The Best Thing that Could Happen with the J6 Committee Would be to Indict President Trump: Accelerating the end of the Democrat Party

We all know by now what the UnSelect Committee, who has been putting on a show trial over what they say is the darkest day in American history, January 6th, 2021, is up to. They are seeking to hide the election fraud they participated in, and they hope they can use the proceedings to indict President Trump and tie him up in court to disqualify him from running in 2024, which they are terrified of. And to all that, I think there would be nothing better for our country than to have Trump indicted because, in the process, there would be legal discovery and all kinds of a mess that would be blasted into the mainstream news cycle that has so far been contained from the public. The result of that would be a complete destruction of the Democrat Party. Which I think is destroying itself quite nicely. But an indictment of Trump would be the end of them and the established order of the Beltway, which would turn out to be far greater than just having Trump run for President again, only to go through the same kind of resistance we saw before. The pressure of Trump is far greater than actually being in the White House. There are a lot of people who could run for President in 2024 who could represent the MAGA movement.  Ron DeSantis comes to mind.  What is being built presently is a new kind of political movement that will far outlast many of the people currently holding office. The net result of all these efforts will save our nation from the looters and scumbags who have given us the mess we see now. But an indictment of Trump would accelerate the process in ways that nobody has been thinking about and would be very beneficial to the ultimate destruction of the Democrat Party due to the kind of case that would be put on full display for all to see. 

What we see happening with the J6 Hearing spectacle is the undoing of the George Bush era New World Order that Klaus Schwab and the other Desecrators of Davos are fully committed to today, with billions of dollars in personal assets fully dedicated to the change state of America from a capitalist country and into a socialist one. They stand to lose a lot of money and power if Trump returns to the White House, which is why they rigged the 2020 election. They couldn’t afford for people to run their own elections; it put at risk all the money and power they had built up over many years. It’s a globalist view of the world that started to be dismantled by the election of Trump in 2016. Back then, the system chiefs thought it was all a joke. They had rigged elections for years and knew how to keep things close to make Americans think they actually picked their own representatives. But most people didn’t believe in the system at all and just didn’t participate, making it easy for the “uniparty” to run all things any way they wanted to. They gave us fake wars and fake economic cycles. They manipulated everything to the gradual sell-off of our country to globalist investors while hiding their vile actions behind red, white, and blue patriotism and selling themselves as patriots as well. But truly, what they were preserving was a kind of Beltway aristocracy that many in the political class craved more than a thirsty person desires water in a hot desert. They wanted power over others more than anything else in the world, so they built a corrupt system to give themselves that power. They had to share it with other Beltway types, but so long as they were members of an elite aristocracy, they were happy to at least do that. 

Then along came Trump running as a person who didn’t need the donor class. He understood the media better than the media understood itself. And he knew how to make real business deals because he had built his brand doing so very publicly. So people showed up and voted for him in more numbers than the election cheats could deal with, and he snuck under the algorithm door in 2016, much to the surprise of everyone. Then, the Beltway, including Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and many others, worked for the next four years to undo the person that the people picked because the hidden little secret all along was that the Beltway ultimately picked the people it put in office. Voters were supposed just to play along, vote to make everything look like a choice, then go quietly back to sleep while the Washington Beltway types sold America away to everyone willing to pay a little cash for the opportunity. And in the process, they have committed so many vast crimes of excessive evil that the parameters were unfathomable to ordinary people. And while Trump was in office, so many crimes were committed to get rid of him, of the people’s pick, that many more crimes were committed by the FBI and the Department of Defense—especially regarding Covid. Many of the things that Wikileaks was publishing which could be traced back to many of the congresspeople and senators we see on television every night, were caught up to some extent or another in sedition, treason, and worse. Actions against America and its constitution left them no choice but to support complete insurrection to foreign interests to hide the crimes they had committed over many years. 

Ultimately, the desire to get rid of Trump and to prevent him from returning to the White House is the desire to cover up all these crimes with a phony trial by the UnSelect Committee over January 6th. The abuse of authority already displayed over Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, General Flynn, Rudy Guiliani, Steve Bannon, and Peter Navarro crossed the line long ago. But to put Trump at the front of the room with all the evidence he has collected along the way and the mouthpiece to sell it to the public, there would be no way for the Beltway types to survive that. We are dealing with new territory politically that we have never experienced before. An indictment would only accelerate a process of destruction that the Beltway has brought on itself. They are the ones with everything to hide, and their attempt to hide so much scandal behind the legitimacy of law and order would only work if people weren’t paying attention. But now, they are paying attention, and the bad guys no longer have control over the media. Social media is more than just Facebook, Google, and Twitter. Fox News does not represent conservatives like it once did; there are many other options now than there were even a few years ago. They don’t have control over what people say to each other. They do not have control of publishing, of anything really. The word of their crimes has gotten out, and now too many people know. It’s over for them already. By indicting Trump, they would only accelerate that process by years and compress them into months. So nothing would be better than to indict Trump. The government cannot live up to the measure they are enforcing on Trump, which is to say that he had an obligation to stop people from behaving the way they did on January 6th, to be angry at election fraud as they knew it at the time and felt that the government had not respected their vote.

The great fear behind the charade of the J6 spectacle is that the political class is not in charge of the millions of people they had taken for granted for decades. And the potential for all-out violence was a genuine fear for them. But in context, they would have nothing to fear if they had not acted so poorly and tried to hide so many crimes behind a façade of political theater. The tricks of old will not work any longer. People are awake to it, and they aren’t going back to sleep. And indicting Trump would only accelerate their own inevitable destruction, which couldn’t come sooner. So yes, indict President Trump, and let’s get the complete destruction of the Democrat Party out of the way once and for all.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

Graham Hancock’s Great Book, ‘Visionary’: To what degree does the spirit world shape modern politics and our everyday lives

I do get excited about my books, and when I read a great one, I often talk about it extensively. Books are my favorite things in the world, I could never have enough of them, and they have been with me most of my life as priorities. But this year, I knew Graham Hancock was releasing an update to his famous book previously, called Supernatural, with the new title Visionary. It was coming out on April 4th, so I nabbed it up and treated myself to a birthday treat of reading it voraciously. I talk a lot about politics and education issues. Still, I enjoy no subject more than the pseudo-sciences, and Graham Hancock, the former journalist, turned pseudo-science investigator, is one of the best currently in the field.    So for a birthday gift to myself, I gave myself a few weeks of April to just sit down and read his new book and soak it up because it’s one of those types of books. Actually, it has all the potential to be a life-changing book because it deals with the kind of stuff that is at the core of all human concerns. What were we before we were born, and what will we become after? What’s the point of it all. Now, I love Graham Hancock’s books. He and I have very close beliefs about bureaucracy’s effect on the sciences. He is into pseudo-science because traditional science, institutionalized, just does not keep pace with the rate of discovery that is occurring in this information age that we are in. Institutionalism is at war with the rate of understanding occurring, and they hate people like Graham Hancock. But Hancock brings his background as a journalist to science and takes what is known by traditional scientific discoveries and pieces everything together in a noninstitutionalized way, which is how things need to be done anyway. And as a result, he asks big questions seeking big answers to things. And for human beings, there is nothing more significant than how the spirit world interacts with the conscious world. 

For many years I have talked about the role that ultraterrestrials play in our human lives. I had done many articles on the giant race of people who lived in the Ohio region well before the times of Jesus Christ and actually had an empire all the way to the Gulf of Mexico before what we know of as Native Americans were even on the world stage. They were as sophisticated as the Stonehenge and Avebury cultures in England and obviously were part of the same culture from the same time periods of influence. So Graham’s topics are not new to me. I learned about these giants while attending the Mothman Festival at Point Pleasant, West Virginia, so it’s a real thing that certainly is under-researched. Traditional science driven by the university system is just too slow. They are guarding too much of their previous assumptions actually to answer these kinds of questions, so that is where Graham Hancock comes in. After reading the book by John Keel on the Mothman Prophecies, I am quite certain that the ultraterrestrials talked about in that book, which Graham’s Visionary is essentially a sequel, the spirit world of angels and demons that so concern religions have shown themselves in stories chronicled in the work of John Keel so effectively. But he was just touching on the surface, and Graham Hancock has taken several additional steps toward unraveling these interdimensional worlds and how they interact with the world of the living and actually redefining what “dead” means. 

Now, where Graham Hancock and I part ways is over the issue of drugs. I get his argument on the Pinery gland and how drugs can pull off the restrictor plate of brain activity to see things that are always there but that we filter out within the visual spectrum of our senses. He advocates for the open and legalized use of drugs to produce real hallucinogenic effects. Still, they are elements that our eyes can’t see because we live life in a four-dimensional world. I’m against all drugs, at any time, over anything. I don’t even take aspirin. I will occasionally sip on a beer socially, but nothing more, and I certainly never get intoxicated. But I am not closed off to his ideas that some of these drugs don’t produce hallucinations but are, in fact, reality seen for what they really are. This is why I was so interested in his book. I recently saw petroglyphs in New Mexico and Utah that were almost identical to known cave art in South Africa and Europe that span thousands of years from each other, and many thousands of miles of travel, so the cultures could not have been communicating 15,000 years ago or even 50,000. Yet they all tell similar stories painted on the rocks, and how they arrived at those images looks to be something Graham has pieced together correctly. He also puts UFO phenomena into the mix, which I had just had a research trip to Roswell fresh on my mind. So, his book reaffirmed many things that I had already been thinking about. And to add to that, he actually used ayahuasca and reported what he had seen, which was independent verification that he didn’t know he would experience. I wouldn’t do it, but I’m glad he was willing to report it scientifically instead of from the perspective of some drug-crazed lunatic. 

There is a taco place I like to go to at The Greene in Dayton called Condado Tacos, and ayahuasca hallucinations obviously inspire the interior. Or is it hallucinations? Is it a reality? I think it’s reality personally, and I think when we talk about political elements, we have to understand that there is an influence from these places that run quantumly with our 4-dimensional existence. Remember, we mathematically know that our present universe supports 11 dimensions that are likely within our current reality. But, outside of our universe, there is a possibility of 26, and within each of those dimensions, likely lifeforms are interacting with us at all times. Our business is to understand these lifeforms, especially if they are interacting with us.

We may not have the eyes and ears to hear them, but our minds certainly do, even if remotely. And that’s not a very fair fight if they have an easier time at communicating than we do, and they take advantage of that aspect often to push the world where we may not want it to go. We might say it’s the will of the spirit world, but what if it’s a maleficent demon who wants to destroy the world and everyone in it. Do you really want to listen to it? Perhaps this is the kind of influence that has brought so much great evil into the world. Or, maybe this is where all the good is, and that the purpose of life is to build a great soul to travel in these realms as an individual instead of just a collection of cosmic dust, and that the act of creation is what matters, of life being a creative process that gives birth to a human soul that then sheds the body for this afterlife. And that the afterlife is just another life that is depicted on those walls at Condado’s in Dayton. I think perhaps so. But regardless, a great book like Visionary is a rare treat, and a journey I was happy to take, and one of the best birthday presents I have ever given to myself. Time and the content to think about that truly has meaning.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

The Child Torturing Cult to Harvest Adrenochrome: How and why to stand against evil for the perpetuation of a good society

Like I say all the time, don’t judge people by what they say. Watch what they do. Actions speak louder than words, always. If a murderer is asked, “did you kill that person.” They will say, “no, I love people. It was all a misunderstanding.” If you say are you a cheater, “did you cheat,” they will say, “no, I am always honest; I go to Church on Sunday, I’ll swear on the Bible.” And if you ask a child molester if they perform the task, even knowing what we do about it, that it is widespread these days and has become something we uncomfortably accept too quickly, they all deny it. Who admits to something like that, even in prison? When you talk to an inmate about such a thing, they will always declare that it was a misunderstanding.

Evil does its work in the shadows; they do not like honesty nor the light of day. So when there is talk about a blood-sucking adrenochrome cult that deliberately tortures sex-trafficked children for a satanic cabal of influential people, quickly the media tells us that it’s some kind of crazy QAnon conspiracy theory. And they chastise anybody for even bringing it up as if the mere suggestion was ludicrous. Remember Pizzagate in the Hillary campaign years? Remember the Spirit Cooking that was talked about in the John Podesta emails? The same people who lied to us about the Hunter Biden laptop, election fraud, and the cause of inflation are the same who declare that the practice of satanic worship among the supposedly powerful and the drinking of the blood of children is not happening. Yet the evidence is mounting up in ways that speak dramatically to the contrary.

There is what they say, which are blatant lies, then there is what they do. We know now what’s on the Hunter Biden laptop. Hunter Biden was having an affair with his dead brother’s wife, and he has naked pictures of his 14-year old niece on that laptop, which many people in the media have seen. At the core of the issue is a child pornography 101 kind of case, but it gets far worse than that. We know that Joe Biden’s daughter’s diary is real, the same one that the FBI harassed Project Veritas over with unconstitutional raids meant to intimidate, not to instill justice. We know there is a lot of smoke on the sex island of Jeffery Epstein and his mysterious suicide while awaiting trial.   The list of the powerful who visited that sex island of underaged girls is extensive and kept a tight mystery. We know people like Adam Schiff went there a lot, as did Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and many others. These are not Walmart shoppers from our neighborhoods. I call them the Desecrators of Davos rather than elites because they aren’t superior to us. They are a bunch of screwed-up messes who crave power over logic and will do anything to get it. Is it that far-fetched to think that they’d pray to the devil or some supernatural aid of a demon or demons to gain a competitive advantage over other people? Consider that they’ll cheat in elections, and knowlingly lie about it. Why wouldn’t they turn to supernatural aid through some secret society or cult to enrich their lives with the sacrifice of other people to hopefully advance their own cause? Is that so farfetched? Just look at what they are doing. Look at the open border with Mexico and the amount of misery generated there with sex trafficking and human trafficking in general. Why is it allowed to happen by those in power now? Might it be that they believe that allowing it helps them in life, helps them find success and fortune? I’d say that history points to this being the most logical answer and the element that nobody is talking about.

People seek supernatural aid every day. Christians, after all, pray to God for guidance and help. It’s a generally accepted belief that prayer helps, and seeking that aid is morally good. But what if that prayer isn’t to a Christian God but of some devil from mythology. Or a demon that exists in the parallel worlds of dimensional occupancy. There are a lot of secret societies that have sought such supernatural aid throughout time, the Free Masons come to mind, the Rosicrucian’s, the Illuminati, the followers of Lucifer, and Gnostic shamans. There are shamans in just about every society, and they aren’t turning to the Christian God of the Bible for advice and aid. They seek those dead and gone or those who may not have ever yet emerged into the flesh on earth for guidance. They are all collective based, where they believe there is safety in groups, much the way Marxists believe in such psychological shelters within the warm blanket of society. Is it too farfetched to believe that they think that mass anxiety and the torture of human beings is off the table if the perpetrators of initiation believe they will get supernatural assistance toward their own goals from the point of view of their warped ideology? Climate change supporters fall under this religious fanaticism certainly. Would they take part in massive depopulation rituals through vaccines to save the planet they have come to think of as a human cell in the vast universe, a life all its own where the humans are the parasites that live off it and kill it with pollution? Well, just listen to those fanatics at a World Economic Forum discussion. They are just as crazy as what anybody thinks of the secretive Illuminati. 

The answer to all these questions is that, of course, there are people who are evil. They are lazy. They don’t like to work. They are insecure. And, of course, they will seek the easiest path to ruling the world. And just as quickly as a Christian will turn to prayer on a Sunday afternoon, there are characters who are failures as adult humans who will sell out a child, who will feed off the innocent and will do whatever they think some malevolent spirit would require of them just to get more power in life, for their own security as they see it. If they would or could enslave all of mankind with their actions through the malice of some demonic chant or mass sacrifice to the gods of evil throughout history, they surely would. And that leaves us to the point. We know people are functioning in the world with these motives. Whether or not these demons are victorious allies is something for debate. But the intent is what matters and acknowledging that evil is happening and is occurring on a mass level—knowing that we all have an obligation to stand up against it, if not for the most basic need to preserve the innocence of children. Children, no child, anywhere in the world, deserve to be let down by some lazy, failed adult who has wasted their lives becoming nobodies overflowing with vices. Kids do need protection from the failed adults who raise them, but that protection will not come institutionally. The police, the colleges, the corporate structure, even the churches are just as corrupt and falling for the secret society scam as anybody else. Instead, we have to stand for good and protect children with everything we do in our lives. We are to live for goodness even when people aren’t looking. We need to construct our society to keep kids from becoming part of some Luciferian scheme, which is now upon us with such a wave of evil that it is difficult to wrap our minds around it. Yet it’s our task to stand for children’s innocence and shield them from the malice of adult failures who are too far gone, usually by the time they arrive in their 30s, to be any good to anybody ever again. We are in an age where we must make some sort of declaration to help the young grow up with the opportunity for good, should they choose to embrace it. However, the choice is often made for them before they ever have the freedom to live for themselves. And that is the greatest tragedy on planet earth presently. It’s not climate change; it’s not politics; it’s not war. It’s the exploitation of children at the hands of evil, and the perpetuation of that evil by the good with a lack of action or judgment that is destroying the world. And if we want to do any good in the world, we would start there, because it’s in children that everything else comes from. They need adults to defend their lives before and after the womb and to have a real opportunity for truth, justice, and the American way.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

Ocasio-Cortez and Republican Sex: What’s at the heart of all communist activity

Sex and Ocasio-Cortez

It’s not just because Ocasio-Cortez looks like the donkey from Hee Haw, but the suggestion that the socialist advocate had regarding her belief that Republicans were frustrated with her because they wanted to date her and ultimately wanted to have sex with her said a lot that was laughable. It goes well beyond the suggestions of sex lifestyles in general, but more to the mass psychosis that tends to follow liberalism ultimately. And it reminded me of the excellent book about communism from Ayn Rand called We the Living, which I’ve said for years, should be required reading for every school child as a fundamental background of education in America. Without meaning to, Ocasio-Cortez, otherwise known as AOC, put her finger on a significant problem in liberal politics, the assumption that Democrats have better sex than Republicans and that the value of that endeavor is far greater among socialists and communists than in capitalist building Republicans. As a young person in her early thirties, the former bartender and waitress have had plenty of people who wanted to pollinate her young body, ignoring the face, of course. Luckily for biology, men were built to engage in sex with a knothole in a fence if needed to procreate our species. Men can at times not be very discerning about where they plant themselves in sexual engagement. They are wired that way because not everyone can be pretty, and not everyone can get the best-looking mate to provide DNA to the next generation. And when a young woman like Ocasio-Cortez has spent time around men twice her age who have wives at home that are well past their prime and are withering away in front of their faces leaving beauty a distant memory, young women like the socialist from New York and her young body and smooth skin can seem appealing. AOC has obviously confused this condition with reality and tried to make it fit her worldview. It comes from being young, and the great apprehension women have at that age because they realize that their female gifts are going away, and a world without those things is scary. 

Democrats, by nature, are too focused on sex because they never really develop themselves emotionally beyond their teenage years. People like Ocasio-Cortez, who aren’t very smart, naturally turn to the biological observations as the center of their mentality, leaving them to think that a night out in pursuit of sex is worthwhile. Sex is a shared practice; it takes cooperation to engage in it. And as long as the rules of sex are understood and prioritized, it makes it easy to control mass populations. It was never an accident that the internet made it possible to have so much access to sex and that online dating was such a centralized feature. Liberals, and their communist roots, as articulated well in that Ayn Rand book, have always intended the destruction of the American family by removing the kids from their parents, promoting divorce among the adults so that the state could manage their affairs, and that a lifestyle of sex obsession would dominate the minds of the masses in every way possible. Communism loves sex because it’s the ultimate communal activity, and sex with more than one partner is the ultimate expression of abandonment of the concept of private property. When Ocasio-Cortez sees that Republicans are moving away from Democrats in a way that she can’t control as part of the progressive caucus, her instinct is suitable to attempt to reel them back in with sex talk. It has likely always worked for her as a young woman needing tips in the service business, and those same rules generally apply in politics where favors are a currency equally desired. 

But Republicans are different; they think about more than just sex. They find joy in starting businesses, building houses, families, acquiring new cars. They enjoy making things, not so much the wasted time ritual of pursuing sex for an evening. Sex, of course, can always be enjoyed, but so can other things, like building a business and providing jobs to lots of people. Many people who are Republicans or who become Republicans learn that there is much more to life than sex and they handle aging much better because life doesn’t end at 30 when everyone’s bodies start to rot away back into dust. In many ways, the trajectory of the Republicans is a natural order that is consistent with all life. Hopefully, before it’s too late, people realize what a waste of time sex is before they get too old to have the choice taken from them in an undesirable body, kind of where people like Ocasio-Cortez are now. Once women like her have wasted their lives sleeping with everyone they can out of some infantile need for a shared experience, they hit a wall they can never come back from. The crises won’t be so bad for them if they have other things going on in their minds because people won’t want to sleep with them once they lose their sex appeal. In the Ayn Rand book, it is there that I learned that the term “Let’s Party” came from way back in the 1920s. The intent was to empower the youth, out with the old, in with the new, so that communal politics could take hold and rule the day with Karl Marx’s philosophy. That same trait is in our current culture, where older people are cast aside, and everything is catered to young, new-bodied people craving sex at every moment. 

However, such small-minded pursuits are creepy, and when compared to the many other options that a person finds in a capitalist culture, sex is easily avoided. There are many other things besides sex, and Republicans figure that out, even if biologically they still feel the tug. In a capitalist culture where it’s much more fun to develop a mind and build something new is an option, then temptations like those suggested by Ocasio-Cortez are much easier to ignore. And for her, that is a significant crisis because she has built her entire political platform in selling communism and socialism to the world through her young, flowering body, which she took for granted would always serve her. But now the panic is the same with all feminists who waste their early lives running around topless and having reckless sex with every degenerate that suits their fancy. The government does not make a very good husband, and older people don’t want to waste their time with someone everyone in the world has had sex with. It becomes a gross reminder of young bad decisions when other things become more attractive to a developing mind. And that is a little secret that most progressives nurture at the most fundamental level. Sex is a very primal thing. It’s a big deal to teenagers for biological reasons, but as humans, we do best when we find other things to do with our time than spending it on such a wasted effort. But socialists have built their entire political philosophy around such wasted efforts, and when they see people not joining them, it is the scariest thing in the world to them. This is where Ocasio-Cortez finds herself early in 2022. There is no nice man to settle down with. There is no future. And her body is aging, and all she has is a history of socialism, of dedication to the parental state to offer to someone who might want to share a life with her. Which, of course, is unappealing to any sane person with a developed intellect. At that point, relationships become a private property argument; nobody will invest in something that everyone can have for free, whereas liberalism always fails. Conservatives prosper, and ultimately that significant gulf between them can never be brought together.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

Anna Perez Understands: Overcoming America’s inferiority complex and becoming your own shepherd

Overcoming America’s Inferiority Complex

As I was promoting my new book, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business,I discovered the show on Real America’s Voice, The Water Cooler, with David Brody.  I contacted the producer Anna Perez about coming on and talking about the book’s contents because it seemed that they would be interested.  This is the same network that produces The Warroom and Dr. Gina, so they have some good things going on there that people are just discovering.  I certainly fit in that category.  Here I was promoting a book, but my personal feelings limited my reach to an audience with clear parameters regarding the massive amounts of injustice that we see play out politically.  So Fox News was out.  Newsmax was too wishy-washy.  They wanted to be a Fox replacement, but they were shying away from the real sources of the problem.  One American News was stuck in what we’ll talk about here, a kind of inferiority complex common among conservatives for all the reasons we’ll discuss.  So what I found in Real America’s Voice was something different.  They were confident, hungry, and asking all the hard questions.  I had a person the other day asking me on Gettr what a replacement for Fox was during a discussion and when I said Real America’s Voice, they shunned it away as if it was a radical right-winged network of religious freaks.  To that, I could only say, the crazy lunatics who are the current problem in the United States would say that anything to the right of Vladimir Lenin is a “radical right-winger.” The entire political scale has been moved and measured so that I would reject the whole premise.  Real America’s Voice represents most American beliefs, and I have found I enjoy them very much.  And I have become quite a fan of Anna Perez’s produced show The Water Cooler.  It’s more fun than The O’Reilly Factor, which made Fox News what it became, and it indeed points to the future of what our country will become once we sort out all this current mess and get Trump, DeSantis, or Kristi Noem in the White House again. 

Anna Perez has done several shows over the last several weeks when she has hosted The Water Cooler as David Brody has been out, that deals with the lack of masculinity in our culture.  Of course, we all know why, especially now.  Our society was primed for a global takeover, and the attackers wanted an easy way. So they watered down the necessity of men with all kinds of sexual viewpoints that would underline toxic masculinity in our culture and replace it with this kind of “beta” male that most women don’t want.  The rest of the world doesn’t identify with masculinity these days, and they certainly understood that to conquer the United States, men needed to be neutralized.  So of all the news reporting going on, Anna has been contemplating why we have allowed ourselves to fall for this concept of toxic masculinity in a busy news cycle.  It’s at the source of everything bad that has been happening to us as a country.  When attacked, the men are running away; they are not standing and fighting.  This goes back to every time society told us that it was OK to cry; we should all hug and express our feelings.  When public schools started promoting this kind of behavior twenty years ago, more people should have seen the intent.  But here we are, and Anna Perez is one of the only ones out there these days asking the question correctly and often.

I essentially wrote my book The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business as an answer to this problem.  It is a guidebook to solving many of these contemporary issues.  But to sum it up concisely to answer the question, I discovered the answer at the Buffalo Bill Center of the West in Cody, Wyoming, as my book was going through the last parts of the editing process with the publisher.  I had long been thinking the same things as Anna has been, where are the men, why are they so ashamed, and how could we wake them up?  Well, oddly, the answer is one that essentially answers the old Saul Alinsky question about Christians and how the left can permanently paralyze conservatives into defensive positions when attacked.  The leftist attackers exploit a part of the conservative brain that puts them perpetually on the defensive, and now with the lack of manhood to defend such actions, there was no defense mechanism.  This was further obvious to me while at a funeral recently where the church was decorated with images of the shepherd guarding the flock of sheep, meaning Jesus playing the role of shepherd and the congregation being the sheep. That’s an excellent idea in church, but when some crazy leftists step in and take out the shepherd, they gain control of the sheep, and that’s what we find has happened to us.  The sheep might be upset about it, but they still follow whoever the shepherd is.  So for the world’s malcontents and evildoers, they understand that the way to beat conservative America is to fight to become their shepherd.  Replace their god with government, and most of the battle is already over.

I propose in my book for the reader to become their own shepherd and look back to the great gunfighters of American culture as the reference.  Take away the willingness to cooperate as a group of sheep and be your own shepherd.  It will help your business, your community, but most of all, your family.  But there is an additional problem that must be solved, which I discovered at the Buffalo Bill Center of the West. It’s the inferiority complex that most Americans have about how young our country is and how we assume that Europe and other places are wiser than we are because of the depth of their history in arts and sciences.  While Buffalo Bill was touring his Wild West show around Europe, even he became enchanted with the Europeans honoring him as a great representative of American culture. That endorsement filled a need that he and most Americans had to be respected by the mother country.  Even now, most Americans still view Europe as the big brother or parent to impress.  There are many great things about America, but our weakness is that we don’t have a vast history of showing that our culture works instead of the other cultures around the world who do have deep histories.  That inferiority complex has prevented us from fully embracing an America First platform.  Sure, there are 30% of all people who get it.  But there is still another 20% who are too insecure about assuming that they are equal or even better off than European or Asian culture.  Then there are the below-the-line thinkers beaten in life who become liberals and want to be sheep all their lives. 

I talk about all this in the clip above; it’s a topic that could use much discussion.  But Anna Perez is tapping into the issue by identifying the toxic masculinity problem.  We can see the shadows of the conspiracy, which is undoubtedly a global trend.  I remember reading the Fifty Shades books a few years ago to understand why women were so hungry for those books, which were essentially about sadomasochism.  I found the lead character repulsive and excessively weak.  From a female perspective, there were all kinds of things going on. The politics of our times have sought to remove men from society to expose that need in women.  The goal has been to replace men as the family’s shepherd and replace them with the government.  It was essentially a coup of every American home.  I wrote my book as a guide to get out of that cycle and to think not just like a man again, but as a culture of shepherds, not sheep.  And what makes us that way, and why are Americans different than other places in the world?  Well, it starts with the invention and cultivation of the gun in our culture.  Not as a weapon of death and destruction.  But in becoming shepherds of our destiny and leaders of business, industry, and family.

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

Sex in ‘Tail of the Dragon’: Solving the problem of impotency

A lot has been said about the massive, destructive car chase in my new novel Tail of the Dragon and how the hero Rick Stevens refuses to yield to any force other than his own impulse to live. But that does not mean that my latest book is strictly for men who like fast cars and violence. No, there’s a more complicated component that brings a texture to the story that is not so subtle, and that is the sex in Tail of the Dragon.

The sex is explicit, and it is necessary because at the heart of the story is a middle-aged couple who have rediscovered their passion for living, and with that passion comes sex, and large audacious amounts of it—just as it does in real life. CLICK HERE FOR MY REVIEW OF THE BOOK ‘FIFTY SHADES OF GREY. In the novel Fifty Shades of Grey which is lighting up book sales with enormous sales numbers, it is proof that women want to read books that involve aspects of their sexuality they are either curious about as reflected in their fantasies, or they are wanting to explore aspects of their sexuality in the safe confines of their minds to explore them in reality later. But I would view the kind of sex that is explored in Fifty Shades of Grey to be unhealthy sex, since it is driven by repressed feelings and fears—which are not aspects of the characters in Tail of the Dragon.

In Tail of the Dragon we have the opposite issue; Rick Stevens and his wife Renee are on a personal journey that does not involve fear, or repression leading them to sexual acts that are quite explicit, particularly the one on the balcony of a Gatlinburg hotel. The sex is purposely audacious and flagrant because those are attributes of Rick Stevens authenticity as a person, which leads to the extreme events of the novel in a non sexual way, just as in real life. If a person is willing to repress their sexual nature, they are also likely to repress their political views, their spiritual convictions, and their yearning for personal independence.

Fifty Shades of Grey has set a new standard for sex in a mainstream novel. As we speak literary agents are dusting off every erotic manuscript anyone has ever sent them because publishers are about to unleash upon the publishing world a slew of erotic fiction designed to ride the coat tails of Fifty Shades of Grey. Before this novel hit the public, publishers frowned down on the heavy use of the “F” word and the very descriptive sex that can go on between characters in a story. Fifty Shades of Grey is in every essence pornography, and it is now sold at Target, and local grocery stores which would have been unfathomable just a few years ago. The sex in Tail of the Dragon is done with much less profanity out of personal taste and editorial direction. My editor at American Book wanted me to clean up the sex which is very descriptive, because that is the standard America Book has. They do not publish erotica, so they expect their authors to find alternatives to such blatant imagery. I suspect that the policy will be reviewed in the wake of Fifty Shades of Grey, since that book was originally published non-traditionally as a print-on-demand title, in other words—self published. Word of mouth carried it over into the mainstream audience where legitimate publishers have picked it up after it became popular.

Sex however is as important to the human condition as drinking water, eating food, or learning to speak. It has as much reverence as conducting political policies. In a novel, such emotions are expected to be dealt with, so when exploring extreme notions, the sex must reflect the journey. In the case of Rick Stevens and his wife Renee the sex is designed to show what a healthy relationship between two longtime mates do with one another. If they have sex occasionally in public, it is not because they are extraverted exhibitionists; it is because when they are together, they have tuned everyone else out, and so the sexual act is a contextual agreement between them of which the rest of the world is excluded. The world may watch like caged animals at a zoo, but the passions for which Rick and Renee partake in are not for the sake of the collective society, but for themselves only.

Renee Stevens is a woman who is constructively submissive to her husband. When Rick wants sex, she gives it to him without question, and without games. In return, Rick does not have impotency problems like many middle-aged men. This leaves Rick and Renee to often have sex several times a day and not just once or twice a week. The point of course is not to show that Rick and Renee Stevens are sex addicts’ hell bent on perverted sexual sign stimuli for the unhealthy act of satisfying inner demons, but a healthy couple in love willing to satisfy the needs of their partners in a mutual fulfillment, the way a marriage should be.

Men and women join together to form families because they want to have sex with each other. At the most fundamental function of the marriage, what sets a couple apart is that they have sex. If sex was not involved, then the couple would merely be friends. It is sex that makes a marriage. When marriage is mentioned, the first thought is sex. Couples unite to have sex and to keep it safe between them in the context of a relationship. So in Tail of the Dragon which is about being authentic to oneself in every way, even when the law attempts to impose the beliefs of politics upon the sanctity of a spiritual union, sex must be robust and an important part of the story without being profane.

The sex in Tail of the Dragon is something I wouldn’t hesitate to tell my grown daughters about for the sake of their own sanity, and I have. My wife and I have traveled all over creation on the back of a motorcycle, and I can report that the sex of Rick and Renee have their roots in reality, because sometimes after a hard day of riding, sweating, and being on the edge of your senses, sex does happen often and anywhere once the shackles of orthodox confinement are outran. And in Tail of the Dragon, the story is all about outrunning orthodox confinement, so the subject is unavoidable.


Click Here to see what people are saying about my new book–Tail of the Dragon 

Visit the NEW Tail of the Dragon WEBSITE!  CLICK HERE and help spread the word! TELL SEVEN PEOPLE TO TELL SEVEN PEOPLE!

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior

The Beta Man: Why ‘Fifty Shades of Grey” is so successful

Before delving into the murky waters of why Fifty Shades of Gray the novel has been such an overwhelming success, I can’t help but recall when the women at the Lakota School District advocating perpetual school levy tax increases decided to gather pitchforks and torches in an effort to run me out of town because of what I said about them.  They did so with the assumption that all men in the world had been converted through the progressive feminist movement into the vile and worthless “Beta Man.” (TO REVIEW ALONG WITH THE “EXPLICIT” WLW RADIO INTERVIEW, CLICK HERE) To a large extent the levy women had good reason to believe it based on their personal experiences. I was a bit shocked that more men didn’t show their support in public, but rather approached me quietly in private, at gas stations, at local shopping areas to tell me that I represented what they truly felt and had always wanted to say. I shook their hands and consoled them with my thanks, but all the while I felt terribly sorry for them, because they had been taught by a confused society that they should be “Beta Men” and they stood before me powerless armed only with the ability to thank me for speaking on their behalf. One person that did see through the media smokescreen was the author of The Whistleblower who was the first to publicly show support for my controversial appraisal of the typical tax increase advocates in public schools, whom I termed “latté sipping prostitutes” because of their desire to sell themselves with tax increases in turn for raising their children in the nurturing arms of a government school which they were too lazy and insecure to do themselves.

For those who do not know what a “Beta Man” is and are requiring context Bill Whittle summed up the situation wonderfully in the video below. An example of a Beta Man as given in Bill’s video is Alan Alda and Woody Allan, both progressive “forward” leaning males. Unfortunately our society, and our women do not really want such men, even though it has been fashionable to pretend to as is in evidence by the sheer number of women who have made the recent novel released only on June of 2011 by E.L. James called Fifty Shades of Grey the bestselling book in the world. Fifty Shades of Grey has sold over 40 million copies worldwide in 37 countries outselling the entire Harry Potter series within one year. The answer as to why is contained in this video.

The definition of the Beta Male seen below can be further analyzed at:

Beta Men are unremarkable, careful men who avoid risk and confrontation. Beta Males lack the physical presence, charisma and confidence of the Alpha male. In the animal kingdom, the Alpha Male is the dominant member of the community. Not everyone can be an Alpha Male, but females tend to like them most over Beta Males.

Progressive politics were designed by Beta Males for their own advantage, in an attempt gain access to the opposite sex with intellectual aptitude instead of physical prowess. Feminists, a progressive creation, would have society belief that “Beta Men” are what they want, so men have adapted much to their own detriment. Socially women will proclaim that they like Beta Men—and this is a quote from the link above—“because Betas are wingmen, collaborative and conciliatory. In human terms, Betas make the best mates. They do more in the house, and probably in the bedroom, because they know how to hasten the greater good. The Beta has poetry in him, and a touch of youthful idealism. He’s sure of who he is, and not constantly trying to prove his value in materialistic terms. The Beta can earn a lot of money, or a little, but the money’s not the thing; he profits because he works well with others.” Awwww, isn’t that so cute? No wonder our society is so messed up. All of that is idealistic tripe created by idiots in the progressive movement, and has no truth to the biological desires males and females yearn for in each other’s company.

Meanwhile those same women who declare publicly their love of Beta Men, who sip their lattés and plan community group hugs so they can pass school levies to save their children from the world, are running to the book store with dilated pupils to purchase Fifty Shades of Grey.

Fifty Shades of Grey is about a 27 year-old billionaire named Christian Grey suffering from physical abuse as a child, which he manifests in the bedroom as a BDSM master. (Bondage and Sado Masiciasm.) He does not seek healthy sexual relationships built on traditional romance, but submissive women who will be totally compliant sex slaves to him. In the very, very popular novel 22 year-old Anastasia Steele signs written contracts to Grey which is a dominant/submissive agreement part of which Ana is not allowed to touch or make eye contact with Grey, especially during sex. She is often tied up, spanked and beaten with leather belts in order to satisfy the sexual desire of Grey.

For millions of women, they see themselves in Anastasia Steele. Most women have the fantasy of being able to “redeem” a troubled man through their sexuality so Ana’s journey into bondage allowing herself to be beaten badly in order to “redeem” the man who took her virginity is a common issue most women suffer from. Many women find themselves in relationships that are abusive because they gave themselves sexually to a man, and are determined to use their love and sexuality as the ultimate “mothering” device to save a man from himself, just like they believe they can “love” a child out of all life’s dangers with a simple hug. (It’s a biological thing and has nothing to do with reality.) But what makes Fifty Shades of Grey particularly enticing is that Grey is a billionaire so the trouble of income supply is solved, which women require to build their lives and families with. For most women to relax and enjoy sex, the issue of money must be removed, so for the sake of this story, the main male character is a billionaire—problem solved. It’s also convenient that Ana is a young woman just leaving her college years behind and about to enter the work place. For many women, even if they are in their 40’s and 50’s, they see the decisions they made at 22 and 23 as being those which set their lives in motion, and the “what if” scenarios constantly play out in their minds. This makes it easy for them to put themselves in Ana’s shoes which is a brilliant literary device that the author E.L. James used to make this book so much more popular, and powerful than typical pornography or romance novels.

E. L. James started this journey as a self published first time writer printing on demand with a very small publisher, very similar to my first novel The Symposium of Justice. The book took off with online sales and message boards, not through the traditional marketing channels. The mainstream media would not have allowed this book to get off the ground through their critic checks and editors. It was the will of the people, particularly women that made Fifty Shades of Grey and its two sequels runaway smash successes that have been picked up by film production companies. To date, Warner Bros., Sony pictures Paramount, and Universal Pictures all showed intense interest in the literary rights. It was Universal Pictures working with Focus Features who won the rights to the trilogy in March of 2012 and being produced by the makers of The Social Network. Once the film rights were secured, the mainstream media began to cover Fifty Shades of Grey legitimately. In just one year the first time author E.L. James has become one of the world’s top 100 influential people.

The reason Fifty Shades of Grey is so successful is it satisfies the deep biological desire that women have for men who are Alpha, and Christen Grey from outward appearances would seem to be everything opposite of a Beta Man. He’s rich, powerful, influential, and in bed, he is in complete control, and Ana agrees to go with him to sexual places that most women only allow themselves to think about. But consistent with the modern “progressive” teachings Christen Grey has inner problems that Ana wants to help heal; by making herself into a “sacrificial victim” she hopes to bring about his redemption through her ability to take his abuse. This paradox is the recipe for most of the world’s unhappiness.

The feminist movement not sure how to react to the lust women have for Fifty Shades of Grey have attempted to say that Anastasia Steele’s desire to be tied up and beaten by an outwardly Alpha Male, but inwardly Beta Man who needs redemption through female sacrifice is reflective of women earning the right to achieve organism by any means, which is therefore liberating. But in all honesty, feminists are horrified by the implications that so many women find the plight of Ana so appealing, because in essence, it shows that women desire not just in their roles in the bedroom, but in matters of life, to be submissive to a man, and that the Beta Men of progressive creation is resented, even despised.

I knew what I was saying when I said what I did about the women who were most vocal about tax increases for our community schools. Their own inner sickness was attempting to upset the economic balance of our district at the cost of declining business and more foreclosures for members of our community. Some of the most unhappy women I have ever known found themselves attracted to men they thought were Alpha’s, but once they married bitched into Beta Manhood through constant complaints and strings of insecure utterances, just as Anastasia Steele fears that she’s not attractive enough for Christen Grey, so too are most women afraid that they cannot keep their men as age robs them of their youthful beauty. So they tend to take on the dominate role of sexuality making their men submissives, converting them into Beta Men. After a few years of marriage the men feeling resentful of the women “robbing” them of their manhood seek younger women that they can more easily dominate and manipulate while their wives seek cerebral fantasies of themselves being dominated by a rough and tumble Alpha Male. After ten or more years of marriage the couple find themselves hating each other but keeping their relationship intact for financial reasons, and family unity. Now that Fifty Shades of Grey has hit the scene, women at least in the bedroom are starting to accept playing submissive roles to their husbands to enhance their sex lives, which might actually save a few marriages. But often the damage is too far done and the emotional baggage is too great.

But the domination/submissive sex roles are extremes driven by years of progressive politics. Human beings are not happy with these progressive role changes, and it shows in their lives. In my upcoming novel Tail of the Dragon, the sex in it is what I’d consider healthy between the man and the woman main characters even though it might be considered over-the-top and extreme to those with quieter sensibilities. The intention is to show a healthy relationship between a man and a woman who aren’t so mentally dysfunctional that they have to resort to sexual bondage to bring balance to their lives. But obviously, there is a lot of dysfunction in our modern society and it is a global problem, as indicated by the blistering success of Fifty Shades of Grey.

The heart of the problem is Beta Men. They have allowed themselves to be pushed around and turned into the submissives of their relationships, and that is not what women want. Feminists will say that both sex partners should be equals, but that does not agree with the biological yearnings that a man has for a woman, or a woman has for a man. The pursuit of equality like most progressive political platforms is a quest to reinvent the desires of the human being with social engineering designed by the academic élite. It has nothing to do with reality and the observations of sexual behavior. The Beta Man just by their very existence are much more damaging to society because in their inability to satisfy women, they perpetuate divorce, encourage progressive politics, and indirectly raise taxes as women who are on the hunt for anything but the Beta Men in their lives look for causes to support which range from local school levies to Obama’s Presidential campaign as a psychological substitute. The intent of these exploits are not solving social ills as these participants might attempt to convince themselves, but to keep an eye on the horizon for their own version of Christian Grey so they can save them with their love and sexuality. But what they get back in return is a society of Beta Males who cry too much, and seem too eager to do the dishes which society says is good, but leave women sexually starving. Women want a man to do as Christian Grey does everywhere and at anytime without request. It might bring some embarrassment, and regret in hindsight, but it is these images that fill most female fantasies.

To have such a relationship in their lives women do not need a contract like the one that Christian Grey made Anastasia sign in the novel Fifty Shades of Grey. All that is required is a marriage contract where the man and the woman agree to take care of those types of things for each other without all the rules that a progressive society has instructed in an attempt at social engineering. Sex should not be used as a bargaining chip, where it is given or taken away like a mother takes candy from a child in order to mold the behavior of the child. When such a thing is done to men it turns them into Beta Men. They change their behavior to make their women happy. But the women find they aren’t attracted physically to Beta Men for obvious biological and psychological reasons so they either have an affair with someone else, or they read books like Fifty Shades of Grey. The incredible sales of that book do not speak ill of the author E.L. James but of a society that has run to her material like their very souls are on fire seeking BDSM to extinguish themselves.

The anger over my comments displayed publicly in The Whistleblower was not one of impropriety on my part for speaking metaphorically about the antics of my opponents advocating tax increases upon the community for which we all live, but that they hoped I did not see what they were really all about. They hoped that their secret was well hidden because they had surrounded themselves with Beta Men and hoped the illusion was foolproof. But it wasn’t because I know many of those critics are among the many that are salivating over Fifty Shades of Grey and deep in their minds conducting their own symphonies of BDSM.

That is why hundreds of men and women thanked me afterwards, but not with boisterous appraisals, but rather quiet winks and nods of acknowledgment because I said what everyone was already thinking, but nobody dared declare because the world has been taken over by the Beta Men fashioned by women who got what they thought they wanted, until they read otherwise in a book by E.L. James. And for those who want to read how a healthy relationship should be between and man and a woman, I might suggest my new book Tail of the Dragon. It has the sex, but without the handcuffs and bondage contracts. It’s better if women indulge in such things freely without having the ability to blame thoughtless surrender as a sex slave to a domination addict. Its OK women to be sexually submissive. Have the courage to admit it and don’t bring to the world more peril at the hands of the Beta Men. The fuel that drives the outstanding sales of Fifty Shades of Grey is the suppression of human desire in a sexual context caught up in a political struggle brought about by the progressive movement. The real desire of human beings comes about in their art, and if Fifty Shades of Grey is any indication, there is a lot that is very, very wrong with the way we conduct our lives in virtually every context. And that realization does not merit more of the same, but rather drastic revision which leaves the handcuffs and leather belts under the bed, and the orgasm under the influence of free will. To learn how to do that, I would suggest reading  Tail of the Dragon.


This is what people are saying about my new book–Tail of the Dragon

With Tale of the Dragon, Rich Hoffman combines NASCAR, Rebel Without a Cause, and Smokey and the Bandit. If you like fast cars, and hate speed traps, this is the book for you. And just every once in a while, any real American wishes he had a Firebird like the one in Tale of the Dragon.

Best Selling Co-author Larry Schweikart, A Patriot’s History of the United States  (CLICK ON THE LINK TO VISIT US ON FACEBOOK)

Visit the NEW Tail of the Dragon WEBSITE!  CLICK HERE and help spread the word! TELL SEVEN PEOPLE TO TELL SEVEN PEOPLE!

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior

Sex in the Halls of the Mason School System: The arrogant public employees

Lumbering down the Mason school system hallways in pursuit of the retched sounding animal noises permeating along the corridor originating from a closed office door Assistant Principal Keeton turned the knob as the ghosts of Stacy Schuler’s sex antics haunted her mind. The worst horror imaginable presented itself to Keeton’s eyes as yet another sex scandal has exploded upon the scene of that promiscuously infatuated school district. Mason High School business teacher Jason Austerman and high school campus supervisor Kimberly Rowland were in states of undress and performing a vigorous rendition of the horizontal mamba in contorted manifestations. Darryl Parks of 700 WLW was one of the first to break this story on his Saturday show. Listen to the video below to hear how it sounded.

So why did they do it? Why didn’t Jason and Kimberly get a room down at the Fields Ertel exit during lunch where they could be alone? Or maybe take a drive in their car and park someplace private and do their business? The only conclusion one can make is arrogance, pure and simple.

Arrogance is what makes these teachers believe they can embark on these sexual adventures during school hours under the protection of the teachers union. Mason during the Stacy Schuler trial was able to contain the portion of the story involving assistant principal George Coates sending pictures of himself to Stacy during school hours. Mason managed to get rid of George quickly and discreetly while the media focused on the sex between Stacy and the five high school students in her home. But there was sex going on at Mason during work hours between Stacy and others. This is just the latest escapade between Jason and Kimberly. Public employees trained in a progressive political system do not have the kind of values that mainstream Americans have, and they have a noticeable arrogance knowing that the union protects them from anything but a catastrophic public relations meltdown.

Because Assistant Principal Keeton opened the door and became a third-party to the act, the labor union and Mason public relations by Tracy Carson could not clean up the public perception at that point. The two school employees resigned quickly, so that they could get jobs elsewhere once the heat was off. That is the mode of operation for all public schools.

At Lakota, the district to the immediate west of Mason, there is a recent case where a teacher used a special needs child to gain access to the mother in order to start a sexual relationship, using the child as leverage. All this was done on this teacher’s school computer and the father/husband of the child and mother had obtained the very salacious emails—stacks of them, done during school hours from school property for acts of sex that was covered up by the school principal and the human resources manager at the time. The teacher was moved to another school to satisfy the parents, the human resources manager took a job in Michigan and just this past week the Principle took a new job locally but far enough away from Lakota to hopefully leave his ghosts with little motivation to follow. There are many such stories and this is why schools have to pay extraordinary amounts of money on public relations to contain these types of scandals.

At Lakota the need for clean public relations went so far that the former public relations director of 2011 was pushed by the school board to clean up a series of dangerous stories, one the pedophile case at Lakota where a teacher was undressing students in his third grade class and taking pictures of them and storing multiple images of child pornography on his school computer. Then of course was this case involving the special needs child and a very angry father. (VERY ANGRY.) The case went to the State of Ohio School Board. But the papers didn’t report that—did they? Because good public relations helped contain the story quickly, but not without damage. The PR Director at Lakota decided she didn’t want to perform the job as dictated by the school board focused intently on keeping all news about Lakota good, because the focus was on passing a school levy in the fall of 2011. The school board paid the PR Director $90,000 to go away and buy-out her contract and they now pay a private firm $60 an hour to do the job. CLICK HERE TO SEE SOME OF THE ACTUAL BILLING STATEMENTS. Yes, it’s very expensive, and its whole purpose is to clean up messes like what Mason is going through right now.

Mason has been forced to avoid a tax increase attempt while the smoke clears from their year of scandals that could not be cleaned up by Tracy before the story got into the mainstream media. They managed to move their superintendent–who had knowledge of many sex scandals going on in Mason climaxing with the Stacy Schuler trial–to upper Ohio to avoid more scandalous damage. So as Stacy Schuler nobly stood in front of her accusers and took responsibility for her actions and went to jail for 48 months, there were many, many rats that had jumped off the ship in Mason to avoid massive investigations that would ruin everyone’s careers. Just like what has happened in Lakota, and is happening at this very moment in every public school in America. It’s a game to these public employees that is focused more on avoiding detection than in behaving correctly.

So why did Jason Austerman and Kimberly Rowland of the Mason school district do it, especially knowing the risk to Mason if they got caught? Because they are arrogant, they lack respect for themselves, their jobs, the community that employs them, and the money that funds the whole operation. They live in a government employment bubble of altered reality that does not understand responsibility for their actions because they lack competition in their business. Public school teachers and administrators can act badly and get away with it because they don’t fear losing their jobs unless their schools public relations department fails to protect them, and in those cases the next choice is to simply move to a different district. So there isn’t any fear of losing a job to keep their morality in check.

This latest case of malicious sex during school between school employees will not be the last. In fact, I’d go so far to say that it’s rampant. There is without question evidence that these things go on in every workplace, but in government positions they happen more often because in those jobs even the least bold among us lack fear of punishment for their actions. In most jobs coworkers might only think about doing the dirty deeds but will avoid the task out of fear of being caught. In government positions, especially well-paid teachers and administrators who do not work pay check to pay check with dimes to spare like most people, they have a luxurious life, short work hours, healthy compensation and a progressive work environment that is a direct result of the utopian hippie age where sex is free, personal possession is forbidden, and trust in a God for guiding principles is virtually nonexistent.

This won’t be the last time sex scandals break out in a school system. It is the job of the public relations personnel in these schools to cover for the Jason’s and the Kimberly’s of public education and all those who knew about the sex, but failed to act while trying to convince the public that they should continue to send their children to these education institutions, and that they should build their homes around such testaments of prosperity as public education. But upon a closer look, these institutions of learning are simply pornographic propaganda nightmares that do very little for the public of what they promise. The children come out of them half-baked, the parents pawn off much of the parenting to the third-party of public education because they fear the personal responsibility of actually being a parent. Meanwhile in a corner office darkened for effect there are animal noises coming from two impassioned school employees as they indulge in each other while students walk by the door outside and snicker. Most of the school employees know about it and avoid turning the door knob because of the scrutiny that in so doing might bring to their personal livelihoods. Reporting the activity might affect the next levy attempt, so they turn their attention the other way, and plot their own sexual moves to attempt to bed either Kimberly or Jason once one of them is free. And we wonder why our kids come out of public education so screwed up and demoralized. Just look to the animal sounds coming from the corner office with the door shut, but audaciously unlocked—almost daring someone to open it—and you’ll know why.

This is what people are saying about my new book–Tail of the Dragon

Just finished the book and am sweating profusely. Wow, what a ride !!!  Fasten your seat belts for one of the most thrilling rides ever in print.

Check out more by CLICKING HERE!

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior

History of the Bible: Objecitivism is the key for America and it’s right here

In advance I must say I’m sorry because this posting will be difficult for many of my readers here to deal with. Before I get into the details of this article let me state that it is better to have something of a spiritual nature that holds together a personality even if they do not get that spiritual means from any other source than religion. I am far from a godless heathen in the way I conduct my own life and for many years the church was important to me. But there comes a time when you either keep growing or you stop, and I never stopped. I outgrew the confines of any religion in a personal quest for knowledge and philosophy that has replaced that spiritual growth for me which I consider to be much larger than the teachings that come from just The Holy Bible.

This small disclosure is needed for a reason, there are two modern philosophers who have done work that will save the world by saving America, and they need to be studied. Any barrier which stands in the way of learning what these people had to say needs to be addressed. It is one thing to study the Founding Fathers and what they had to say, but the task of our modern age is different, and will require a different level of understanding to accomplish. We cannot just repeat what was done in the past, but must learn from it and translate it to our modern circumstances, and to understand the perspective of where America finds itself in 2012 this information is important.

The first figure is Robert Pirsig who is currently floating around the Atlantic Ocean in his sail boat purchased off the royalties of his two books, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, and Lila. Pirsig is a former school teacher who achieved an earth-shattering discovery that the human race has not yet come to terms with. I predict if left alone, Pirsig’s ideas might take 100 years to assimilate into our culture, but on our present course, I do not think America can last that long. Pirsig discovered the nature of “quality” referred to here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom in large doses. The weight of this discovery drove Pirsig to madness, and he was treated in a way that was intended to drive the knowledge from his mind without malicious intent. But the experience placed so much weight on his thoughtful mind that he more or less retired after the publication of Zen, and is currently living off its royalties.

A few times a year he makes port with his boat in New York and picks up his royalty check from his publisher, then he goes back out to sea to disappear for months at a time. He made his contribution to the human race and he’s done—and I don’t blame him one bit.

Pirsig went one step further than Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism. Pirsig was able to explain why Ayn Rand was correct in her belief that it is the senses that create a mind that achieves reasoning ability through cognition. When Ayn Rand writes about the exceptional beings who carry the world on their backs it is because of the methods that Pirsig discovered that makes some people exceptional and some not so much so. Ayn Rand’s objectivism is a direct descendent from Aristotle who was in direct conflict with his close friend and mentor Plato.

The turn-off that many people have toward Ayn Rand is that she did not believe in God, and her reasons are for the same reasons that Aristotle and Plato were fundamentally in intellectual combat all the time. Plato eventually at the end of his life began to see that Aristotle was correct in the belief that “The truth resides in the world around us.” Plato on the other hand believed that “Earthly knowledge is but a shadow.” Plato thought that forms in the living world were to some degree less than an unseen, unknowable supreme being that is just out of reach of our conscious reality. It is Plato who was used by later philosophers such as Boethius in 480 CE to help formulate the terms of Christianity in the church and create what we think of God here in the modern age. Boethius wrote the masterful book The Consolation of Philosophy while in prison awaiting execution for treason. It was in this work by Boethius that many of the myths about a living God emerged such as “God foresees our free thoughts and actions,” and that God is beyond time. Descartes, Leibniz and Kant would proceed on with Plato’s corrupted theory through the Dark Ages into the modern progressive age. It would be Immanuel Kant that the academics of Europe and America would attempt to mold the progressive philosophy from and Karl Marx was a huge fan of Kant. The flaw in Plato’s thinking was not malicious, nor did it take away from his creative genius. His thoughts were improved by Aristotle by competition of thought and many problems Plato had in his theory were solved by Aristotle. But Aristotle was rejected by the medieval churches because Aristotle didn’t fit the agenda of social control, and Plato did.

After Aristotle died there was a philosopher by the name of Epicurus from 341-to 270 BCE who took Aristotle’s ideas a bit further. He determined that if mankind could overcome a fear of death, then we can be happy. On the last day of his life, knowing he would be dead by the end of the day he was asked if he was still happy. He replied, that he was truly happy—as he had rejected any fear of death in his life. It was Epicurus, known by many in the Dark Ages as a man in pursuit of sensual pleasures by rejecting the idea that his actions in this life were in a quest to obtain something better in the next life. It was John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham in the 18th century who much later revived the ideas of Epicureanism putting the idea in the head of the American Founding Fathers. It is because of Epicurus that the term, “Life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” was put into The Declaration of Independence. It was Jefferson and many of the other Founding Fathers who embraced Aristotle in favor of Plato. And it was Ayn Rand who took Aristotle to a whole new level in objectivism. She has done for Aristotle what Kant did for Plato.

The modern cry out for a fix to the worlds moral state of depravity is because everything the human race thinks and believes was built off a false premise that Plato himself attempted to correct later, but the editors of history looking to the passive collectivism in Plato’s belief of a superior afterlife created flocks of human slaves ready for worldly representatives who could communicate with the Gods.

After Epicurus died, Greek philosophy quickly declined and the Roman Empire rose to power. The Romans applied stoicism which placed duty before self. As America became a world power and considered itself to be more like Rome, our military had adopted the Roman practice of honor in sacrifice. Of course the Romans advocated stoicism to serve the needs of the empire and this went on until Constantine declared himself a Christian by signing the Edict of Milan which allowed Christians for the first time to profess their religious beliefs.

The Roman Empire fell basically in 395 CE with the division of the Empire into East and West and the vacuum of philosophy and the arts vacant in Europe and the Mediterranean since the time of the Greeks was satisfied by various churches trying to fill the power void left in the wake. This was the beginning of The Dark Ages and the churches needed a way to gain control of the various segments of the population no longer under the obedience of the Roman Empire. St Augustine of Hippo 354 to 430 CE had began to devote himself to Christianity and proposed that God is not responsible for evils which led to the interpretation of the Fall in the Garden story of Adam and Eve. The Hebrew Bible began to take shape as early as the 7th and 10th centuries organized by Masoretes. The Codex Amiatinus was produced in the 8th century, but it wasn’t until The Gutenberg Bible printed in 1452 that a Bible could be given to anyone outside of a church for comprehension and personal study. Until that time all information was passed to the masses through the church, which they ruled with an iron fist.

Many of the books in the Bible were not written or translated until several centuries after the passing of Christ. Given the nature of the churches in the Dark Ages, I would suspect anything they put into a biblical translation, or left out. To me the Bible makes an interesting story, but it doesn’t come close to providing irrefutable truths about faith or the nature of God. It was not constructed by the hand of God, but by just another group of tyrants running the churches at the time. By the time the first Bibles were available for printed publication, well over 1000 years had transpired from the times of Christ.

A few hundred years after the fall of the Roman Empire, the Muslim religion started as they sought to translate Aristotle’s work into the formation of their religion. Evolving in parallel with Christianity following closely the teachings of Zoroastrianism the Muslim religion did not have a Quran (Koran) at the time of Muhammad’s death in 632 CE. Zoroastrianism had been prevalent in the modern area of Iran as early as 6th century BCE and had gradually been assimilated into Islam. Both Christianity and the Muslim faith resemble great similarities to Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism would be revived by Friedrich Nietzsche in his book about the Übermensch (translated to overman—the name of this site) called Thus Spoke Zarathustra, named his main character after the prophet of Zoroastrianism.

Dear reader—I am telling you all this so that you can understand the shallowness of our human history and the beliefs that have brought us to this point. Much of what America did right in its creation was created by philosophies built upon the shoulders of Aristotle. Much of what we have done wrong has been done on the shoulders of Plato. It really comes down to those two thinkers. Everyone else has simply added to the basic ideas between those two philosophers. Aristotle was rejected until Thomas Aquinas talked the church into reviving the philosopher around 1270 CE, and it was Aristotle who had filled the gaps of his master Plato. Yet it was the churches, and the philosopher Immanuel Kant, Karl Marx, then Woodrow Wilson, then Franklin Roosevelt, then John Kennedy, then Lyndon Johnston who brought to America more of Plato’s philosophy with an emphasis on religion from the Dark Ages through the writings of Kant and Roman stoicism. And that is where we have gone wrong as a country.

Ayn Rand has put her philosophy of Objectivism behind the work of Aristotle and when our nation functioned with a leaning under Aristotelian terms due to philosophers like John Locke whom the Founding Fathers read heavily, America worked better than anywhere in the world, much the way Greece did before the death of Aristotle. A country is built on the ideas of the people who inhabit the nation, and depending on the quality of the minds of those individuals a society will have success or failure. America is failing because it is functioning from the wrong ideas, so it is time to get rid of what doesn’t work and replace it with what does.

I’m certainly not asking anybody to give up their Bibles or their religions. But I am asking you dear reader to repot yourself into a larger container and give your roots some room to spread so you can grow even more. As human beings we are only performing at a fraction of what we are capable of, and progressives are using the same methods that created the Dark Ages to keep mankind as small plants in small pots with no room to grow. I didn’t learn all that I showed above in public school—in fact not one word of it. I may have heard the names of Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle in my high school anthropology class, which I did enjoy. I learned all that from reading—and reading a lot. And being willing to go outside my comfort zone in pursuit of truths that no teacher could give me—because most of the teachers I ran into were practicing evasion tactics in their own lives and were certainly not in a condition to teach others.

But Ayn Rand should not be avoided just because she didn’t believe in a God the way the Bible instructs. She asked for proof and in the world of the living there were no signs of such proof. Ayn Rand demanded explanations for what she believed and why she believed it. Regulating certain thoughts to the blankness of a superior world that is unknowable, has left thieves and looters open to scam society with false teachings and speculation anchored in an afterlife. This is what looter politicians and corrupt representatives of the churches have done for many years—they prayed on the weak-minded who had been looking for salvation in their lives. Churches and governments both appeal to the masses through collectivism, and if America is to ever find itself again, it must eliminate collectivism from its vocabulary and protect the rights of individuals in the here and now.

One of those methods of replacing collectivism in American culture with a philosophy grounded in the roots of Aristotle, properly–as the greek texts had conceived before the corruption of interpretation exploding forth in the Dark Ages is Ayn Rand’s Objectivism.  Today, it is Leonard Peikoff who carries Rand’s message as he is the official authorized presenter of Objectivism through his classes over many years starting in 1976.  Objecitivism is the next step for the human beings of the world as it’s logic is destined to replace all the superstitions and theory of many years of religious turmoil and philosophic limitation.  Below are an entire course worth of videos from Leonard Peikoff himself as he provided this philosophy to one of his classes.  If you are a fan of Rand’s work such as Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead, you will learn why those works are so powerful to you by watching Peikoff’s presentation.  If you reject Ayn Rand in anger, or fear, you will learn why you are wrong in your thoughts.  Philosophy is the foundation of everything, so if society is broken in some way, it is because the metaphysics and epistemology of the society is wrong at its basic premise.  This is not an idea that can be cheated, or corrected with further spending.  It can only be fixed with correction into the metaphysics and epistemology of a societies philosophy. 

Religion is a guide for a person’s eternal life, and whatever method one chooses to utilize in getting there is perfectly fine. But radical Muslims cannot be allowed to inflict their beliefs on the rest of America and threaten to kill everyone who doesn’t believe in their shallow version of history. And Christians are in the same situation. Zionists have a right to exist and much of the trouble in present day Palestine and Israel are conflicts over the same plot of land as interpreted by the religious beliefs that were stemmed off the sources shown above. They have more in common then they have apart, yet they are willing to kill with the simple mindedness of stoicism utilized in the Roman Empire to bend the opposing belief system into their way of thinking. And this behavior is perpetuated by powerful interests all over the world who actually wish to rule in the same way that the churches did in The Dark Ages.

For all these reasons discussed above the great mind of Robert Pirsig is sailing out in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, or perhaps even the Caribbean right now aloof to it all. I know people who attempt to read his books and find themsevles reading them over and over again never quite getting the concepts. This is because they still have their roots in too small of a pot–the world of Plato and Kent. But just because it’s hard, or different does not mean it’s not right. You can see more about Robert Pirsig at the link below.


It’s not enough to wave the flag and proclaim change. You have to know what you want to change into, or in the case of The United States, what we want to revert back into. We have to know what part of our history worked and why, then commit ourselves to the act of getting there. I am not quite where Robert Pirsig is, where I’m willing to drop the world and walk off—because that’s what he did. Lucky for us Ayn Rand never did that. She stayed with the attempt of waking up the world her entire life, arguing against the foolishness of building the entire human race around Platonic thought with one eye everyday toward death allowing priests, politicians and simple looters to believe their souls could be saved if they coerced society into collective salivation through their toxic manipulations. The key to all life, to the betterment of all the world is to wake up the soul of every single human being and get them to treat their soul well in the here and now with an eye on today and living a good life as an individual of value and end the global practice of evasion utilized by the second-handlers of religion and politics. God gave human beings the gift of reason, and it is an insult to the universe if we simply refuse to use it due to half-hearted beliefs rooted in a time thousands of years ago that was faulty from the start, and identified. But the looters of logic stole the broken thoughts and passed them through the centuries to arrive before us all today in modern America. The key is in our minds already—all we lack is the courage to use it.

This is what people are saying about my new book–Tail of the Dragon

Just finished the book and am sweating profusely. Wow, what a ride !!!  Fasten your seat belts for one of the most thrilling rides ever in print.

Check out more by CLICKING HERE!

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior

Julie Shaffer’s Facebook: My response to the salacious Enquirer article

It’s true; when I was with No Lakota Levy we did approach Patti Alderson at the Community Foundation to partnership with them to attempt to heal the community. We had a plan to give substantial amounts of money to help kids and the community as a whole, but within a week of making the announcement public, Patti decided that it wouldn’t be a good idea and pulled away from the community unifying idea. Disappointed our guys went to work to begin our own foundation to be able to help the community in some way.

(To review this story as it personaly affected me CLICK HERE.)

The maneuver to me appeared to be completely motivated by community politics. Word from within the Lakota front who inform me of many things, let me know that a group that fights tax levies cannot be seen helping children, because to their minds the only thing that can help children was passing tax increases. Now, my opinion of Patti is that she does a lot of good in the community for what I see, but she stuck her name on my personal situation, and since her name appeared in probably the most salacious article the Cincinnati Enquirer has ever produced, I have to address her involvement and what led up to the demise of something that was intended to be very good.  (You can review that article here)

Shortly after this collapse of the No Lakota Levy reaching out to help heal the community while the levy fights continue I attended one of the large school board meetings at Lakota East and was shocked at the amount of parents who urged the board to attempt to pass yet another levy for the fourth time, instead of asking the union to take a 5% wage cut to balance the budget. I reported my findings at this article, CLICK HERE.

The more I thought about the situation, the refusal of the pro levy people to work with the anti levy people for the good of the community, and the push by a handful of parents to advance another tax increase on a community that already has high taxes, the short sightedness of it all stirred me into a rage. While all this was going on I was getting comments and messages along with information from my “feelers” within the school that I was anti child, anti education, and bad for the community in an effort to paint me negatively in front of their next campaign. Yet it was the group I was associated with that was reaching across the aisle to bring peace. And that peace was refused because the pro levy factions needed to maintain the public image that No Lakota Levy was a group bad for the community.  Because their message was that if you want to do “good” for the community then a new levy needed to be passed.

This blog site of Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom has become over time to be something like a newspaper that many people come to for information. Its numbers compete with small press newspapers daily, so I decided to take advantage of my site to stir the pot a bit and paint the picture of the situation as I saw it using a graphic metaphor. I didn’t hold back, for one, a blog site has an expectation to be a different news source than a traditional newspaper. So my readers like to see passion when I exhibit it, which was genuine. But I also wanted to see if I could smoke out some of these pro levy people who worked behind the scenes to make it so good things couldn’t happen, so the illusion that it was Lakota Schools who held all the cards in doing good things for the community could be exposed.

When I put up the controversial articles, I was a little disappointed that I didn’t get much reaction from the pro levy people. I shrugged it off and moved on. Approximately two weeks later the No Lakota Levy group had our press conference announcing the new foundation to help kids and it felt good to do something positive. The press enjoyed it. But ironically, the pro levy people seemed to become infuriated in a way that I wouldn’t have guessed. You can see some of their comments about me personally here upon this announcement.  (CLICK HERE)  And as you can see when reading those things, people used far worse language than I did in the bit I wrote and it was personalized where my wasn’t.

Within three days of our big press conference, Julie Shaffer went to my articles and took out sections of them and put them on her Facebook as seen below. Keep in mind that Julie has worked on previous levy attempts and she is now a school board member. Her intention here is to fan the flames of her supporters obviously against me. I wanted to see her do this, but what is most telling is that she waited until I was involved in something very good to take the shot.

I didn’t get all the screen shots from the posting, but down the page a bit was Pam Parino urging Julie to send this information to her “friends” at WLW, which she apparently did. Pam is a long time levy activist; you can see how she attempted to extort WLW a few years ago at this link. Now I still get along with people at WLW, but I was surprised at how they turned on me during the broadcasts of March 15th 2012, especially considering how they chose to broadcast. But I was told by Scott Sloan that I am a public figure and that I couldn’t say these kinds of things even if similar statements were made on their very shows. I disagree. I may be a public figure, but I am not a public servant. I can say whatever I want and it’s up to me to decide if voters will reject or embrace it. Not any social standard. It’s my risk to take.

My feelers at Lakota told me that the superintendent was personally sending out links to Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom to “community leaders.” My initial response was, “good, maybe they’ll learn something.” Then some of my friends asked me to take out some of the things I said which might affect the good work they were trying to do, which was fair enough, so I put the articles that might cause such trouble on password protect not to protect me, but to protect them. The entire time I saw no reason to not stand by my statements.

Within days the anger mounted and I was getting very heated messages like, “Rich Hoffman, you’re going down!” I knew the pro levy people were mounting an offensive, which I anticipated two weeks prior, so I wasn’t surprised. But once the Enquirer article came out, I was a bit surprised. It was way over the top and made me realize I should have just kept the article up so people could have seen the context of the metaphors I was using to describe the situation. Because the way that Mike Clark assembled his article painted me in such a bad way that there was no way to explain it without a tremendous back-story, which there wasn’t time for. I agreed to do the Scott Sloan show and I didn’t have a problem with the hard nature of that interview, but I was surprised at how he inflamed the situation after our interview, which again was fair play. Their ratings at my expense. When WLW called me later in the day to see if I would do a spot on Eddie and Tracy’s show I said no, because they had put me in a really bad position. Eddie and Tracy tried to call me out on the air knowing I almost said yes to the interview, so they attempted to push me over the edge to get me to come on. But they only had a piece of the story, and openly calling me a sexist all day long broke friendships that I felt for some of those guys, who have used worse language than I did on many occasions. So I elected not to blow my top on the air for 200,000 people to hear, and to calm down. Yet the blood was in the water, and I put it there to learn the lay of the battlefield. When I wrote that quote I wanted to see if Julie would take the bait, I wanted to see how Mantia would react, and who was in the pro levy network so I could figure out how to fight them. Because taking a passive approach wasn’t working. After three levy failures, it was still the minority who sought to impose on the majority their intentions for a levy increase and they had a network that was vast enough to prevent our work with an independent foundation headed by a powerful local personality in Patti Alderson. So I needed to see how these people were connected. When they thought they had me on the fence they emerged with bold words. Patty felt strongly enough about me to speak before the Lakota school board. She wanted to clarify that her group, which also raises money for needy Lakota students, has no affiliation with Yes to Lakota Kids. Alderson told the board audience of more than 200 people, that No Lakota officials had approached the foundation last month but that “we refused to accept their funds.” She said that with a pride that I found fascinating. She also said, “We refuse to accept funds where political statements are attached.” What she should have said is that she refuses to accept funds that had political statements that she didn’t agree with, because by endorsing the pro levy faction she is supporting the political position of the school, and not the entire community.

Out of all the terrible news that came from the Enquirer article the parts that actually made me laugh that day were from West Chester Township Trustee Catherine Stoker who said “the language used by Mr. Hoffman is not only egregiously offensive, but reflects badly on the No Lakota group that Mr. Hoffman supports.” So does that mean the No Lakota group had a good name before all this? If so, then why was our help turned down? And who in the world is Catherine Stoker? She’s a public servant. She should have shut her mouth and done some work instead of trying to grandstand on my head, which is what she was doing as a favor to Superintendent Mantia and the pro levy people. And who decides what’s egregiously offensive? Her? The pro levy people? Or these next two pretentious specimens.

Lakota school mother Kim Hesselgesser said “I was very disgusted by the blog Rich Hoffman posted.” I was also very saddened for this extremely disturbed man. To me it is evident that he has some agenda that goes far beyond increased school taxes. Although I hate the fact that he is getting exactly what he wants – a lot of media attention. I feel it is worthwhile to make the public aware of who they are truly supporting when placing No Lakota signs in their yards. Pro levy or no levy…is that the type of person you want leading a group in our community?” Well, Kim, if you don’t like my blog postings—don’t read them. You refuse to see what’s right in front of your face. You have no right to say that I’m an extremely disturbed man. You have no authority to speak from. You read one thing I said because Julie Shaffer put it in front of your face and you cast a judgment without any thought, just like you do when you support a school levy. If someone like Julie, or Catherine tells you to pass a levy because it’s for the kids, then you do what they tell you without further consideration. And that’s the problem. We will still be paying off the debts your type of people bring to our community decades in the future because you can’t get your mind around the truth. You just listen to what people tell you to do, and you make statements about which you know nothing. I’d respect your opinion if it was yours, but it’s not. You have no right to tell all of Cincinnati that I’m an extremely disturbed man. Based on what? Because I don’t agree with you? You made that comment as a fact, not an opinion, and I’m considering in the back of my mind of what to about it next. I’m waiting to calm down before acting. I can see such things being said in online forums, blogs, blog comments, but it surprised me that The Enquirer printed that quote. That’s very dangerous stuff and yes, I am deeply pissed off about it. If that’s what you wanted, then you succeeded.

And Laura Sanders who has personally emailed me with what I consider to be messages way outside her level of expertise and who I personally addressed at this link (CLICK HERE) said “Mr. Hoffman uses misogynistic and vile language when addressing women and mothers because most teachers are in fact, women and mothers. He wants the public to think that he is merely attempting to rein in public school spending, but his underlying mission is really one of hatred and fear of women earning decent salaries. He alone is the destructive force behind the last three levy failures, and I hope this … convinces the women in our community that he is not a rational or credible source for the counterpoint argument.” Laura—you are out of your mind to paint me in such a fashion. While I am certainly not one who supports feminism, mainly because I think it has destroyed the modern family, it does not give you the right to paint me with the broad brush of stating what I think and making the high salary issue all about hating women. That is a pathetic argument and I can’t believe you said it. Just like Kim you used generalities to explain aspects of me that you know nothing about. If you did just a little research you would know what my number 1 Rule is on my Ten Rules to Live By. You can see those rules for yourself at the bottom of every signature at the end of every post I make. The number one rule is to honor women, because they are the pillars of our society. I believe in it so much that I wrote a book about it, and I made boys who dated my daughters read that book so they’d know my position. Those Ten Rules to Live By are in the back of that book published in 2004! Everyone and I mean EVERYONE who knows me, particularly women, knows how much I love them. I have daughters, I have been married for over24 years to the same person, and I have a lot of women friends. I help women carry heavy objects—always! I hold the door for them when they come in behind me—always! In fact I do a lot every day that doesn’t even begin to articulate the kind of person you and your pro levy friends have attempted to paint me as. And for what, so you could try to destroy me, and get me out-of-the-way so you could have your money!!!!!!! IS THAT WHAT YOU THOUGHT GAVE YOU THE RIGHT TO MAKE STUFF UP AND PUT IT IN THE PAPER ABOUT ME WHEN I’VE WENT TO GREAT TROUBLE TO BE OPEN HERE AND SHOW EXACTLY WHAT I AM! That’s what you have told the world through your actions!!!!!! You spoke about nothing of which you had an understanding. You smelled my blood in the water and you crossed the line with made up assumptions!

I had a conversation about you with a man the other day who attends your church. He told me you are just the sweetest girl there is and he tried to calm me down after that email that you sent me which I was still mad over a week after you sent it. I listened to him and took your actions as just political rhetoric and blew it off. But what you said in the paper was not just inflammatory, it was personal, and your type of people believe you have a right to step all over me to get what you want. My comments might have been audacious, but they were left obscure on purpose. I wanted badly to reveal the names I was thinking of when I wrote the salacious blog posting, but I didn’t because that would make it personal, and even if I want to bring my enemies down, that is not the way to do it. There is a difference between political rhetoric and personal attacks and what you, and your pro levy friends did to me on Thursday was a personal attack designed to hurt me in every single way possible, and I had planned for you to do it. But I was disappointed to be right once again. I will tell all of you something. There will be payment given to me in one fashion or another for what happened on Thursday. You can decide for yourselves what that is and I expect at a bare minimum a public apology. Failure to act will dictate action on my part.

This isn’t just about name calling anymore. I am happy to argue back and forth, and even debate on the radio as we have in the past in friendly competition. And when you make yourself a public official you make yourself prone to attacks. And when you work in a government job, you are prone to tax payer scrutiny. But I have made a choice to never be involved in an elected position because I want the freedom to be able to speak my thoughts, even when they are outlandish to get my point across, because sometimes that’s what it takes. But what the people mentioned in this article attempted to do was destroy me for standing in their way, and that WILL not be tolerated or left unresolved!

I stand by my comments that I posted. I wrote it as a metaphor to the type of woman who just don’t grasp fiscal concepts, and their opinions should therefore be discarded in political theater. I spoke in generalities to protect the real people I was thinking of even though I was very angry with them for desiring to drag our community through a fourth levy attempt. But what the women above did was turn me personally into the poster child for progressive politics to attempt to remove me the way they have for many years any barrier that stood in their path. If I had to guess, 80% of all legislation that gets discussed daily in any governmental body has it’s start with these same radical types who came after me so aggressively, so the same blind pro levy supporters who refuse to look at any facts and vote purely on emotion are the same who lobby members of the house and senate to pass all types of ungodly legislation, and pass more rules of every kind in every neighborhood across America. It’s these pro levy types who have made it so a kid can’t just go out and ride a bicycle anymore, but have to arm themselves from head to toe with padding and helmets. I see these radical progressive agenda driven pro levy supporters as being a huge problem on not just our communities but our human race, and I said what I said to call them out on it, to let them know that they aren’t fooling anyone—maybe themselves. I used a metaphor that was taken literally to use against me as a political maneuver which was fine, but everyone mentioned here took it several steps further and for all different reasons. Some of those reasons were strictly economic. Some were political. But mostly it was pure hatred for anyone who thinks different from the pretentious pro levy supporters. And these people felt they had a right to “destroy” me and everything I have ever been, or will be.

And it all started on Julie Shaffer’s Facebook. See what happens when you elect a levy activist onto your school board. And do you see now what kind of school board we have? She’s the Vice-President. What does that say about how wrong the entire situation is and what we have been fighting against? And since they can’t win the arguments against me with facts, they sought with every gun available to them to destroy the mouth piece.

It’s not Lakota as a school that I am fighting. The school will still be there if every employee were removed, and the kids would still be successful because the parents in general of Lakota, as I’ve said many times, will make sure it stays good. I’m fighting the radicalism that has embedded itself into our tax dollars. And to continue that fight, I have to do it my way using my network of Overmanwarrior’s to help get under the covers. This group has always been the force that supplied No Lakota Levy with information, so the attempt to separate me from No Lakota Levy was a lot of energy spent on nothing. I know there is a lot of disappointment because the assumption was that the members of No Lakota Levy were funding me, and if I were cut off from them, I’d be rudderless. But my funding comes from my professional writing endeavors and exemplified by my The Symposium of Justice where my Ten Rules are published.  I wouldn’t bring it up if my integrity had not come into question. It’s my personal projects that allow me to fight like this. That’s also why at the bottom of the book on the front cover it says, “Tyranny has a new enemy.” Did you just think it was silly words on the cover? I meant it literally! So nothing that happened Thursday was unforeseen. I knew what to expect. But my disappointment is in being right and to witness firsthand the destructive nature of my neighbors and the manipulation that can be employed to advance an agenda even if it costs lives.

And if you want to know who I am and what I believe, look at my Ten Rules to Live By. I don’t talk about my books during levy discussions because I don’t want to confuse any messages with the selling of books. So I just put the link out for those interested, and never mention it otherwise. But those are my beliefs and I live by those every single day. I should know them, because in this case—I wrote the book on the subject—so I know the material well. The person that I am and what these reckless characters described in this article tried to paint me as are not even close to the same thing.  The words used to describe me by these people mentioned here are as far from the truth as one could get.  They took small little bits of information because they didn’t want to work for the truth even though I placed it here for all to see.  They did with me what they do with the funding problems at Lakota, saw what they wanted to see and assassinated the characters of anyone who stood in the way of what they wanted. 

 Here are the rules I live by:

1. To honor women, they are the pillars of society.
2. Stand as an example of the highest moral order.
3. Avoid mental depletion such as intoxication, and ignorance.
4. Pursue learning like a person on fire pursues water.
5. Live with integrity, where values are in line with behavior.
6. Live the given life, not the dreams of others.
7. In a crisis handle everything calmly and without confusion.
8. Be capable of firmness in the heart.
9. Sorrow is everywhere, accept it with a smile.
10. Resist hiding in numbers, stand as an individual contributor.

And to add a bit to that, I consider telling the truth even if the names are ugly to be of the highest moral order. That’s why I stand behind my comments.  The truth does not live behind political correctness.  It lives in the facts.


To understand the truth it helps to view the world through Hoffman Lenses.  To understand what those are CLICK THE LINK.  If you can’t handle the truth, then don’t read here.

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior