the best price in the best place. At Rodizio Grill at Liberty Center, quality is what the experience is all about. And with that, I’m pleased to report that they are the real deal, not just a flash in the pan. If you are looking for a good place to grab lunch, they should be at the top of your list.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

CNBC is Actually a Cable Television Station: The marathon race of people who already lost

I honestly didn’t know CNBC was still a cable channel until I watched the Republican debates on October 28th, 2015. What a pathetic mess those moderators were. They had a record 14 million viewers which is probably more than watch their network over an entire year and those idiots spent their time in the sun showing the world why they are such a ratings bust. I can’t believe those people are actually employed who work at CNBC. I know there is a liberal bias in the media—we know where it comes from as I’ve covered The Naked Communist for a number of years now, and that was one of the strategic objectives by the communists going into the 1960s was to take over both political parties and to control the media. They do—and have on both accounts—but come on. These idiots were just way too obvious about it. Who do they think their potential audience is—the Bolshevik Revolutionaries of 1917? Or maybe it’s the Cuban nut jobs under Castro. Perhaps even the Mao fanatics from China? I didn’t know that there was such a television network that actually had so many radical leftist on a payroll, because I can’t say I’ve ever watched the network—because they never appeared to have anything on that I’d be interested in. Now I know why—geez!

I’m not a fan of all the Republican presidential candidates, but after listening to some of the questions by the CNBC moderators, each of them—even Governor Kasich sounded like rock solid Republicans. Trump’s lambasting of CNBC at the end of the debate was spot on—and so was Marco Rubio’s comments—as were Ted Cruz’s—even Jeb Bush looked like a conservative next to the crazy lunatics on the CNBC moderations panel. Where do these people come from—Hugo Chavez’s personal bathroom? The presidential nominees had a right to be upset, during the recent Democratic debate the questions were so much easier for them—but for the Republicans everything was a gotcha question. They were deliberately designed to make Republicans look bad.

Although I generally liked all the Republicans on the stage that night for different reasons I am still a firm Trump guy at this point. The whole system needs a Teddy Roosevelt type who may very well yank the nation back away from progressivism—whereas Teddy pulled the bar so far to the left as a Republican. By the end of his 7 years in office, Roosevelt was more like Grover Cleveland than he was Abraham Lincoln. The Republican Party now needs the opposite to happen and it will take a bombastic personality like Trump to do it. No soft talking Ben Carson will work, or soft faced Marco Rubio. Cruz is too hated by insiders while Rand Paul is not worldly enough. Fiorina is too weak—she is a good debater, but her track record as a CEO is not robust enough. Jeb Bush is too establishment and way too nice. John Kasich is too far behind the times, he’s like those marathon runners who cross the finish line three hours behind all the top-tier runners and then puts a picture of himself on his office desk showing that he’s a marathon runner.  He confuses participating in a marathon to being a contender. Huckabee is a nice guy—a pastor type but is way too passive to slug it out with the greasy slime of K-Street—which is where the real fights for the next president are really at. Nobody but Trump has the right stuff to be president on behalf of the Republican Party. Nobody likes to fight as much as Trump does, and the next president will have to LOVE fighting.

It would be my hope that either Ben Carson or Ted Cruz would be the Trump running mate so that a president Trump could set the stage for a 2024 election of a real conservative for perhaps the first time since Calvin Coolidge. Ronald Reagan was an actor playing the part of a conservative that he acquired late in life. I want a conservative that is that way in their marrow of their bones, and within Cruz, I think there is one. But he’s not ready yet and the environment is all wrong for him presently. The day after the debate Paul Ryan was elected Speaker of the House which many people think is the same as electing an establishment candidate, and he is. But the bar is at least headed to the right again as opposed to the left. Ryan is at least an Ayn Rand fan and deep down inside will lean in that direction if allowed. Under a president Trump I think he would move more conservative than he is under an Obama president, much more so than John Boehner. Like his friend Kasich, Boehner is another hour behind him in the marathon puffing away on cigarettes. The sun has set on Boehner a long time ago only nobody told him that the flashlights at his feet were from his supporters who didn’t have the heart to tell him that the sun had already set—and the race was over and the finish line was already disassembled. They didn’t want to hurt his feelings. Paul Ryan is not the best choice, but he was a Tea Party darling at one point, and is proof that the needle is moving back to the political right.

So that’s the trend yet CNBC seemed so far behind the times that they hadn’t even started that marathon race that Boehner and Kasich were already proudly running well behind the front-runners. I mean, it was disgusting—that people actually think as liberally as those idiots at CNBC. I can’t imagine how they even pay for the cameras to keep the network on cable—unless those people work for nothing. It’s a good thing they had the debate because I didn’t even realize they were a channel—I had mistaken them for MSNBC which I used to give some credit to just because I liked Microsoft. But that loyalty went away after Bill Gates became the face of Common Core—and Jeb Bush with it. Microsoft’s influence on MSNBC is gone now, whereas in the early days it was on the tech side of news coverage with was good. But now they are all about progressive politics and are just ridiculous. I had no idea there was even a channel to the left of them!

I supposed I’m grateful that now I know, because of the debates, but I am seriously embarrassed for them as a network. There were so many stupid things that they said that even in hindsight it seems unfathomable. Yet they are real, and the questions they asked were to—all of them with a liberal spin. If there was ever any doubt that The Naked Communist had predicted such a thing successfully, that the media would be controlled by communists in the future—then CNBC is the proof as to that reality.   But even that terrible reality isn’t anywhere as sinister as it was a year ago. Now liberals are more of a joke than ever—their policies have been proven ineffective and rejected by sane voters everywhere. They just haven’t paid attention to the memo yet. And that was never more evident than at CNBC. Wow, they are out there and are a dying breed. Watch them before the go extinct, because in this climate, they are well on their way.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

How the DOJ and Lois Lerner Demanded the need for more Guns: Government pleads stupidity as a defense

Let’s see if we can get this straight, the Department of Justice has used a legal criterion of incompetence to justify not prosecuting Lois Lerner as she abused her power at the IRS for political reasons. DOJ officials reported that “substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia leading to the belief by many tax-exempt applicants that the IRS targeted them based on their political viewpoints. But poor management is not a crime,” thus establishing forever by attorneys everywhere that government can act against private citizens so long as they can prove they were too incompetent to manage a situation. So in essence, the DOJ has given all government employees a future way out of any abuse of power situation—all anyone has to do is plead stupidity to be relieved of whatever crime they may have committed.

Well, isn’t that interesting. That means hypothetically that if the President of the United States is given intelligence data suggesting that someone like me is a threat to national security and they send a squad of people to apprehend me—hypothetically speaking of course—but they go to the wrong house and bump into one of my neighbors who then opens fire and a firefight ensues similar to something like what happened at Waco, Ruby Ridge and other places—and a lot of people are killed–that those guilty of the whole thing would be let off the hook at the DOJ because bad management is not illegal.

Or suppose that a Secretary of State sets up a private server that she runs all her top-secret email through so she can scrub the information later for deniability—but then gets caught—that all she has to do is plead stupidity and all will be forgiven. They will even get the opportunity to run for president—wait, that’s actually happening right now with Hillary Clinton. That is not a hypothetical, but you get the point.

The DOJ has just provided the primary reason that government is too large and needs to be scaled back. They have just established why Washington D.C. should not be one of the highest per capita employment regions in the country—because they are too incompetent as a collective group to occupy so much wealth. Through their labor unions there are no expectations of performance and now with the DOJ decision over the Lois Lerner case regarding the IRS, there is no legal expectation regarding performance either making the federal government fully motivated to hire the dumbest people they can get their hands on so there is always an escape if something goes wrong.

The Department of Justice further stated, “we found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution. We also found no evidence that any official involved in the handling of tax-exempt applications or IRS leadership attempted to obstruct justice. Based on the evidence developed in this investigation and the recommendation of experienced career prosecutors and supervising attorneys at the department, we are closing our investigation and will not seek any criminal charges.” That statement was provided in a letter to selected members of congress by Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik. So let’s strip away the legalese rhetoric there and get to the heart of what Kadzik was saying. In essence the investigation was run by government employees against government employees for the end goal of protecting government employment. Lerner was told to plead the fifth, say nothing, get out of public office and let the government clean up the mess with a defense of stupidity to conceal their tracks. The government declared of itself that they were too stupid to properly conduct themselves with tax payer resources and that there will never be ramifications for incompetence in public office. Without question, we will get a lot more of the behavior as a result.

Now you know dear reader yet again—with evidence provided from the highest law enforcement office in the land—why we have a Bill of Rights established by the anti-Federalists during the formation of our Constitution at the start of the American concept. We have freedom of speech so that we can call such abuses of power by their true implication—because obviously the DOJ has no interest in doing anything but protecting government employment as a direct arm of radicalized union labor. And we have the right to arm ourselves in case our military and police fall under the malice of future incompetent idiots like Lois Lerner at the IRS. If the IRS can abuse its power why not the local National Guard post? We need guns to protect ourselves by the DOJ definition of incompetence, because they have shown that they will take the side of the fool over the righteous expecting the good to surrender their lives to the bad for the “greater good.” Greater in this case is established by all the hoards of knuckle-draggers who are employed by the federal government. Their employer actually permits stupidity so those of a sane mind out of the Beltway need a way to protect themselves from the stupid—because nobody else will take up the job.

Because of this ruling by the DOJ we now have evidence that under no circumstances we should reduce the number of firearms in our society, because in a time when the DOJ is using stupidity as a defense the only way we can enforce respect among the corrupt is by promising to end their life—because they don’t respect the law. So they must respect the guns we possess—because in reality, that’s all that really protects us from the bad management decisions of the federal government. When they think they can abuse their power—as they have many times and been caught—they are very inclined to continue the behavior. The IRS attacked my friend Justin Binik Thomas and my local Tea Party group at Liberty Township because they assumed that everyone were nice people not inclined toward rambunctious violance—so they were easy targets for showing the vast authority of the IRS as a way to build up their brand of enforcement. As nice as Justin was however, they didn’t expect him or the Liberty Township Tea Party to stick up for themselves using the First Amendment. So the situation backfired on the IRS in a spectacular way. The IRS was clearly guilty of abuse of power and the only way out for them was for the Obama controlled DOJ to plead stupidity to avoid prosecution. If the case had been allowed to fester, the original guilt would have put it within the White House through union connections which was the likely origin Lois Lerner’s radicalism.

These same idiots are the people declaring that we need fewer guns in society. It’s like a robber scouting out potential hits complaining that people have bars on their windows to prevent break-ins. The government wants easy targets and a compliant people, because they are too stupid to deal with a challenge or any philosophic position in favor of freedom, so they want to confiscate guns to have their way and be allowed to mismanage our society. Without guns people like Lois Lerner would be in charge of everything and the abuse of their offices completely unfettered. It is for this very reason that gun sales are so high in America right now. It makes us sleep better at night knowing we can at least take care of ourselves if something dreadful happens. It is quite obvious that we can’t count on the DOJ, the IRS, the White House, the Secretary of State, local law enforcement, the National Guard or even the local school, because they have been given the gift of stupidity to protect them from the ramifications of their own devastating decisions. In the end the thin blue line that resides between justice and chaos is not law enforcement led by more government employees—its in the Second Amendment and under the right to bear arms that Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of State authenticated, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” That militia is not a group of idiots ran by the federal government—its individuals fighting for their right to protect their private property and to take back their government when and if that government fails them in the future. With the decision by the DOJ over the IRS case—it is clear that there was a lot of wisdom in Thomas Jefferson’s assumptions. So the best thing to do is to protect yourself from future stupid people. Join the NRA if you haven’t already. Sign up for Second Call Defense. And buy a gun. If you already have one, or two, or a hundred—buy another gun so that the DOJ can get a taste of what their bad decisions cause regarding social behavior patterns.   And if you live near me, buy that gun from the good guys at Right 2 Arms, which is essentially at the end of my street in Liberty Township. It’s government’s problem for their bad decisions—not yours dear reader. Protect yourself from them by using the rights provided at the outset of the country. The lawyers, politicians and theatrical fools have strayed away—and Lois Lerner is the proof of just how bad it really is. The DOJ just confirmed it.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.



Gun Rights “Shall Not Be Infringed”: Philosophy trumps legality–get to know Senate Bill 199 and Senate Bill 180

I get really tired of all this talk about gun control. On Saturday Night Live shown on October 10, 2015 the obvious attack against guns was incredibly obvious. They did several skits attacking guns showing how the progressive New York culture sees the rest of America. Well, just for clarity not to the gun owners who read this site each day, but those progressive types who are way too politically left-winged, the Second Amendment is not up for debate. It is not up for negotiation. And there is no interpretation of the words “shall not be infringed,” that opens the door for more rules, confiscation, or government involvement. As lawyers do try to discuss the meaning of words which can take on different meanings as times change the Bill of Rights is an extension of American philosophy for which legal terms evolved. The intent of the Constitution therefore does not fall under the proper interpretation of legal minds, but philosophy. And the essence of that philosophy is that governments cannot be trusted—which is grossly evident in our modern news cycles. Here is how the terminology has been misinterpreted by legal minds giving the illusion that the Second Amendment can be modified to suit some progressive diatribe—such as those shown on left leaning news outlets and entertainment venues.

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment’s intended scope. On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment’s phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this “individual right theory,” the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language “a well-regulated Militia” to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state’s right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory “the collective rights theory.” A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right.

In 1939 the U.S. Supreme Court considered the matter in United States v. Miller. 307 U.S. 174. The Court adopted a collective rights approach in this case, determining that Congress could regulate a sawed-off shotgun that had moved in interstate commerce under the National Firearms Act of 1934 because the evidence did not suggest that the shotgun “has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated milita . . . .” The Court then explained that the Framers included the Second Amendment to ensure the effectiveness of the military.

This precedent stood for nearly 70 years when in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court revisited the issue in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290). The plaintiff in Heller challenged the constitutionality of the Washington D.C. handgun ban, a statute that had stood for 32 years. Many considered the statute the most stringent in the nation. In a 5-4 decision, the Court, meticulously detailing the history and tradition of the Second Amendment at the time of the Constitutional Convention, proclaimed that the Second Amendment established an individual right for U.S. citizens to possess firearms and struck down the D.C. handgun ban as violative of that right. The majority carved out Miller as an exception to the general rule that Americans may possess firearms, claiming that law-abiding citizens cannot use sawed-off shotguns for any law-abiding purpose. Similarly, the Court in its dicta found regulations of similar weaponry that cannot be used for law-abiding purposes as laws that would not implicate the Second Amendment. Further, the Court suggested that the United States Constitution would not disallow regulations prohibiting criminals and the mentally ill from firearm possession.

Thus, the Supreme Court has revitalized the Second Amendment. The Court continued to strengthen the Second Amendment through the 2010 decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago (08-1521). The plaintiff in McDonald challenged the constitutionally of the Chicago handgun ban, which prohibited handgun possession by almost all private citizens. In a 5-4 decisions, the Court, citing the intentions of the framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment, held that the Second Amendment applies to the states through the incorporation doctrine. However, the Court did not have a majority on which clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the fundamental right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense. While Justice Alito and his supporters looked to the Due Process Clause, Justice Thomas in his concurrence stated that the Privileges and Immunities Clause should justify incorporation.

However, several questions still remain unanswered, such as whether regulations less stringent than the D.C. statute implicate the Second Amendment, whether lower courts will apply their dicta regarding permissible restrictions, and what level of scrutiny the courts should apply when analyzing a statute that infringes on the Second Amendment.

Recent case-law since Heller suggests that courts are willing to, for example, uphold

  • regulations which ban weapons on government property. US v Dorosan, 350 Fed. Appx. 874 (5th Cir. 2009) (upholding defendant’s conviction for bringing a handgun onto post office property);
  • regulations which ban the illegal possession of a handgun as a juvenile, convicted felon.  US v Rene, 583 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2009) (holding that the Juvenile Delinquency Act ban of juvenile possession of handguns did not violate the Second Amendment);
  •  regulations which require a permit to carry concealed weapon. Kachalsky v County of Westchester, 701 F.3d 81 (2nd Cir. 2012) (holding that a New York law preventing individuals from obtaining a license to possess a concealed firearm in public for general purposes unless the individual showed proper cause did not violate the Second Amendment.)

That’s just a bit of history on how the Second Amendment has been knocked back and forth over the years. Yet the trend in spite of New Yorkers like those found on Saturday Night Live around the rest of the country is for gun laws to become less stringent not more so. For instance in my home state of Ohio there are two pro-gun bills being introduced for discussion which are very important.   The Ohio Senate Civil Justice Committee had a hearing Wednesday, October 7, at 2:30 p.m. in the Finance Hearing Room to discuss two pro-gun bills.

Senate Bill 180, sponsored by Senator Joe Uecker (R-14), would allow an employee to store a firearm in their locked vehicle without fear of employer retribution.  Throughout the country, many employers have adopted “No Firearms” policies that extend beyond the physical workplace to include employee parking lots – areas often accessible to the general public and not secure.  In order to comply with these policies, many employees must choose between protecting themselves during their commutes and being subject to termination by their employer.

The fundamental right to self-defense should not stop simply because you park your car in a publicly accessible parking lot owned by your employer.  When companies invite employees to park on their property, they should not be allowed to dictate employees’ constitutional rights inside one’s own vehicle.

Senate Bill 199, also sponsored by Senator Uecker (R-14) and Senator Randy Gardner (R-2), would allow an active duty member of the military to carry a concealed firearm without obtaining a concealed carry license if the active duty member is carrying a valid military identification and a certificate indicating a small arms qualification.

If your company has such a misguided policy that impedes your inherent right to self-defense, please contact NRA-ILA’s State and Local Division at state& and share this information.

And that’s where I stand, there needs to be a lot more guns out there, not less, and we need to be able to carry them in more places more often. The trend is clear and the necessity for more guns is obvious. Guns are not just instruments of death the way left leaning politics frames them—they are part of the philosophic American experience. They transcend legal interpretation as philosophy trumps legality because it is in thought that all law emerges. So to undo some of the laws misinterpreted by sissy-driven legal minds over the years, the Ohio Senate Civil Justice Committee is working to walk back the intrusions that gun owners have been conceding—illegally due to improper legal negotiations from the anti-gun lobby over previous decades. The activism displayed on Saturday Night Live and other anti-gun venues made a false assumption—that gun rights “shall not be infringed,” were up to debate. They aren’t under any circumstance. End of story. It’s not complicated. Guns=philosophy which trumps legality.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Trump Offers Himself as a Superman President: A curious query into meekness and the assumption that its good

One thing that really disgusts me is when I’m around other men who make the statement, “I’m not superman” as a way to let themselves off the hook for underachieving. The statement usually comes when there is great pressure to do everything and be everything to all the needs of all who require solutions. The chicken thing to do is to declare—I’m not superman, “I’m not perfect,” “I’m just a man.” I don’t think there has ever been a single day in my life from a young boy until the present where I’ve just wanted to be “just a man.” Considering the name of this site is “overmanwarrior” that should be a pretty good indication of where my sentiments reside in the context of personal expectation. So when presented with problems, no matter how many or how difficult, I always lean in to solve them all and carry whatever burdens there are—no matter what the odds. To my mind that is what is expected out of men—all men of all races and ages. It is their job and if they fall short of that attempt—I don’t think much of them. That is why I am so interested in the Donald Trump campaign. He says and expects of himself much of what I do—which is the type of person I want for president. That was never more obvious than in an early October weekend interview with Trump by CNBC’s John Harwood who declared to the presidential candidate, that America doesn’t have “superman” presidents. Trump’s response was that “You will if you have Trump for president.” Watch for yourself.

What John Harwood said was actually a mouthful—it had meanings at many levels. But most obvious is that American presidents should be expected to be supermen—otherwise no nation can expect to maintain such an exclusive status as a dominating superpower. Ordinary men with their petty weaknesses have caused enough trouble over the years, from John Kennedy’s affairs, to LBJ’s womanizing, Bill Clinton’s obsession with sexual relationships, and the Bush family meekness, if the problems in our country were to really be traced back to an origin, it comes from human beings—especially people who are supposed to be leaders, lowering the bar of their own expectations to be viewed as simple men with humble origins. Society might teach that meekness is a positive trait in Sunday school, but in reality that just gets your ass kicked intellectually and physically. Meekness invites some dominating personality—or county to step in and push you around and that mentality needs to change if America is going to survive.

Men should expect themselves to be supermen. Teddy Roosevelt with all his faults pushed himself toward greatness nearly with every breath he took, daily. One of his life goals was to kill a man which he did on San Jaun Hill with his Rough Riders. He overcame illnesses, great opposition, and even finished a speech he was giving while he was shot. He was campaigning when an assassin’s bullet penetrated his body—he knew it—yet he finished his campaign speech anyway just to show how tough he was. That was not a guy who allowed himself to be “meek.” Andrew Jackson was another such personality. Over his lifetime he survived many duels and carried with him all his life an expectation toward a rough and ready approach to just about everything. It was because of Jackson that the United States currently has Florida, Texas and had a paid off debt during his time in office. Thomas Jefferson was another personality who expected of himself not great physical strength, but incredible intellectual strength. It was because of him that we have the Marines when he put together a force to go and fight the Barbary Pirates. I would expect every American president to exhibit similar behavior. Even though those presidents were far from perfect, they at least made attempts during their lives to be more than ordinary. They certainly tried and had personal expectations of greatness.

During westward expansion many men challenged themselves against fate for the potential of fortune. Most failed, but a few rose to the top and became larger than life characters largely on the backs of their personal bravado. Doc Holiday was one of those gun fighting characters that took a debilitating illness and pushed himself beyond the limits of fear to something he otherwise would not otherwise become as a gentleman gambler. Many don’t know it but likely the real inspiration for the Lone Ranger western character was a man named Bass Reeves. He was a black lawman who was obsessed with living with honor and a sense of justice for the innocent. The westward expansion period was an exciting time because there did emerge strong personalities that pushed themselves toward superhuman expectations, Jessie James was one, Wild Bill Hickok was another. After World War II many westerns were made in the movie business and on television that embodied something of an overman mindset, where men tried to live under a system of honor to protect their families and friends with a superhuman courage. John Wayne and Clint Eastwood built their careers around embodying those traits to the movie going public. For a lot of years there was an expectation among other males that they were expected to act whenever possible as something beyond mortal when pressed.

Most males today make me sick at their lack of bravado, and now we live in a time where such superhuman expectations have been abandoned. Even among our celebrities there are no longer many who even attempt to portray a larger-than-life personality. Yet John Harwood says it so easily that we don’t elect superman presidents. When have we decided not to? What ridiculous imposition of assumption dictated that we vote for the meek, week, losers of low self-confidence emitting from the “everyman” like sweat running through the crack of a gorilla’s ass? When did weakness become such a noble quality—because at such a point the instigator should be wrung up and cast through the folds of time into a boundless existence where they can do no further harm toward the fate of humanity. No wonder so many people dislike Trump’s boastfulness. Donald Trump doesn’t sit around crying like some modern man that his goldfish died. Trump doesn’t politely pretend to be stupid so some losers can feel like they belong at the tables of greatness. Over the last few weeks there have been several examples given of past Mit Romney campaigns along with John McCain as if they were the types of presidential candidates the Republicans were looking for in 2016.   Are you kidding me? Both of those idiots lost—because they took the advice of marketers and allowed themselves to be seen as “everyman” instead of “overman.” There is nothing noble or good about the belching, farting, insecure everyman. There is nothing endearing about such a creature. The universe is laughing at them daily—we don’t want them in the White House.

Trump has no trouble sticking up his hand and declaring he’s not an “everyman.” He states emphatically without apology, that he is and would be, a superman. That’s who I want at the wheel of a “superpower” that America is supposed to be under the capitalist style of government that we have. We don’t need another meek statesman who believes himself to be just another guy in a field of team players unimportant on the cosmic stage. We’ve had plenty of presidents like that—and they haven’t done us a good job. As a result, there are not enough men in the world willing to be a superman within the sphere of their personal contacts. Ask a wife who she’d rather sleep with, a crying fool ready to throw himself at the feet of a community and sacrifice himself to their qualms, or an unapologetic superman who always has the answers and is ready in a fraction of a second at all hours of the day to take her where she wants to go? What about the child who looks up at a father and wants someone who knows best 100% of the time, or the wavering reed of indecision who declares that they are just men among men—and nothing particularly special. Then who would that kid listen to when they ask what would happen if it were discovered they smoked pot for the first time. Typically the meek dad would say, “well son, I’ve smoked it and it wasn’t very smart, but you’ll have to make up your own mind. Who am I to judge or tell you anything, I’m just a man?” Compare that to the dad who tells the kid, “if I catch you smoking pot I’ll kick your ass off this fu**ing planet you little bitch. I’ve never smoked it and only pussies smoke it because they can’t handle the pressure of this life and seek to numb their minds from the pain of reality. That makes them weak and you don’t want to be weak.” Which is the correct answer dear reader? That is why the world needs more supermen. The meek types have done enough damage to last many lifetimes—and its time to change our approach. The world needs more supermen. Wives want them in their beds, kids want them as fathers, and nations need something to encourage them to be better people. So especially in the White House, we had better learn to elect such people. Because we all need to face a high bar and stop using humanity as a crutch for laziness, and cowardly dispositions. We have tried that and it doesn’t work.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Jock Lindsey’s Hanger Bar: A tribute to the real life Fred Sorenson

Not many people except for aviation enthusiasts would know the name of Fred Sorenson. On a Wednesday in mid June, 2014 the veteran pilot turned 65 and as mandated by the FAA had to retire from his job as a pilot for Southwest Airlines. On Flight 4246 from Burbank, California to McCarran International it was his last flight, professionally. The man had a colorful career as a pilot. He once flew in and picked up Steven Spielberg and a panicked crew up from their Hawaii location while shooting Jurassic Park just as a hurricane was headed to destroy everything in its path. But that wasn’t the first time Sorenson had met Spielberg. Years prior, Sorenson was flying the crew of location scouts around for Raiders of the Lost Ark. Those guys liked Fred so much that they offered him a role in the movie. That role turned out to be the famous secondary character Jock Lindsey complete with his pet snake Reggie as seen below.

Movies are reflections of real life characters, like Sorenson—people who live real mythologies. Without such people to populate our memories there is no canvas for which to paint a character like Indiana Jones upon. That’s why I’m so proud that Disney now that they’ve opened up their new Disney Springs—the former (Downtown Disney) have built a bar/restaurant dedicated to the type of real life characters that Fred Sorenson really was. Disney could have done the usual thing and had a restaurant more directly connected to the famous archaeologist played by Harrison Ford, but they didn’t. Instead they decided to concentrate on the spirit of adventure that characters who knew Indiana Jones would have exhibited, which was a smart idea. What they ended up with is a place called Jock Lindsey’s Hanger Bar which features a theme reflecting the early days of aviation and an adventurous spirit that had roamed the world during that period.

When things really get cynical in my life, I find balance in the type of people who rushed out to the grand opening earlier this week and wanted to be the first to record their experience at the new establishment. Ironically the best video I saw of the event was from the Jones family—aptly named. The couple in the above video run a travel business centered down the road from Disney World. They invented their life so that they could have unfettered access to their favorite vacation destination and live their life within that grand mythology. They are my kind of people, they even homeschool their kids—so they are not the kind of glazed over products that public education produces intellectually. They are fully alive people functioning from their internal bliss, so their optimism is contagious—and revealing. They had to be among the first to visit the new bar dedicated to Jock Lindsey whose character set the tone for the entire Indiana Jones series over the next three decades.

So guess where I’ll be going on my next trip to Disney World? And I’ll likely be more excited than they were to visit Jock’s place. The little Indian Jones relics spread around the bar were put there just for people like me and the Jones family—fans who truly feel passion for the little things in life. But additionally, unlike the Jones family, I have expected out of myself to actually live the life of people like Fred Sorenson myself. Because it takes unique people to give film makers and the creative minds at Disney the idea to capture such personalities on a screenplay page to make mythologies out of. So the adventurous little trinkets that populate the bar from the old-fashioned propellers to the boat dining area outside have a particular appeal to me.

My oldest daughter probably has the adventure bug the worst in our family. Over the last six months she and her husband have traveled extensively first to the Snowdonia mountains in Wales then all over the rustic terrain of Iceland. They often stayed in the type of places captured in the fantasy environment of Jock Lindsey’s bar. My daughter has never really aspired to be an Indiana Jones type of character, but rather the real life Fred Sorenson personalities—people who tend to have beat up luggage and only a fist full of dollars in their possession at any given time living on perpetual hope. And with such people often come personalities of child-like optimism. Movie people know when they meet people like Fred that they need to tap into that essence so to bring their natural magnetism to their projects. My daughter as a photographer is always on the lookout for these types of people because when you meet them good things happen. It’s no coincidence that Fred was involved in two of the greatest adventure films of all time, even if remotely—Raiders of the Lost Ark and Jurassic Park.

Disney when designing the Jock Lindsey’s Hanger Bar clearly understood just how important Fred was to Indiana Jones and the mythology that followed that popular character. Of the artifacts displayed in the Hanger is the dinosaur bone that Spielberg gave to Fred thanking the pilot from rescuing the film crew from the hurricane in Hawaii. And that’s how it goes with people who live lives of adventure—they collect a lifetime of items that reflect what they endure through experience. That is why such places are so exciting. It’s why the Jones family and many others were so excited to visit the new bar at Disney Springs. Disney as a company better than anyplace in the world understands how to capture the life essence of adventure without the risk of actually living life on the edge. Guests to Disney Springs can visit Jock’s bar and get a sense of a life of adventure—the type of adventure my daughter just recently shivered through in Iceland. It’s not the same as real life, but its close enough to celebrate the type of life people like Fred actually lives.

I’m looking forward to visiting the place; it will likely be the highlight of my next trip to Disney. It’s not just for the remembrances of one of my favorite movies that Jock Lindsey’s Hanger Bar represents. It’s the celebration of adventurers everywhere in every walk of life. It’s not just a place dedicated to Indiana Jones, but to the type of adventure that Raiders of the Lost Ark was always a tribute to. Producers from Spielberg’s famous movie knew that the essence of that adventure was in the real life persona of Fred Sorenson. Because without him, I don’t think Raiders of the Lost Ark would have been the masterpiece it was. So it was fitting that when he retired from Southwest Airlines he retired in a manner similar to the opening of Raiders—flying off into the sunset. When I do have my beer at Jock Lindsey’s Hanger Bar it will be to him that I dedicate it to. People like him are the types we should all aspire to be. They create excitement just in their every day living and they make life just a little bit better because they are alive. They make movies better just by waking up in the morning. All anyone needs to do to make their movies classics is to turn their cameras on those magnetic personalities and let the film do all the talking.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.