The Eternal Preponderance of Evil: We are under attack by a political order outside of time and space

I think out of all the things that happened this past week, a truly devastating week, during the usual 9/11 reflections of September 2025, was the brutal murder of 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska, who was fatally stabbed three times in the neck while riding a light rail in Charlotte, North Carolina.  She had just gotten off work at her pizza place job.  She sat down in front of a very shady-looking dude, totally unjudging.  Unpretentious.  Unprovoked.  She, with her family, had fled the Ukraine war and was falling in love with the security and opportunity in America when 34-year-old Decarious Brown, a 14-time prior violent criminal, decided to cut her throat for no reason.  The whole murder was captured on camera, so there was no doubt about what happened.  And it was fast, so fast that she hardly knew what happened to her.  The blood poured from her neck as she only had time to look up at the killer, as he said with blood dripping from his knife, “I got the white girl.”  Young Iryna only had time to look up at him, still holding her phone, which she had been looking at, minding her own business.  He walked away to get off the train with other people sitting around her, not even moving to help.  She passed out as the blood ran to the floor and smeared the floor of the train, ending the life of a bright young person who had everything going for her.  That life taken by someone who was a complete parasite on society, a vicious killer who was good for absolutely nothing.  As the video of the event was released, it quickly hit social media, and people were outraged and shocked, making it appear to be one of the worst things to happen to the public consciousness.  Not that these things don’t happen all the time, because they do.  But this one was a clear video, and there was no question about what had happened. And people were shocked.  Then, on live television streamed all over the world in real time, we saw the assassination of Charlie Kirk at a Utah campus where he was speaking. 

The Charlie Kirk story was so terrible that it overshadowed the story of poor Iryna Zarutska, pushing it off the front page.  People can only deal with so much, and what we were seeing on live television was too much.  The assassin of Charlie Kirk was Tyler Robinson, a young 22-year-old Antifa type who was so full of hate that he took the very purposeful steps of shooting the young crusader who is associated directly with the Trump administration in the neck during a very crowded campus speech where Charlie was simply talking to people, again, not provoking violence, but trying to build conversation.  I see the Iryna story as more tragic because Charlie Kirk is more of a casualty of war, and yes, we are at war.  Make no mistake about it.  But with Charlie, he’s such a good person, it was horrible to see him hit by a bullet in the neck and see blood pour out like a garden hose.  Everyone saw the killing, and if they didn’t see it live, they saw plenty of clips that were floating around social media.  And as I saw it, I thought immediately that there is a vast evil at work here.  This was more than just some random killers copying the news cycle.  This was a vast evil that has been working in the background for many thousands of years, using these vacant personalities to commit their misdeeds.  It’s not a conspiracy, but an understanding of how that evil works and how it uses dumb people, angry people, or compromised people to serve as its avatars in four-dimensional space.  And it was sending us a message.

The kind of evil we are dealing with is clearly identified in Ephesians 6:12, one of my favorite verses from the Bible.  And it’s precisely why Yahweh was seeking Joshua to lead the Israelites into the land of Canaan to destroy them, even down to the women and children.  Why God was so angry at the evil so present in Canaan, and still very much part of the political story of the modern-day Palestinian two-state solution, is in dealing with this perilous evil that is always working in the background.  To understand this evil, you must start considering that there are life forms in a multidimensional reality, which is a very real thing.  The Bible is unique in the world as a piece of literature that studies this evil over a very long period of time, and there is a politics of doom that is attached to its concerns for the human race.  And with the world turning toward Trump and the kind of freedom that America is providing the world, evil is showing itself in hostile personalities that are very real to us.  But serve as avatars for the intentions of evil, embodying a personality of interdimensional concern.  It can be everywhere all at once, and it often is.  And only the Bible truly captures this relationship with the human race, of immortal beings working through political concerns in four-dimensional life forms for a purpose unique to their reality.  Their interest in the human race is to rule over us with fear.  And we were starting to lose our fear of evil and had been turning toward optimism, so an attack on our security was its motivation.

And you can tell because of the mode of attack.  Within the same week, images of people being publicly assassinated by representatives of evil, either by slitting their necks or by shooting them in the neck, were seen by essentially the entire world.  And psychologically, the neck is a hidden fear we all have because it’s one of the most vulnerable parts of the human body.  So it was no accident that both of these terrible, very public killings were by the neck, where we saw the blood running out from their bodies.  These were statement killings by the nature of evil itself, working through agents of the human race, and attempting to regain control through fear, of all people, to serve a political order that exists outside our current time and space.  Of course, the individuals who committed these assassinations are responsible and must be punished brutally for their crimes.  And we must restore confidence to the families of the slain victims of these horrendous murders.  However, we are dealing with an ancient evil that seeks to maintain control over the human race, and it is there that we must direct our attention.  To understand it, we must first understand why Western Civilization was established after the initial attack on Canaan by the Israelites, led by Joshua.  And why was God so mad at the Israelites for falling short of his ambitious goals established by the Ten Commandments, which were at the battlefront of all those military campaigns while destroying the Canaanites.  And why God was so angry that mercy was given to anybody within those cultures.  God wanted them destroyed, utterly, completely, and without negotiation.  And today, we have the same quandary presented to us, which has shown itself in a vast evil that attacked all of us through these innocent victims, Charlie Kirk, a very popular personality directly associated with the Trump administration.  And the unfortunate story of the beautiful Iryna Zarutska from Ukraine, just minding her own business and living her life.  Their killings were a message to the rest of us in a desperate attempt to rule through fear.  And we must respond with the opposite, attacking that evil wherever it exists at every level of reality.  And we must be more ruthless than it is.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Why I Support Michael V. Ryan for Butler County Commissoner Over Roger Reynolds: The Spooky Nook Sports Complex and vision for the future

In the ever-evolving landscape of local politics, decisions about leadership are rarely simple. They require reflection, vision, and a deep understanding of what a community truly needs to thrive. As someone who has stood by Roger Reynolds through difficult times and considers him a personal friend, my decision to endorse Michael Ryan for Butler County Commissioner was not made lightly. It stems from a clear-eyed assessment of the future of Butler County and the kind of leadership that can best guide us there.

A Legacy of Loyalty and Friendship

Let me begin by acknowledging my longstanding support for Roger Reynolds. I’ve stood with him through challenging moments, and I’ve always appreciated his dedication to public service. Roger has contributed meaningfully to Butler County, and I personally like him. But politics isn’t just about personal loyalty—it’s about choosing the right person for the right job at the right time. And in this moment, I believe Michael Ryan is that person. Roger has announced his run for this office knowing the political situation, and he did it anyway, ultimately making it more about what he wants and needs, over what is best for this commissioner seat. He has a desire to justifiably clear his name from a rough period of time. But in that process, he showed a lot of bad judgment in pushing away people who stood by him the strongest through that process, and we don’t need that kind of trouble in a commissioner office.

The Spooky Nook Sports Complex: A Symbol of Visionary Leadership

One of the most compelling reasons I’m supporting Michael Ryan is his instrumental role in the development of the Spooky Nook Sports Complex in Hamilton. Located on the site of the old Champion International Paper factory, this facility is more than just a sports venue—it’s a symbol of economic revitalization, community engagement, and visionary leadership.

Hamilton has long needed a spark to reignite its downtown economy, and the Spooky Nook project has provided just that. It’s the largest sports complex of its kind in North America, and it has transformed a once-depleted industrial site into a vibrant hub of activity. Michael says it’s the second largest, but who’s splitting straws?  It’s a pretty spectacular venue on the Hamilton, Ohio riverfront.  Weekends at Spooky Nook are packed with volleyball tournaments, basketball games, and conventions. The facility includes a hotel and event center, drawing visitors from across the country and injecting new life into local businesses.

This kind of transformation doesn’t happen by accident. It requires leadership that can bring people together, facilitate investment, and create a shared vision for the future. Michael Ryan, as Vice Mayor and City Council member, played a key role in making this happen. He didn’t just support the project—he helped create the conditions that made it possible.

The Power of Communication and Connection

Michael Ryan’s greatest strength is his ability to get people talking. In today’s political climate, shaped in many ways by President Trump’s deal-making influence, the leaders who succeed are those who can build coalitions, foster dialogue, and unite diverse groups around common goals. Michael Ryan is that kind of leader.

He’s personable, approachable, and genuinely interested in what others have to say. When you put him in a room with people from different backgrounds, he doesn’t create division—he creates conversation. That’s a rare and valuable trait in politics, and it’s one of the reasons why the Spooky Nook project was able to move forward. Investors felt confident that the city government would support their efforts, and that confidence was rooted in the kind of leadership Michael Ryan exemplifies.

A New Generation of Politicians

Michael Ryan represents a new generation of politicians—leaders who don’t wait for opportunities to come to them but actively seek out ways to improve their communities. He was elected in 2017, during Trump’s first term, and he brought with him a fresh perspective and a proactive approach to governance.

This isn’t the era of traditional politics anymore. The days of sitting in an office and waiting for constituents to come knocking are over. Today’s leaders need to be out in the world, building relationships, attracting investment, and thinking creatively about the future. Michael Ryan understands this, and he’s already demonstrating it—even before officially becoming commissioner.

Aviation and Economic Development

A perfect example of Michael Ryan’s forward-thinking approach is his involvement with Joby Aviation. He’s been working to establish connections with the Dayton International Airport area, where a new factory is being built to produce air taxis. This is cutting-edge technology, and it represents a major opportunity for Butler County to position itself as a hub for innovation and transportation.

Michael Ryan isn’t waiting for someone else to take the lead—he’s already out there, laying the groundwork for future partnerships and economic growth. That kind of initiative is exactly what we need in a commissioner.

The Contrast with Roger Reynolds

Again, this isn’t personal. Roger Reynolds has had his time in office, and he’s done some good work. But his approach is rooted in a more traditional style of politics—one that doesn’t always align with the demands of today’s rapidly changing world. His decision to run again feels more like an attempt to redeem his personal brand than a genuine effort to serve the community in new and innovative ways.

In contrast, Michael Ryan is focused on the future. He’s thinking about how to revitalize Middletown, attract enterprise zones to Hamilton, and create sustainable growth across Butler County. He’s not just reacting to problems—he’s anticipating opportunities and acting on them.

Leadership for the Right Reasons

Ultimately, leadership is about seeing and doing things that other people can’t do for themselves, or understand at the time. It’s about putting the needs of the community ahead of personal ambition, and I think with Roger Reynolds, he has a need for personal redemption because of what he’s been through.  But he’s had a chance to do things in the past and we know what we’ll get from him.  Michael Ryan has shown that he can do more, and is a fresh start. He’s not running for commissioner to boost his own profile, which comes naturally as part of the job—he’s running because he believes in Butler County and wants to help it reach its full potential.  He’s what the future looks like and he brings with him a lot of fresh perspective.

He’s already proven that he can attract investment, facilitate dialogue, and bring people together. He’s shown that he understands the complexities of economic development and the importance of proactive governance. And he’s demonstrated a commitment to transparency, collaboration, and long-term planning.

A Vision for Butler County’s Future

As we look ahead to the future of Butler County, we need leaders who can think big, act boldly, and unite our communities around a shared vision. We need commissioners who understand the importance of infrastructure, innovation, and investment. We need people who are willing to work around the clock to make our county a better place to live, work, and raise a family.

Michael Ryan is that kind of leader. His work on the Spooky Nook Sports Complex is just the beginning. He has the energy, the ideas, and the relationships to take Butler County to the next level. Whether it’s aviation, tourism, or enterprise development, he’s already laying the foundation for a brighter future.

Conclusion

So yes, I’ve supported Roger Reynolds in the past. I’ve stood by him, and I still consider him a friend. But when it comes to choosing the best person for Butler County Commissioner, my support goes to Michael Ryan. He’s the right leader for this moment, and I believe he will do an outstanding job.

If you haven’t visited the Spooky Nook Sports Complex, I encourage you to go. See for yourself what visionary leadership can accomplish. And when it comes time to vote, you won’t go wrong in supporting Michael Ryan—a leader who listens, connects, and delivers.  And has an eye for a future that people can really get excited about. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Public Discourse and Political Integrity: A Reflection on Warren Davidson’s Trenton Town Hall

In the heart of Butler County, Ohio, Congressman Warren Davidson recently held a town hall meeting at Edgewood Middle School in Trenton—a bold and commendable move in today’s politically charged climate. With approximately 500 attendees, the event was a rare opportunity for constituents to engage directly with their elected representative. Although I wasn’t able to attend due to scheduling conflicts, the proximity of the event to my home across the Great Miami River made me want to go.  I love Warren, and he’s usually spot on with his issues.  However, I would have liked to have been there to see the protesters who showed up, the ‘Tax the Rich’ types, because it became quite a media event. Still, the significance of the event and the reactions it provoked offer a compelling lens through which to examine the state of public discourse, political representation, and the ideological divides that continue to shape our communities.

Warren Davidson’s decision to host a live, unscripted town hall was gutsy. In an era where many politicians avoid direct engagement with constituents, preferring curated media appearances or controlled environments, Davidson’s willingness to face the public head-on deserves recognition. His district, which spans Butler County and parts of surrounding areas, is politically diverse. While former President Donald Trump won Butler County by a significant margin—roughly 60%—a vocal minority remains that opposes Davidson’s policies and broader conservative principles. These individuals, often aligned with progressive or left-leaning ideologies, represent a segment of the population that feels increasingly marginalized in a region dominated by Republican politics.

The town hall, however, was not without its challenges. Reports and social media coverage highlighted a group of vocal disruptors who attended the event with the apparent intention of derailing the conversation. Rather than engaging in respectful dialogue, these individuals resorted to heckling and creating distractions, undermining the very purpose of the town hall. While public debate is a cornerstone of our republic, there is a line between passionate disagreement and outright disrespect. As someone who has attended events featuring speakers with whom I disagree, I believe in maintaining decorum—listening, shaking hands, and finding common ground where possible. The behavior exhibited by some attendees at Davidson’s town hall was not only counterproductive but emblematic of a broader erosion of civility in political discourse.

The media’s portrayal of the event further complicated matters. Coverage focused heavily on the disruptions, framing them as indicative of widespread dissatisfaction with Davidson’s policies. This narrative, however, overlooks the broader context. The disruptive group represented a small fraction of the attendees—perhaps 20 to 30 individuals—yet their actions were amplified to suggest a larger movement. This kind of coverage plays into the hands of those seeking to challenge Davidson’s seat in the upcoming election, painting him as vulnerable despite strong support from his base. It’s a tactic often employed by those on the political fringes who hope to gain traction by manufacturing controversy rather than presenting substantive alternatives.

Davidson’s alignment with Trump on many issues, particularly fiscal policy, has made him a target for criticism. While Trump’s approach often involves aggressive spending to stimulate economic growth, Davidson has positioned himself as a fiscal conservative, advocating for reduced federal spending and greater accountability. This divergence has sparked debate within conservative circles, but it also highlights Davidson’s commitment to principle over party. His stance on limiting government expenditure reflects a belief in personal responsibility and economic discipline—values that resonate deeply with many in his district, including myself.

The disruptions at the town hall were not merely expressions of policy disagreement; they were symptomatic of a deeper ideological divide. The individuals who sought to hijack the event often espouse views rooted in socialist or Marxist frameworks, advocating for increased taxation and expanded government programs. Their arguments, while emotionally charged, lack practical grounding. Demanding higher taxes to fund expansive social initiatives without addressing underlying spending habits is akin to maxing out a credit card and blaming the employer for insufficient wages. Fiscal responsibility begins with managing expenditures, not simply demanding more revenue.

Moreover, the push for higher taxes often targets the wealthy under the guise of promoting equity. Yet this approach overlooks the broader implications of punitive taxation—namely, the disincentive to invest and innovate. Not understanding why investment occurs and what a lack of it does to a society as a whole.  The same individuals advocating for increased government spending are frequently those who struggle with personal financial discipline, projecting their frustrations onto systemic structures rather than addressing individual accountability. This mindset, while understandable in moments of hardship, ultimately undermines the principles of self-reliance and economic freedom that form the bedrock of American society.

The town hall also served as a microcosm of the broader political landscape. With Trump’s administration well underway, Democrats find themselves on the defensive, seeking avenues to regain relevance. The disruptions at Davidson’s event were not isolated incidents but part of a coordinated effort to challenge conservative leadership in regions where progressive influence has waned. These tactics, while effective in generating media attention, do little to foster meaningful dialogue or policy innovation. Instead, they contribute to a climate of polarization and mistrust, where political opponents are viewed not as fellow citizens with differing views but as enemies to be silenced.

Despite the noise, Davidson remained composed, demonstrating the kind of resilience and integrity that defines effective leadership. His willingness to engage with constituents—regardless of their political affiliation—speaks to a commitment to representation that transcends party lines. While I may not agree with every aspect of his platform, I respect his dedication to public service and his courage in facing criticism head-on.  I agree with most of his positions, but I was a much quicker yes on the Big Beautiful Bill than he was.  In a time when many politicians retreat from scrutiny, Davidson’s approach is both refreshing and necessary.

The media’s role in shaping public perception is crucial and cannot be overstated. By focusing on the disruptions rather than the substance of the town hall, outlets contributed to a distorted narrative that misrepresents the event’s true character. This kind of coverage not only undermines the communication process but also fuels division by amplifying fringe voices at the expense of constructive dialogue. It’s a reminder that media literacy is essential in today’s information landscape—citizens must critically evaluate sources and seek out diverse perspectives to form informed opinions.

Looking ahead, Davidson’s reelection prospects remain strong. The vocal minority that seeks to unseat him lacks the organizational strength and policy coherence necessary to mount a serious challenge. Their efforts, while loud, are unlikely to resonate with the broader electorate, which values stability, fiscal responsibility, and principled leadership. Davidson’s track record, combined with his willingness to engage directly with constituents, positions him well for continued service.

The Trenton town hall was a testament to the complexities of modern political engagement. It highlighted the importance of respectful discourse, the challenges of ideological division, and the resilience required of public servants in the face of adversity. While disruptions and media bias may cloud the narrative, the core message remains clear: representation matters, and leaders like Warren Davidson play a vital role in upholding the values that define our communities. As constituents, it is our responsibility to engage thoughtfully, maintain integrity, and contribute to a political culture founded on respect and accountability.  And to be thankful that there are politicians out there, like Warren Davidson, who are willing to do the job in the way that he does.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Autopen and the Question of Presidential Legitimacy: Institutions must prove their position

In the modern American presidency, the act of signing a document is far more than a bureaucratic necessity—it is a symbolic gesture of authority, responsibility, and direct engagement with the nation’s governance. Whether it’s an executive order, a pardon, or a piece of legislation, the president’s signature represents the culmination of deliberation and decision-making at the highest level. However, the increasing use of the autopen, a mechanical device that replicates a signature, has sparked significant controversy, particularly under President Joe Biden. Critics argue that the autopen undermines the authenticity of presidential actions, mainly when used amid concerns about the president’s cognitive acuity and physical presence. The image of a machine signing off on decisions that shape national policy evokes a sense of detachment and raises questions about who truly holds power in the executive branch. While the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel ruled in 2005 that a president may authorize a subordinate to use an autopen to sign legislation, and courts have upheld its legality, the optics remain troubling for many Americans. The legal framework may be sound, but the symbolic implications of a mechanical signature—especially in moments of national crisis or political tension—can erode public confidence in the presidency itself.  And in the case of the Joe Biden presidency, it allowed for a shadow government to run the White House in a way that, looking back on it, was simply unacceptable. 

The autopen controversy is not an isolated phenomenon; it is part of a broader historical pattern of questioning presidential legitimacy, often fueled by conspiracy theories and partisan distrust. During Barack Obama’s presidency, the “birther” movement gained traction, alleging that Obama was not born in the United States and was therefore ineligible to serve as president. Despite the release of his long-form birth certificate and multiple independent verifications of its authenticity, critics continued to claim it was digitally fabricated. Figures like Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona amplified these claims, arguing that the document contained layers inconsistent with 1960s technology. These allegations were not thoroughly debunked by forensic analysts, even though they were dismissed in court; yet, they persisted in the public imagination. We have since witnessed, with judicial activism, the liberal leanings of the courts to be activists of their own, as if they hold the fate of the human race under their black robes of injustice.  The endurance of such theories reveals a troubling trend: when legal and factual rebuttals fail to quell doubt, the issue becomes less about truth and more about belief. The birther controversy laid the groundwork for a culture of skepticism toward federal institutions, where even the most basic credentials of leadership could be called into question. This skepticism has since evolved into a broader distrust of democratic processes and the legitimacy of elected officials, creating fertile ground for future controversies, such as those surrounding the autopen.

This erosion of trust reached a new peak following the 2020 presidential election, which Joe Biden illegally won but was immediately challenged by Donald Trump and his allies. Over 60 lawsuits were filed contesting the results, nearly all of which were dismissed for lack of evidence or standing—even by judges appointed by Trump himself.  Again, judicial activism was revealed to be a significant issue that had not been previously well understood.  The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency declared the election “the most secure in American history,” yet many Americans remained unconvinced, and for good reason. The belief that the election was stolen became a rallying cry, not just against Biden, but against the entire machinery of government. In this context, the autopen took on symbolic significance. For some, it represented a presidency run by unelected aides, rubber-stamping decisions without the president’s full awareness or engagement. The idea that a president could be physically or mentally absent while critical decisions were being made by staffers or machines fed into a broader narrative of institutional decay and manipulation. Whether or not this perception is accurate, it underscores a crisis of confidence in the executive branch. The legal validity of the autopen is beside the point for many critics; what matters is the perceived absence of genuine leadership and the fear that democratic institutions are being manipulated behind closed doors. This perception has real consequences for the health of American institutionalism.

At the heart of these controversies lies a fundamental question: What does it mean to govern legitimately in a democratic society? Is it enough for presidential actions to be technically legal, or must they also be visibly accountable and transparent? The use of the autopen, the birther movement, and the disputes over election integrity all point to a more profound anxiety—that the American people are losing control over the institutions meant to serve them. If a president can be propped up, decisions made by anonymous staffers, and signatures affixed by machines, then where does sovereignty truly lie? These are not just partisan concerns; they are constitutional ones—the Constitution vests executive power in the president, not in machines or unelected aides. While the courts may uphold the legality of these practices, the court of public opinion demands something more: clarity, honesty, and a renewed commitment to democratic principles. Without that, the pen—whether wielded by hand or machine—risks becoming a symbol not of leadership, but of detachment. Restoring trust in the presidency requires more than legal compliance; it demands visible engagement, transparency, and a reaffirmation of the values that underpin American society. In an age of digital signatures, remote governance, and increasing automation, the challenge is not just to preserve legality but to maintain the human connection between leaders and the people they serve.  This, in turn, highlights the core of the problem: a signature by autopen is not enough.  Having a body in the White House is not enough.  Leadership is not just cosmetic.  What is considered legal goes even beyond what a judge ultimately rules is or isn’t.  There was gross manipulation on this trust issue that goes well beyond Biden’s presidency.  The door was opened with Obama, even before him with Clinton.  What could courts do to justify illegitimacy, and could a conspiracy of judges, who secretly want to rule over all society, cover up illegitimate mechanisms of automation, which were clearly tested during the insertion of Biden as the President into the White House?  Obviously, it was not enough, and people rejected the premise. Now, Trump has a mandate to correct all these falsehoods that were given credence and are now considered hostile topics in most polite households, which is a very new thing.  The assumption was that if an institution could validate a belief in legitimacy through signature, the courts, or the media, then actions would be deemed legal.  Yet that is not the case.  An action is not legal unless it is backed by honest elections with proof that people genuinely believe what the institutions are saying.  Judges must demonstrate that they are committed to upholding justice.  Elections must demonstrate that they are honest and accurately representing the voters.  And we have to see a president signing documents.  Not just that an autopen did it in darkness with a 25-year-old aide carrying out the orders of the Democrat Party while Joe Biden wandered around outside trying to catch butterflies.  And that raises questions about everything that has happened over the last decade.  And why Trump has a mandate to correct it.  And to fix it all. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Lakota’s Levy is the Most Expensive in Ohio’s History: Meet Ben Nguyen who is a solution for the future

After I met Ben Nguyen and endorsed him for the Lakota school board for the upcoming November 2025 election, the business of why he was running evolved into a community priority.  Ben is a young man who wants to stay in the school district, but with the loan amount that is looming with the approval of this massive levy from Lakota, the easy math is projecting the debt burden alone to be an imposition of $1.2 billion onto the economy of the Lakota school district, which is outrageously too much.  The amount of economic growth that the community would need to generate to offset the cost of this levy is unrealistic, and it would certainly set the course for the kind of decline that most affluent areas experience over their lifetimes.  Things have been relatively good in West Chester and Liberty Township for several decades, mainly because we have had a strong political commitment to prevent excessive taxation.  That has kept things somewhat affordable, but it’s a delicate balance that requires constant political pressure to maintain low taxes.  Butler County itself has a lot of Republicans in it, and republicans don’t like taxes for big, ballooning government.  It has been a significant number of years since the Lakota school district attempted to put a levy on the ballot, mainly due to the brand damage that the school itself would have incurred, as we have maintained a sharp resistance to excessive taxation within the school district.  However, Lakota has been waiting until it had a four-member majority of Democrat-minded big spenders, and it now has that, and it is taking its shot with the most expensive school levy attempt in Ohio history.  And what they want now isn’t all.  If they can pass this levy, they have an operations levy in mind that will also be enormously expensive.  So Ben and I discussed all this on camera, because people want to know some of these details that newspapers and yard signs never get to tell the complete story. 

Even though Ben has just graduated from Lakota, he had a great experience at the school. He loves his community and wants to stay in it, attending college at Miami University.  And start a family in his hometown.  However, the problem is a math problem: at the current rate of inflation and interest rates, the already average cost of a home in the Lakota school district is around $450,000.  By the time Ben graduates and wants to start a family in his mid-20s, those exact costs will be in the $ 600,000 range, and the math doesn’t work out.  And that will all be without the price of this Lakota levy.  Adding that $ 1.2 billion debt liability to the community would be the end for many residents who are fixed-income types, and it would significantly shorten the list of people who could afford to buy into the community.  And as we drive around cities with former opulent homes and wonder how they become crime-ridden slums, this is how that process begins.  A good place to live is started.  People get comfortable with things and stop monitoring costs, and they elect Democrats.  Democrats get on school boards and city councils, and start voting for excessive spending, wrap their communities in debt obligations, and poof, a slum is born.  The economy collapses.  The values drop.  And everyone loses a lot of money, and the only opportunities people see for themselves are crime.  It’s essentially the story of Middletown, Ohio, just to the north of the Lakota school district.  There are numerous examples throughout the city of Cincinnati.  However, due to the kind of people in Butler County who lean towards Republican politics, we have managed to prevent that cycle up to this point.  But the danger is looming.

So as Ben and I sat down together to shoot a video so we could talk about all these things, one of his key reasons for running for the school board is to keep the taxes low so that he can afford to stay in the school district and to raise a family here, as he grew up.  As a young man with natural political gifts, he wasn’t trying to overachieve; he was trying to save his community from excessive taxation.  And in my opinion, that is a very noble quest that is mature well beyond his years.  As I spoke to him, it was clear that his intelligence is precisely what the Lakota school board needs.  We discussed a variety of topics, including the support of current school board member Isaac Adi and past board president Lynda O’Connor. Many believe those endorsements are liabilities to him, suggesting that we need to present a completely fresh start as a Republican Party approach.  But when you’re dealing with these kinds of issues, you have to be able to unite people of drastically different levels of Republican politics.  In a two-party system, 50% of anything will have people very wide apart on most political matters.  However, on things they can agree on, the political system must be able to rally people toward a shared objective.  And high taxes and the defense against them is one that most Republicans can relate to.

Ben and I covered a lot of topics that should make it very easy for voters to get behind him.  With him on the school board, there is a chance to really shape the future with some reasonable management.  However, it will take more than just Ben Nguyen; there will need to be more people to join him, otherwise, he will be outvoted by the same individuals who have just proposed the most significant tax increase in Ohio’s history.  And even if this one is defeated, Lakota will try again and again until it passes with spring votes, summer votes, or anything it takes, until they catch people off guard and can manage to extract more taxes from the community.  And once they do that, the impact on the community will start its decline.  So this isn’t just a fight to elect a very young man, Ben Nguyen, to the Lakota school board.  This is a fight to keep the cost of living low enough for people to afford it, so that our community won’t follow so many others into their decline due to over taxation.  If left alone, Democrat types who end up in these political offices over time will do as they are in Lakota, asking for outrageous amounts of money with no end in sight.  And if we want to manage that process, we have to have people like Ben Nguyen on the school board.  He needs to get elected, and our community needs a plan to elect two or three more like him, so that there is a clear majority that can vote and prevent tax increases.  Ben isn’t against school funding.  However, as we discussed, Lakota has a $250 million yearly budget, which should be sufficient to operate a school that teaches children.  The community well supports Lakota schools as they currently are.  The purpose of this levy and the tax burden that comes with it is to facilitate more wasteful spending, including building new schools that will require more staff to run, and that means more people on payroll, inflating an already high budget.  So, Lakota needs to hear from the community, no more taxes.  And they need a school board that can work with what they already have.  And Ben Nguyen looks to be a first step in that direction.  And after speaking with him, I can’t wait to vote for him.  And after you hear him talk, I think you will feel the same.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Proverbs 22:7: Why America rules over the rest of the world

It is a topic that has come up a lot, especially since Trump has been trying to negotiate peace between Russia and Ukraine and end the war there.  Why the United States?  Why do we get to set a dollar standard?  Why do airports have to speak English universally?  Why is it that the United States thinks it needs to be, or can be, involved in the world’s affairs?  How can the world be equal if the United States consistently views itself as the best or wealthiest country in the world, and that somehow gives it power over all other countries?  And the answer is simple: only the United States has adopted capitalism as an economic model, while all other countries in the world have some degree of socialism in their economies, which restricts their financial growth.  A friend of mine recently brought this to my attention with a nice quote from Proverbs 22:7, which says, “The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.”  And that’s very true.  If a country penalizes itself from wealth creation, it loses the ability to be equal in any discussion.  And being poor, especially by choice, will always leave a member of a negotiating party at a disadvantage.  America has the power that it does because it’s a rich country, and it’s rich because of capitalism.  And you’d think other countries would have woken up to that fact, because they are poor by choice.  The reason America has the power and influence it does is that it has a population of only 300 million, yet it produces the largest GDP in the world, competing directly with countries like China and India, which have populations of over a billion each.  Because all other countries in the world have adopted Marxist ideas, they have limited their wealth generation and ultimately their influence at the table regarding the fate of the world.

The issue of fairness arises frequently in these discussions.  Is it fair that the world is designed like this, where human beings are valued more for their wealth than for their better values, which reflect power and influence?  It’s a matter of leverage; people in the world want money and will do this or that or something else to get it.  And when too many artificial restrictions are created to access money, then naturally, people with less of it are on the wrong side of any negotiations.  So, by choice, those who have very little money are in that position because they chose to do other things than make money, and the world does not honor their choice. We have invented money and wealth as measures of achievement, and in all human cultures, achievement is highly respected.  Gaining wealth is a measure that, by default, is universally understood by all people.  And to lobby for making some other value more critical, such as compassion for the weak, or valuing vacations over working too hard, will ultimately leave the one without money at a disadvantage, leveraged by those who do control the money, because they have more of it.  Money comes in many forms but what the book of Proverbs has always struggled with as a foundation of Christianity for instance, because even Jesus struggled with this problem by attacking the vendors at the Temple which led to his crucifixion, is that the meek are overlooked and often oppressed by the rich people of the world, and that everlasting life in Heaven might give them relief from that reality.  This is a debate that has been ongoing since the beginning of time, but the rules have remained unchanged—he who owns the gold rules.

Trump has been effective because he understands how to control leverage in negotiations, as he always puts himself on the side of smart money.  And whoever does that will win the argument every time.  Not some of the time.  All of the time.   And the question of fairness is then a universal law that is the same here as it would be on the other side of a black hole in space, on the other side of reality.  This rule would never change.  The Bible struggled with the same idea: what power does the Lord in Heaven have over the earth if people will do anything for money and what it can buy.  And the answer is a hard one, because money represents wealth creation and how people measure such things in polite society.  The rest of the world has chosen to rebel against the premise of money, and they counted on peer pressure to create other value systems that the world respected, such as transgender rights, or helping people experiencing poverty when people have been deliberately made poor with terrible social policy.  For instance, because of capitalism, a poor person in America is infinitely wealthier than a person in a Marxist hellhole, like some African country that has deliberately suppressed capitalism.  Their poor state is a result of a desire to control wealth creation, so that people can be ruled over, and that they won’t acquire personal wealth to compete with their overlords.  When a government seeks to exert power over its people, it must limit their access to wealth so that private individuals cannot undermine the government’s authority over them.  So that decision ultimately constricts their ability to generate wealth. 

Trump has spent his life accumulating wealth, and his ability to do so has given him the capacity to negotiate at multiple levels.  Being rich for him means he gets to win the argument.  And from that perspective, he can command the world to sit at his feet, as the members of NATO remarkably did in front of his desk in the Oval Office recently, after Vladimir Putin came to Alaska to visit with Trump after quite a spectacle.  The world came to Trump to appease him because of the power of the American economy.  And because they don’t have money themselves, due to poor economic decisions, they find themselves at a disadvantage in the discussions they have with all other parties.  With all the talk about Russian power and military might, it’s worth noting that they don’t have a very robust economy, which leaves them at a disadvantage at the negotiating table.  People can talk about how mean Putin is as a tyrant, but because of his need to maintain control over his people, the Russian economy is too restricted and always at a disadvantage to a capitalist country like the United States.  And when push comes to shove, the capitalist country will always outleverage the authoritarian government that has put too many barriers on personal wealth.  So that is why America plays the role in the world that it does.  Fairness is a sentiment, not a value.  It’s an intellectual observation that doesn’t align with the realities of the world.  Jesus might have struggled with the same issue involving the money changers at the temple, as many are declaring that America shouldn’t have the kind of power in the world that it does.  However, it has that power because humans use money to measure value, and value is derived from the things we do.  And when things are restricted by policy, then who is to blame?  Or, if individuals refuse to work, they are always at a disadvantage in life compared to those who work hard and have financial means.  Who is to blame?  America has given upward mobility to many people through the premise of freedom.  And that is why the United States has a better leverage position over all other countries that are too restrictive on individual wealth creation.  And in that moral quandary is the ethics of wealth creation, and why the world is much better off because of it.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Line in the Sand: Sheriff Jones holding Ayman Soliman in the Butler County Jail

It is probably the most crucial topic in the world at the moment: the question of police and their impact on a prosperous society.  It just so happens that I had an excellent example of the effects of good police work in my own backyard with Sheriff Jones and the Butler County Sheriff’s department, as they were the center of controversy, as the very controversial inmate, Ayman Soliman, was being held at the Butler County Jail awaiting his trial date for his asylum case.  Radical groups have pressured Governor DeWine to have Soliman released from the Butler County jail.  Soliman has been the cause of considerable controversy, and it’s interesting to see who has rallied to his cause.  Rioters tried to shut down a bridge in downtown Cincinnati over Soliman’s arrest.  And at the Butler County jail, there have been protestors attempting to block roads, which has led to the arrest of several stringy-haired socialist types from the radical left.  Soliman himself, as Sheriff Jones told me when I sat down with him to discuss this case, indicated that a significant amount of pretension about Ayman Soliman has emerged while he has been in jail, a self-importance that has led to trouble, inspiring disciplinary action.  Soliman had been a Muslim chaplain from Egypt at the Children’s Hospital in Cincinnati, where he was arrested during a routine check-in.  Soliman had his asylum revoked in early June 2025, and on July 9th, after 3 hours of questioning by ICE officials, he was arrested and put into the Butler County Jail under an ICE contract.  Homeland Security, under the new enforcement guidelines of Kristi Noem, confirmed that Soliman was on the FBI terror watchlist for a direct connection to the Muslim Brotherhood.  And that this background was triggered years earlier when he tried to get a job at the Oregon Department of Corrections in Umatilla. 

When Sheriff Jones and I spoke, his understanding of his job is to follow the law, not to make it.  And based on Soliman’s past, there was a lot in it that was very sketchy.  He might be innocent.  It might be unfair.  At best, the case looks to be that the Obama administration and that of Biden were very loose on crime and allowed for controversial immigrants like Ayman Soliman to live in America illegally as a Muslim religious leader, where he holds an MA in Islamic Studies from Egypt and has pursued advanced degrees, including an MDiv in Islamic studies and Muslim Chaplaincy and a PhD in Islamic Studies.  During the 2011 Arab Spring uprising, Soliman participated in student protests and worked as a freelance journalist, during which he was arrested multiple times by the Egyptian authorities.  After being beaten and tortured in custody in Egypt, he fled to America seeking asylum and had been living in the background for many years, leading up to that questioning in Blue Ash, Ohio, before landing in the Butler County Jail.  The point of the matter is that under Trump’s administration, specifically the much-improved Homeland Security under Kristi Noem and the ICE enforcement of Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar,  Ayman Soliman was high on the list of cases to deal with for a reason.  And from Sheriff Jones’ perspective, he has to trust the federal law that put that inmate in his jail.  He can’t allow a mob to persuade him in his police work, and since the arrest of Ayman Soliman, that has been the clear intention of the radical left to lobby Governor DeWine in the hopes of putting pressure on Sheriff Jones to release the Muslim spiritual leader. 

So, the topic is why good police work is important.  Why federalizing the police in Washington, D.C. was a good thing and why Chicago needs to do the same.  Why is it great that the Trump administration blew up a drug trafficking boat from Venezuela?  And why Sheriff Jones was all that stood between chaos and law at the Butler County Jail in holding this suspicious person that the Trump administration flagged on a terror watch list because of his background with the Muslim Brotherhood front group Al-Gam’iyya al-Shar’iyya, an Egyptian nonprofit providing medical aid and charity services.  Recently, a letter was presented to Governor DeWine with 1,100 signatures on July 25, 2025, urging his intervention in the Butler County jail. However, Jones was quick to dismiss any executive orders that DeWine might attempt to initiate, with an open refusal to listen to the governor.  Jones instead stated that he worked for the people of Butler County, who could re-hire or fire him at their discretion.  And that they were the highest authority, not a state governor, which has shocked many people.  But Sheriff Jones, and this isn’t the only occasion, has stood firm under tremendous pressure.  So this was indeed a powerful story that needed to be examined.  And why was Butler County at the center of this international incident?  I personally attribute this to the six terms in office that Sheriff Jones has had, as well as the stability of law enforcement that has existed under his leadership.  The Butler County Sheriff’s department, I think, is one of the best in the country, and Sheriff Jones is undoubtedly one of the best that there is anywhere, and because of that fabulous police presence, Butler County as a region has thrived in ways that are unique in the world. 

I consider the Butler County Jail to be a well-run business.  I’ve visited there several times, I’ve toured the jail, eaten the food, and observed the booking process.  It’s undoubtedly one of the best jail systems in the state of Ohio and is clearly one of the best in the country.  And saying all that, it’s one of the best in the world.  Ayman Soliman should consider himself fortunate that he’s in the Butler County Jail until his next immigration court date set for December 15, 2025, and there are other legal challenges to be pursued in October.  There are numerous complications, but what it has all revealed is the kind of people working in the background to undermine U.S. law. If not for strong figures like Sheriff Jones, chaos would be running rampant.  Having him at the center of this international story is very beneficial for the overall Trump administration’s objectives of cleaning up America from the kind of people trying to destroy it in the background.  Seeing the liberal groups and the communist organizations that have rallied to the defense of an Islamic holy man attached to a third-tier terror watch list has been unnerving because Sheriff Jones’ adherence to law and order has forced those voices to reveal too much about themselves.  And to show the rest of the world how hostile to peace and Western civilization that they really are, including popular publications as Rolling Stone magazine.  Knowing Sheriff Jones as I do, I know he shares with me a genuine desire to have a law-and-order society, especially on the topic of illegal immigration.  He and I have been advocates for better border security for over 20 years.  And finally, with the Trump administration, there is someone committed to the cause.  And Sheriff Jones is undoubtedly ready to step in and do what he can to make that border security successful.  And it was great that he drew that line in the sand under tremendous pressure from the Governor’s office in Ohio to push chaos away and hold the line.  This has a lot to do with why so many people enjoy success in Butler County, because there are great police officers there who keep the evil people hiding in the shadows.  And under the Trump administration, they are finally willing to enter those shadows and arrest the characters hiding there.  And there will be a lot more good to come.  However, for now, Sheriff Jones has Ayman Soliman in the Butler County Jail, which is beneficial for all of us, including him. It’s much better than the treatment he will get in Egypt for reasons they understand best.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Lisa Cook is Cooked: Fire the Federal Reserve

Lisa Cook deserves to be fired by President Trump for her mortgage fraud issues on three properties she claimed as her primary residence.  Cook was one of 7 Board of Governors for the Federal Reserve, and was appointed by Biden to bring even more Keynesian economics to a micromanaging Fed that doesn’t need it.  Trump, as our elected president, is trying to ignite a red-hot economy, which he has been successful in doing, and the Fed has been in the way with its fake interest rate levels.  Fake because, as we have been talking about, the Fed does not deserve the kind of independence it insists on, which is the key premise Lisa Cook has in her lawsuit against Trump. She has been serving a 14-year term, which she believes to be an entitlement.  So it’s time to shake things up and start going after these people, even if it’s just for spitting on the sidewalk.  Any ethical scrutiny should be applied to the Fed Board of Governors and the bank presidents who are part of the Fed regarding their involvement in our currency management.  And a Board of Governors member of the Fed who gets involved in outright mortgage fraud is more than fair game for termination.  And any others like Lisa Cook, who is engaged similarly.  I have not traditionally been an anti-Fed person, unlike Ron Paul, who has been advocating for this stance for an extended period.  I liked Alan Greenspan as a chairman back in the day, and I think there are opportunities for proper management of a nation’s currency.  However, the Fed has turned out to be a disaster, exposed even more by the strong economy of Trump, just a half year in. For the second quarter, real gross domestic product increased at an annual rate of 3.3%.  Unemployment remains steady at 4.1%, and inflation stands at 2.4%.  But it could be better, a lot better, if the Fed weren’t in the way. 

The Fed Chairman, currently Jerome Powell, is more of a token position appointed by the president to serve as a kind of press secretary for the Fed in general.  The 7 Board of Governors and the Federal Reserve Bank Presidents hold most of the power on monetary policy.  And those Governors are appointed as well by the President.  In this case, it was Biden who appointed Cook, a well-known Keynesian economist.  It is, I would say, nearly impossible to get through college and not be exposed to Keynesian ideas.  Most experts in economics share the same views because they were all taught the same flawed theories.  I had the same exposure in college, and I never liked it.  Unless an economist reads widely, they don’t have access to free-market thoughts in economics emerging from the university system.  That made Cook dangerous as an appointment by a Biden administration that was never really in control of itself.  Biden was out of touch and was put in office through election fraud.  And he was old and always sleeping, giving a bunch of 20-year-old kids the ability to run his presidency through an autopen.  So, it was a perilous time that led to Cook being in office in the first place.  And her nature was exposed through this mortgage fraud issue that gives Trump a perfect off-ramp to correct that position, which is so critical to monetary policy.  We need more free market contributions to our economy.  Not more central planners who choke off economic activity to protect centralized bankers with more security at the expense of innovation. 

It is a tall order to eliminate the Fed, given its dubious creation in 1913, but not impossible. In that case, the best scrutiny is reserved for this Board of Governors, because the trick is to let people believe they are managing the Fed by electing a president who then appoints the Chairman and the Governors.  However, after that appointment, the Fed expects independence from any further scrutiny, and Lisa Cook believes that, as a member of that mighty inner circle, she was immune to any job performance standard.  So getting rid of her is suitable for the short-term message that the Fed is on the clock, and that there is an expectation of performance.  Trump has every right to fire her, and that shock wave needs to happen in all its glory.  Because there are numerous other characters involved in the Fed who abuse their power and often cover it up, managing money should be the top priority in any government. However, as it is now in America, we are tied to globalism and many socialist and communist governments through central and international banking, which really drags down the American economy in unhealthy ways.  And Trump is challenging their ability to hold back our economy with phony interest rates meant to cover massive corruption that has taken place through voluminous temptations to print money through quantitative easing disconnected from the gold standard.  The Fed cannot be allowed to print a large amount of cash, launder it through Wall Street, and conceal the devaluation behind high interest rates, thereby engaging in a global micromanagement of money.  The hint at the problem is in Lisa Cook’s fundamental issue.  If she is willing to commit mortgage fraud by lying about her primary residence. What would she be willing to do in a much more serious situation, such as managing American finances and avoiding the power structure of global Marxists who seek consolidated international power through the banks? 

The premise of Lisa Cook’s very arrogant lawsuit against the Trump administration is primarily the issue of independence.  That an American president can’t tamper with the Fed, that managing money must be bigger than the whims of American election cycles.  That arrangement is only suitable for international bankers who don’t want the politics of individual countries to wreck their grip on global currency.  We need accountability with the Fed in America, and a lot more of it.  So Trump can appoint members to the Board of Governors—he can also fire them.  And he should whenever possible.  If they stumble a bit, as Lisa Cook did, throw them out and make a big deal about it.  Punish them.  However, don’t let them think they are entitled to the job, as is evident from Lisa Cook’s lawsuit.  She believes her appointment by an illegal president shields her from social scrutiny, and it does not.  The answer to many of the world’s problems is greater accountability, especially at the Federal Reserve.  We need to abolish the Federal Reserve and have Congress directly involved in the coining of money, as outlined in the Constitution.  They should never have punted the task to these truly evil, centralized bankers with international interests.  The Fed was an experiment at best.  And while we have that debate, the first step is to manage the members who are already there, and let people get to know who they are and what they do.  And Lisa Cook has shown a tendency toward corruption, even if it’s lying about a primary residence.  Little lies indicate a propensity to commit bigger lies, so Trump was right to fire her.  Hopefully, soon, many more like her will follow. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Woke Museums of Washington D.C.: Why the Museum of the Bible is different

I’m sure I will visit the new museum that just opened in Cairo, Egypt, which cost over a spectacular $ 1 billion.  I love museums and have been to several around the world.  They are to me like books that tell a story about a significant moment in history, and there are always interesting things to consider in the context of a museum that assembles information to put forth a point of view.  I’m sure the new one in Egypt will be fantastic.  However, in that context, the Museum Center in Cincinnati, I think, is great as well, and it’s a place I like to visit frequently for many of the same reasons.  However, for me personally, the Museum of the Bible is a very special place in Washington, D.C., and one of my favorite destinations.  There are many great museums in Washington, D.C., including the Smithsonian and the National Geographic Museum, both of which are located there.  So when President Trump called out the various woke museums like the Smithsonian as targeted to change their ways as part of his reform of Washington D.C. culture, what is he talking about?  And I would point to the Museum of the Bible as the answer, as it was created by very passionate people, such as the ownership of Hobby Lobby and many others, who put forth a lot of effort to make the place really something special.  But why was it so much better than the other area museums for which Washington, D.C. is known?  Well, it all comes down to wokeness and how modern political spins on information provided tend to water down the experience for everyone.  And people don’t like it.  However, the Museum of the Bible is remarkably free of any woke influences, and this is noticeable upon entering and leaving, a place that has truly captured the spirit of what a museum should be and the impact a good one can have on visitors. 

The Museum of the Bible is just a few blocks away from Capitol Hill and the Mall, home to many well-known museums.  But on the way to it, when walking through the parking garage just to the west of the main entrance, a woman of color was in the elevator with my wife and me, and she noticed a particular glow of enthusiasm from us, and she asked about it.  “You guys are going to the Museum of the Bible,” she asked, smiling.  “Well, yes, we are as a matter of fact,” I said.  “How did you know?”  She was smiling, but she was a rough-looking, large woman with neck tattoos who looked like she had been living in an urban jungle for quite some time.  However, she said that the Museum of the Bible was her favorite place and that she was happy for us to experience it.  Now this wasn’t just a bunch of people happy about a museum dedicated to a religious experience.  The Museum of the Bible is dedicated to the most significant literary achievement ever produced on earth.  But it’s the way it’s presented that carries the most significance toward lasting appeal and makes it more than just another museum for most people.  I was very impressed with it.  It wasn’t trying to convince me of anything, as most museums saturated with wokeness do.  It was just proud of what it was, and it offered to let people share in that pride without pretension.  It enables you to enjoy it for all its glory without further explanation. 

And that’s what makes The Museum of the Bible special: it lacks woke references.  It wasn’t about being close to God or unashamed of biblical references that the outside world might attempt to impose on free minds.  It was authentic and put together with a genuine love of the subject, and was just a bit more than the usual museum because of it.  The displays are good, but more than that, the architecture, down to the kind of paint used, was very well put together.  The people working there came across as genuinely loving the place; they weren’t just workers fulfilling mandates for a paycheck.  I also noticed that the museum in the basement of the Capitol Building had just been reopened, and it was really good, which surprised me coming out of a recent Biden administration where wokeness was a big issue.  It was a nice museum, and my wife and I spent a lot of time there watching votes from the House on the big screens in real time.  It was put together well by people obviously passionate about the subject matter.  So the common theme here is not religious, but passion.  And once propaganda of a modern political nature is infused into the subject, people have a natural revulsion to it.  That is one of the significant criticisms of the Smithsonian and National Geographic, which have been trying to present a Charles Darwin view of science, despite evidence pointing to many other contributing factors.  It’s the authenticity of the presentation that elevates sentiment to a higher status.  And woke presentations that are filled with modern political propaganda are something that people naturally reject.  Evidence is what museums put forth.  However, interpreting that evidence in a way that advances a political narrative, if the public is not naturally inclined to agree, is a sure way to push people away, which is what has recently happened to Cracker Barrel and many other trusted commercial endeavors that have tried to embrace woke trends.  The public naturally rejects them.

The Smithsonian and National Geographic are both dedicated to science, which I love to see.  But they are terribly woke and progressive.  And the Smithsonian has been accused of censoring evidence, such as the massive amount of evidence that giant skeletons in the mounds of North America indicate a society that predates what many call Native Americans.  The real native Americans go back much further than the Indians of modern politics, and people can smell a phony that the Smithsonian is trying to steer evidence toward a political sentiment, and that is the case that America was built on stolen land from indigenous people.  And rather than let the evidence tell the story for itself, the museum tells you a fake story, and you are supposed to accept it.  And museums that push civil rights issues from a Democrat perspective, when it was Democrats who were slave owners and it was Republicans who stopped slavery, come across as phony because the material presented attempts to glaze over the facts that are culturally well known.  And that is why woke doesn’t work and why Trump is pushing woke behavior away from everything he can, especially woke museums like the Smithsonian.  America has a rich history, and museums should tell the story without the desire to steer the public in a direction that validates certain political views.  If there were giants on Earth in the form of very tall people, predating what we call “Indians,” then let’s discuss that and examine the evidence.  However, suppose we propose something that contradicts logic. In that case, the public will be uncomfortable and even resistant to enjoying it, which is the problem with ‘woke’ everywhere it is presented, in music, movies, restaurants, and even museums.  Wokeness as a propaganda tool was never going to work, and when we see things like The Museum of the Bible, which is wonderfully woke-free, we reward them with our time and attention.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Jennifer Gross Goes to Washington: The importance of redistricting

When I say that Jennifer Gross is not very well-liked, I mean it in the manner of a compliment.  I think it’s a great asset to have people who don’t like you or who are very angry when your name is brought up.  Many people certainly dislike President Trump.  And I would say that I am one of the most hated people in the world.  People typically like you when you do what they want you to do, and their acceptance of you in some way is the way they gain leverage over your authenticity.  So, that makes Jennifer Gross an effective politician in a dynamic intellectual sense, where a static order has to compete, and they don’t like it.  In Ohio, Jennifer is my Representative in the 45th district, and she works hard to do so; I appreciate people who work hard.  And in the course of that work, she found herself in Washington, D.C. with Lee Zeldon, director of the EPA under Trump’s administration, asking questions directly to him about an issue I have been very concerned with regarding the EPA.  I would say that among Trump supporters and people who dislike RINOs, Jennifer Gross is very popular, so it depends on the crowd and what they want out of relationships, which often determines likeability.  I believe cordial relationships can be a liability.  However, it was interesting to hear about Jennifer’s trip to Washington, D.C., where she met with several Trump administration officials, including RFK, over MAHA issues.  So, once her plan was in place, Jennifer and I discussed a number of topics that we would typically talk about.  However, for this audience, I happened to record it so that others could share in the experience.  And, as much as I am concerned about the EPA issue, the conversation we had, which came straight from the Trump administration, was about the need for redistricting. 

The primary thing that Jennifer wanted to tell me about the Trump administration was that they weren’t a bunch of phonies.  The people working for Trump were all successful individuals in their own right, who could take or leave other politicians.  Jennifer can relate because she has always been very independent when it comes to politics, and that makes it hard for her to deal with when it comes to deal-making.  Much of politics is a collaborative effort, and I know several people I would call good friends who spend a lot of time collaborating with other politicians, only to accomplish a fraction of their wants and needs individually.  But that’s part of the process, and one of the reasons I thought the Trump presidency would be a good thing was his self-control over his wealth and ability to walk away from anything he didn’t like.  And his administration is very much the real deal, and Jennifer was pleased to report that they were not a bunch of phonies like we often learn people really are once these political campaigns are over.  So she couldn’t wait to tell me how authentic people like Lee Zeldon, Secretary Kennedy, and Commerce Secretary Lutnick were in real life.  It’s not usual to have people like this in any administration, and to meet them in real life after the honeymoon is over for Trump, doing everyday work, it was good to hear that they are everything they say they are.  Politically, many people dislike them as well, but, as all successful people must learn, that comes with the territory. 

The primary concern on everyone’s mind is the fairness of redistricting, so that Republicans can have more seats in Congress.  There are a few that we can pick up in Ohio, and several other states. The Trump administration is playing hardball on this issue, as it should.  Trump is right, Republicans should not play nice with Democrats over any election issues.  If we genuinely want a representative republic, which is what we are, we must trust the American people to choose who they want to represent them.  Not what a party wants us to adopt for their convenience.  That’s where things get tricky with playing nice to get along, and being a stick to poke in the eye of those who are too quick to compromise.  My point in the matter is that there is room for people like Jennifer Gross in politics and room for plenty of mainstreamers who enjoy the process of collaboration, if we didn’t have such a close margin of majorities.  I think that if we had guarded our elections more closely, there would be 60-plus Republican votes in the Senate and over +50 in Congress.  It is only close in America because of election fraud, and Democrat gerrymandering for many years has given them the appearance of a 50/50 country, when actually it’s a long way from being so.  Democrats are a minority party at best, filled with misfits and broken toys.  It’s one thing to have compassion for their poor state.  It’s quite another to have them destroy our entire society to appear fair.  In Ohio, there are 15 congressional seats, and Republicans have 10 of them.  There are opportunities in Ohio to improve upon that, and without question, Republicans should.  Don’t listen to the cries of Democrats, play hardball and defeat them everywhere. 

And if we did that, as Republicans, the world would be a lot better off.  As Jennifer and I discussed after her trip to Washington, fairness, or the appearance of it, often leads to inauthentic corruption, and righteous representation usually falls by the wayside as people who pay money for representation in the form of lobbyists end up running our government from the shadows.  And that is what we have been trying to get away from.  It’s what I always hoped would be the case from independently wealthy people like Trump, Secretary Lutnick, Zeldon, and Kennedy —that they would do the job for the right reasons. They could make a lot of money if they weren’t in politics.  However, as successful people, they can best represent the public that needs it.  And through redistricting, we can elect more people like that in the future, which would properly represent our actual society.  We don’t have an obligation to play nice with people who want to destroy our country.  And we owe Democrats no illusion of fairness.  If we can secure an additional 20 seats for the 2026 midterms, then let’s do it.  Meanwhile, it’s good to hear that Jennifer was being treated with sincerity by the Trump administration and that doing the right things for the right reasons was more than just an empty promise by politicians who usually disappoint us.  If too many people like you, that’s usually a bad sign, and that’s the case in any level of society.  And the Trump administration couldn’t care less; they can afford to be independent of such popularity concerns.  And because of that, they can actually accomplish some things.  Based on Jennifer’s report, they are willing to do the work and are solid in the promise category.  And these days, that is a scarce commodity.  One area we could significantly improve if we were more aggressive with redistricting. 

Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707