The Fading of a Purple Haze: Prince leaves the world through death, but the music will last forever

Even for me, I was a little shocked that Prince had died.  It wasn’t the loss of a person that I considered to be something scratching the surface of a oveman, but the last great loss of a great talent from the 80s. I feel worse for the modern kids who don’t know what it’s like to have James Brown, Michael Jackson and Prince all alive and making music for their society all on stage together.  With the modern record industry comparatively crushed relative to that unique period in 1983, shown below, the amount of raw talent that was enjoyed by the 80s may not be seen again for a long time.  For modern race baiters who declare that America is a racist nation, they obviously don’t know much about our history.  I am proud to say I live in a culture that produced minds like Prince, Michael Jackson and James Brown.  Prince for all his small stature of 5’ 2” made the best of it and walked around like he was 9’2”.  I always thought of him as a remarkable person and he had an impact on me that lasted.

I also thought he was a little weird—and for whatever reason, we accept culturally people who are extremely different if they are musicians.  It’s a very strange thing to watch people who pick on others for being different turn right around and wear the shirt of a famous musician that behaves in very eccentric ways.  Prince was certainly one of those people. Prince was about nine years older than I was, so as he was making his most famous music, the album “Purple Rain,” I was traveling all over the country as an Explorer in the High Adventure Boy Scout Post, 962 ran by one of my arch rival school teachers from the 7th grade.  Me and that woman hated each other, but she was access to adventure so I put up with her and spent a lot of my time from 14 to 16 years of age doing just about everything human beings could do regarding adventure, rappelling, backpacking, spelunking, and competing against others in yearly competitions at Camp Frielander in Loveland, Ohio.  It was the only thing that could have held my interest at that particular time and I thrived in that environment.  In a lot of ways Prince and I came to age at the same time in very different ways.  Both of us learned to think bigger than just being human which a lot of Prince’s songs reflected.

I was never particularly compelled by the religious leanings of Prince, but I did enjoy his otherworldly approach to life—the eternal aspect, and he seemed to accompany me everywhere during those Explorer days.  Explorer Posts are divisions of the Boy Scouts of America, but they are co-ed activities so there were always girls around—especially on the competition campouts where explorers from all over the southern Ohio region showed up to fight it out at Camp Frielander each August.  Most of the competition was fire department Explorer Posts and those from various police divisions—where young people were basically in apprenticeships for those careers.  My Explorer Post was designed to make global adventurers, and the skills I learned there I never forgot.  I always had extreme confidence and all that came to excessive fruition during this period of my life—and my antics seemed to always occur next to a Prince soundtrack.  No matter where I was, or what I was doing, Prince was on the radio or on somebody’s private boom box.  And when it came to confidence and multitasking, I looked at Prince and took some young direction.  My introduction to the Explorer Post world came at Camp Frielander where on my very first night I blew up our campfire on purpose with a homemade bomb and picked a fight with a rival Explorer Post over a girl who me and the other males all wanted.  From winning several of the events and gaining everyone’s instant attention, like Prince I had splashed onto the stage of adventure boldly.  Within a year I was giving speeches in front of massive crowds at GE Aviation in Evendale and running around the University of Cincinnati like I owned the place and I was still six to seven years younger than all the kids attending.  From Prince I learned to step in front of an audience and take charge.  With him being so short and strange, I used to watch how he handled things and I incorporated many of his social tactics to my own escapades. So I can say that Prince greatly improved my life during a key time.

Within a few years I was elected president of the Dan Beard Council for the entire Tri-State region and I eventually secured the girl that we all wanted whom I had met that first night at Camp Frielander.  But by then I had outgrown her and I had rapidly evolved beyond many of the people who were with me that first night of that summer competition.  Literally the day that I was elected, which occurred at General Electric in front of a packed house I had met another girl that I liked a lot more so I was looking for a way to get rid of the other one and her father was one of the guiding administrators for the entire Dan Beard Council in the eastern part of the country.  Later that night when I was supposed to be in fight against a bunch of kids at my school, one of them ended up dead and of course I was the key suspect—everyone in the Explorer Post community abandoned me, including all my girl friends—and Prince’s constant music was the only thing that made sense to me during that period.  It was a surreal feeling to listen to the song, “When Doves Cry” as police cars all over Cincinnati went looking for me to question me for murder.  In 24 hours I went from the top of the world to just a few steps from jail and it was very strange.  But at no time was I afraid, or did I weep for my losses.  I simply recaptured myself quickly and got back to what I did best and within a few weeks, had recovered completely and was back to my usual persuasions.

Prince was so boldly creative that he gave to my mind, which desired unlimited energy, a glance into the eternal—and that carried me to places that would soon become self-sustainable.  I outgrew Prince by the end of the 90s largely due to the fact that I did more before I was ever 19 than some people did in their entire lives. By the time that Prince did a song for Tim Burton’s 1989 Batman film, I had outgrown him—but I continued to always admire the eccentric musician.  Prince was wildly imaginative and magnificently talented and I learned a lot from him at a key time in my life—and it was clear when he died that future generations wouldn’t have the same opportunity—and for me that was the saddest aspect of the mysterious death at Prince’s Paisley Park home and studio in Minnesota.  Prince at 57 didn’t eat meat, and was pretty religious for a rock star—and he had such a tiny little body.  So diseases took a toll and if he took some drugs to alleviate the pain, he likely put himself under too much strain—and he left his body to join the focus of his otherworldly pursuits which had been a big part of his music for so long.  It was that otherworldly appeal which I always enjoyed and drew from for myself. So it didn’t surprise me that his soul just decided to leave his body one day as the body struggled under pressures only the living understand.  Prince seemed indifferent to life and death, so he obviously didn’t have much fight in him to struggle through such tribulation.  But it’s always a shock to see that someone as full of life as Prince had left the world of the living—because it seems counter to his core personality.

Death is a journey of its own, and Prince took it closing a chapter on earth that future generations will only hear about.  I learned a lot from Prince, and I am happy to say that his overman appeal to me is something I quickly mastered myself—and actually exceeded by the time I was 30 years old and had suffered through many more tragedies on the same scale as that day I was elected onto the Dan Beard Council and lost it all just a few hours later. Prince seemed at that time to be the sage from the top of a mountain who had all the answers, but it wasn’t long before I was looking down on his mountain and thinking how small he really was.  That’s not Prince’s fault, as an artist, all he did was present something to contemplate through his music—it was up to us to bring meaning to it—and I did—living the life of a boundless adventurer who didn’t know any limits.  I probably achieved more earlier because of Prince than I would have without him.  Then suddenly he was gone as quickly as he came, like a purple haze and a distant memory that will soon be forgotten like a purple rain once the sun comes back out and distracts us from the day.  Such is life—but for me, I will never forget.  He was certainly one of the best and our society won’t produce another like him likely for hundreds of years—if ever.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

Disney is so Gay: Literally–they are pushing a homosexual agenda in the ‘Once Upon a Time’ television show on ABC

It is so immature, the concept that most people have about love and instantly associating love and sex interchangeably.  In most cases the people who write these modern movie and television story lines are kids themselves—barely in their 30s—and they lack deep understandings about life and how humans evolve.  They certainly don’t understand love—for that you need a married couple who have been together for at least 25 years—and been through a lot yet still choose to stay together.  It is impossible for anybody less to write about love in a manner that is based in any kind of reality and that is certainly true of most Disney productions where they are driven by progressive values instead of tangible human motivations.  Their television show Once Upon a Time finally made good on its promise to include a gay story line in season five, and that was something I had been predicting that they’d try and the result was embarrassing.  I actually felt sorry for the writers and actors who had to portray the story line, which went something like this; although Mulan (Jamie Chung) revealed her unrequited love for Princess Aurora (Sarah Bolger) in season three, she wasn’t the one in a new relationship in Sunday’s episode, “Ruby Slippers.” However, she did help make it happen, and now we have Disney justifying “loves first kiss” as “love” doesn’t know any boundaries, sex or ethnicity.  Love just is.  Well, they are wrong.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/once-a-time-gay-storyline-884653

I love a lot of things and that love does not translate into sex.  I love movies, I love cars, motorcycles, and guns—I love my grandchildren, my kids—I love my life.  But love and sex are not equal elements to a social paradox.  Progressives to spread this gay love socialism that they have been preaching for so many years had to strip away the value of love before they could attempt to sell it the way these idiots on the show Once Upon a Time have provoked.  In order to sell gay sex to the public—which has been going on for quite a long time—they had to destroy the notion of deeply committed love and attribute it to raw physical sex—the desire to integrate biologically with another human being for first the pleasure of it—then to procreate humankind with the result.   Under the progressive definition of love, if a human feels compassion for another person, then they must have some sort of physical justification for that emotion.  For instance—they must kiss them, or touch them in some way.

Sex does not represent love.  When I see a young couple (a man and a woman) kissing at a restaurant or at a park it is a beautiful thing.  When I see a couple of girls kissing in the same settings—or God forbid a couple of dudes—it is disgusting.  The reason is that the man and the woman have the potential through their affection to create a family, and that is a beautiful thing to see.  Without the potential for the creation of a family the physical display is simply for pleasure and it can then be disgusting—because the act becomes intrusive to our senses.  Sex by itself isn’t beautiful—two fat chicks covered in tattoos and body piercings making out in an amusement park line waiting for a ride is annoying.  Anybody with experience knows that what they are seeing is a short-lived emotion.  But if a young girl is making out with her boyfriend and they are holding hands and hugging each other, then that can be kind of sweet.  The reason is that their affections for one another can lead to the creation of a family.  All of us with experience know that the public sentiments of physical expression fade away as the love grows stronger but that what they are engaging in may be the start of a new family name—and that is beautiful.

Ultimately this is why progressives are attacking traditional sex and trying to paint gay sex in a way that makes it appear to be love—because they hope to remove the value of relationships and throw that value back to the states to manage allowing people to engage in open sex with all human beings without the stigma of judgment. This was the kind of world in the dystopian novel Brave New World—where nobody really felt anything for anybody—people just engaged in sex for the pleasure of it but they did not feel the meaning of love behind it.  Sex in that book was open and meaningless.

You can love a member of the same sex—two guys can love each other—but it is not appropriate for them to take that love to the barbaric level of sexual intercourse because what would be the biological point?  The appropriate thing for two guys to do to show love for one another is to punch the other guy in the arm and call him a name—like “hey dick-head,” or “hello you diabolical scum bag,” followed by a smile.  The reason is that the two friends are showing they have command of their biological functions and are working from a foundation of mental domination—love is in the mind, not the heart.  Such relationships are able to last over many years and are a form of love.  Take away the sex and love can thrive in a relationship.  Sex is only a distraction to real love—it doesn’t define it.  Sex is only a biological function.  Love is a mental decision not related to biology.  One is a function of instinct; the other is an affirmation of shared values.

As I’ve said before—even though the House of Cards is a compelling show, the gay sex is just ridiculous.  They have attempted to normalize gay sex and it is just gross.  Disney will face the same problem as they continue to advance the gay agenda through their feature films.  When it was announced that the Green Lantern superhero was a gay character—the popularity did not increase for him.  The mass population will reject such a premise because ultimately it’s gross.  Nobody wants to look at gay sex—not really.  For the same reason that it was always the teenage girl who survived until the end of 1980s horror films—because it is always a tragic loss to lose a girl because of the potential for life that she holds within her—gay expression is something audiences will reject because they cannot relate to the characters.  Those of us with experience know that love is deeper than just physical attraction so a story cannot advance in our minds if sex is used as a substitute for love.  It just doesn’t work and having two girls show their love for each other through physical attraction in Once Upon a Time comes out awkward, and it makes you want to change the channel.  It leaves the viewer with a desire to turn away and move toward something else instead of sticking with a story they know will go nowhere biologically.

Hollywood has been trying to normalize the acts of gay sex for a long time and now they are really testing the fences.  But all they are doing is cheapening the foundations of love that every human being craves by confusing young people with expressions of sex and calling it love.  I understand that the writers of these shows haven’t lived enough to understand—and it shows in their products—but it’s not cute to see such failures exhibited as successes.  People will endure the gay sex to watch a show, but it will hurt the appeal and weaken the ultimate market viability—and that is the risk that companies like Disney run by signing up for such progressive experiments.  The moment that Woody and Buzz Light year announce that they have a gay love relationship the value of Toy Story drops immensely because the love that the two characters have for one another transcends sex—which is why the Toy Story films have been so successful.  But playing with biological and psychological relationships in stories intended for young people, like Once Upon a Time is suicidal from a creative standpoint.   I would hope that Disney would employ smarter people and not get so wrapped up in progressive politics—because it will hurt them.  And I personally want Disney to succeed—so it pains me to see them make such epic mistakes.  That prime time attempt to normalize gay sex on a popular television show was really stupid.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/04/18/once-upon-a-time-gets-first-gay-couple/

If you click on the link above, you’ll see something really……………gay.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

I Hated ‘The Hateful 8’: A terrible movie by a failing Hollywood industry

There was a lot not to like about Quentin Tarantino’s latest film The Hateful Eight. I personally didn’t see it when it came out in theaters around Christmas of 2015 because of Tarantino’s political activism against police, but I put it on the checklist.  It was sold as a western shot in 70mm traditional wide—just as Ben Hur was many years ago—so I figured it would be worth watching.  My chance came once it was released to the home theater market and I was a little excited about it. But after two hours of movie realizing that the whole thing was going nowhere, I was very concerned that if Tarantino was the best that Hollywood had to offer—that they consider him a “modern” Shakespeare–that there is no wonder their movie industry was in trouble.  At that point there was still about 45 minutes of movie left to show and I was ready to turn it off—but didn’t because I already had too much time invested.

This is what happens when someone becomes so full of themselves—and have been told by hundreds of aspiring actors and progressive movie producers that they are the greatest thing to arrive since fire.  They forget that people actually will see their movies and that those people think very differently about the world than those tucked up against the mountains of California and the Pacific Ocean. The only good characters in The Hateful Eight was the Kurt Russell character.  Samuel Jackson wasn’t the greatest and once he revealed an oral sex scene with another guy—I decided I didn’t like him and didn’t want to invest any more time into learning about him.  Most of the movie took place inside a cabin getting to know all these characters who were telegraphed very early to being all completely killed off.  There was no point to their stories or the interaction between them because it all led to one place—death.

The Hateful Eight is like a person being walked to an execution getting to know all the people spitting on him along the way.  It just doesn’t make any sense because that person was going to be dead soon—so why waste the time?  It was just horrendously stupid.  Beautifully photographed, good soundtrack—most of the time—but just a stupid story—I can’t believe anybody read that script and thought it the work of a genius—and I can’t believe anybody gave Tarantino money to make that movie.

Coming from a guy who shares with me a love for the great movie, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Tarantino obviously isn’t at the same level of Sergio Leone, and I went into The Hateful Eight hoping sincerely that he was.  Not even close—not even close to the sincerity of a spaghetti western, which I thought was the point of The Hateful Eight. It ended up being just another sign of a broken and declining culture that doesn’t make anything original anymore—even though all the tools were provided.  To suggest that The Hateful Eight is anything close to the masterpiece Hamlet, just because everyone ended up dead in the end is ridiculous.  There weren’t any sympathetic characters for which to hang a morality on in Tarantino’s movie.  All the characters were villains and none of them were people I’d want to get to know if they sat down next to me at a bar.

Even using the barroom metaphor with The Hateful Eight seems underwhelming.  Typically when a man wants to pick up a girl in a bar he engages in small talk to get her to reveal bits about herself.  Once she decides to talk about herself the conversation evolves into more personal matters.  Then as a climax and some trust won, the girl decides whether or not she wants to sleep with the guy.  It’s a little mating game that our species plays to make the experience not seem so cheap.  The Hateful Eight is like walking up to that girl and just flatly saying, “Let’s have sex.”  Then spending three hours talking about all the things you should have talked about before blurting out the obvious.  It was just despicable as a story—pathetic at every level.

I have liked other Tarantino movies—I thought Pulp Fiction was clever, and I enjoyed his work in other things—but I wouldn’t say he’s a master of anything.  He’s only smart compared to the very stupid people who now make up the Hollywood industry which these days are just a few rungs above raw porn in its creative impulse. I am really glad that I did not go to see this Tarantino western at the theater because I would have been angry at wasting the money. The Hateful Eight wasn’t a western; it was a monstrosity of undeveloped ideas from a director who obviously has personal problems holding back his artistic ability.

As an example of how all westerns should be presented these days, The Revenant is still the featured example.  If you are going to make a western, at least put in the work.  So what if someone stole the script to The Hateful Eight and that’s why Tarantino made it into a feature film.  The material wasn’t so good that an eight year old child couldn’t have written it—so whatever provoked big money donors to give Tarantino money for that piece of crap sadly overrated the ability of the troubled, progressive filmmaker.  The movie wasn’t just bad enough to write a poor review about, it was bad enough that I personally feel like I was robbed just by watching it, because I can’t get back my time.  It would have been a much better movie if Samuel Jackson hadn’t forced a naked man to perform oral sex on him, because in the last dying moments he was the only one left and I couldn’t help but think that he was the last person I wanted to see on the screen in the end.  Given that, he was the best character in the movie after Kurt Russell’s character died of poisoning.  The Hateful Eight was horrendous filmmaking and storytelling at its absolute lowest.  Sadly, it represents a new generation that thinks it’s the work of genius—because people are now so stupid and have such a low opinion of themselves that they don’t know any better.  People now can actually relate to these despicable characters.  And that’s the real problem with The Hateful Eight and the filmmakers who put that trash on the screen.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

Donald Trump Wins the Presidential Nomination Easily: Ted Cruz womanizing story gets no traction because there’s no money in it

It is surprising that this video hasn’t had more airtime.  Obviously the #NEVERTRUMP people are salivating at an opportunity to pounce on Donald Trump after he effectively took off for a week to rest and welcome the birth of his latest grandchild.  Cruz moved up on him in Wisconsin and the media thinks they have him cornered finally and can knock him out of the race with a gauntlet of criticism that has been unheard of in American politics.  Meanwhile, this Cruz story is pretty important.  There is obviously something very diabolical going on.  If the guy cheats on his wife and is claiming to be a “Christian” this is a big deal.  Carly jumped in entirely too fast, and Cruz is giving off the entirely wrong body language to be innocent.  He never answered the question which is pretty bad. 

Look dear reader, Donald Trump even if he doesn’t win states like Wisconsin, Colorado, Indiana, Oregon and several other places still wins easily with 1237 delegates by June.  He may not even need to win California to get those delegates.  I’ve done the math.  Donald Trump would have to have a major meltdown to lose.  Granted, the questions at this stage get harder and he has a lot against him—literally at every turn.  But even if he only does “OK”, he still wins the nomination without a brokered convention pretty easily.  If Trump keeps his swagger, the nomination is his.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-latimes-republican-primary-poll-20160327-story.html

The media wants people to believe that the whole presidential race is closer and more dramatic than it really is.  They want Trump to keep working hard to win the nomination because it makes them all a lot of money having him on the news every night.  So if they can delay it, they’ll do what they can to keep him in the news until the general election against Hillary begins.  They would like a solid eight months of Trump ratings to generate several years worth of cable news projections.  The Cruz story is going nowhere because there is no money in it.  But for voters, they should be asking hard questions about Ted Cruz.  He doesn’t have a chance to win as president, but he is a sitting senator and a Tea Party favorite.  If he’s a cheater we need to know.  Watching that video of Cruz and Carly indicates that something is very, very wrong.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

 

Proof of a Global Communist Agenda Exposed: Alex Jones and his March 2016 show in full

They are lucky in a lot of ways that in America, we have the 1st Amendment.  Because the outrage is protecting them from those of us who are fully awake.  We are shooting words in an open marketplace instead of bullets.  It is obvious that many on the political left and establishment right don’t like the rebellion that is currently occurring, because not enough people are complying to sustain their formulaic plans.  But, too bad.  I will never submit to their way of thinking.  It’s just not going to happen.  If given opportunities  to compete in the marketplace of ideas, I’m happy to use that method to fight them with debate.  But if that goes away, I’m happy to do it in other ways—and I can assure everyone, that compliance with the current conditions is not an option.  To understand what I’m talking about, do yourself a favor, listen and watch this Alex Jones broadcast from Friday March, 25th.  While you are working in the garage on this nice spring day, or around the house, listen to this very good report—its three hours long.  I don’t agree with all of it, but it is quite good at detailing the fight we are all facing.  Don’t be asleep, it’s time to get up and go to work.  Join me on the battlefield.

And do a friend a favor and send this to them to help them wake up as well.  If you want the evidence of what Jones is saying, I have written millions and millions of words providing the proof.  Just look up any topic in the search bar on the left and you’ll find the evidence to substantiate what you are hearing.  If you doubt any of this remember that last night, the same day as this Alex Jones broadcast, Bernie Sanders–a socialist–filled up a 15,000 seat baseball stadium in Seattle.  The communists are rising, and the only defense there is against them–are us.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

Bill O’Reilly’s Question about Donald Trump: Defining a divided party and why Glenn Beck has lost his mind

Bill O’Reilly asked an important question when he wondered why members of his network, Fox News were so divided over Donald Trump.  The same could be said about the different between Donald Trump and Ted Cruz—who are the clear front-runners in the 2016 presidential race. The divide is unusually deep because the two candidates properly represent the philosophic divisions that are taking place within the Republican Party.  As much as hard-core establishment supporters would hate to admit it, Ted Cruz represents what they seek in a president, someone from within their political ranks that is a person of faith who gets their guidance from prayer and deity submission—religiously pious.  They also hold that the presidency is America’s version of royalty, and they that take that oath of office very seriously.  Trump on the other hand represents the fighters, the businessmen who have bent over backwards to one too many regulations–the financially independent—the self starters.  Trump appeals to people who turn toward themselves first for an answer before soliciting government help or prayer to a deity whom has never physically manifested in a logical way.  That last type of conservative has never really had a candidate—they have held their nose and hoped that they might get lucky because options were limited—which is often not how they do most things in their life.  But with Trump, they finally have someone running for the White House who thinks like them for a change.  To confirm my statement just read the linked article from Glenn Beck about why no Christian should vote for Donald Trump, and you’ll get the gist.  Glenn Beck whom I used to like—has lost his mind.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/274267-glenn-beck-no-real-christian-supports-trump

Personally I liked that Thomas Jefferson answered the door to the White House in his night robe.  I liked that Teddy Roosevelt skinny dipped in the Potomac River—just a century ago.  I liked that Andrew Jackson would target shoot from the White House grounds.   I’m not big on formalities and in regard to the President of the United States—I feel as Jefferson did, as an Anti-Federalist, such tokens of ordainment should be cast away in America and dropped from assumption.  We should go out of our way to strip away formality anywhere we can in regard to the White House, not increase it.  We don’t elect a king, we elect a public servant—and we should treat them that way.

We also need a president who makes decisions based on their life experiences and the use of cold hard logic.  I don’t want a president who gets his decisions from “praying.”  For instance, let’s look at the reasons that John Kasich decided to expand Medicaid—which he did in Ohio against an amendment to the Constitution passed to protect residence from the grips of Obamacare.  Kasich claimed when he went against voters and the Ohio legislature that God told him to expand government so dramatically when pressed by reporters.  Well, screw that.  We didn’t elect “God” to run our public offices.  With all the bad dreams and insanity that goes on in any civilization it is difficult to tell God’s providence from the claws of insanity.  While I can claim many similar stories of providence—as miraculous as Andrew Jackson’s assassination attempt by the unemployed painter who tried to kill him with two guns—that both misfired—I don’t make decisions based on providence or the hope of it.  You can only make decisions based on what you know or see.  If God decides to help out, that’s fine.  But such an ill-defined character cannot be a part of any strategic plan—because there isn’t enough evidence to count on such things.  You don’t think with your heart—you do with your head—and having faith that things will just work out is not enough.  When faced with a problem I want a president who works through it, not one that sits at the side of their bed and “prays.”  I don’t care what George Washington did—if he prayed less and acted more—he probably would have won more often.  If you want to pray, be a preacher or volunteer at church.  If you want to lead a nation—come to the table with self-reliance.

http://www.redstate.com/diary/jasonahart/2013/06/19/gov-kasich-god-wants-ohio-to-expand-medicaid/

Kasich, the closet liberal that he turned out to be could have misread his inclinations.  We as a voting public have no way to know if what Kasich said about God’s desire is true or not.  God did not have a press conference with us and tell us to expand Medicaid.  And we didn’t elect a “leader” to be some ancient go-between between God and man in the form of a priest holding some kingship based on the merits of “godly access.”  This is exactly why we were supposed to have a separation between church and state—not one where the church runs the state.  If people want the church to run the state—as Glenn Beck seems to—you might as well sign up for communism.  Capitalism requires self-reliance and logical thought—not altruistic sacrifice to divine will.   The worst time to make a decision of any kind is after a bad dream where some figure speaks to you in the form of some disembodied spirit.  The even dumber thing to do is to assume that the voice is “God.”  It in all actuality could be anything—some ghost from the past, some vengeful demon, some inter-dimensional terrorist—or it could be the lingering effects of an emerging insanity where deep-seated insecurities manifest into a mythological story played out among the brain’s neurons.  You never know.  When we elect a president, we elect a manager and we expect that person to make hard decisions based on reality as we can observe it.  That is the best that we can do given the limited scope of our human senses.

Then there is this ridiculous notion that the presidency should be beneath earthly squabbles.  I watched Republicans for well over thirty years play the moral high ground game and lose every time—especially George W. Bush.  He thought the office of the president was so elevated that he could not, or should not answer his many critics.  Well, that was the old alcoholic coming out of him, and the kid who was in the Skull and Bones society who participated in embarrassing hazing rituals.  When you are elected by the people for the people—you don’t surrender yourself to the political left by becoming a punching bag—using the “high office” excuse to mask internal fears.  You don’t sit in the White House on my behalf and make yourself a “pussy.”  You are expected to fight when attacked and to represent the constituency that elected you into office.  The office is not a higher authority than the people who put you there.  That kind of thinking leads to kingship—and we should not think of an American President as a king or as royalty.  He’s just a manager.

Just a few weeks ago I had an opportunity to shake Donald Trump’s hand.  I could have certainly had him sign any of my books–easily.  But I didn’t do either—even though I love the guy for president.  He’s on a job interview as far as I’m concerned and I’m the boss.  The boss doesn’t seek autographs and tokens of friendship from the people they employ.  Given that, if President Obama broke down in front of my house and needed to use my car jack or even the phone—I would tell that bastard to get off my lawn.  I wouldn’t shake his hand; I wouldn’t be getting a selfie to show that I had managed to get my picture next to a “powerful” person.  To me he’s just another person and in the case of his actions—he’s conducted his presidency as a domestic enemy that any constitutionally minded person is sworn to protect the nation from.  Needless to say, I will never shake the hand of president Obama under any circumstances.  He doesn’t rule over me, he doesn’t make decisions on my behalf, and he is a proven incompetent that has not earned the right to shake my hand.  And to be fair, I feel the same way about George W. Bush—he blew it.  I don’t care that he made some mistakes—but he was a lot like Glenn Beck—a former alcoholic who turned to “God” to straighten out their weak lives. I don’t fault them for their mistakes but they are smoking crack if they want to tell a person like me—who has never been addicted to anything, who doesn’t drink, has never smoked, has never done any drugs of any kind—who even avoids pain killers for surgery or at the dentist—and assumes that they have some place between me and the everlasting.  Give me a break!  They are not qualified to be in that position, and really, I can’t think of a single person on earth that is—even religious leaders.  If they have my high standards on personal living, I might listen to them—but short of that—forget about it.

Ted Cruz is way too much of a “god boy” to me.  I don’t want someone in the White House praying for answers.  I want someone who can extract answers from reality by sheer will.  I don’t want someone who will only enter the Oval Office with a jacket and tie on.  I want someone who will work there for 14 to 16 hours straight if needed to accomplish whatever task is on the table.  And I certainly don’t want a king—but I equally don’t want a self-sacrificial lamb that is willing to be plucked apart by the political opposition.  So to answer Bill O’Reilly’s question about Donald Trump there are still too many Republicans who want a president for all the wrong reasons—all the types of things that George W. Bush represented—meekness, sacrifice, divine providence-and policy concocted by voices from God which in all actuality were their addictive pasts calling out to them to return to the bottle.  For all those reasons I support Donald Trump—he’s a self-starter, he’s never been addicted to drugs or alcohol, and while he’s respectful of religion—he tends to guide himself before seeking the council of some otherworldly creature.  That’s good because I don’t have to worry about him waking up and starting wars based on dreams he’s had about “weapons of mass destruction,” or expanding Medicaid because God told him in a dream to help people.  I just want someone to do the job as president for the first time in the modern era.  I don’t want a king—I want someone to do the job—and I certainly don’t want a politician with ties to any lobbyist.  The deep divide over Donald Trump within Republican ranks is that not all conservatives quite understand what they want out of a public servant.  They know what they’ve had and are basing everyone on those examples.  But to me, what we’ve had was never good enough.  And the answer is not in more of the same—but in an entirely new direction.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

A Guide To Dealing with Trump Protesters: Taking lessons from the great film classic, ‘Dirty Harry’

Now that he’s obviously the most serious Republican contender for the White House, the protests against Donald Trump have escalated dramatically.  It is the last-ditch effort of all statist minded people to use collective protests to demonize individual effort.  We see it in labor union disputes over collective bargaining agreements, we see it in boycotts of businesses by liberal groups—look what they’ve done to poor Sea World, and we see it in politics—when change agents want to have an impact on culture—they use the mob to protest effort to essentially stop progress.  It has been the playbook of the political left for many years and was most effective in the Soviet Union during the early 1900s as Marxists used protests to usher in communism.  Ever since, especially in the 1960s, Marxists have turned to protest to stop management of any given issue for the purpose of pulling the Overton Window continually to the political left.  No Republican except for Ronald Reagan has effectively stepped beyond the reach of protests leaving conservatives in the United States defenseless against the Marxist strategy so explicitly outlined in the Karl Marx book, The Communist Manifesto.  Now the frustration among those left-leaning insurgents is in a near panic mode as they have run up against a Republican candidate in Donald Trump who seems to love the conflict and his supporters who know that this is the best shot they are likely to get in their lifetimes to stand their ground against the Marxist sympathizers are fighting back.

It is unlikely that CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC along with all the network outlets think of themselves as Marxists.  Their college training and public educations disguised the political philosophy behind Democratic politics and otherwise liberal thinking—so unless they understand history—they wouldn’t know. Most news reporters and news anchors lean-to the left—even Bill O’Reilly—compared to mainstream America—so they have a natural sympathy for the efforts of the protestors against someone controversial figures like Donald Trump.  But Trump, being a master communicator knows exactly what to say and how to say it—especially on camera.  If he needs to use three syllable words, he does it.  If he needs to use four letter words to make his point—he does that too—and so far he has been able to withstand everything that the political left has thrown at him.  He is the new brand of ironside that is unsinkable as Republican candidate and his supporters are eager to rush to his aid to help him through the gauntlet.

Before the Trump rally in West Chester, Ohio recently a friend of mine and I were in the front row just at the corner of a townhall style event.  Trump was literally 11 feet from our seats and between us were two layers of Secret Service.  I was seated on the aisle and my friend was just across it from my position.  We joked that if protestors were going to try to rush the stage, they would have to get through us—because we were best in position to stop it.  Sure enough, two protestors about 15 minutes into the Trump event came down the aisle and were coming right by me.  I looked them in the eye—there were two of them, a woman carrying a Bernie Sanders socialist sign and a guy behind her trying to chant down Trump before the crowd had a chance to react.  They were approaching the stage.   Looking at them both soaking wet they might have weighted about 200 pound together, so it wouldn’t have taken anything to throw them like a Frisbee out of the place.   I looked in eyes of a guy just behind my friend who was about 6’ 7” and was covered with tattoos who wanted to eat some red meat—he was ready to decimate somebody to protect his presidential candidate—his emotional investment.  Trump was in no danger.  I knew a Secret Service agent had moved just a bit to my right so he wasn’t standing in front of me—out of courtesy to me–so I knew he would easily have control of the situation.  The protestors came right up and stopped next to me and quickly law enforcement grabbed them and removed the two quickly. I could have easily grabbed the two, and made the news by justifiably protecting Trump—but there was plenty of security and there was no need for the audience to get into the mix.  The protestors were clearly in the wrong and the law was clearly on our side.  If I had grabbed them as a civilian, things would have gotten a little murkier, so my friend and I stayed out of it—for the most part.

The trick of the protesters—which is to them a self-sacrificial enterprise—they wanted to get arrested—they wanted to get beat up—they wanted to become victims so that they could advance their cause.  They intend to use guilt to leverage against their opposition.  Lucky for conservatives in this case—Donald Trump does not feel guilt—so he continues on in spite of their efforts.  The protesters are essentially doing exactly what the Scorpio character was doing in the great cop drama by Clint Eastwood way back in the early 70s, called Dirty Harry.  Scorpio was the villain of the movie and Dirty Harry had gained leverage on him by following him all over to harass him—keeping him from committing more crimes—which liberalized laws had prevented him from being charged with.  Scorpio paid a person to beat him up so that the blame would fall on Dirty Harry—which is exactly what happened.  This freed up Scorpio to commit more crime until finally Harry essentially quite the police so he could shoot and kill Scorpio after the left leaning terrorist hijacked a school bus full of children.  Protestors especially at Trump rallies are after the same kind of thing.  They can’t beat the message—so they want to get beat up so they can extract sympathy and get the light off their Marxist antics.

It’s not that so-called-blacks, Hispanics, or any other progressive voting blocs are bad people because of the color of their skin or that “white America” has an aversion to their place in American culture—it’s that their foundation beliefs about how a society should be run has been shaped by Marxism.  The left uses these voting blocs as weapons of insurrection to become change agents from capitalism to socialism.  That is clearly understood by a majority of the American people—especially in the flyover states.   Until Trump there wasn’t any mainstream defender against that act.  We remember how John McCain in 2008 defended Barack Obama from conservative pundits who used with emphasis of the middle name Hussein to point to a possible Islamic connection.  McCain lost that election–embarrassingly.  We saw Mitt Romney come out swinging in one debate and obviously had Obama on the ropes—then in the next backed off over guilt over his wealth, his hiring of women, and the perceived notion that in the last debate—he attacked a black man as president over allegations of racism.  Mitt Romney lost.  Now Trump backs down from nothing and people feel invested to defend him when he’s attacked—and that is understandable if the context of what has been against American culture is clearly understood.

However, the best way to beat the protesters is to let the Secret Service do their jobs.  Use your brain.  If protesters are just carrying signs and making a ruckus—let the police come and take them away.  If they bring weapons and intend to do harm, that is something else.  Quick action is necessary to delay trouble before the police can get there.  But if they are just blocking roads, and making an ass of themselves, let the police and the cameras do the work.  Don’t give them the sympathy they seek to invoke change.  The worst thing that can happen to these Marxist sympathizers in both the media, in politics and in the protesters themselves is that a Trump rally happens at all—the fact that an unapologetic person like Trump is speaking on behalf of the flyover states is something that hasn’t happened since flight was invented.

 It’s a big deal to have Donald Trump as a candidate doing what he’s doing—and I love that it makes so many on the left infuriated.  Now they know how I’ve felt for forty years of watching elections—welcome to the club!  The best way to beat them is to consume them utterly with ineffectiveness.  The rallies need to go on.  Just don’t fall for the Scorpio trick.  If you need to review that old cop drama just watch the clips above.  It’s an old movie, but some things never change and those old Clint Eastwood films were very good at painting a picture of the kind of politics that shaped the 60s, 70s, and 80s which documented properly the Marxist movement in America by insurgents who wanted to change it.

If you are at a Trump rally, let the professionals handle it—unless you can determine that the bad guys really intend harm.  In my case it was easy.  Those two protesters in West Chester weren’t a risk.  But you can bet I weighed all that out in the 1.5 seconds I had to make the call as they moved toward the stage where Trump was speaking.  If they are just yelling and holding up signs, they are harmless and Trump has a right to throw them out of his private event.  So let that process happen.  But if they intend harm, like that guy in Dayton clearly did, then a further step of prevention may be necessary.  These are bad people—treat them as such and tread carefully.  Understand what their objective is, and keep them from having it.  Don’t fall for their tricks because they will get worse.  We have to have this fight now.  Failure to have this fight might mean a much worse fight later.  Save lives—let’s get this over with.  The right people need to win for a change.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.