The Fourth Plank of Communism: Free trade and wealth redistribution

I am currently undertaking an explanation of the 45 Planks of Communism listed in the 1958 book The Naked Communist, which was unleashed upon an unsuspecting public many years ago to fulfill the strategic aims of global communism.  Such an aim seems remote to a society addicted to sports, visual entertainment like pornography, flashy music, and gossipy story lines—but little do they know that all such devices were used as a means to destroy them philosophically.  It was discovered at the start of the 20th Century that more than luck and favor of the Gods led to a successful life, it had more to do with the psychology of the mind—which is driven by the philosophy that a mind holds—so the way to destroy a human being was to destroy their philosophy.  The way to destroy a collective society is not with guns, tanks, or massive troop deployments—as several world wars have proven—but to destroy their general social philosophy.  During the Cold War Russian communists not able to compete economically against America, and knowing that they would eventually lose that race set out to perform an all-out assault against America’s philosophy of capitalism and individual freedom for their own preservation.  That race ran out on them by 1989 when Communist Russia collapsed economically upon itself.  Yet their long burning policies enacted many years earlier had already interrupted American culture taking much longer than planned by KGB agents exclusively because of the efforts by President Ronald Reagan who was the last president in American history to stand vocally, and principally opposed to communism.   (Other American presidents opposed vocally communism, but principally supported progressive causes of statism)

Communists knew they had to solve a critical problem in 1958.  Communism did not produce the same kind of economic power that capitalism did so the only way they could expect to hold their own on the world stage was to create Plank 4 on their list of 45 communist goals in that book of destitution released by Cleon Skousen.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

By encouraging free trade with communist nations, using the United States funded United Nations as the platform to achieve the task, communists were able to hide their production problems from the world, and even their own people.  Collectivization in the Soviet Union was enforced under Stalin between 1928 and 1940. The goal of this policy was to consolidate individual land and labour into collective farms: mainly kolkhozy and sovkhozy. The Soviet leadership was confident that the replacement of individual peasant farms by collective ones would immediately increase the food supply for urban population, the supply of raw materials for processing industry, and agricultural exports. Collectivization was thus regarded as the solution to the crisis of agricultural distribution (mainly in grain deliveries) that had developed since 1927.[1] This problem became more acute as the Soviet Union pressed ahead with its ambitious industrialization program.[2]

In the early 1930s over 91% of agricultural land was “collectivized” as rural households entered collective farms with their land, livestock, and other assets. The sweeping collectivization often involved tremendous human and social costs.

After the emancipation of the serfs in 1861, peasants gained control of about half of the land they had previously cultivated, and began to ask for the redistribution of all land.[3] The Stolypin agricultural reforms between 1905 and 1914 gave incentives for the creation of large farms, but these ended during World War I. The Russian Provisional Government accomplished little during the difficult World War I months, though Russian leaders continued to promise redistribution. Peasants began to turn against the Provisional Government and organized themselves into land committees, which together with the traditional peasant communes became a powerful force of opposition. When Vladimir Leninreturned to Russia on April 3, 1917, he promised the people “Peace and Land,” the latter appearing as a promise to the peasants for the redistribution of confiscated land.

During the period of war communism, however, the policy of Prodrazvyorstka meant peasantry were obligated to surrender the surpluses of almost any kind of agricultural produce for a fixed price. When the Russian Civil War ended, the economy changed with the New Economic Policy (NEP) and specifically, the policy of prodnalog or “food tax.” This new policy was designed to re-build morale among embittered farmers, and lead to increased production, while as a progressive tax, those with more money paid more.

Until this time, the Bolsheviks allowed the peasants to take the land and farm it privately.[3] In the 1920s, however, they began to lean toward the idea of collective agriculture. Memories of World War I were that soldiers from the Green cadres (Yugoslavia) maintained ties with the Red Guards (Russia) and helped them with food, sugar, tea, tobacco, etc. and they transferred their experience with the organization of agricultural cooperatives of the former Military Frontier, when the Red Army began to conquer Tomsk in Siberia.[4] The pre-existing communes, which periodically redistributed land, did little to encourage improvement in technique, and formed a source of power beyond the control of the Soviet government. Although the income gap between wealthy and poor farmers did grow under the NEP, it remained quite small, but the Bolsheviks began to take aim at the wealthy kulaks. Clearly identifying this group was difficult, though, since only about 1% of the peasantry employed labourers (the basic Marxist definition of a capitalist), and 82% of the country’s population were peasants.[3]

The equal land shares among the peasants gave rise to food shortages in the cities. Although grain had nearly returned to pre-war production levels, the large estates who had produced it for urban markets had been divided up.[3] Not interested in acquiring money to purchase overpriced goods, the peasants chose to eat their produce rather than sell it, so city dwellers only saw half the grain that had been available before the war.[3] Before the revolution, peasants controlled only 2,100,000 km² divided into 16 million holdings, producing 50% of the food grown in Russia and consuming 60% of total food production. After the revolution, the peasants controlled 3,140,000 km² divided into 25 million holdings, producing 85% of the food, but consuming 80% of what they grew (meaning that they ate 68% of the total).[5]

The Soviet Communist Party had never been happy with private agriculture and saw collectivization as the best remedy for the problem. Lenin claimed “Small-scale production gives birth to capitalism and the bourgeoisie constantly, daily, hourly, with elemental force, and in vast proportions.”[6] Apart from ideological goals, Joseph Stalin also wished to embark on a program of rapid heavy industrialization which required larger surpluses to be extracted from the agricultural sector in order to feed a growing industrial work force and to pay for imports of machinery (by exporting grain).[7] Social and ideological goals would also be served though mobilization of the peasants in a co-operative economic enterprise which would produce higher returns for the State and could serve a secondary purpose of providing social services to the people.

Most historians agree that the disruption caused by collectivization and the resistance of the peasants significantly contributed to the Great Famine of 1932–1933, especially in Ukraine, a region famous for its rich soil (chernozem). This particular period is called “Holodomor” in Ukrainian. During the similar famines of 1921–1923, numerous campaigns – inside the country, as well as internationally – were held to raise money and food in support of the population of the affected regions. Nothing similar was done during the drought of 1932–1933, mainly because the information about the disaster was suppressed by Stalin.[55] Stalin also undertook a purge of the Ukrainian communists and intelligentsia, with devastating long-term effects on the area.[56] Many Ukrainian villages were blacklisted and penalized by government decree for perceived sabotage of food supplies.[57] Moreover, migration of population from the affected areas was restricted.[58][59]

About 40 million people were affected by the food shortages including areas near Moscow where mortality rates increased by 50%.[60]The center of the famine, however, was Ukraine and surrounding regions, including the Don, the Kuban, the Northern Caucasus and Kazakhstan where the toll was one million dead. The countryside was affected more than cities, but 120,000 died in Kharkiv, 40,000 in Krasnodar and 20,000 in Stavropol.[60]

The declassified Soviet archives show that there were 1.54 million officially registered deaths in Ukraine from famine.[61] Alec Nove claims that registration of deaths largely ceased in many areas during the famine.[62] However, it’s been pointed out that the registered deaths in the archives were substantially revised by the demographics officials. The older version of the data showed 600,000 fewer deaths in Ukraine than the current, revised statistics.[61] In The Black Book of Communism, the authors claim the number of dead was at least 4 million, and characterize the Great Famine as “a genocide of the Ukrainian people”.[63][64]

Due to high government production quotas peasants received, as a rule, less for their labor than they did before collectivization, and some refused to work. Merle Fainsod estimated that, in 1952, collective farm earnings were only one-fourth of the cash income from private plots on Soviet collective farms.[44] In many cases, the immediate effect of collectivization was to reduce output and cut the number of livestock in half. The subsequent recovery of the agricultural production was also impeded by the losses suffered by the Soviet Union during World War II and the severe drought of 1946. However the largest loss of livestock was caused by collectivization for all animals except pigs.[45] The numbers of cows in the USSR fell from 33.2 million in 1928 to 27.8 million in 1941 and to 24.6 million in 1950. The number of pigs fell from 27.7 million in 1928 to 27.5 million in 1941 and then to 22.2 million in 1950. The number of sheep fell from 114.6 million in 1928 to 91.6 million in 1941 and to 93.6 million in 1950. The number of horses fell from 36.1 million in 1928 to 21.0 million in 1941 and to 12.7 million in 1950. Only by the late 1950s did Soviet farm animal stocks begin to approach 1928 levels.[45]

Despite the initial plans, collectivization, accompanied by the bad harvest of 1932–1933, did not live up to expectations. Between 1929 and 1932 there was a massive fall in agricultural production resulting in famine in the countryside. Stalin and the CPSU blamed the prosperous peasants, referred to as ‘kulaks‘ (Russian: fist), who were organizing resistance to collectivization. Allegedly, many kulaks had been hoarding grain in order to speculate on higher prices, thereby sabotaging grain collection. Stalin resolved to eliminate them as a class.

The Soviet government responded to these acts by cutting off food rations to peasants and areas where there was opposition to collectivization, especially in Ukraine. Many peasant families were forcibly resettled in Siberia and Kazakhstan into exile settlements, and most of them died on the way. Estimates suggest that about a million so-called ‘kulak’ families, or perhaps some 5 million people, were sent to forced labor camps.[46][47]

On August 7, 1932, the Decree about the Protection of Socialist Property proclaimed that the punishment for theft of kolkhoz or cooperative property was the death sentence, which “under extenuating circumstances” could be replaced by at least ten years of incarceration. With what some called the Law of Spikelets (“Закон о колосках”), peasants (including children) who hand-collected or gleaned grain in the collective fields after the harvest were arrested for damaging the state grain production. Martin Amis writes in Koba the Dreadthat 125,000 sentences were passed for this particular offense in the bad harvest period from August 1932 to December 1933.

The deaths from starvation or disease directly caused by collectivization have been estimated as between 4 and 10 million. According to official Soviet figures, some 24 million peasants disappeared from rural areas but only 12.6 million moved to state jobs[citation needed]. The implication is that the total death toll (both direct and indirect) for Stalin’s collectivization program was on the order of 12 million people.[47]

It is said that in 1945, Joseph Stalin confided to Winston Churchill at Yalta that 10 million people died in the course of collectivization.[48] However this allegation has been criticized by historian Michael Parenti.[citation needed] At Yalta, Churchill asked Stalin about the famine in the USSR to which Stalin responded by raising his hands, gesturing an unwillingness to speak about the subject, which Churchill, counting the Soviet leader’s fingers, interpreted as Stalin confessing a death-toll of 10 million people.[citation needed]

American farming unlike Russia and China did not have such statist restrictions, and food was produced relatively easily, and cheaply under the capitalist system of The United States.  Even though the landmasses of both Russia and China are much greater than The United States, per acre, America produces much more food.  Knowing this, communists had to find a way to hide their inefficiencies and stop the peasant uprisings that occur under communist’s systems after years of continuous failure, so they implemented Plank Number 4, which encouraged global trade without restriction of political ideology.  This allowed communists to appear efficient to the people of their countries while implementing the global attempt of wealth redistribution.  Over time, it has become expected that America has a responsibility to feed the world, as the Washington Post article below indicates at the link.

The suggestion is that regardless of what a country’s political philosophy may be, whether or not it is communist, socialist, authoritarian, or capitalist that the needs of the many out-weight the needs of the few, and that if there are a lot of hungry people in a communist country, the world—namely America—owes them the worth of their labor.  The suggestion by communists in Plank Number 4 is that communist countries are entitled to the welfare of the world in spite of their failed political philosophy because they exist.  This allows communist governments to maintain their failure without inciting their people into riot, which was the point of their strategy.  The communist countries can then drain the wealth of capitalist nations destroying their enemy while using their enemies’ effort to feed their own starving people—which is indicative to all collective societies.

The result is in the expectation that America should feed the world at our expense allowing socialist countries and communist countries to pretend their economies, and philosophies are equal to The United States through wealth redistribution.  The communist does not care what creates wealth; they only seek to destroy it for the aims of communism.  Once the world has been emptied of its wealth, it can then be remade into the communist state under one world-wide rule—which was always the intention.

These are the reasons for Communist Plank # 4 and its implementation into American culture.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

Explaining the first Three Planks of Communism: A gift from Matt Clark

It used to be 700 WLW that I did a lot of radio work for, but over time they decided to take a noticeably centralist political position and stay close to their core audience, which is sports radio.  But I still do a considerable amount of radio in other markets, and one of the most is my friend Matt Clark from WAAM in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  Recently Matt and I did a show together about American Excepetionalism and Walt Disney to bring to mind why America was the only country on earth who could have produced a Walt Disney type of person, let alone an entire company.  Many countries have tried as the blue print is evident for all to see.  Walt Disney even tells everyone how he did it at one of his amusement parks in Florida—the Hollywood Studios “History of Walt Disney.”  But those countries can’t and never will, because success is more than just performing the action—it is a philosophy.  To thank me for doing that particular one hour radio episode, Matt sent me a coffee mug that he had bought at Disney World showing all the different logs of that “happiest place on earth” which have been designed over the years.  CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW.  It arrived unexpectedly weeks after the interview and it has taken me time to sort out my feelings about it.  The surface emotions were one of gratitude and kindness.  Matt didn’t have to do anything to thank me.  I enjoy doing radio shows, so gifts weren’t necessary.  However, there was more to the mug than just a simple gift.  Matt went to the time and trouble of purchasing it for me, and having it sent to my house at a reasonable expense.  The mug itself wasn’t any different from one which could be purchased from a local Wal-Mart or other retailer.  But the fact that this mug came from Disney World had meaning which Matt and I mutually understood, containing the symbol of what America is, or has been.  That symbol was captured well by the Disney Company and is nearly all that remains of the old philosophy of The United States—the one of self-reliance, and innovation.  Matt sending me the mug was intended as a message across time and space in recognition that he and I know the secret which is lost to the human race.  That secret was the knowledge of an attack that occurred many years ago, and slowly.  Walt Disney, Ronald Reagan, John Wayne and Ayn Rand, along with many others in Hollywood attempted to warn the world of the attack.  CLICK HERE TO SEE FOR YOURSELF.  But by 1958 the attack, by a secret Trojan Horse many years in the making was unleashed in full view of all.  The battle plan was listed in the book by Cleon Skousen, The Naked Communist, but it was too late.  The Horse had already been opened behind enemy lines and the troops of world-wide communism had spread out to strike down an unsuspecting public.

In the book The Naked Communist, the means for taking over the world in favor of communism was listed so that those sympathetic to communism could step in and know the battle plan quickly, and acclimate themselves to the climate.  Those in denials of such a plan would ignore the book and turn away from the warning of Walt Disney and Ayn Rand hoping they were wrong—but they weren’t.  The list of strategies listed in that dreadful book is shown below.  I’ve covered them before, but it is apparent that more needs to be done to explain what has happened in modern American culture, so I am going to take the considerable effort of explaining each of them one by one in upcoming articles—starting with the first.  The rest can be seen in the following list.  Read them then attempt to deny that such an attack has not happened.  After the list is viewed I will begin with issue #1 and explain the strategy behind it and implementation value.  The list was read before the House of Representatives in 1963, as evident by the link at the conclusion, but by then it was too late.  The communists had already infiltrated both parties, and freedom had lost its majority rule.  America had been prepared to fight off any enemy that showed its swords, guns and missiles to us.  But it was not prepared to fight an attack on its philosophy which was conducted with pinheaded academics and political bureaucrats.


1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

Since the first three items on that list are so related, let us deal with them as a whole so to understand the intent of the communists in listing them in the first place.  They are:

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength

The world, particularly Russia was very weary of the manufacturing capacity by The United States.  Through capitalism, America had wealth which allowed it to dominate all other militaries—so communism would never spread so long as America had a military force which stood in the way.  So the only strategy available to the communists was to develop a coexistence strategy that crippled the moral aptitude of America from engaging in war.  The Peace Sign was created as a way to stimulate the compassion of American youth into turning against their government’s willingness to out produce weapons of mass destruction, which communist nations could not keep up with under their statist policies.

By the 1960s the Peace Sign was common, and in 2013 it is even sold as jewelry to unsuspecting young people who think its “hip.”  The message of global peace is wide-spread and well understood, but it was started by the communists who knew they could not impose themselves upon an America that could destroy their country a thousand times over with firepower created under the unrestricted aptitude of capitalism.  The human race had been in a sprint for nuclear power, and under capitalism, America had arrived first gaining the high ground in a global strategy.  The only way to take America away from that high ground was to convince them to allow every country in the world to share their strategic position.

Nobody in their right mind wishes for nuclear war, or even armament that could destroy the world millions of times over.  However, if America had not gained such supremacy first, the world—especially the towel headed extremists of the Middle-East would have used such weapons to destroy all members of Christianity, Buddhism, even the cannibal eating tribes of New Guinea into oblivion just to fulfill their religious direction to destroy all infidels—anyone who is not of the Islamic faith.  The weapons of the world are only one madman away from global threat, and America has been all that stands in the way of that takeover.  Communists wish to remove the threat of madmen altogether by micromanaging every life into servitude to the state.  They believe falsely that they can stop such attacks with a global communist government.  Before they could do that, they had to remove America as the barrier to tyranny with capitalism.  So long as America stood as a symbol of freedom, economically, morally, and strategically, communism would be a stalled case.

The rest is history.  Of course nobody calls the “peace sign” a symbol of communist menace.  People don’t even call communism—communism.  They call it “socialism,” Labour Party philosophy, the Democratic platform, progressivism, the concerns of the “green movement,” they call it everything but what the roots are—and that is communism.  Because of the rest of the 45 communist planks, people have forgotten what the threat of communism was completely, which I will cover in detail with future articles.  But Walt Disney knew of the danger and is the only place left in America where communism is still kept at bay.  Communism has certainly left its mark on the Disney Company as compliance regulations have made its presence known through the legal system, but the ideal of freedom that Walt Disney captured through his entertainment empire protected America with a Trojan Horse of its own.

When Matt Clark sent me the mug, he was sending me a secret message letting me know that he understood.  That secret message is that Uncle Walt is the method to undercutting the infiltration that communists have ushered in upon American culture and that no matter how dire the situation gets; we both know that freedom from communism is again obtainable.  To touch and feel that freedom, all one need to do is look at the logo of the Disney World complex, and understand that communists could have never created such a place under any conditions.  Only a free people could ever conceive such a thing as Disney World—which communists could never hope to aspire to.  Matt understands as I do, that the best way to beat the 45 Planks of Communism is to undo each of those points one by one—and the best way to do that is not with guns, force, or legislation—but with creativity—which the communist is dreadfully lacking.  The way to beat a communist is with a superior intellect and creative force that cannot be duplicated under communist regimes—and to use that high ground to finally destroy a foe that thrives off public sentiment and emotional mandate which drives inaction.

So Matt, I will enjoy the mug.  It sits proudly on our counter top when not in use.  The emblems upon it speak of a truth mutually understood, and a long battle yet to fight against the thoughtless tirades of The Naked Communist—exposed not due to a lack of clothing, but their philosophical attack which has finally been acknowledged for what it always was.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

A Better Reality: Life in ‘The Old Republic’

The very expensive wine was flowing freely at the type of dinner that cost a small group of five over $2500.  It was the type of thing that business professionals and political science majors spend many thousands of dollars in college hoping they’ll achieve some day.  The minds were powerful; the participants were dressed in their latest fashions from Nordstroms, and the topics were at the top of discussion in any level of human endeavor.  It was a power dinner and at 8 PM in the evening my wife sent me a text………..”are you done yet.”  I replied, “not yet, I’m about to wrap it up.  I’ll be home very soon.  Get everything ready.”  The handshakes concluded and all members of the small party left into the parking lot by different trajectories as I headed for my motorcycle parked far away but in clear view of the restaurant.  I do this so my enemies cannot tamper with my transportation while I’m involved in these kinds of activities.  I never sit with my back to a crowd, and I never sit somewhere where I cannot see my transportation at all times.  It is an old trick I learned from friends I who were “hit men” during the 80’s working for a branch of the mob stationed in Chicago responsible for the Chester Road portion of business coming out of Sharonville, Ohio.  Precautions no longer necessary I headed home quickly and within 25 minutes was in front of the same computer station that had been set up 9 months prior for the solitary purpose of playing an online game called The Old RepublicMy wife and I have duel computers built specifically for heavy online gaming, and she was waiting for me with both units powered up and ready to go.  I sat down and we began to play the same video game that we had played almost every day since the previous December when we started our journey into a galaxy far, far away set in a time, a long time ago.

I consider the time my wife and I have spent playing that game together to be far more important than the value of the dinner described, or any other dealing I’ve been involved with at any point in my life.  The reason can be seen in the above video.  In the real world that we all live in there are veils of deceit that permeate everything—even the dinner mentioned.  There is a sense that nothing is as it really is—that everything is dressed up to disguise the ugliness that is left unmentioned.  Our society is at war, but nobody discusses it—the war is not over racism, equal rights, or even political ideology—but over philosophy—even religion.  It is a war over values which nobody discusses.  However, in the Star Wars game my wife and I have spent well over a thousand hours playing together as one of our favorite past times, values are the theme of the entire game, and I relish the environment.

I feel most comfortable on the space ship I have in the game in the middle of space away from the noise of the busy metropolis worlds, or the baron outposts that exist in the outer rim.  The ship is mine, the space is mine, and the control I have of what goes on within it are for me and me alone.  Of all the cool things to do in The Old Republic my favorite are the space missions.  They are not traditional flight simulators, but the graphic combat is absolutely astounding.  I never tire of them.  In that place the perspective of existence is easy to see.  The values of the game make sense to me, and the war between the factions eluded to in the above video are those of our modern age, which go unsaid in the dinner meetings previously described.  In such meetings it is permissible to discuss football team power rankings, baseball playoff scenarios, and the latest in fashion, but not the things that really matter—philosophy.  But in The Old Republic, my wife and I can play side by side on many far flung worlds against players who adhere openly to the opposite philosophy, the fight between statism represented by the Imperial players, and individual freedom represented by players of The Old Republic.  The fight for freedom versus control is out in the open and obvious.  Those attracted to the Imperial faction tend to support statism, while those who support the Republic tend to support individual freedom, and within the confines of that game, it is easier to see the boundaries that exist in the real world—and I relish the honesty.

I have said it on many occasions, I believe Star Wars and their movies, the television shows, the many novels, the comics, and the video games are bringing a philosophy to tomorrow’s world that will have far-reaching consequences deep into the future.  Those consequences are stepped carefully around during dinner meetings as nobody feels comfortable discussing them in public, because most people feel unqualified to express their feelings about philosophy.  But philosophy is the foundation of thought, and without firmness in a manner of belief, people have a tendency to drift in their convictions.  However, in the world of The Old Republic, the characters are not shy about their beliefs, and they are willing to fight to support them—which for my wife and I, is why we’d rather play that game together, than do just about anything else.  Meetings like the one I was engaged in do not impress her.  But beating a terrible villain on a remote world in The Old Republic does.

When I arrived at my game that day my wife had snacks lined up by my keyboard ready for two or three hours of gaming.  Her computer sits right next to mine and our characters link up online so we can travel together in that virtual world the way we would in the real one.  We both love the game for its honesty—and for the commitment to goodness that The Old Republic stands for.  I enjoy fighting for that Republic the way I’d like to fight for the American Republic—if only people in the real world were as honest with their beliefs, as they are within the world of a video game.  Under such conditions, I will choose the honesty of fiction over the falseness of reality.

There is a freedom in the of The Old Republic that does not exist in the real world of current, but it should.  The philosophy of America articulated through The Constitution allows for that freedom, but in practice, it has been surrendered to discussion about sports teams, and redundant trivia—leaving the most important things in life unrepresented.  In The Old Republic I am free to punish evil, and stand for good without the worry and concern of confrontation with statist government.  In the real world there is constant worry about arrests, legal costs, and social castigation for doing the right things—and standing up for what’s right over what’s wrong.  In The Old Republic, such concerns do not exist, which is why my wife and I prefer that environment over all others.  That is the reason even after a long day associating with the kind of people young professionals dream of growing up to correlate with, and dinning in luxury among—my eye was on the clock dreaming of getting home to my wife who awaited me at the spaceport of Corellia.  It is then that we experience freedom, and justice the way the human mind desires—away from the failed philosophies, and political corruption that leads to war, and the suppression of freedom in the real Republic of America.  It is in the fictional world of the computer where real freedom resides, and why video games in general are so popular—and hold so much power over the minds of tomorrow.  I foresee a literal day when the video above comes true as shown, in the world of the living, of the real.  The statists are out to destroy those who cherish freedom, and the fight has not yet manifested beyond unspoken words over wine glasses and sports trivia.  But it’s coming……….trust me.  For now, the only world that matters is the one in The Old Republic—where honesty is clearer through the lost art of philosophy accompanied by the sights, sounds, and action from a computer generated world that is freer providing relief from the real world we are all chained to.

My wife and I have never really returned from our vacation that started so many months ago during the cold December months of late 2012.  I have cut back my personal meetings and interactions to a bare minimum in favor of this fictional world because the vacation has been that good, so good that not even the indulgencies of opulence conducted under luxurious and socially acceptable conditions hold a candle to tasting freedom within the purely imagination driven world of The Old Republic.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

Matt Clark Tells Everything About Obamacare: The history of how and why it came down to socialized medicine

Obamacare is an evil invasion driven by ancient communist sentiments intending total government control of the greatest healthcare system in the world.  It is a giant attack on everything that America has stood for, and is a progressive Trojan horse into the lives of every citizen in The United States.  It is a terrible, dastardly intrusion upon the lives of every living being—and is sold to the public under the guise of smiling faces and social benefit.  The corrosive practices that Obamacare is forcing upon the innocent are the same which advance school levies for public education—exploitation of the weak, in order to erode the freedoms of the many.   My good friend Matt Clark during his radio show on WAAM in Ann Arber, Michigan has done an excellent job of breaking down why my comment above is valid.  Some reading my opening statement that aren’t so well-informed might think that it is merely the rhetoric of a right-winged activist.  However, Clark does an excellent job of exposing the many crimes of Obamacare in the below video from a radio interview with a medical professional who worked previously within the Canadian health care system.  The bottom line is that Obamacare is an attack on the free market and an attempt to create more medical monopolies that will provide fewer options rather than more, and medical innovation as America as become accustomed will halt.  The pain will be evident to American culture within months and as the years pass, the medical system that everyone has taken for granted will be terribly missed.  Evil has been sold to the masses with the usual good intentions under the slow erosive agreement of a complacent society.    Watch carefully:

Matt dug up a lot of those old clips showing Obama, Pelosi and many others doing everything they can to lead America to a single payer system—which will lead directly to complete government control of medicine.  That is what they are after, and they do not care if they mislead the masses to accomplish it.  The politicians and pundits advocating a single payer insurance system tend to be secular, so they do not care about being cast into Hell for lies, and they tend to support socialism—which is soft communism of the European model.  Under the premise of communism the needs of the many out-weight the needs of the few, so by sacrificing their good name with out-right lies does not worry them.  They are willing to sacrifice themselves and their very souls for what they perceive to be the greater good.  This is how Obama has been able to so openly lie to the faces of virtually everyone he knows, including his union supporters over Obamacare, because his goal is not their salvation, but the salvation of the collective whole, as interpreted by academia—which has been fashioned after traditional communism.

They have changed the names, but the concepts are the same.  To understand what Obama and the rest of progressives want out of Obamacare, just read the Ayn Rand novel We The Living.  There is a reason progressives hate Ayn Rand, and it’s not so much Atlas Shrugged, or The Fountainhead, but We The Living which tells the story of how the Russians failed in their communist attempts during the 1920’s.  In America those communist sentiments arrived through academic institutions and media outlets through the newly created Progressive Party climaxing in the 1930’s which became known as The Red Decade.  World War II interrupted the communist push as the world became focused on another version of the same Marxist concept, the Nazi as Adolph Hitler turned Germany into a socialist state.  Leading up to Hitler’s terror were the same academic institutions applauding the ruthless dictator in similar ways that they openly support modern socialism in Venezuela and in Europe.  The same type of minds became tenured professors at popular American colleges and entrenched the “establishment” behind their communist rhetoric.  As America completed the dream of progressive president Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations with The United Nations after World War II world-wide statism was up for grabs and the progressive oriented could taste the blood in the water, and set to pounce upon individual freedom for good.  In 1958 communists and progressives rallied behind the book, The Naked Communist which layed the foundation of a communist takeover of world-wide education, business, political parties, the media and everything in between.  They were quite clear about their intentions—the information was out in the open for all to see.  Colleges continued to push the communist agenda as President Lyndon B. Johnston did his part with his Great Society programs introducing Medicaid and other government action on his war against poverty.  As America fought a Cold War with the Soviet Union and braved threats from communist Cuba right off the coast of America, communism was pouring into both political parties through academia under the name of progressivism so to become a Trojan horse of that time, for the same reasons as today.

Medicaid was created by the Social Security Amendments of 1965 which added Title XIX to the Social Security Act. Medicaid was created as an entitlement program to help states provide medical coverage for low-income families and other categorically related individuals who meet eligibility requirements. Candidates include the blind, aged, disabled and pregnant women. In essence, Medicaid serves as the nation’s primary source of health insurance coverage for low-income populations. Each state administers its own Medicaid program, establishes their own eligibility standards, determines the scope and types of services they will cover, and sets the rate of payment. Benefits vary from state to state, and because someone qualifies for Medicaid in one state, it does not mean they will qualify in another.[6] The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) monitors the state-run programs and establishes requirements for service delivery, quality, funding, and eligibility standards.

The attack of the progressive and communists was to use compassion to advance their cause.  They do not stop to analyze why some people are poor, while others are not, as the free market gives all people the opportunity to become wealthy based on their merit.  Such a society does not need a government, or the communist minds of academia to train a society’s workforce in the benefits of bureaucratic statism.  Free market options are to be attacked because they do not serve the greater good of global communism, as they were established in the early days of Petrograd, Russia in 1917.

Obama is a modern academic, and holds the views typical of the modern progressive—the professional students who find safety in the halls of scholarship—where theory serves as experience.  Within those halls for nearly one hundred years nationalized health care has been a communist target, to nationalize medicine giving direct control of the government over every single individual. For the weak of all societies, they find the blanket of communist governments reassuring.  For the misfortunate who lack strong adult influences in their lives, like Barack Obama, government represents safety and opportunity they wouldn’t have had any other way, so they found their minds molded by communism from day one to the present.  They do not like, or trust the free market and have been taught by decades of academia to despise capitalism—and to attack it finally putting an end to it forever—giving rise to communism’s century long slow burning assault.

I grew up in the 80’s and Ronald Reagan was a president that I campaign for as a 7th grade child.  I remember the debacles of Jimmy Carter’s progressive Democrats and I was born during the chaos of the 60’s.  I watched Reagan use capitalism to destroy communism with the Berlin Wall falling in the last year of that marvelous decade.  I watched music; art, business, and all culture thrive under the comparatively soft capitalism of Ronald Reagan.  I noticed that those who hated Reagan seemed to have sympathies for communism or at the very least socialism.  But back then they kept their mouths shut up tight because Hollywood was mostly pro-capitalism.  MTV rose to power, and many millionaires were created off the conservative messages of the 80’s action heroes like Mel Gibson, Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Clint Eastwood.  After Reagan left office, progressives rushed in to regain ground and the witless statist George Bush Sr. didn’t know what hit him, and the 90’s began and ended with Bill Clinton.  All those 80’s action heroes found the world turned upside down upon them and most were on their way out by the year 2000—outcasts in the same Hollywood that made them massive international stars.  The Naked Communist goals had taken over the funding of Hollywood, and more progressive films were introduced to a gullible public that had no idea what was going on, films like The Crying Game.

George W. Bush after a close election attempted to become more “open minded” and bring everyone back together after the progressive political interests suggested he rigged the election away from Al Gore.  Being a genuinely good man, Bush was out maneuvered by the statists of Washington and he started the trend of deficit spending that continues to this day.  For eight years, communists and statists bit their tongue and pounded away at the Republic machine until there wasn’t much left of the gears but a bunch of defenseless old men trying to protect their pension checks.  That is until senators like Rand Paul from the newly created Tea Party entered the political race followed by constitutional puritans like Senator Ted Cruz.  One of the progressive goals was to send a minority president into the White House and they achieved this with the hand-picked progressive Barack Obama who had been trained in the ways of Marxism and Communism extensively, and knew how to schmooze the public.  For the first time after decades of planning and fighting, the communist oriented progressives had their guy in the White House under the Trojan horse of racism.  Americans desiring to prove they weren’t racist elected a man of color not caring anything for his background.  They simply wanted to avoid being called more names by proving they were not discriminating against a presidential candidate because of his dark skin color.

The climax to all these attacks is nationalized health care. Obamacare is the direct attempt to end America as a capitalist nation—it is no secret to those who know anything about history.  The facts Matt brought to light in his video is the reality behind Obamacare.  It is not being implemented to help people; it is an attack on America and everything it has stood for as a beacon of freedom to the entire world.  The characters pushing Obamacare are like soldiers sacrificing themselves for a greater cause, the progressive cause of nationalized health care outlined behind the philosophy of communism many, many years ago and slowly advanced decade by decade to every American attending public education or seeking a college degree.

I have stated at this site the many possible technical advances available to the modern patient seeking medical attention, such as cures for cancer and regenerative medicine.  Such free market options would eliminate many of the medical procedures that are covered under insurance plans, and statists like Barack Obama and the entire medical lobby on Capital Hill who pour millions upon millions of dollars into the pockets of law makers for both parties are terrified of the cure for cancer that is coming out of Texas and the concept that surgery could be eliminated completely and addiction to pharmaceutical drugs disposed of totally through the growth of new human tissue the way children were created in the first place, through cell growth.  So to halt such advancement, the government wishes to do their pharmaceutical lobbyist friends a favor and preserve their grip on human culture through medicine that belongs in the dark ages—like high blood pressure, diabetes, and all forms of cancer.  Government health care is about eliminating these threats to orthodox medicine and keep every citizen in the world dependent on some form of government control.  But for the socialists and communists, nationalized health care eliminates independent lives and makes even the strongest human being dependent on the government for their very lives.  So they better behave………………….

Matt and his guest are not inflating their claims about the dire consequences of Obamacare.  My statements are not inflammatory—they are a fact.  Obamacare is an attack on capitalism and every American should find it repulsive.  Once implemented politicians will never have the guts to stand against it, and Obamacare will become just another statist program sucking money out of our pay checks like Social Security and Medicaid do presently.  It will last so long as there is money to steal from those who work and contribute, which these days won’t be very long.  Obamacare is an assault on everything that is good—because it attacks capitalism directly—and is the indirect target of the program from the very start.  Matt’s information should be listened to and passed along to a friend as quickly as possible.  Failure to do so now may mean that such a chance may never come again under the flag of The United States.  Act now, or fall to peril.  Indecision is not an option.  Pick your side, and fight now!   There is no middle ground.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

The Time of My life: Carving out a path where there never has been one

I am having more fun in my life now than I ever have.  Who I am today is the sum of many years of work, adventure, and tenacious pursuit.  In a given day I may be involved in prestigious social engagements to reading novels in my hot tub and everything in between. I just simply enjoy my life every single day.  It is fun to be the person that you always dreamed of being when you are growing up.  But even more than that it is fun for me to watch my kids learning to become the people they want to be—to watch them push their limits, ask hard questions and stretch themselves beyond convention.  My oldest daughter is a professional photographer who does wonderful work now, but is continuing to push herself to new heights of skill level.  Growing up we had many talks about seeing the truth in life.  I chose to pursue that truth through the written word, she has chosen to pursue it through photography.  I knew she had shifted into a different gear when she sent me the video below of some new experimental time-lapse photography methods she was trying, but when I first saw it, maybe for the first time in my life, I forgot that my daughter had shot the footage and found myself assuming I was watching film done by a National Geographic photographer.

I share these little moments with the world because it is obvious to me that people have forgotten how to reach for the stars and be all they can be—and I want them to see what it looks like.  There is nothing that can be given to the young artist through the welfare system. The eye to shoot a picture, or capture an image on film that is unique to really good photographers comes from living life honestly, and feeling the sting of pain from it often.  In that way, a photographer learns to capture images as nature intended them to be, not as the human mind wishes them to appear.

In the clip above my daughter is joyously facing the worst that life has to offer, with a smile on her face, and optimism in her vision to articulate the transitory passage of time.  It is over time that fruit is produced from the trees, and the seasons bring with each new quarter opportunities for life—or death.  Regardless of what the human being does, or what it desires, time will pass ruthlessly forward.  The human being can either ride that wild wave, or be crushed by it.  My daughter, as the photographer chooses to ride it.

During our many hours of talks together, I always told her that the treasures in life are where others are afraid to go, to cut through the forest and make your own path where nobody else has dared go.  Under such advice, it is not enough for her to take on a job as a civil servant, another typical business professional, or a meaningless bureaucrat.  She is on a path of her own making looking for treasures lost to the rest of society, and she is doing it boldly.

It is good to see all those discussions we had coming to life within the context of her existence.  The ability to see the world the way she does gives me optimism for the future of mankind that I would not have otherwise.  For as cynical as we all have a right to be, it is in young people like my daughter that all the opportunities of existence present themselves.  I am looking forward to all she produces in the future for a world that won’t know how good it was till it has passed them by.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

The Mind of Lakota School Levy Supporters: Hidden meanings from behind enemy lines by the Lorax

It is now at a point that I cannot read all my email, let alone respond to all of them.  But I have a group of people who when I see their name in the header, I make a point to at least read what they send me.  Of these people is a group that sends me rumors, facts, and happenings behind the enemy lines at the Lakota school district.  I learn all kinds of things from these “double agents” who show their Lakota employers politeness and cooperation to their faces, but are willing to cut out their heart through actions driven by pent-up frustration.  One such email came to me from within the For Lakota campaign as the participants were promoting their pro levy zombie tactics to one another through a Facebook campaign.

I put a small caption of these Facebook diatribes upon these pages below for analysis, because it offers a fascinating glimpse into the thoughts and actions of the typical levy supporter.  Most of the normal people who vote against school levies don’t get a chance to interact with these levy supporters because what they say disgusts us.  But in the context of their social imposition, it is relevant to understand their mindset.  With that in mind, read the exchange below with caution.  The shallow perspective may be extremely insulting, yet it is the kind of dialogue that is going on within the confines of the typical levy supporter openly broadcast on their Facebook accounts.

Andrea Sack Sandy

September 19

Please take the time to vote!!! We can all make this happen!!! Our children deserve the best so let’s make sure that Lakota is able to give it to them….Register, Show Up and Vote YES for Issue 7-Lakota School Levy!!!!! Thanks Laura Macdonald Kennedy for the great Lorax quote!!!! — feelinghopeful with Jeanne Brauns and 84 others.1234036_10201580914752206_1149262620_n

  • Andrea Sack Sandy If you are “on the fence” just Vote Yes, do it for “that one teacher” whose extra time with your child, kind words or endearing smile changed your son or daughters life. Be responsible for the well-being of our children and our community. Do the Right Thing!!!! Vote Yes!!!!!

Leslie Reese Anzalone Love this Andrea!!

Yesterday at 7:32am via mobile · Like

So let’s study what is meant by the phrase, “Our children deserve the best so let’s make sure that Lakota is able to give it to them,” since this appears to be a common belief among the levy supporters.   What is the determining qualification for why “their” children deserve the best?  Why do they deserve the best, because they are the children of these particular women?  What makes these mothers so special?  Are these children royalty for some future kingdom—what makes them so prone to entitlement?  And why does Lakota have to give them this attribute.  Lakota in the context provided is all tax payers in the Lakota district.  These mothers are supporting the open looting of financial assets from every tax payer to fulfill the Barbi dream house mentality that their children are automatically deserving of some special treatment just for being born.

The word “let’s” implies collective action, as though through thuggish democracy the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.  The levy advocate above states clearly that even if voters are on the fence, they should just vote Yes for some greater purpose—defined by the levy supporter. They are encouraging thoughtless compliance to the mob rule of group assimilation.  The purpose of this Facebook communication is not to address a single fact as to why taxes need to be increased at Lakota, but simply to advance the emotion of the argument with thoughtless compliance.

Always at the center of these rally cries are the “needs of the children” which are exploited, as if kids will be destroyed if such a tax increase is not passed.  Yet the responsibility for raising children falls squarely on the shoulders of the parents.  Most of these staunch advocates of tax increases come from voters who are deeply insecure about their parenting skills, and would rather pass that responsibility off onto a paid teacher who is professionally trained.  This equates to the same mentality of the person who sends their car to the dealer to change their oil or replace the brakes.  Since they lack the skills to make the repairs to their vehicles on their own, they would rather pay large fees to have someone else perform the task for them.  The same trend translates over into their family lives; they would rather pay a specialist to do their parenting for them, because they lack the skills of parenting needed to raise children.  They seek to cover up this deep insecurity with rally cries supporting teachers who they fully expect to do their parenting jobs for them while they run around like busy bodies gossiping about everyone who intersects their life, eating too much, shopping too much and are continually busy so they can always have an excuse for avoiding the scary task of parenting.  The escapades of their life are a travesty of errors brought about by their need to avoid the insecurities of parenting.  So they want Lakota teachers to do their job for them, and expect the “community” to pay for their children to be fixed, just like a mechanic fixes their cars.  The notion is as stupid as those same tax advocates asking the community to pay for their oil change, when the rest of us tend to do it ourselves.

Most voters in the Lakota district already raised their kids, and they did it on their own.  They didn’t leave the task of raising children to professional teachers.  In previous generations, when education quality seemed to be higher, and still cost a lot less than it does today, teachers were only a part of the lives of children, they weren’t expected to actually be the parents the way modern levy supporters do.  The guilt that many parents feel over their lack of skill in communicating with their children is covered up with their radical support of tax increases.  In a warped way, the levy advocates believe that they can sin every day of the week, but on Sunday, they can say a prayer and get into heaven.  In the case of their children’s educations, they believe they can be gossiping, materialistic, social menaces and all the sins of their lives will be erased if they campaign for higher taxes at their children’s school.  They convince themselves and anyone who will listen that everything they do is “for the children” but it’s really for them—to cover the sins of their chosen lifestyle and the guilt they feel over it.

I know most these levy supporters will read this at some point in time over the next couple of months and I challenge any of them to dispute my claims in the comments below.  I know what is in their hearts and I invite them to dispute it with me.  But they can’t because what I have said here is true—it is the backbone of their neurosis—they seek redemption for the sins of their crumbling lives off the backs of their children and they hope that nobody notices.  But anybody with any level of intelligences sees the situation clearly.  Only the like-minded levy supporter is blind to the messages of mental depletion that is written upon their foreheads with invisible ink, yet the messages are there for those with special lighting who can see it plain as day.  My special lighting comes from experience, and in dealing with these types of people for thirty years now.  I have met and dealt with every personality type that gets involved with these school levy things, and I know how they think.  The tax increase is not for their children, but to get them off the hook for being terrible parents either by choice, or by personal insecurities.  The cry for better schools is the subtle demand that someone besides them raise their children for them.  The crime is that those types of parents believe falsely that their children can be maintained like their cars—dropped off at the dealer to have their oil changed and brakes fixed—then returned to them all ready to run for a few thousand more miles.  But kids don’t work like that—and no amount of tax money thrown into the black hole of public education can change that fact.  Kids need love, and they need parents who are role models.  And that can’t be purchased at a school, or supplied through tax increases.

As for the Lorax , he’s a greenie weenie tree hugging anti-capitalist and it is appropriate that the pro levy Lakota campaign would seek him as a symbol of justification for their public education expansion.  Watch the video above and see how anti-business the Lorax is—just like the pro levy supporters at Lakota.  

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

Sara Pichler’s Letter to the Editor: Fighting against the Lakota school levy

Over the weekend I was out and about when I noticed that several No Lakota Levy supporters had put out their signs early matching the efforts of the levy addicts.  The “For Lakota” campaign had already done so weeks ago as their inbred campaign of terror and parasitic throttling began pretty much at the start of the football season.   While it was good to see the signs for No Lakota Levy going up so soon, I must caution everyone to wait, at least until the last two weeks of the campaign just prior to the election.  The levy zombies will steal the No Lakota signs and they will be all gone by election time.  CLICK HERE TO SEE WHAT THEY DID LAST TIME.   We had over 500 signs stolen or openly vandalized within one weekend during the last campaign which cost thousands of dollars in damage.  The school, the police, nor the pro levy campaign attempted to stop the behavior as behind the scenes it was encouraged.  Word came back to me after the election that Lakota teachers were breaking the law spending time covering pro levy topics during their classes and were encouraging students to spend their Friday and Saturday nights vandalizing, and stealing No Lakota Levy signs.  The police of course did nothing about the behavior as pickup trucks filled with No Lakota Levy signs—some quite large—drove around at 3 AM unmolested by Butler County Sheriffs sitting along the road ways and watched.  The police after all were protecting their fellow union brothers and sisters, and encouraged the property destruction with their silence.

Because of all the sign stealing that tends to go on from the “For Lakota” side, I have encouraged the tax resistance efforts to utilize methods of protest that cannot be so easily stolen, such as letters to the editor in local newspapers, blogs like this one, and the comment boards where the levy addicts tend to hang out—and challenge them on their turf.  Over the weekend it was also good to see that Sara Pichler had done just that, she had submitted a well written Letter to the Editor in the September 22nd 2013 edition of Today’s Pulse Butler County competing directly with the hive of levy supporters which typically hijack that process with neurosis, and mindless radicalism.  That letter can be seen below as it appeared in the paper:


Homeowners in the Lakota School District need to be aware that the state of Ohio has passed legislation that will eliminate the 10 percent rollback on your property taxes on Jan. 1, 2013.  This means that if you vote “YES” for the school levy, you will be paying the 10 percent rollback that was eliminated and the new millage Lakota is asking for.  Everyone might want to look at their 2012 property tax statements to see how much the elimination of the 10 percent rollback will impact their household budgets.

With the current economic conditions and the uncertainty about how much your healthcare costs will rise on January 1st 2014 can you afford to vote for a school levy in November?  Lakota has declining enrollment.  Lakota emphasizes that they will increase security at schools return busing, lower fees for students, etc. but, really, aren’t they just going to raise salaries and benefits for all staff?  The levy is not needed at this time and at the millage Lakota would like you to vote for.

Sara Pichler

Liberty Twp.

All those points are good ones yet the best one is the cost of the upcoming Obamacare debacle that will have a major impact on all our incomes with the largest wealth redistribution scheme ever attempted by government.  Even the Lakota teachers who make such extraordinary salaries for mediocre work will agree that they are concerned over Obamacare.  Even with their amazingly high wages of an average of 63K per year the best of the benefits from the Lakota Education Association is the gold-plated health care benefits.  Obamacare threatens that benefit in a radical way with costs not yet foreseen.  Obamacare is the tsunami wave that is not so far out at sea which is coming and we all know it, and when it hits there will be massive amounts of destruction to personal bank accounts.  Can property owners even dare afford hundreds of dollars in additional taxes for the Lakota district when that money might only be a drop in the bucket toward the increased premiums that will come to insurance policies in the wake of Obamacare implementation?  No.  The idiots supporting the upcoming Lakota Levy of 2013 obviously have not done the math, or are too brainwashed to see clearly how dire the situation truly is.

That letter is but one small effort toward the efforts that are massive before us all.  For every letter and sign that is put out against the proposed tax increase, there are ten that will come out in favor of the levy.  This does not mean that there are more supporters for the levy than against; it simply means that the No Levy voter tends to be quiet about their thoughts because they don’t want levy radicals running through their yards stealing their property and threatening them with sins against children while attending church on Sundays. They have learned to keep their opinions to themselves, and they tend to vote NO at the ballot box as a way to stick it to the social parasites who perpetually wish to raise taxes on them.

But a letter like the one above against the levy does thirty times the good of any literature that comes out in favor.  The reason is that the levy people are preaching to the choir, the kind of people who want a first-class education, but can’t afford a private school, so they seek a free education off the backs of the community.  They don’t mind paying $5,000 to $6,000 a year in taxes when private instruction might cost them twice that.  But if they can trick the senior citizens, and business owners into helping to cover those costs, they certainly will.  Those are the typical levy supporters and once their children grow up, they move away, and leave the rest of us with their tax bill, and the teachers union make off like bandits.  That has been the trend anyway, until No Lakota Levy put a stop to the madness—and slowly more people like Sara Pichler have gotten involved and participated in the process of fighting school levies.

The early activity is encouraging, the signs, the letters, and the willingness to engage the levy zombies with facts they cannot combat.  While signs are important to a campaign, No Lakota Levy has won many campaigns without having a majority of the signage out.  The Pro Levy groups have often outnumbered us 10 to 1, but we still win because the silent majority quietly despises the levy addicts.  Still the most effective way to fight the levy zombies is on their own turf, particularly the local newspapers in the fashion that Sara did.   Signs can and will be stolen, lost forever to the thieves of Lakota, but words and ideas stick around much longer.  It is in those tactics that the levy zombies cannot meet with equal ambition because their tax increase proposal is simply a scam that requires emotion vacant of facts to advance.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

Gennifer Flowers Wants Hillary Clinton For President: The failure of feminists

I am certainly no fan of Bill and Hillary Clinton.  If either of them were to pass me in public I would not shake their hand or acknowledge them in any way aside from anyone else.  They are both disgraces to America for many reasons.  It does not surprise me that Bill’s mistress Gennifer Flowers claimed that Hillary was a bisexual.  It would not surprise me if the Clinton household regularly participated in three-way sex and that Hillary actually found it appealing to learn of her husband’s multiple sexual liaisons with other women.  Hillary obviously has a kind of voyeuristic lust for her husband’s sexual recklessness that is more common among women from her generation than many people care to admit.  But what does surprise me is that Gennifer Flowers said she would support Hillary for president in spite of all the hard public relation battles that went on over the  years between them, for the one all-powerful reason………………because Hillary is a woman.

This statement reminded me of the stupidity of the levy supporters at Lakota that tried to make me out to be a “sexist” because I called levy supporters “latté sipping prostitutes with asses the size of car tires and diamond rings to match.”  My political opponents believed that all the women of my community would join their band-wagon against me for the one solitary reason, because they were all women.  The suggestion was that being a woman trumped all logic and individual thought and that as a demographic group, they all stood together.

Several years ago there was a very distinguished family member who came to my home while I was at work to take my wife out to lunch—to supposedly touch base and see how things were going—to talk “girl talk.”  I have discussed that my wife has never worked in a career and has been a housewife for most of our 25 years of marriage.  It’s an arrangement that we mutually support and believe very passionately in.   We rejected the social concerns of the 60s, of feminism, and diluted family relationships early in our marriage, and maintained that position even to the present.  I even spent a considerable amount of time explaining that position in my novel Tail of the Dragon released last year, staying sold out during four fiscal quarters.  My wife and I have always been staunch supporters of traditional families, and rejected many of the arguments made by feminists.  At events, particularly where this family member was present, the first question they’d ask my wife is, “do you have a job yet?”  Or, “you never want to be in a position where you have to depend on a man, after all, what if something were to happen to Rich.”  This went on for many, many years, and we casually brushed off the comments after each engagement out of politeness.  All the other women in the family however buckled under these types of elder statesman, and they were diminished greatly in my eyes by the influence of the bra burning exploits of the family feminists.  Over the years, my wife began to stick out like a sore thumb at Holiday dinners and this really made some of the women mad, especially the aforementioned woman.  This prompted the luncheon she invited my wife on out-of-the-blue, which naturally drew my suspicion.  But I do not tell my wife where to go and where not to go.  She is free to do what she pleases when she pleases to do it-which is my gift to her for being the centerpiece of our family, so my wife agreed to meet with the family feminist to…………..”touch base.”

The luncheon went the way I expected and over the next two hours migrated from small talk centering on all the family’s children to an all-out assault against my wife’s chosen way of life.  The meeting ended by this family member telling my wife that “we’re going to get you if you don’t listen,” meaning that my wife was making the other women in the family question feminism, and that my wife needed to get on board with the collectivism of womanhood—otherwise there would be consequences.

Well, I don’t take threats well—in fact, I don’t take them at all—ever.  Never have, and I never will.  As close as that family member was to us, we have never spoken since, and that was over a decade ago.  There are of course the casual hellos, and good-byes out of politeness, but never any discussions of a personal matter.  But as angry as I was, I didn’t tell my wife how to feel and think about the situation—she arrived at her own conclusions, which were of course very similar to mine.  After that event it left us both wondering who “WE” was.  After a lot of time passed it became more clear who the “WE” were in reference.  My wife was expected to surrender her loyalty to our family in favor of the collective whole of the family member’s suggestion.  If she didn’t, there was a threat of action—either social castigation, or possible physical violence.

The result dramatically backfired.  My wife and I haven’t been married for a quarter of a century because we don’t get along.  She may not be as violent, and display such a vicious temper as I do at times, but she is every bit as vindictive when threatened maybe more so.  A rift formed in our family from that point on that never recovered, and is why I can talk about the things I do here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom knowing full well that everybody reads it.  That is because my life is aligned with my thoughts, and what I have said here in writing, I have said in person to many people to their faces.  My wife was made to feel badly by other women for many years because she stayed home with our children and baked cakes for their birthdays personally instead of buying one from Kroger.  When my kids wanted a drink, my wife was there.  When they wanted help with their homework, my wife was there.  When my kids wanted someone to drive them someplace, my wife was ALWAYS there.  My wife was there every single day of their growing up years to cook them fresh food for every meal and teach them values as question arose.  Because of my wife, my kids never had to rely on a third-party for instruction.

Of course over the years the roots planted in such times begin to yield fruit.  The family member mentioned who threatened my wife found her existence plagued with social problems from her part of the line.  All the women who bought into the feminist dialogue are suffering through various problems, such as financial stabilization, ethical conduct, and personal aptitude.  My children have no such problems—zero and that is more than a proud father talking.  It is everyone who meets them.  The family member was wrong, and my wife was right.  The implied threat backfired and caused rifts in our family that will last a lifetime because it is not the will of any group—even a group of women, to change the mind of a single individual.  It was not my wife’s duty or task as a woman to yield to the pressure of a powerful family member who subscribed to the feminist arguments of her day.  In my family, my wife and I agreed to reject those arguments in favor of tradition and the results are self-evident.

What Gennifer Flowers is talking about in reference to Hillary is virtually the same.  She clearly resents that she is not married to Bill Clinton, and would love to have been the first lady of America if only she could have stayed with her lover.  But she is willing to put personal issues aside in favor of Hillary for president not because she is a better person for the job, or has a proven track record as a politician.  She stated that she would vote for Hillary only because they share womanhood in common, and that the sex or race of a candidate is the primary qualifier of their decision to vote for a so-called leader.  Gennifer Flowers is talking about collectivism of the worst sort, and brings to light why Barack Obama is the current president not because of his skill as a politician, but because he is a man of color.  People of color have voted for Obama nearly 100% of the time because of the color of the politician’s skin, not by the beliefs of the individual.  Flowers is suggesting the same.  Women should vote for Hillary forgetting the Benghazi debacle, the lies, the murders, he incredible deception projected by the Clintons over many years, because she is a women—and only for that reason.

The same ignorance has been seen in family politics, and even local politics where my opponents having no way to win an argument against me attempted to use feminism as a club to unify the women of all political types under common causes of sexuality—which is a dangerous assumption.  It didn’t work of course, but did bring out the unusual amount of anxiety many men feel toward their wives fearful that they will turn against them and run toward the collectivist tendencies of group behavior, in this case feminism.  The implied threat against my family seen many times is that if I or my wife did not yield to the power of the collective, then our individualities would be snuffed out.  The same rational is being put forth by Gennifer Flowers toward Hillary Clinton, a rival for her affection toward the only man it sounds like she ever loved in Bill Clinton.  Collective feminism takes higher value over individual desires, or as Spock would say in Star Trek, “The needs of the many would out-weigh the needs of the few.”  Well, Spock is wrong, and so are the feminists.  The many do not trump individual thought, yet those who allow for such possibilities find themselves in a life constantly in trouble seeking solace which never comes from the group.   Women should vote for whom they think is the best person, they should not vote in a certain way because feminism demands it.  So long as these elements exist in American culture, no amount of bright lights and academic progress can erase the fact that society is still functioning as a hunter and gather tribe stuck in a village mentality.  So long as individuality is frowned upon and collectivism is championed, society will continue to be corrupt, stagnant, and morally lost.  As far as presidential candidates who represent collectivism none is more positioned than Hillary Clinton who is a buffoon, and a woman of many secrets.  Yet women will have to make the choice that is a hard one, one that my wife had to make many times over many years, to reject feminism for the thoughts of their own mind, and to be dedicated to themselves and their families and reject their collective associations for which they are members only because of their sexuality.

As to the next question many reading this will ask, what does my wife do with herself now that the children are grown?  How does she fill her days?  The answer is she is free to do whatever she pleases.  She is a free woman.  She is not in service to an institution, a social obligation, or any family member.  She can do what she wants when she wants to do it.  And lucky for her, she likes to read, because I do too.  That is the key to a long marriage, and really nothing else, shared common interest, and making sure that outside influences do not end up in the bedroom.  Ladies, forget about Hillary Clinton or Opera.  Strive for freedom and drop the concerns for inclusion in any groups of collective endeavor.  Be individuals and strive every day to be free.  You will be a lot happier if you do.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

Why ‘Grand Theft Auto Five’ Made Over A Billion Dollars: The sign of times to come

Everybody is good at something if they spend any time and effort to dig out their uniqueness from the swirling broth of social soup.  I have been fortunate to discover that I am good at a lot of things one of which is the unique skill of discovering trends a long way out before they manifest into the rest of society.  I predicted well over 15 years ago the collapse of the housing market—which my daughter reminds me of often.  Over ten years ago I predicted the rise of a welfare politician like Barack Obama, the collapse of Europe financially, and the current bursting of the college bubble.  I would have vast arguments/discussions with my in-laws over college back in a time when everyone was going and was ashamed to say otherwise.  The view I argued against was that college was not a magic Harry Potter potion where once a degree was obtained would fill the personal bank accounts of the graduates.  Their view of college had been shaped by LBJ’s great society, and blinded them to the perilous results currently before us all—leaving unskilled spoiled brats as the primary workforce who were trained by their educations to be government workers and nothing else, because nothing else in the reality of capitalism supports the view of the world shaped by modern public education and college experiences.

Another unique skill I have is the ability to be surrounded with the worst news possible, death, famine, ignorance, hard luck, etc., and still find something good to work with in order to escape.  This has been beneficial as a family matriarch and those who have ridden my coattails in the past have discovered the financial benefits of tagging along for the ride as I can drag them through the worst portions of their life and they will come out smelling like roses on the other end.  The trick is that they have to shut up and listen.  I don’t mind people riding my coat tails until they become back seat drivers and attempt to share equal credit for the decisions made along the way.  I don’t do the sharing thing, not even when it comes to ideas.

With all that in mind I mentioned a few days ago the trend of Fantasy Flight Games as a gaming company that is unusually good at what they do, and how an emerging market is changing to intersect their particular business model.  Part of the creation of that business model is the failure of public education and the open rebellion that millennials are about to unleash upon the global marketplace.  Well, as I was making those statements Rock Star Games, a video game manufacturer of popular titles like Grand Theft Auto, Red Dead Redemption, and L.A. Noire released the fifth edition of their very violent and morally decrepit game, Grand Theft Auto.  In the first twenty-four hours of release, GTA5 made $800 million dollars and in just three days hit one billion in sales.

I have played Red Dead and L.A. Noire, and both are wonderful games.  Red Dead is one of the best modern westerns I have ever seen, it’s a great game with large open worlds and is a real technical marvel driven by intensely realistic story lines.  It was a successful title.  L.A. Noire was a L.A. Confidential type of story that featured good guys in 1940’s Los Angeles solving crimes to root out the bad guys.  As good as that game was, it did not find an audience, as modern young people who drive the video game market could not relate.  So they shrugged the game.  Grand Theft Auto is a game that I can’t stand however, because it is evil.  It requires the player to be bad in order to succeed and glorifies drug selling, prostitution, and social decrepitude.  So I don’t play it, and have rejected the title.

Yet millions of kids absolutely love GTA which is a kind of compass needle which points to the direction society is moving—one that current education lovers, government statists, and political think tanks will find repulsive.  A video game with a billion dollars in sales has the power to change cultural references.  Movies that make a billion dollars during their entire release are thought of as social shaping indicators that drive artistically the values of human culture—and are taken very seriously.  Musical records that make that much money over a multiyear period are considered classics that define the generation of their release, but there are no definitions that can articulate the impact of a GTA video game that makes over a billion dollars in just three days.  The plot of the game is the beating and maiming of street whores, having shoot-outs with police, and stealing cars, and the graphics are very realistic.

I’m not going to say that the game is bad however.  It is a work of art that reflects the times that created it.  For all the reasons that L.A. Noire failed, GTA succeeds because it is the product of the first generation that have grown up entirely with failed role-models in their lives.  The parents at the homes of millennials have divorced too often and shown themselves to be physical and intellectual weaklings.  Father can never know best because he is on his second and third marriage by the time he’s forty.  Meanwhile the millennial’s step-fathers are losers who have sex with their mothers and complain a lot and do not have the moral authority to discipline children.  The teachers at their schools are out-of-touch and seem to be coming from a different world.  They are teaching statism to a generation that will be lucky to maintain a job at McDonalds—let alone work in a six figure income.  Millennials have had their religion stripped away from them and have been molded socially with a dangerous replacement of socialism taught in their schools mixed with carefully controlled capitalism broadcast to them from the largest stable influence in their lives, the television.  They can’t trust their teachers, they can’t trust their parents, and they can’t trust their religion.  They are a hapless heap of social failures created for them by the previous generations functioning from failed philosophy.  It is not their fault that they have been given a rage that cannot be communicated any other way but in total social rejection.

When I mentioned that football games in high school were headed toward extinction, the attitude of this millennial generation was what I had in mind.  Without values in those experiences, there is nothing to keep their minds anchored into the future—and public schools have taught the opposite.  They have exacerbated this entire situation.  Public schools have imposed themselves upon the American family, helping to destroy families, showing children that the real authority in the world is what they see at school, not at home, which is draped with chaos and decadence.

The success of Grand Theft Auto 5 is a sign of the times to come.  The players are living out a fantasy that fulfills the emptiness given to them by a statist society overflowing with failure.  I would say that GTA5 is the ultimate libertarian fantasy, and that will be the political persuasion of this millennial generation.  I am so sure of it that you dear reader can mark it on your calendar.  Within ten years it will be discovered that social gun acceptance will increase dramatically, sexual promiscuity will greatly increase, drug use will become more open, and a hatred of the police will permeate a vast majority of the population.  The social models that were built-in America from the 1930’s to the 1980’s will be wiped away completely for good and bad leaving a world that will not be surprised by every mass shooting that occurs, won’t give a damn about fairness or equality, and will have no respect for the law, or the politicians who make them.  For those over 40 who found the Occupy Wall-Street crowd dangerous, and morally corrupt, nothing has been seen yet as these poor hopeless millennials were born without trust and let down by every adult they had ever met from the time of birth till their social maturity at age 10.

It won’t be Rock Star Games that is at fault for the decadence of society in the years to come, it is the failure of an education system driven by government to carry entire generations of people to a statist philosophy that was rejected at the most primal levels of subsequent age brackets.  After all, public education is sold to the public as the fix all for all problems, and quite the opposite is true.  The failure of public education is the reason that GTA 5 made a billion dollars in three days.  It is the reason I hate public education so intensely because it is creating the kind of world where young people cannot relate to good guys, but only the bad.

When I was a kid playing cops and robbers provoked fights because nobody wanted to play the bad guy.  Everyone wanted to be the good guy.  This was the result of previous generations who had grown up on westerns and kids saw that their parents liked good guys and hated the bad—and kids always wanting deep in their minds to please their parents wanted to be something their parents would respect.  So every kid wanted to play the good guy in such games. Now it is the opposite problem.   Now kids fight to be the bad guy.   They have learned that their parents are flawed characters and cannot be made to be happy, so they have given up.  Public schools sought to fill the void with statist educations which only made things worse.  That is why GTA5 is such a hot seller and is the envy of the entertainment market.  The movie industry is aghast by the numbers, politicians are completely unable to comprehend the why or how.  Society is in for a very rough ride that they are not prepared to deal with.  Politics will change dramatically within the decade—and there is no stopping it at this point.  The situation will just have to play itself out.  To understand that situation, study the sales of Grand Theft Auto 5, and the future of America will become quite clear, and it has nothing to do with the values of Bill O’Reilly on Fox News, or the hand holding unified world of George Soros.  It will be more like the plot of Grand Theft Auto 5, and for that, the blame deserves to be placed on the shoulders of the institution that promised since the creation of The Department of Education in 1979 to make society better not worse.  Public education is the cause of GTA5’s success, and the blame deserves to be assigned there and only there as it has ushered in a period that will be one of the darkest in the American experience.  Mark my words—I see it as clear as a noon day sun upon a hot cloudless desert.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!  

The Bee Hive of Lakota Schools: Parasites, Thugs and Communists

A wonderful example of the labor union hypocrisy penetration of public education came to me through an email message from a guy who communicates with me regularly arguments contrary to mine. As it is well-known by now, I report virtually every bit of news that comes out of my school district of Lakota with the intention to combat the constant tax requests imposed by that education institution upon my community.  I write at least one article every day, sometimes two or three. When Lakota is light on news, I cover other topics discussing schools all across the country, and sometimes just to take a break I talk about other kinds of things all together.  However, the primary focus of my blog is the evils of public education particularly centered on my home district.

Of course there are people who take great offense to what I write, because they profit off the education business in some way or another as it currently is.  And those people look constantly for some way to undermine my arguments.  That is the spirit of the letter listed below where the commenter sent me three pictures of nice, pleasant women who teach at Cherokee Elementary as an attempt to invalidate my claims that teachers are typically, parasites upon civilization, thugs as their radicalism brings harm to the communities that employ them, and are serving an occupation that is designed around the philosophy of communism.  I list the letter below without the pictures of the teachers to protect them from unneeded scrutiny.



I am a little tired of seeing images of teachers from other cities in your blog.  So I give you images of three teachers from Cherokee Elementary.  The titles above them have been given to them for no apparent reason other than they are teachers in Lakota, just as you have labeled virtually every teacher in Lakota as being parasitic, a communist, and a thug.  Why don’t you start with these three teachers in your effort to call out the bad guys instead of beating around the bush with the out-of-towners you like to put in your blog.



 (picture omitted)


  (picture omitted)


 (picture omitted)



William Schmidt



What I love about that letter is it shows the weakness of the labor argument.  The primary driver of high taxes imposed upon communities by their school districts is the collective bargaining agreements that were typically reached through the threat of labor strikes by the same teachers that were mentioned above.  It is through collectivism that the budgets of Lakota were wrecked—as all boats in the teacher labor pool rise together regardless of skill level and personal behavior.  Typically, through collectivism, the bad teachers such as the parade of teachers who have been busted recently at Lakota for sexual misconduct hide their evil actions behind the smiling faces of the nice teachers exhibited from Cherokee Elementary.  Through collectivism the bad, unskilled, and corrupt disguise their failures behind the good deeds of the few.

When a bee hive is identified as a threat to a small child out of fear that the youngster might swat at it and stir up the hive of bees into stinging in retaliation, it is the fear of the collective bees that is the threat.  But when individual bees are seen landing from flower to flower harmlessly doing their business, they might be considered a thing of beauty.  Typically when I see a bee land in my swimming pool, I will scoop it out hoping to save it, so that it can live life one more day.  But if a bee hive were near a spot where a child I cared about played, I would incinerate the hive killing thousands of bees in the process to protect the child.

The collective bargaining agreements reached by the teachers unions are a bee hive in our communities.  It protects the bad by using the good as props to show value for the collective whole, which is what the letter writer above was attempting to do—sensing that public sentiment is very much against their public education arguments.  He is attempting to play on my sentiments, which are universally human, to fish out a struggling bee out of a pool to save it from drowning, when I am arguing the incineration of the entire hive.  The hope is that by pulling the focus away from the collectivism that caused the trouble of creating school levies and focusing on the individual lives of a few teachers the bad behavior of the of the collective whole will be forgotten.   They are attempting a trick from the past which created the entire problem.

Collectivists in education want the power of group force behind them to advance their position, but when they get into trouble they seek individual recognition.  When a teacher has sex with a student it is just one or two bad apples that have went bad, but when they want more money, they collectively stop work and hold children hostage from their educations to force wage increases.  I show routinely that these problems are nationwide and exist in every school where labor unions control the political structure.  This leaves the only strategic maneuver by them to loot off the good merits of a few teachers to justify the cost of the entire bee hive.  The teachers mentioned above I have no doubt are nice people taken individually.  They are someone’s mother, someone’s daughter, someone’s special someone, and are not the epitome of evil.  Yet, they allow their good names to be tarnished in association with the group hive of their labor union where statist advocates use the good deeds of a few to justify the evils of the many with looted value.  This makes them every bit the menace as the child molester because the pervert is allowed to hide behind such good teachers through the collective bargaining process.  This makes the entirety of the teaching profession in public school an evil entity which should be defunded at the very least, and eradicated politically before it further destroys the next generation the way it has the previous three.

The attempt to use three mild-mannered teachers from Cherokee Elementary as a way to run cover for a profession that advocates open communism, and radical Democratic political policy on the backs of children is sheer evil.  Evil is not always in the biggest, scariest foe, but sometimes is most dangerous when the single bee stuck in the swimming pool appears harmless enough, but is simply a trap for the entire hive.  Public education is on a declining trend and its advocates are seeking the good name of the very few to loot their collective value for their perpetual salvation.  However, eventually just like money, good deeds do run out and once the good stop offering themselves up as sacrificial victims to the merits of collectivism, the communists, the thugs, and the social parasites will have nowhere left to turn as they are then exposed for lack of anything to hide themselves behind.  This is the nature, and frustration of the note sent to me from an education advocate who can’t fathom such a realization.  But even if the skill is not present to see the facts, the facts exist and will not go away just because pro education supporters wish them to.  Once the masks of goodness are stripped away from individual analysis, what becomes quickly evident is that the teaching profession is filled from the top to the bottom with parasites, thugs, and communists.  This leaves the next statement which should then be obvious to all—what will society do to protect themselves from this diabolical menace that unleashes upon all society an invisible attack designed to conquer the minds of children before anybody ever realizes it?  The first step is to not approve tax increases, and from there let the system collapse on itself.  The way to destroy the bee hive is not to become filled with compassion for one single bee, but to see the threat as a whole.  In this case, every public school in America is a bee hive filled with busy bees functioning as a collective unit for the manufacture of honey.  But in these schools the honey is not the kind consumed as food, but is taxes for the solitary consumption of the federal government and their statist policies of doom concocted with tyranny in mind sold to the public through promises of comfort…………and goodness.


Notice how all those lip dub videos were published around the same time as Lakota did their video.  Lakota wasn’t doing anything new.  They were just copying off everyone else like all collective organisms do, and that is what they are teaching children.

Rich Hoffman

Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE.  CLICK HERE!