Rodizio at Liberty Center: Review after the first full month of opening — a vacation in our own back yards

To be completely honest, when I travel it is usually the restaurants that I remember most and what I look forward to experiencing before hand. Maybe it’s just the primal need for food and its connection to our daily life that does it, but restaurants reflect most about whatever culture I’m visiting. For instance, when traveling to my favorite amusement park, the Epcot Center in Florida it isn’t the rides that I think of most afterwards, it’s the chance to eat at all the various restaurants representing the different countries. It’s like traveling the world without the pain of all the border crossings and language barriers. Usually when I’m planning a trip, whether it’s to another country or another city within the United States, I scout ahead to the dinning options available and look forward to concluding whatever business I have in those places, so that I can enjoy a unique restaurant experience.

Given that little prequel it should be obvious then why I have taken such a liking to the Rodizio Grill at Liberty Center. It’s an exotic joy that is just as authentic, if not more so, than if I visited a steakhouse in Brazil, but it’s just down the road from me saving the plane fees to get there. After a hard day, or week I can visit the Rodizio at Liberty Center and feel like I took a vacation—which I consider invaluable to stress management—so I feel grateful to have one of these Rodizio restaurants so close now in southern Ohio. There are only two in all of Ohio, one in Columbus and now the one at Liberty Center. There are a few in Colorado, a few in Florida, one in Louisiana, one in Minnesota, Nebraska and New Jersey. So there are a respectable number of them in the United States—but for most of the country it is a journey to get to one of the locations. The Rodizio at Liberty Center is literally down the road for me so given that convenience and my love of a vacation experience even if it’s just for a few hours, it shouldn’t be a surprise that I have been there several times in just the first month of its opening. My wife and I were fortunate enough to be invited to a VIP opening on October 27 2015 and we enjoyed it so much that we took our daughter there for her 25th birthday exactly one month later.

I had been there other times in between, most of them professionally based, but this last time was different—it was my family, so out of all the nice places around the city of Cincinnati, I wanted my little girl to have the best opportunity. I have eaten at most places around the city of Cincinnati. I am very familiar with the various restaurants along the Fields Ertle exit just outside of nearby Mason. But there is nothing like this Brazilian steakhouse outside of downtown Cincinnati. However I prefer the suburbs to downtown mainly because of parking, so it was a no brainer on the decision. I wanted to take her to the Rodizio for a unique, “worldly” experience that I think she deserves—because she’s a good kid who deserves to be pampered on her birthday.

My measure of steakhouses is of course Jags in West Chester which I consider to be the best in the area. Jeff Ruby’s Steak House on Fountain Square is a close second. But these are very expensive establishments. The food is very good, of course, but it’s more a place to be seen, or to raise an impression with a client then the actual functionality of those places. I put the Rodizio at Liberty Center above those steakhouses for one simple reason. The food is on par with those upper crest establishments—but the atmosphere is much more ambitious at Rodizio, and the food supply is limitless. The full Rodizio experience is essentially an all you can eat buffet—an endless supply of fresh vegetables, fruits and salads with some of the best cuts of meat that you can find anywhere—such as the Maminha which is a tri-tip sirloin steak with a moderate marbled-to-lean cut presented medium to medium rare right at your table. The Gauchos bring the meats to your table and present a slice to your plate directly. They will keep coming until you turn your table indicator to red letting them know to either give you a break, or to bring your check. The Picanha is a slice of top sirloin that rivals the best of what any steakhouse anywhere can provide and it’s presented in whatever quantities you can hold as the customer. At the birthday lunch for my daughter they were circulating roughly 7 different types of meat and a standout was the Miolo Da Paleta and the Garlic Beef. Lunch is $19.95 for the full Rodizio experience which I think is an absolute bargain. At dinner the selections increase to well over 10 items including lamb. Dinner is just shy of $33 dollars per person. I’ve now been to Rodizio enough to begin knowing the various cuts of meat on sight which seemed very exotic upon my first visit. They still are, but now they are like familiar friends.

My concern after the VIP dinner was that the management at Rodizio was putting their best foot forward to win over community leaders, but that the food quality would subside after a few weeks of a hard open to the general public. As of this writing Rodizio at Liberty Center has been open for only a month, but their food quality is as good as it was on that first special night. Each time I have been to Rodizio since, which has been at least once a week, Captain Hook, the head chef has personally come to my table to make sure the food quality is up to par. He welcomes criticism because he is aiming at perfection—which impresses me in any endeavor. I continue to be impressed with Captain Hook and the management at Rodizio purely from a business standpoint. It is a real challenge to offer so much fresh food to an unpredictable public. Dinners at Rodizio are busy, so make sure to make reservations. Lunches are something that local residents haven’t yet discovered so the rushes have been sporadic. Yet Captain Hook prepares large quantities of food to accommodate without putting the restaurant in an obvious strain. The kitchen might feel the pressure, but it doesn’t show on the floor where the customers are. Pricing wise, and by function Rodizio is like a hot rod healthy version of the Golden Corral, or a Frisch’s breakfast bar. In those places the food is prepared in mass quantities and sits under hot plates for hours. The food can be good, but you know you’re at a smorgasbord so you don’t expect high quality food. Rodizio has the same challenges, but they’re competing with the best of the steakhouses in the city so the food quality challenge by Captain Hook and the management is to balance out need with supply. I’ve been to Rodizio on really busy nights and during sporadic lunches and the food quality under all those conditions has been very high. They maintain items ranging from Ovo de Codorna (marinated quail eggs) to Salada de Cogumelo (mushroom salad)—fairly complex arrangements all presented very fresh—and I have yet to see the food quality drop.

The 27th of November happened to be Black Friday at Liberty Center and it was good to see the place  bulging with business. People have discovered the place and at just after 6 PM, there wasn’t a parking space to be found except in the very back of the complex. After the first thirty days of opening my family has been there at least 20 times—so Liberty Center has become very important to our social life. We’ve now eaten in most of the establishments—both the premier restaurants of which Rodizio is but one, and the offerings around the food court, and we have had pretty much positive experiences at all of them. I prefer the Rodizio because it is the most unusual of the dining options—it is the one that most feels like something you’d have while on vacation as opposed to just a night out on the town. Rodizio reminds me of something I’d have at the Epcot Center instead of at a local eatery—so I love it. But it’s not just that place, but all of Liberty Center which contributes to that vacation destination feel. If I were from out-of-town, I’d look forward most to visiting Liberty Center and restaurants like the Rodizio as the takeaway of my traveling experience. It’s that kind of place. I can’t help but think of how lucky some of the people who are leasing apartments and office space in the yet to be opened buildings where work, living, and pleasure will be offered in a one stop experience. When those places do open restaurants like Rodizio will be wonderful options for them. You can eat healthy and affordably at the Rodizio, and load up your food for the day instead of leaving hungry. A group of eight like we had at Rodizio would have cost about $700 to feed at Jags. That same group at Rodizio was just shy of $200 and we didn’t hold back on anything—we spent very loosely, deserts, drinks, and tips. And we were stuffed. I didn’t need to eat the next day. The food was so good that you just don’t want to stop eating it. But at some point you are on the verge of busting so you put your table indicator on its side and they bring your check. If I were a young millennial living at one of the Liberty Center apartments, I’d eat at Rodizio every day for lunch at only $19.95 and get all the fruits and veggies a body needs. For business travelers staying at the Marriott at the other end of the complex, Rodizio will solve jet lag and replenish you after a long day of boring business meetings. It’s a bargain, and a luxury. As good as the other restaurants are—and so far they all are, it’s the all you can eat option at Rodizio mixed with the exotic style of the food that put it on top for me.

After our lunch we walked around Liberty Center and enjoyed the Holiday lights. It was a warm evening, so it was a pleasure to stroll around and people watch. Liberty Center is a special place and in just a very short time my family has used it for what it was intended. It’s a vacation destination that we have in our own backyards. As I write this we are making plans for a complex trip overseas to very exotic locations, but I can’t say that I am looking forward to any of them the way I do when going to Liberty Center and dinning at the Rodizio Grill. I appreciate what all the ambition that made Liberty Center possible was committed to so that places like Rodizio could be an entertainment option. But it’s still nice to see people enjoying it. If there was anything that really jumped out at me about the Thanksgiving Holiday for which we just experienced, it was that I’m thankful for the wonders of capitalism—because it’s on full display at Liberty Center. It shows what unlocked human potential can generate if provided with the opportunity. Among the best of these examples is the Rodizio Grill. It’s a real treasure in southern Ohio and a perfect getaway for a spirit needing to recover from the stresses of living—without the worry of spending yourself into oblivion to get there. It’s a vacation experience every time you go—and for me, that’s a cache worth more than money.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


People like Euric Cain Cause Racial Tension: The strategic objective of pitting “blacks” against “whites”

If the people considered “black” were all like Ben Carson, or John Boyega from the new Star Wars film, The Force Awakens, we wouldn’t be having the conversation that we are about to have. The racism that the black community protested over the last week in Chicago doesn’t exist, it’s a made up fantasy promoted by George Soros progressive type activists. It’s a fiction. For instance, most of America spent Thanksgiving watching NFL football games and journalists would be hard pressed to find a single case of racism where fans boycotted viewing one of those events because most of the players were black. The color of skin does not matter to white Americans. I know I could care less about skin color or even nationality. Most of the people I like best come from other places in the world—and I welcome them as American citizens. Most conservative white people who I know feel the same way. They are not prejudice in any way. They wear their AJ Green jerseys to their luxury boxes and cheer on that player at Bengal football games without thinking for a second about that player being black. And if AJ Green asked those same wealthy white Americans to lick his feet, they would, just to be near him. Racism in America is a created story designed to undo our freedom. That is the end of the story.

But you didn’t see that crooked bastard Barack Obama come out on national television to protect the reputation of Euric Cain seen shooting a white Tulane University medical student in New Orleans did you? I say bastard as the correct term for the little boy from Indonesia born to a mother who had loose relationships with men. I don’t know who the father of the current President of the United States was. I don’t know if it was some Kenyan dude, the communist Frank Marshall Davis—which was quite possible, or some dude that she had sex with in some other escapade—because she was that kind of girl. So there is no way of knowing the truth about Barack Obama’s actions because his parental heritage is very “sketchy.” Not his fault, he is likely as clueless about his parental heritage as the rest of us, but it is an element to his behavioral mystery. This is important because Barack Obama is well-known to have come out in defense of black criminals like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown. Both of those “black men” exhibited similar behavior as Euric Cain, a 21-year-old hoodie wearing punk who was robbing an innocent woman then shot a man who stopped to help her. As seen in the video above, Euric tried to shoot Peter Gold in the head just for showing up to help—this after severely wounding the helpless man. The nation was shocked to see the callused nature that Cain indicated as he pulled the gun on Gold shooting him then trying to shoot the victim in the head before the gun jammed. Cain then left the scene in an SUV only to be tracked down later.

The president didn’t have a press conference asking for more gun control to keep guns out of the hands of people like Euric Cain—who obviously is not an NRA supporter and would have guns regardless of any legality. However, if Gold had been armed—which he should have been—and shot Euric Cain dead in self defense—then blacks all over New Orleans would be protesting, just as they are now in Chicago, and many other places. Because blacks under this current president have been “community organized” into radicalism to artificially create another civil rights movement in America with the underlying intention of promoting economic communism as the end goal. If you look carefully at the motivations behind Black Lives Matter and other George Soros funded endeavors regarding gun grabbing politics and artificially induced racism debates—you will see that they openly profess socialism and communism as the answer to their quandaries. But you don’t hear about that on the news either—do you dear reader? Instead, the press quickly tried to kill that story about Euric Cain. The media carried it as an obligation, but the talking heads on the cable news stations and prime outlets like the Today Show got off the story like a teenage kid being caught with a pornographic magazine as a deeply religious mother stepped into his room unannounced.

So I’ll say it, Euric Cain was a maniacal thug, a supreme loser and is the reason that “white America” is skeptical of places where lots of people of color reside. It’s not the skin color that whites fear, it’s the collective behavior of “blacks.” When you watch the ease for which Euric Cain pulled the trigger of a gun on another human being and left him for dead, it is clear why anybody would be fearful of a group of people. It’s not because of the color of Euric’s skin, it’s because he demonstrated behavior that indicated he could be a ruthless thug. Euric Cain was dressed like a number of other young black people do these days, so when others see this kind of thing they’ll associate it with all future interactions. If black America actually wanted to integrate equally into “white” neighborhoods and be treated fairly, people like Obama would have come out in a press conference to denounce the actions of Euric Cain. Instead, he, along with rest of the progressive oriented media sought to look the other way and put their effort into every white cop who shoots a black youth—like exhibiting the same kind of behavior as Cain only as police they shoot too soon. In our current society, you have to be wounded first otherwise lawyers will prosecute you until the ends of the earth robbing from you everything that the criminal assaulting couldn’t get in an actual crime. Instead the money is still taken, only it’s gathered in a courtroom instead of on a city street. The blacks in those types of legal cases are used as a means of wealth redistribution—as a military objective. If the black criminals on the streets don’t get the money, then the government legal system does. Either way, the attack is against “white America.” Defend yourself with a gun, and you lose everything you ever had. Show up to a gunfight without a gun, like Peter Gold did, and you end up either giving the criminal whatever you have, or you end up dead. It’s just another form of terrorism being induced against “white” America for the purpose of wealth redistribution. That has always been the goal.

There is a reason white people cringe when they see a group of rough-looking black kids dressed like Euric Cain on a street corner. Well behaved moral white people don’t want to see people who they identify as criminals in their shopping malls, in the parking lot of their grocery stores—and they don’t want to see them at the Post Office. They don’t want to deal with them, period. It’s not their color; it’s their behavior that scares white America. Of course it’s not just whites, but all colors of skin tend to duck away from situations that they perceive to be dangerous. That perception is formed by people like Euric Cain. We’ve all seen them and dealt with them and that forms our impressions of future dealings.

Additionally in New Orleans about the same time as this shooting involving Cain and Gold was a gang related shooting that took place at a playground during a music video shoot. 16 people were shot in the exchange. I can promise this much—none of the shooters were NRA members. They were thugs, losers, and punks—probably all of them people of color. There may have been some Mexicans with some white people who want to be seen as black so they can live out the “thug” life that is so popular in video games like Grand Theft Auto and other urban myth making machines selling thuggish behavior to kids with an otherwise good future in front of them. But nobody talked about that shooting either. The story died within a few hours of breaking once it was discovered that the perpetrators were progressive creations, not NRA members or Tea Party supporters. If they had been, the news would have spread like a wild-fire across the world instantly, and white America would have been further prosecuted for their racism and love of guns.

Do you see dear reader what’s going on? We are at war—only nobody has formally declared it. Keep your guns close and sign up for Second Call Defense. Things are going to get much, much worse because this thuggish behavior isn’t localized. It comes from the top and is flowing down through society with strategic objectives in mind. So when the time comes, you don’t want to be a victim like Gold was. You’ll want to stop people like Euric Cain in their tracks. Then let the defense network at Second Call help you through the minefield that has become our legal system which in its current form is there to protect the criminal from the truly good, regardless of skin color.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Watching Mosques in America for Terrorists: Catching the potential Tony Montanas from Syria before its too late


There was some backlash when Donald Trump said that the proper response to the Paris attacks meant that we should watch mosques in the United States. For some strange reason that caused consternation within the progressive community—as if saying such a thing was taboo. There was also further ridicule by the left and some on the right (politically) when Trump reminded everyone that Barack Obama still refused to identify the threat of Islamic terrorism by name.   The point, a valid one, here was a president after all who told NASA that their priority was to instruct Muslims of ancient contributions to science instead of managing a space program—so obviously there was some emotional investment from Obama into Islamic faith that is—“abnormal.” When terrorist attacks come from that particular religion, it is natural to look twice at radicals within those institutional organizations and contemplate their intentions—just for public safety. But denying that there is a problem is actually dangerous, and reckless—which of course was Donald Trump’s point.

I was taking some people out for a bite to eat recently, the type of people who know very little about politics. All they know about Donald Trump is that he was on The Apprentice and that he had a lot of money. They have no idea who the current Secretary of State is, and probably don’t know who the governor of Ohio is, but they could tell you all about the latest Cincinnati Bengals football game—down to the last detail including the color of the jock strap of many of the players. Obviously the conversation while eating wasn’t very deep and was very non-political—which wasn’t very interesting to me. However, we were returning to our pre-dinner destinations and while driving down I-75 they saw that the parking lot to the West Chester Islamic Center of Greater Cincinnati was bulging with participants. There wasn’t an open parking spot anywhere and this led to some grumbling among my passengers that the next terrorist threat might come from such a place and that somebody should watch them. Of course that particular center has condemned violence publicly as seen in the Journal News article below.

What Donald Trump was saying is what logical people everywhere are assuming—and it’s a dangerous path. Trump has stated that social networks connecting terrorists need to be shut down, their oil taken from them, and they should be chased down to the ends of the earth with vigilance. That sounds wonderful when we all agree who the enemy is, but if that same mentality was used against people like us—constitutionalists—then the same intrusiveness can be justified by the progressive left—just as it has been in regard to Lois Lerner and the IRS attack against conservative groups. Trump is talking about dangerous things in regard to border security and the Islamic faith in general. However, the aggression of ISIS terrorism forces everyone to come to terms with these quandaries. You either attack them by violating an American assumption of live and let live—or they attack first striking at the things we all value, our freedoms, our values, and our capitalist economy. Trump’s warnings remind me of the film Scarface with Al Pacino which has become a cult classic. Trump is right, correct thinking Americans know it. We are at war; the targets have to be identified. And decisive action must be enacted. Philosophy from that wreckage must follow with proper conduct in the aftermath. At some point you have to stop looking at the past for a guide-book of directions and instead learn what you can and apply those concepts to the future in ways not yet implemented. You have to take action, be decisive, but must also remain flexible so that you do not become a tyrannical state adhering to a constitutional republic.

At the beginning of the film Scarface were political refugees escaping the communism of Cuba. Tony Montana was a freedom fighter who fell out of line within the Casto regime in Cuba. Boat loads of immigrants fled to the United States flooding the immigration offices seeking freedom, for which Tony was one of them. Under Jimmy Carter, very similar to Barack Obama and the Syrian refugees, American arms were held open to those misplaced people. Tony tried to work a standard job in the states, but found he wanted more out of life so he became a drug lord. I always loved Scarface as a movie. As much as I despise drugs and its culture, I always did love Tony Montana for his sincere honesty and his explosive temper—and ultimately his desire to do the right thing even though he became a raging thug. One scene in Scarface was particularly powerful for me. Tony was solicited to assassinate an anti-drug speaker at the United Nations with a car bomb. But the man had his children in the car with him, so Tony killed his accomplice who was to detonate the bomb killing the target and all inside. Without getting into too many details, I understand that scene very well, and I loved it when Tony Montana shot the guy in the head saving the kids and doing the right thing in a brutally honest way. It was a wonderful scene that really captured the paradox of our current problems with Syrian refuges to America.

Likely within the groups of young men coming to America from war torn Syria, a country mismanaged from the start, empowered by a failed Obama administration that fed the fire of that insurrection either by accidental incompetence, or deliberate passive-aggressive desire to arm the rebels—who became ISIS—there are terrorists using the fleeing masses to bring ISIS ideology on a suicide mission to the states. There are probably several real-life Tony Montana types who are fleeing Syria for all the right reasons, but find there is nothing for them in the states but unholy infidels. All it would take is for them to make friends with some of the members of the Islamic Center of Greater Cincinnati at a backyard barbecue, or even a local bar and discover that some of those people have radical thoughts and would be susceptible to a charismatic leader from Syria who had been there and already seen the decadence of the West first-hand due to the Sykes-Picot agreement from a century before.   Even though the Islamic Center of Greater Cincinnati’s leaders preach against terrorist violence, likely there are members who are sympathetic to the ISIS point of view if they spent time watching Al Jazeera America on cable television. All they need is a match to start a blaze and an ISIS sympathetic Syrian brought into the states with a feel-good intention to free those poor people from the mismanagement of the Obama administration might do something vile. All this is completely hypothetical of course. But it doesn’t take much to consider the possibilities.

Those guys who went out for a bite to eat with me had no skin in the game. They don’t attend Tea Party events, they aren’t overly religious, unless you consider football games a religion—and they are not even sure if they’ll vote for a president. But they knew enough to look at that center in West Chester and feel uneasy about its presence. In its current state, it is probably docile—its leaders seem to have a grip on their public actions, and their dealings center primarily on religion. However, a dangerous combination is a collective based religion combined with the type of communist anarchy that is well-known with the Occupy Wall Street crowd. That volatile mix could easily make an ISIS terrorist. And such young people fresh from Syria mingling with other young people who are having a hard time paying for their college debts, or finding a good job might be an attractive option to people not sure if they could even have a good life-like those of their parents who are obviously preaching peaceful Muslim faith. Take away the comfortable job, the nice home, the family structure, and a young radical no matter what their faith might easily become a social terror. And in this fashion, ISIS seems poised to infect the United States with just such a poison.

And for even suggesting it, Donald Trump was laughed at and mocked. Glenn Beck was treated in a similar way in 2011 when he proposed that the radicals in the Middle East were working to create a caliphate under Islamic rule. History has proven Beck right, and Donald Trump is sadly probably more correct than not, just like those football fans were weary of anything resembling Islamic faith—especially a large gathering of them in one place. There is a reason to be weary. Common sense dictates that awareness.   What we do with that determines our humanity. But indecision is just another form of terrorism because it promises that aggressors will have victory. Peace loving people therefore must accept that to have peace, action must take place, and for that to happen, judgments against assaults must occur. Only then can the war against ISIS be fought. And not a moment until the words are spoken in public—ISIS is the enemy and they use Islam as their camouflage in society. To root them out, we must look everywhere—especially where they like to hide.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

Robert Tracinski, Rich Hoffman and Matt Clark on WAAM: Why ‘Star Wars’ is better than ‘Star Trek’

Matt Clark had me on his show to actually co-host with him as we spoke to Robert Tracinski who writes for The Federalist. He had written an interesting article about how it was unlikely that J.J. Abrams could screw up the new Star Wars film, The Force Awakens, so long as he stuck with the formula. There were some condescending aspects to Tracisnski’s article which I was willing to overlook, because he was right about a lot of things. But more than anything Tracisnski had been dismissive of the original trilogy as not being very good—which I thought was odd. So I was eager to talk to him. It only took a few moments into the interview however to learn the root of his issues—he was a Star Trek fan and had only come to Star Wars through his children. His position was that Star Trek was philosophically superior to Star Wars and that these new movies were kid stuff that he was enjoying with his children. Listen to that interview here:

I don’t care much for Star Trek, to me it is the United Nations in space. While Robert Tracinski is not a liberal and is a pretty committed Objectivist, which is Ayn Rand’s philosophy—it was clear to me quickly why Robert didn’t like Star Wars much in his article. I disagree with him on a number of topics regarding the formula of Star Wars, or its appeal. I think the Star Wars films are deeply philosophical; especially The Empire Strikes Back—much more so than Star Trek. I mean, people are not lining up across the world to see the latest Star Trek movie, and Star Wars isn’t as popular as it is because it’s just adults living out their childhoods once again through a movie. It’s more complicated than that. As we were talking to Tracinski, because of his background with Ayn Rand I kept wondering if I had met him someplace before, so I wanted to cut him some slack. Everyone comes to things in their own time and if he came to Star Wars late in life through his kids—so be it. One aspect that Tracinski got right in his article was the perception that Han Solo is the key to the franchise—so I stuck to that topic in our conversation.

Matt and I spent the first segment of his Saturday WAAM show talking about Disney and their progressive activism with a gentle warning about messing with the formula of Star Wars and the impact that might have on their massive investment. Matt and I love Disney—the Uncle Walt version. I love that Disney is a family friendly entertainment group—so I am willing to overlook a little of their liberal activism. Something that Robert Tracinski did bring up on his show that was true.  George Lucas and Steven Spielberg were the best conservative filmmakers coming out of the 80s. I personally think they were both seduced by Bill Clinton in the 90s and have lost their minds since. The reason their early films were so successful was because they all had conservative leanings to them. Once both directors had achieved their monstrous success and essentially stepped away from the Objectivist roots of their film careers, their movies started making a lot less money. Without question George Lucas was at least attracted to Ayn Rand in his early days—when she was at the height of her influence—and Han Solo was a character that represented that struggle within George. As he become more liberal with age and success—perhaps feeling a little guilty that all his liberal employees were constantly berating him for his capitalist tendencies, he softened up on his stance for individualism and began to accept collectivism to a much higher degree, which was clearly represented in the prequel  films—which were noticeably absent of the Han Solo type of character.

Where I disagree with Tracinski about the prequel films is that I don’t think George Lucas ever intended those films to be successes. They were dark movies about the failure of a Republic—and have great political merit to them. They are very philosophical from the position of how poorly constructed philosophies can destroy a body of government. Even though Lucas had been moving to the left—politically, his message about the failure of groups to detect evil, and how institutional failure is indicative of all government cycles is powerful stuff that set the stage for some pretty deep storytelling. As much as people dismiss the prequel films as silly, they are important in the larger scope of the intended message. The movies did lack heroics on the scale of a Han Solo, but that was on purpose. A lot of characters including Yoda and Obi-wan Kenobi made mistakes that they spent the rest of their lives correcting. So the films were never supposed to be heroic repeats of the original trilogy. For that story Han Solo was the savior, he kept Luke alive, married his sister Leia and that set up the events of these new films. Solo is an Ayn Rand character and Disney even with all their activism against conservative causes—can’t ignore that the magic of Star Wars isn’t Luke Skywalker, or anything about the Force—it’s about Han Solo’s position against hooky religions and ancient weapons not being as competent as a good blaster at your side.

Just a few days before Matt and I had our radio show together Harrison Ford was on with Jimmy Kimmel dressed up for Halloween as a hot dog. It was a funny segment and of course Ford was asked about the new Star Wars film. I thought his comments were interesting to say the least. He stated that nobody would be disappointed—at all. That was a remarkable statement considering what’s at stake. He knows the potential cost of over-anticipated hype—so his comments had me very curious in relation to Disney’s strategy going forward. Han Solo is going to be playing a larger role in Star Wars than he has in the past largely because the character tests well demographically. His children will without question be the subject of the new stories but Disney will find every opportunity to insert a younger Han Solo into the movies at every juncture. To be successful at that, Disney will have no choice but to adopt the obvious aspects of Han Solo’s Objectivism view points—his natural conservatism and love of capitalist endeavors if they want Star Wars to continue being successful.

After Matt’s show I spent time at my children’s house going trick or treating with my grandkids—and kids. Late into the night my oldest daughter and I spent time talking about Han Solo and how it seems obvious now that Disney will find a way to put him in the stand alone films as much as possible just to use him as a springboard to success. Like Robert Tracinski and I spoke about on Matt’s show, without Han Solo, I think the Star Wars saga crashes and burns. If they try to turn him into a sacrificial collectivist Disney will lose a lot of money because people will reject the premise. The ticket buying public will only accept the Objectivist Han Solo—and nothing less—the hero who acts in his own self-interest. Even though the moment at the end of A New Hope was intended to show that Solo was able to act for others, the need to save Luke at the last moment was out of Solo’s self-interest because he was starting to like the kid. Like I said, Star Wars is a lot more philosophical than people give it credit for, and I’d think that as much as Tracinski likes Ayn Rand, that he’d prefer Star Wars over the United Nations in space—Star Trek and all that “needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” crap. Screw Spock and his pointy ears—he’s a damn collectivist. Solo is a rugged, gun slinging individualist who acts out of his own self-interest. That’s why Star Wars is better than Star Trek.

We’ll see what happens, time will tell. It was a good conversation that was worth listening to, especially given what Star Wars will mean when it opens in a few weeks. There will be no escape; the opening of The Force Awakens will impact just about everyone no matter where they live. It will be impossible to not notice something about it as the merchandising around Christmas will be everywhere. Just watch the Duracell commercial shown above. Star Wars will literally be everywhere in just a few weeks of this writing. There will be nothing like it ever—history is being made both commercially and philosophically. The question will be whether or not The Force Awakens will be as anticipated on the 19th of December as it was on the 18th after people start seeing the movie. To be as successful as Disney needs it to be people will need to see the film several times. And to have that kind of power over the mind of fans—Han Solo will have to be a part of it with an Objectivist approach—otherwise the whole thing falls apart. It’s not the lightsaber battles and space antics that make Star Wars so great—it’s the Objectivist leanings of its basic premise:

Han Solo—“marching into the detention area is not what I had in mind.”

Luke Skywalker—“but she’s rich.”

Han Solo—“How rich?”

Luke Skywalker—“More wealth than you can imagine.”

Han Solo—“I don’t know, I can imagine quite a bit.”

Luke Skywalker—“you’ll get it.”

Han Solo—“I better!”

Luke Skywalker—“You will!”

Han Solo—“Alright kid, what’s your plan?”

That’s Star Wars—it’s an Objectivist love fest designed before George Lucas was overly liberalized. It’s also why twice during the broadcast with Matt that I uttered to his millions and millions of listeners—“Han shot first!” When Lucas changed Star Wars in 1997 to have the bounty hunter Greedo shoot at Han first in the Mos Eisley cantina fans were angry. It was a liberalized mistake for Lucas to cave under the pressure from the liberal film community to make Han Solo not appear as such a blood thirsty killer. But Solo acting out of self-interest shot first because that is the nature of his character—he’s an Ayn Rand survivalist and the heart of what makes Star Wars great.

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.

Being a Big Fish in a Small Pond: Sheriff Richard K. Jones running for congress

It was spring of 2015 and I was at the Brazenhead in Mason, Ohio having a beer with some heavily connected conspirators fresh off the ear rings of Judy Shelton, the local Republican protector of John Boehner within the ranks of the Central Committee where I first learned that the Speaker of the House in Washington D.C. was planning to step down. It was also there that I learned that Sheriff Richard K. Jones was eyeing Boehner’s congressional seat which evoked some interesting thoughts which had been percolating for quite some time. At times I have liked Sheriff Jones. He once gave me a well done portrait sketch drawn in a way that made him look like a Wild West superstar—which I liked. But he lost me when he supported the union position against Governor Kasich’s Issue 2 in 2012, and the Lakota levy in 2013. As larger than life and John Wayne-like that Sheriff Jones wanted to be, he was a strictly local hometown celebrity who would be like a tropical goldfish cast into the frozen waters of the Artic Ocean if he were to go to Washington where much bigger fish than he experienced in Butler County, Ohio were there to eat him quickly—so I thought it odd that he’d even consider risking his reputation at his age to such a politically dangerous enterprise. After all, in Hamilton, he was a big fish in a small pond—but in Washington, where the GOP is changing rapidly under Tea Party influence—the game had changed in front of his face not in his favor.

I get the opportunity to work with lots of people from other parts of the country. In my work with bullwhips locally I was always well-known to be the best that anybody had ever seen. I grew up with that designation where literally everyone I met had never witnessed a person who could crack a cigarette out of the mouth of a willing participant with a bullwhip. For me it was not enough to be a big fish in a small pond, I had to know that I could be a big fish in a big ocean too—so I pushed myself to get better and compete against people from all over the world. Competition after all makes everyone better, even if you don’t like the results. I knew as a bullwhip artist that I could never truly consider myself one of the best in the world if I didn’t challenge myself against people who also considered themselves the best at the craft.

My journey took me to many competitive events; winning several trophies competing with the best that are out there. I even have had some stints in Hollywood dazzling celebrities with my whip work. I know what it feels like to stand in the middle of the road on Brand Blvd in Glendale California where television producers and movie stars were gathered around stopped traffic to watch me perform because they had never seen what I was doing before—and were fascinated. For me personally, it was then that I deserved to call myself a big fish in a big ocean. I had challenged myself and I had to. My life goal was to write stories about the pulp hero Cliffhanger and as the author; I had to know that I could have the swagger in real life of the character I had created. As a writer I had to know that I could do what I demanded my character to do. I never wanted to be one of those sickly writers who live through their art. Rather, my art had to reflect my reality—so I demanded of myself to be really good at the things I wrote about. Yet prior to the year 2000 few people knew about me outside of my hometown. I was a big fish then too, but the pond was small and easy to win in. Outside of my town the water was much larger and there is always the theory that there is somebody better than you. Until you test yourself against them, you don’t have a right to consider yourself the best—and if that’s your goal, you have to step out of the small pond and into the big one and compete.

Between 2005 and 2008 I had satisfied my goal. I had met and worked with some of the best bullwhip artists in the world. There were a few I didn’t get to meet, but at a high level, everyone is pretty even, so you get a good idea of where you stand among them. And it was very satisfying to realize that with all the hard work, that I could swim with the biggest fish in the biggest water possible and hold my own. I didn’t do such a thing to fulfill my personal ego, but to satisfy my literary needs for my own personal work of philosophy. After I achieved that goal I was ready to move on to the next thing and was quite secure in my place in the universe. Those who watched me and competed against me who worked hard to get better and better, I am happy for. I never felt a need to keep up with them or to outdo their efforts—because I know what they are trying to do—which was the same thing that I was—they need to know that they can swim with the biggest of fish. And I respect people who strive to do that. There is lots of room for big fish to swim in a big ocean. There are plenty of little fish to eat, so there is no reason not to cheer on other big fish to grow even larger—and impressive.

When Sheriff Jones first gave me the poster of himself I thought of him as a big fish. The day he gave it to me Fox News was going to have him on that night to talk about immigration issues on the border of Arizona. And during the Issue 2 union debates he and I were frequent guests on 700 WLW radio—so I thought of him initially as a big fish in a big ocean. But over time it was obvious that he was happy to be the big fish in the small pond, because the ocean out there was a bit too threatening. He’s a local boy who will always be the hometown hero, the public servant who marches in parades and made good by the area he grew up in. But going to Washington D.C.—that’s a big ocean that requires more than just tough talk—you have to actually be tough.

Jones showed what kind of person he was during the Issue 2 debates where he thought he was a conservative Republican who attended Tea Party events and was fighting to preserve American tradition. But his view of that tradition was much like John Boehner’s, a progressive touchy, feely, sentiment about conservatism that belonged more in a Sunday school class than in the halls of Congress. As the government in Washington started changing slowly under the Tea Party influences, Jones stood against that tide attempting to preserve the Republican standard nurtured by crony capitalists and pink middle-grounders just a few steps away from socialism on the scales of political philosophy. Issue 2 exposed him as a labor union supporter who refused to see the damage collective bargaining was doing to local budgets. He certainly lost my support, and many others like me who are looking for a purer version of a constitutional republic than we presently have.

When I heard that he wanted Boehner’s seat the first thought I had was that he’d be reluctant to test himself against the big fish of Washington. I remembered my first bullwhip competition against some really talented people—particularly Chris Camp who had won about everything there was to win in the bullwhip arts. He was a star in Vegas, had several world records and was the bench mark of a really good professional bullwhip artist. I worried for days before the competition about having a respectable showing against him. That was nearly 15 years ago, but I remember well how nervous I was about it. It was a bone chilling paralysis that sucked the life right out of you. The reason I was so nervous was that I thought I was pretty good with the bullwhip, but if I couldn’t hold a candle to Chris, I would know that I didn’t have what it took to be the best. Since the bullwhip was one of my signature attributes it was very important to me to be one of the best, so I pressed on. In 2005 after working very hard, I won every event there was against the best competition that the nation provided. I earned their respect and I earned the right to consider myself one of the big fish—and it was one of the proudest days of my life. In the scheme of things, it was a pretty minor deal—a competition at a regional festival. But, in the world of bullwhip work, it was a big deal to me because I had a lot to lose in the attempt.

In the world of politics becoming a congressman at the federal level is like winning that bullwhip contest against a really skilled group of guys. And Sheriff Jones I knew when I heard the story from the political insiders at Brazenhead that the local sheriff wouldn’t risk the disgrace. It’s not that he’d lose the race. I believe he would be elected if he ran for the seat. Butler County is the most populated area of Boehner’s district, which runs all the way up to Greenville, Ohio. Jones could run and win I think pretty easily. I share with him a passion for two big platform issues, his stance against drugs and illegal immigration. But on most other issues, he is as soft as Boehner was, and the now former Speaker of the House was just chewed up and spit out of Washington by a Tea Party wing of the Republican Party that is fast emerging to dominate the party. Those like the local apologist Judy Shelton who have fought so hard to keep Boehner in power all this time are well behind the political current of the times. Conservatives are demanding to move back to the right, they don’t like the left, or even centralist’s positions. And that is where the big fish swim these days. And in that pond, Sheriff Jones is a little fish who will have to scramble for his very life. That’s not a risk I think he is willing to make at this stage of his life. The time for him to test himself with such a feat would have been twenty years ago. The insurrection that is currently happening on Capital Hill for which Donald Trump and several other outsiders are a part are going to change politics from now on. Boehner saw that he was not equipped to handle the hard decisions that are ahead for a Speaker of the House, or even a congressman. So he jumped off the train singing songs. Sheriff Jones is of the same mind. If Sheriff Jones wants to be remembered as a big fish—he better stay in the small pond, because if he goes to Washington, he’ll be eaten rather quickly.

The talk went on that evening and I listened casually while looking at all the magnificent cannons decorating the Irish Pub. It was an appropriate setting for political intrigue and maniacal subterfuge among the socially manipulative. And that made the beer taste better. But I only half believed those sources when they said that Boehner was going to step down. So I have to also believe that Sheriff Jones is going to climb out on that limb and try to take Boehner’s seat. My advice to him would be to keep his image of a big fish alive for the sake of his grandchildren. An embarrassing experience in Washington would be hard to recover from unless he thinks he’s savvy enough to take on the candidates coming out of FreedomWorks. Because they are the future—the past is John Boehner and progressive radio hosts like Bill Cunningham. Sheriff Jones has more in common with them than the candidates nurtured along through FreedomWorks. Getting elected is only half the battle. Getting trampled as a RINO on the house floor is far more embarrassing.

Rich Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.