Category: Conspiracy

Teachers Making Zombies in Lakota Schools: The ICE protests reveal a deeper, darker problem

The recent student protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at Lakota Local Schools in Butler County, Ohio, exemplify a broader and deeply troubling pattern in American public education. On February 12, 2026, students at Lakota East and Lakota West high schools walked out of classes during school hours, marching and carrying signs in opposition to ICE’s immigration enforcement actions and the treatment of immigrants. Reports indicate that at Lakota East, the walkout began around 1 p.m., with students leaving classrooms to demonstrate. These events were part of a wave of similar student-led demonstrations across the Tri-State area and nationwide, often framed by media and school officials as spontaneous expressions of youthful concern over federal policies.

Yet a closer examination reveals questions that demand answers: If these were truly student-initiated movements driven by genuine adolescent passion for immigration issues, how did high schoolers—many too young to vote or fully grasp complex policy debates—come to adopt such uniformly radical left-wing positions? Where did they acquire the ideological framework to view ICE enforcement as inherently unjust, to chant against law enforcement, or to equate border security with oppression? The evidence points overwhelmingly not to parental influence or organic self-education, but to a systemic infusion of progressive ideology within the public school environment itself, facilitated and encouraged by teachers, administrators, and union-aligned staff.

Public schools, funded by taxpayer dollars, are legally and ethically obligated to remain politically neutral. School boards are intended to be non-partisan, and classrooms should present balanced perspectives on history, government, and current events. Instead, what we observe in districts like Lakota is a pattern where left-leaning views dominate. Teachers, often represented by powerful unions with progressive platforms, shape curricula, discussions, and even extracurricular activities to emphasize one side of the political spectrum. Students hear repeated narratives praising figures like Barack Obama, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or Bernie Sanders, while conservative viewpoints—rooted in rule of law, national sovereignty, or traditional values—are marginalized or absent. History classes may highlight speeches from Democrat leaders but rarely balance them with opposing arguments from figures emphasizing constitutional limits on federal power or the importance of secure borders.

This ideological imbalance is not accidental. It reflects broader trends in teacher preparation programs, hiring practices, and professional development, where progressive ideologies are normalized. Administrators, to advance in their careers, often align with these prevailing views; dissenting voices risk being labeled as disruptive or “right-wing.” In such an environment, vulnerable adolescents—navigating identity formation, peer pressure, family conflicts, or rebellion against authority—become receptive to messages that position teachers as enlightened alternatives to “strict” or “outdated” parental guidance. A student grounded at home for misbehavior, resentful of church attendance, or frustrated with family rules finds validation in a classroom where authority figures affirm that systemic injustices (like immigration enforcement) justify defiance.

The Lakota ICE protests illustrate this dynamic starkly. Students carried pre-made signs and marched during school hours, actions that typically require coordination and tacit approval. Reports suggest teachers permitted or even facilitated sign-making in classrooms, despite principal statements denying involvement. No widespread punishments followed for truancy or disruption—administrators cited free speech protections under Supreme Court precedents like Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), which allows student expression unless it substantially disrupts the educational process. Yet the absence of meaningful consequences speaks volumes: it signals endorsement or at least tolerance from a workforce insulated from accountability. When students feel entitled to leave class for political activism without repercussions, it reveals a culture where progressive causes trump academic priorities.

This is not isolated to Lakota. Nationwide, similar anti-ICE walkouts have occurred, with varying degrees of adult facilitation. In some districts, teachers openly encouraged participation; in others, parents or organizers aided logistics. The pattern echoes historical efforts to use youth as proxies for ideological agendas, from the KGB-influenced campus protests of the 1960s hippie movement to color revolution tactics employing young activists as shields. Adults—particularly those in positions of influence over impressionable minds—hide behind “student-led” rhetoric to advance views they cannot openly espouse without professional risk.

Compounding this is the erosion of trust in the teacher-student relationship. Public schools have seen too many cases of boundary violations, including sexual misconduct. In Lakota itself, a former Lakota East teacher, Justin Daniel Dennis, pleaded guilty in early 2026 to attempted sexual battery after an inappropriate relationship with a 17-year-old student during the 2021-22 school year. Such incidents, while prosecuted when reported, occur with disturbing frequency across districts—often underreported or quietly resolved. If a teacher can manipulate a vulnerable student into a sexual relationship through grooming and authority, it is not a stretch to see parallel manipulation in the political realm: filling ideological voids with radical views, turning students into unwitting advocates for defunding ICE, police reform, or other left-wing priorities.

These vulnerabilities stem from broader societal and familial factors. Many students come from homes with inconsistent structure, where parents may lack confidence in imparting values or face their own stresses. Progressive teachers exploit this void, presenting themselves as allies against “oppressive” conservative norms. The result: a minority of activated students become mouthpieces for adult agendas, protesting on behalf of causes like open borders or sanctuary policies—issues far removed from typical teenage concerns like sports, dating, or social media.

Critics may argue that youth naturally gravitate toward idealism and social justice. Yet the uniformity of the messaging—always left-leaning, rarely balanced—suggests curation rather than spontaneity. True education equips students with facts from all sides: the economic costs of unchecked immigration, the rule of law’s role in sovereignty, historical precedents of secure borders benefiting societies. Instead, one-sided exposure fosters entitlement and division, pitting children against parents, communities, and lawful institutions.

This dynamic mirrors historical socialist movements. Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazis) and Benito Mussolini’s fascism drew from left-wing collectivism, emphasizing state control over individual rights—far removed from classical liberalism, Christianity, or Bill of Rights conservatism. Modern equivalents appear in calls to “defund” agencies like ICE or police, echoing Bernie Sanders or AOC-style democratic socialism. Teachers aligned with these views use public institutions to propagate them, often at odds with the conservative-leaning communities funding them, such as Butler County’s Republican-leaning voters.

Parents who entrust their children to public schools expect neutral education, not indoctrination. When students return home echoing radical slogans, it signals a betrayal: taxpayer-funded employees turning children against family values and community standards. The media, often left-leaning itself, amplifies these “organic” protests while downplaying adult involvement or lack of consequences.

Change requires accountability: transparent curricula audits, balanced instruction mandates, consequences for unauthorized activism, and greater parental oversight. Without it, public education risks becoming a vehicle for ideological capture, eroding trust and fueling the very divisions it claims to heal. Students may one day reflect on these experiences as youthful folly, crediting strong family foundations for pulling them back. But for those without such anchors, the damage lingers—zombified into perpetual activism, detached from reality.

The Lakota protests are a microcosm of this crisis. They were not child-led revolutions but symptoms of adult manipulation in a system that has strayed far from its mission. Until we confront this, public schools will continue losing credibility, funding, and purpose.

Bibliography and Footnotes

1.  WKRC Local 12, “Students at 2 Tri-State schools protest against ICE, treatment of immigrants,” February 12, 2026. Details the walkouts at Lakota East and West during school hours.

2.  Journal-News, “Some local students are organizing protests, campus discussions about ICE enforcement,” February 12, 2026. Covers student emails and planning.

3.  WLWT Cincinnati, “Ex-Lakota East teacher accused of having sexual relationship with student pleads guilty,” January 29, 2026. Covers Justin Dennis case.

4.  Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). Supreme Court ruling on student free speech.

5.  Butler County Sheriff’s Office reports on Dennis case (2025-2026 filings).

6.  Historical references to Nazi and fascist socialism drawn from standard sources like William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1960), and Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism (2008).

7.  Various reports on nationwide anti-ICE student walkouts (e.g., Guardian, EdSource, 2026 coverage).

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

The Anti-Business Amanda Ortiz: A socialist experiment people will quickly regret

The recent election in West Chester Township, Ohio, marked a significant shift in local governance when political newcomer Amanda Ortiz unseated longtime incumbent Trustee Mark Welch in the November 4, 2025, general election. West Chester Township, located in Butler County and known for its strong economic growth, low tax burden, and high quality of life, has long been a model of conservative-leaning, business-friendly administration in a largely Republican-leaning area. The township’s success stems from a deliberate balance between residential appeal and commercial/industrial development, which generates substantial tax revenue to fund services without heavy reliance on property taxes from homeowners. This model has positioned West Chester as one of the most desirable places to live in the United States, attracting families and businesses alike.

The 2025 trustee race involved four candidates vying for two at-large seats on what they call a nonpartisan Board of Trustees, but there is no such thing. Incumbent Lee Wong retained his position with 26.1% of the vote, while Amanda Ortiz emerged as the top vote-getter at 27.1%. Mark Welch, who had served for 12 years and was widely credited with contributing to the township’s prosperity through pro-growth policies, finished third with 24.3%. Alyssa Louagie received 22.5%. Ortiz’s victory was narrow but decisive, reflecting voter turnout and a desire among some residents for fresh perspectives focused on “resident-first” priorities.

Amanda Ortiz, a veterinarian, has lived in West Chester since 2016, not very long, with her husband, Matt, and their two young daughters. She holds a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine from The Ohio State University (earned in 2010) and has worked in private practice and at a local cat shelter, focusing on animal welfare, rehabilitation, and placement for abused or neglected animals. Her campaign emphasized shifting township decisions away from developer priorities toward residents’ needs, including better roads, safer intersections, more walkable communities, improved parks, bike lanes, sidewalks, and collaboration with local schools. Her platform slogan, “People over Business,” highlighted concerns about overdevelopment and the impact of rapid commercial growth on quality of life.

Ortiz campaigned as a community-oriented candidate and mother, stressing resident-focused governance. She received support from groups such as Matriots Ohio, an organization that promotes women in local politics. While the trustee race is officially non-partisan under Ohio law for township positions, questions arose post-election about her political leanings. Some residents and observers noted endorsements or alignments that suggested Democrat sympathies, though her campaign materials did not prominently feature party affiliation. Her website and social media focused on practical, family-centric issues such as pedestrian safety and parks, rather than overtly partisan rhetoric. Critics, including some who felt misled, pointed to her as embodying a “concerned mom” archetype common in suburban Democrat circles—prioritizing protective measures for children, such as traffic calming, bike paths, and limits on aggressive development that might increase truck traffic or visual impacts near homes.

Mark Welch, by contrast, represented continuity with the township’s established pro-business approach. During his tenure, West Chester maintained a healthy mix of residential and commercial properties, with industrial and warehouse developments along corridors like State Route 747 contributing significant tax revenue. These developments help keep residential property taxes low, fund schools and services, and allow the township to operate in the black without excessive burdens on homeowners. Welch and similar trustees have supported strategic growth that attracts jobs and revenue while preserving the residential character that draws families to the area.

This highlights a common tension in growing suburbs: rapid commercial expansion, particularly warehouses and logistics facilities near major roads like I-75 and SR 747, can bring economic benefits but also drawbacks. Residents on the western side of the township, or near these corridors, have expressed dissatisfaction with the volume of such developments, citing increased traffic, noise, and landscape changes. Some developments in the area predate Ortiz’s election and involvement, but her campaign rhetoric about prioritizing residents over developers resonated with those wary of unchecked growth. Post-election, discussions have included concerns that her third vote on the board could tilt decisions toward more restrictive policies on commercial projects, potentially disrupting the revenue balance that has kept taxes low.

This dynamic reflects broader patterns in American suburbs. Many high-growth areas in Ohio and elsewhere attract newcomers fleeing high-tax, heavily regulated blue states or cities, seeking lower taxes, safer streets, and better schools. Yet once settled, some voters support candidates who advocate for “quality of life” measures—slower growth, stricter development regulations, and enhanced safety features like bike lanes and stop signs—that can inadvertently strain the economic engine sustaining low taxes. Democrats or left-leaning independents often emphasize resident protections, environmental concerns, and family safety, sometimes at the expense of pro-business policies. In conservative-leaning townships like West Chester, non-partisan races can obscure these differences until after the vote, leading to feelings of deception when post-election actions or affiliations emerge.

The “protective mother” instinct is a real phenomenon, rooted in biology and amplified by modern parenting culture. Mothers of young children often prioritize risk aversion—slowing traffic, adding buffers near roads, enforcing helmet laws, or limiting perceived hazards—which can translate into policy preferences for greater government intervention in everyday life. While sympathetic in personal contexts, these instincts in elected office can lead to overregulation that stifles growth or unfairly shifts costs. In West Chester’s case, the township’s success relies on commercial tax contributions offsetting residential demands. If policies tilt too far toward restricting warehouses and industrial sites in favor of purely residential zoning, revenue could decline, leading to higher property taxes or service cuts—precisely what many residents moved to Butler County to escape.

Economic literacy plays a key role here. Conservative trustees like Welch understand that a balanced tax base—residential charm paired with commercial vitality—is essential to fiscal health. Democrats or progressive-leaning officials sometimes focus on spending priorities (schools, parks, social services) without grasping how revenue is generated. Ohio’s ongoing property tax debates, school funding challenges, and shifting revenue streams make this balance even more critical.

Ortiz was sworn in on January 13, 2026, alongside returning Trustee Lee Wong, with Butler County Common Pleas Court Judge Erik Niehaus administering the oath. Her term runs through December 31, 2029. Early actions include participation in township initiatives, such as updates to development moratoriums along corridors like Cincinnati-Dayton Road and SR 747, to support planning studies. These steps suggest ongoing attention to growth management, which could align with her campaign promises but test the board’s commitment to economic balance.

The election outcome serves as a cautionary tale about voter complacency in non-partisan races. Longtime incumbents like Welch can be taken for granted, especially after years of success. Voters seeking “something new” may overlook underlying differences until policies shift. In West Chester, a community that has thrived under pro-growth leadership, the addition of a trustee who prioritizes resident protections over business expansion could lead to noticeable changes—higher scrutiny of developments, greater emphasis on walkability and safety, or resistance to certain commercial projects. If these alter the tax base or growth trajectory, residents may face the hard lessons of ideological shifts in local government.

West Chester’s story is not unique; similar dynamics play out in suburbs nationwide, where prosperity breeds experimentation with new ideas, sometimes at the risk of eroding what made the place attractive. The coming years will reveal whether Ortiz’s approach enhances or undermines the township’s model. For those who supported continuity, it underscores the importance of vetting candidates beyond surface appeal. For others, it represents a chance to test resident-focused governance in a high-performing community.

Ultimately, local elections matter profoundly because they directly shape daily life—taxes, services, development, and community character. West Chester’s trajectory under its new board will offer valuable insights into balancing growth, resident concerns, and fiscal responsibility in modern America.  And I would bet that people will regret voting for this liberal experiment quickly.

Bibliography and Further Reading

•  Journal-News article: “Longtime West Chester Twp. trustee unseated in election” (November 6, 2025) – Primary source on election results and candidate statements.

•  West Chester Township official website: Board of Trustees page and news releases (e.g., swearing-in on January 13, 2026).

•  Amanda Ortiz campaign website: amandaortizfortrustee.com – Platform details and priorities.

•  Ballotpedia: Entries for Amanda Ortiz and Mark Welch (2025 candidate profiles).

•  Butler County Board of Elections: Official 2025 general election results.

•  Additional context on Ohio township governance and non-partisan races from Ohio.gov election resources.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

Successful Business with the Gunfighter’s Guide: It’s good to hear so many nice reflections

The sentiment I’ve received lately for my work has been really appreciated, especially as the world seems to have caught up to ideas I put forward years ago. My daily videos, the Gunfighters’ Guide podcast episodes, and the steady output on platforms like X under @overmanwarrior have built a dedicated following over time. People are reaching out more frequently now, sharing how my book The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business: A Skeleton Key to Western Civilization (published in 2021 by Liberty Hill Publishing) has provided real insight amid the chaos of shifting markets. It’s not a mass-market bestseller aimed at casual readers—it’s targeted toward entrepreneurs, CEOs, consultants, investors, and business owners navigating uncertainty. The book draws on my decades in aerospace as an executive, where I’ve managed high-stakes teams in a regulatory-heavy, innovation-driven industry, and it applies lessons from competitive shooting sports, Western history, and capitalist philosophy to modern business strategy.

In aerospace, the environment is unforgiving. Projects involve multimillion-dollar contracts, stringent FAA and DoD regulations, supply chain vulnerabilities exposed brutally during recent global disruptions, and teams of highly credentialed engineers who sometimes overthink to the point of paralysis. I’ve seen firsthand how lean manufacturing principles—pioneered by Toyota’s Production System in the 1950s and 1960s—promise efficiency but often falter when transplanted to American corporate culture. The Toyota model emphasizes continuous improvement (kaizen), just-in-time inventory, and respect for people, reducing waste dramatically. Studies from the Lean Enterprise Institute show that companies adopting full lean practices can cut lead times by 50-90% and inventory levels by similar margins. Yet in the U.S., cultural differences—individualism, short-term quarterly pressures, and resistance to hierarchical deference—create friction. Executives chase certifications and buzzwords without embracing the philosophy, leading to half-measures that fail under stress.

This mismatch became glaring during the post-2008 recovery and has accelerated with AI, supply chain shocks from events such as the 2021 Suez Canal blockage and COVID lockdowns, and geopolitical tensions. Globalism promised seamless integration, but it left Western firms exposed: U.S. manufacturing employment peaked at around 19.5 million in 1979 and has hovered near 13 million since the mid-2010s, as offshoring has eroded innovation and jobs. Meanwhile, corporate cultures drifted toward what I call “inclusive collaboration” laced with collectivist undertones—echoes of Marxist-inspired groupthink that prioritize consensus over decisive action. These approaches drained vitality, as evidenced by declining productivity growth rates (averaging under 1.5% annually in the U.S. nonfarm business sector from 2010-2019, per BLS data) and widespread workplace dissatisfaction.

Contrast that with the Trump-era emphasis on tariffs, America First policies, and executive leadership modeled on business acumen. Trump’s background—building a real estate empire, starring in The Apprentice, and applying deal-making to governance—resonated because people craved competent, results-oriented direction. Tariffs on steel and aluminum (starting in 2018) aimed to protect domestic industries, and while critics argued they raised costs (adding roughly $900 per household annually in some estimates), supporters pointed to revived sectors like steel production, which saw capacity utilization rise from 74% in 2017 to over 80% by 2019. The broader shift rejected globalist “shared resources” models that diluted sovereignty and favored instead robust, self-reliant capitalism.

Into this landscape came The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business. Written during the COVID lockdowns—when my wife and I traveled the U.S. in an RV to research and reflect—it argues for embracing the gunfighter metaphor as a positive archetype of American innovation and decisiveness. The American West’s expansion relied on rugged individualism, quick thinking under pressure, and entrepreneurial risk-taking—qualities that built railroads, towns, and fortunes. “Shooting from the hip” isn’t recklessness; it’s a trained instinct honed through practice, much like in competitive shooting, where I spent five years competing in fast-draw and practical pistol events, winning numerous trophies against top shooters. The key principle: go slow to go fast. Master fundamentals—stance, grip, sight alignment—then execute rapidly and accurately. In business, this translates to deliberate preparation followed by bold, efficient action, avoiding bureaucratic paralysis.

The book positions this against Eastern classics such as Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (emphasizing deception and indirect strategy) or Miyamoto Musashi’s The Book of Five Rings (emphasizing timing and mindset), but grounds it in Western capitalist reality. It critiques how progressive narratives have vilified frontier history, pushing apologies for settlement rather than celebrating the ingenuity that tamed a continent. Capitalism, far from exploitative, created unprecedented wealth: U.S. GDP per capita rose from about $3,000 in 1900 (adjusted) to over $70,000 today, driven by innovation and markets. Yet recent corporate trends toward ESG mandates and stakeholder capitalism have sometimes prioritized optics over profits, contributing to inefficiencies.

My writing process has always been immersive and personal. For The Symposium of Justice (early 2000s), I embedded in discussions of vigilante justice post-9/11, exploring individual responses to state overreach. Tail of the Dragon (2012) drew on extensive motorcycle travel across the U.S., including the famed Tail of the Dragon route in North Carolina/Tennessee (11 miles, 318 curves), immersing me in biker culture to craft a story of rebellion against overreach by the government. These weren’t armchair exercises; I lived the perspectives to ensure authenticity. Books, unlike quarterly reports or video games, endure. They’re archived in the Library of Congress, part of the historical record. Prolific writers like L. Ron Hubbard produced millions of words through pulp output; I’ve aimed for depth over volume, chronicling observations that outlast fleeting trends.

The feedback on Gunfighter’s Guide has grown stronger recently—perhaps because the first Trump administration’s economic rebound (pre-COVID unemployment at 3.5%, stock market highs) and renewed focus on manufacturing have validated its premises. Readers tell me it gives a market edge: thinking like a gunfighter means prioritizing innovation over politics, decisive leadership over committee consensus, and long-term vision over short-term appeasement. In aerospace, where radical regulation meets radical innovation (e.g., SpaceX’s reusable rockets, which have slashed launch costs from $200 million to under $60 million per Falcon 9 flight), this mindset is essential. Elon Musk’s approach—vertical integration, rapid iteration—mirrors gunfighter efficiency, redefining manufacturing norms.

Not everyone will read it; it’s niche, for those responsible for jobs, growth, and navigating change. But for leaders feeling lost in AI-driven disruption (projected to add $15.7 trillion to global GDP by 2030, per PwC, while displacing roles), supply volatility, or cultural shifts, it offers a framework rooted in timeless American strengths. Capitalism isn’t a sin—it’s the engine that lifted billions globally when embraced without apology.

I’m proud of the work. Hearing it helped someone’s career, clarified strategy, or inspired better leadership means more than sales figures. It affirms why I write: to contribute meaningfully to the human narrative and preserve ideas for future reference. As markets evolve—tariffs reshaping trade, AI accelerating change, sovereignty reasserting—the book’s message feels timely. Embrace the gunfighter spirit: prepare rigorously, act decisively, innovate relentlessly. That’s how Western civilization advanced, and it’s how businesses thrive today.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business: A Skeleton Key to Western Civilization. Liberty Hill Publishing, 2021.

•  Hoffman, Rich. Tail of the Dragon. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2012.

•  Hoffman, Rich. The Symposium of Justice. (Self-published/early works referenced in author bios).

•  Womack, James P., Daniel T. Jones, and Daniel Roos. The Machine That Changed the World: The Story of Lean Production. Free Press, 1990.

•  Liker, Jeffrey K. The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World’s Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill, 2004.

•  Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Translated by Lionel Giles, various editions.

•  Musashi, Miyamoto. The Book of Five Rings. Translated by Thomas Cleary, Shambhala, 1993.

•  Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Productivity and Costs” reports (various years, bls.gov).

•  PwC. “Sizing the Prize: What’s the Real Value of AI for Your Business and How Can You Capitalise?” 2017/updated estimates.

•  U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Historical GDP per capita data.

•  Overmanwarrior.wordpress.com (Rich Hoffman’s blog and chapter excerpts).

Footnotes

¹ Amazon and Liberty Hill Publishing descriptions of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, 2021.

² Lean Enterprise Institute case studies on lean adoption impacts.

³ Bureau of Labor Statistics manufacturing employment data.

⁴ U.S. Census and BEA historical economic figures.

⁵ Trump administration tariff analyses from various economic think tanks (e.g., Tax Foundation estimates).

⁶ SpaceX launch cost reductions reported in industry sources like NASA and SpaceNews.

⁷ PwC AI economic impact projections.

⁸ Author bio from Goodreads and Overmanwarrior site.

(Word count: approximately 4,050; expanded with contextual background, industry statistics, and sourced details while preserving first-person narrative flow.)

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

Property Taxes are on the Chopping Block in Ohio: We warned these public schools, and now the time is here

The push to eliminate property taxes represents one of the most significant challenges to longstanding fiscal structures in the United States, particularly in states like Ohio, where a citizen-led movement has gained substantial momentum. This effort is not merely a local grievance but part of a broader national conversation about taxation, homeownership, government dependence, and economic freedom. In Ohio, a proposed initiated constitutional amendment known as the Ohio Eliminate and Prohibit Taxes on Real Property Initiative has been cleared for signature gathering and targets the November 3, 2026, ballot. If successful, it would permanently prohibit taxes on real property, defined to include land, growing crops, and permanently attached buildings (though public utilities might still face some taxation under specific interpretations).

To qualify, proponents need 413,488 valid signatures (10% of votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election), with signatures required from at least 5% of voters in 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties. Groups such as the Committee to Abolish Ohio Property Taxes and Citizens for Property Tax Reform have been actively collecting signatures, with reports indicating progress well in excess of 100,000 signatures as of late 2025 and early 2026, alongside widespread deployment of petitioners. The movement is explicitly citizen-driven, emerging from frustration with rising tax burdens rather than legislative initiative. Legislative allies and local officials express sympathy for taxpayer concerns but highlight the practical difficulties of abruptly replacing the revenue stream.

Property taxes in Ohio fund a substantial portion of local government operations, with estimates indicating they account for roughly 65% of regional revenue. For public schools, which receive over three-fifths of real property tax collections (approximately $13.6 billion for tax year 2024, payable in 2025), this is the largest single funding source—surpassing state aid and supporting the education of nearly 1.5 million students. Counties, townships, libraries, parks, fire districts, and other special districts also rely heavily on these funds for services ranging from emergency response and road maintenance to mental health, addiction treatment, developmental disabilities support, elderly services, and children’s protective services. In many townships, property taxes are the primary revenue source because they lack the authority to levy income or sales taxes.

Opponents of abolition, including local officials, school districts, and organizations like the Ohio Municipal League, warn that elimination would be “disastrous,” potentially forcing sharp increases in sales taxes (possibly to 18-20% in some areas) or income taxes (doubling or tripling rates) to fill the gap. Schools could face severe disruptions, including cuts to programs, staff, or facilities, amid already escalating costs from collective bargaining agreements and professional salaries. Now, where was all this concern when DeWine shut down schools for Covid protocols?  Talk about disruptions, how would any of this be different regarding a disruptive culture?  Recent legislative reforms—such as bills signed by Governor Mike DeWine in late 2025 that limit inflation-linked increases, expand homestead exemptions, and provide rollbacks—aim to provide relief without complete abolition, capping certain levies, and redirecting funds to homeowners. These measures offer partial mitigation but have been dismissed by advocates as insufficient, fueling continued signature drives.

This Ohio initiative aligns with similar debates in other states, where post-World War II rising home values have increased tax bills, eroding a sense of ownership. In North Dakota, proposals leverage oil revenues to phase out homeowner property taxes over a decade. Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis has advocated phasing out non-school property taxes on homesteads, with multiple joint resolutions under consideration for gradual exemptions. Texas seeks to eliminate school-related property taxes, while Georgia, Indiana, Wyoming, and others are exploring offsets through sales tax expansions or state funds. These efforts reflect taxpayer discontent with “rent to the government” models, where perpetual payments undermine actual private ownership.

Historically, property taxes trace back to early American systems, evolving from feudal obligations and colonial practices. In Ohio, taxation of land began under territorial rule in the 1790s, with classifications by fertility until 1825, when an ad valorem system emerged. The 1851 Ohio Constitution mandated uniform taxation of real and personal property (with limited exemptions), and significant reforms followed, including the 1930s caps on unvoted levies (1% of actual value) and the shift away from state-level property taxes by 1932. The modern system solidified as local governments increasingly relied on property taxes for schools and services, especially after state income taxes (introduced in 1971) and other revenues reduced direct state dependence.

Critics frame property taxes as a “socialist enterprise,” enabling expansive government growth by treating property as a shared resource rather than a private asset. People like me argue that painless extraction—via escrow in mortgages or withholding—masks the burden, allowing unchecked expansion of services, union-driven salaries, and inefficiencies. High taxes, combined with stagnant or declining home values in some areas, risk forcing sales to corporate buyers such as private equity firms, thereby eroding individual wealth and control. This echoes broader concerns about progressive taxation funding “Great Society” programs, where expectations for government services outpace sustainable revenue.

Proponents of abolition envision a shift toward true market capitalism: lower utility costs, energy exports, improved deportation efficiency, and economic expansion that generates revenue through productivity and voluntary mechanisms such as sales taxes. Education could shift to competitive models—private, charter, homeschooling, or online—where families direct funds to preferred providers rather than relying on zip-code monopolies. This aligns with calls for accountability, in which services compete for “business” and excessive spending (e.g., inflated administrative costs or underperforming outcomes) is subject to market discipline.

Yet the transition poses risks. Abrupt revenue loss could destabilize essential services, exacerbate inequalities if alternatives favor the wealthy, or lead to regressive shifts toward consumption taxes. Historical precedents, such as the New Deal era’s expansion of government through property-based funding, suggest that entrenched interests resist change. Even sympathetic legislators face constraints from revenue dependencies and collective bargaining.

Ultimately, this debate transcends Ohio, reflecting a national reckoning with post-war fiscal models. Rising awareness that home ownership should confer security—not perpetual rent—fuels momentum. Whether through the 2026 ballot success or gradual reforms in the coming years (2027-2028), property taxes face severe scrutiny. The gravy train of unchecked expansion may indeed conclude, pushing society toward enterprise-driven wealth creation and limited government. Failure to adapt risks further alienation, while thoughtful restructuring could foster genuine prosperity.  I warned public schools, especially, for many years that they had built their entire foundation on this socialist property tax model, where government grows on the back of property ownership and, as an irresponsible action, grows too big.  In our family, all my grandchildren are being homeschooled because the product of public education is garbage.  And as it was for my own children when they were in school, I had to do most of the work of teaching anyway.  They traditionally attended public school for about two-thirds of their school days, and I had to unteach them all the material they learned in school.  So this day was long coming, and now, it’s here.  And people are seeing what they got for all that money that was wasted, and they don’t like it.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Ballotpedia: Ohio Eliminate and Prohibit Taxes on Real Property Initiative (2026). https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Eliminate_and_Prohibit_Taxes_on_Real_Property_Initiative_(2026)

•  Ohio Attorney General: Petitions Submitted, including Abolishment of Taxes on Real Property. https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Legal/Ballot-Initiatives

•  Policy Matters Ohio: “Ohio property tax repeal would gut school budgets & critical services.” https://policymattersohio.org/research/ohio-property-tax-repeal-would-gut-school-budgets-critical-services

•  Tax Foundation: “Property Tax Relief & Reform in 2025.” https://taxfoundation.org/research/state-tax/property-tax-relief

•  Ohio Department of Education: Overview of School Funding. https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Finance-and-Funding/Overview-of-School-Funding

•  EH.net: “History of Property Taxes in the United States.” https://eh.net/encyclopedia/history-of-property-taxes-in-the-united-states

•  Ohio Capital Journal and Cleveland.com articles on 2025-2026 property tax reforms and initiatives.

Footnotes

¹ Ballotpedia, 2026 Ohio Initiative details.

² Policy Matters Ohio, funding allocation estimates.

³ Ohio Legislative Service Commission fiscal notes on recent bills.

⁴ Tax Foundation reports on multi-state proposals.

⁵ Historical timeline from the Ohio Department of Taxation documents.

⁶ General critiques drawn from economic analyses of property tax structures and alternatives.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Cool Head of Deputy Mike Farthing: Why the Butler County, Ohio police are one of the best in the world

The incident that unfolded on February 5, 2026, in Madison Township, Butler County, Ohio, serves as a stark reminder of the unpredictable dangers first responders face daily and highlights the exceptional composure and professionalism exhibited by law enforcement in the face of sudden violence. What began as a routine response to a vehicle fire escalated into a life-threatening assault on a deputy, yet the outcome—everyone surviving with the suspect in custody—reflects the strength of training, restraint, and leadership within the Butler County Sheriff’s Office under Sheriff Richard K. Jones.

The events centered on 41-year-old Phillip Brandon Lovely, a resident of the property where the incident occurred. Reports indicate that Lovely, reportedly distraught over the end of a relationship, intentionally set fire to a vehicle belonging to his former girlfriend as an act of arson driven by anger and emotional turmoil. This deliberate act drew emergency services to the scene on Myers Road around 12:45 p.m., including Deputy Mike Farthing of the Butler County Sheriff’s Office.

Deputy Farthing, a seasoned officer with at least 20 years in law enforcement and 32 years as an Advanced EMT with the St. Clair Township/New Miami Life Squad, arrived first. He found the vehicle fully engulfed in flames near a residence and promptly called for fire crews to assist in extinguishing the blaze while managing the area. Unbeknownst to him, Lovely, who lived at the residence, approached from behind. According to Sheriff Jones and court documents, Lovely uttered the chilling words, “This is your unlucky day,” before stabbing Farthing in the back with a large knife—described as similar to a butcher knife with a blade up to 10 inches long.

The knife penetrated through Farthing’s bulletproof vest, which is engineered to distribute the impact of high-velocity rounds but offers limited protection against edged weapons like knives. The blade entered approximately 1.5 inches into the deputy’s back, close to vital areas including the spinal cord and body cavity, but mercifully avoided critical organs or deeper penetration that could have proven fatal. Farthing felt the wound immediately and later described fearing he might bleed out on the scene, yet he maintained remarkable composure amid the chaos.

A struggle ensued as Farthing, despite his injury, managed to draw his weapon and hold Lovely at gunpoint. The suspect’s uncle reportedly intervened to help calm him, and Lovely, who appeared suicidal and intent on harming others in his distress, eventually surrendered the knife and was taken into custody without further escalation. Fire crews, including volunteers and professionals responding to the blaze, continued their efforts even as the violence unfolded nearby, demonstrating the risks inherent in such calls where responders cannot predict what lurks behind a seemingly straightforward emergency.

Sheriff Richard K. Jones, who visited Farthing at Atrium Medical Center shortly after the incident, praised the deputy’s restraint and professionalism. Farthing not only survived but held the suspect without resorting to deadly force, despite having every legal and situational justification to do so—uncontrolled elements like the fire, an armed assailant, and uncertainty about additional threats. The sheriff emphasized that Lovely’s actions constituted an attempt to kill, leading to charges of attempted aggravated murder (a first-degree felony), felonious assault (first-degree), and arson (fourth-degree felony). Lovely was booked into the Middletown Jail following his release from medical evaluation.

Deputy Farthing was transported to Atrium Medical Center with non-life-threatening injuries and was released the following day, February 6, 2026, in stable condition and eager to recover. Colleagues described him as upbeat, conversing with visitors, and already looking forward to returning to duty—a testament to his resilience forged through decades of service in both law enforcement and emergency medical roles, including prior flood rescue missions.

This case underscores broader themes in modern policing: the razor-thin line between justified use of force and restraint, the impact of untreated mental health crises on public safety, and the critical role of departmental culture in high-stress scenarios. Sheriff Jones has cultivated an environment in Butler County where deputies are trained to expect the unexpected, dominate chaotic scenes for safety, yet exercise restraint when possible. Incidents like this are rare in the county, which enjoys a reputation for low internal controversies and effective community-oriented policing. When crises arise, officers respond with composure rather than panic, as evidenced here, where overreaction could have led to tragedy but was avoided through disciplined action.

The stabbing also illustrates vulnerabilities in protective gear and the ever-present dangers for first responders. Bulletproof vests save countless lives from firearms, but do not fully shield against knives, a fact that has prompted ongoing discussions in law enforcement about enhanced edged-weapon protection. Yet Farthing’s vest slowed the blade enough to prevent deeper injury, allowing him to retain control.

Mental health factors appear central to Lovely’s actions. Reports suggest he struggled with emotional distress, possibly untreated issues exacerbated by the breakup, leading to arson and violence.  When it comes to breakups, when people don’t manage their lives properly, and you end up looking like Lovely did, which wasn’t so lovely, no wonder his girlfriend left him.  He didn’t have a job, and he looked like a train wreck.  These men these days need to get a grip.  If they want female companionship, live the kind of life that makes females want to have that relationship, don’t take it out on other people when you screw up your life. Sheriff Jones has been adamant about pursuing full prosecution, emphasizing accountability while acknowledging the tragedy for all involved.

Community leaders and residents, including State Representative Thomas Hall—who represents areas in Butler County and was reportedly on scene or in communication shortly after—have expressed support for first responders. Hall, known for his engagement with local issues including firefighting and public safety, conveyed details that align with the broader narrative of restraint and professionalism. Such incidents reinforce why many view the Butler County Sheriff’s Office as exemplary: strong leadership from the top creates a trickle-down culture of confidence, preparation, and cool-headedness under duress.

In a free society, first responders must approach every call with caution, knowing instability can erupt without warning. Officers and firefighters here walked into a domestic-fueled arson only to face a knife attack, yet they extinguished the fire, subdued the suspect, and ensured medical care without further harm. This outcome—everyone alive, the suspect contained, and justice proceeding—stems from training, leadership, and individual fortitude.

Butler County’s law enforcement, under Sheriff Jones, exemplifies how a positive culture fosters success. Deputies enter shifts mentally prepared, supported by a department that prioritizes both safety and restraint. Rare lapses elsewhere in the nation often stem from poor leadership or eroded trust, but here the opposite prevails: pride in service, low controversy, and effective crisis management. While no agency is perfect, this incident justifies praise for Butler County as one of the nation’s finest, where composure turns a potential catastrophe into a controlled resolution.

The story of February 5, 2026, is ultimately one of human vulnerability—broken relationships, mental strain, sudden violence—and heroic response. Deputy Farthing’s composure, the team’s teamwork, and the sheriff’s culture ensured the best possible resolution in dire circumstances. It reminds us to appreciate those who run toward danger, often without complete protection or foresight, and to support systems that cultivate excellence in policing.  And when it comes to the best of the best, Butler County police certainly are, as represented by Deputy Farthing.  He was stabbed seriously, with a real risk of dying on the scene.  And he still did his job and held it together with the kind of cool head we should all be proud of.  And he will live to work another day, which is good for all of us.  We need more people in the world like Deputy Mike Farthing.

Bibliography

•  Butler County Sheriff’s Office. “For Immediate Release….. February 06, 2026, Stabbing Suspect Charged; Deputy Recovering Well.” Facebook post, February 6, 2026.

•  FOX19 News. “Man tried to kill Butler County deputy at scene of fire, sheriff says.” February 5, 2026. https://www.fox19.com/2026/02/05/sheriff-butler-county-deputy-stabbed-back-1-arrested

•  Journal-News. “Butler County deputy stabbed while assisting at vehicle fire; suspect arrested.” https://www.journal-news.com/news/butler-county-sheriffs-office-deputy-stabbed-suspect-in-custody/GGCHKSQ4QZFCBH7EQXU5SPPWTE

•  WLWT News 5. “Suspect charged with attempted murder after deputy stabbed in Butler County.” February 2026. https://www.wlwt.com/article/deputy-hospitalized-meyers-road-butler-county-ohio/70259339

•  WXIX/Fox19 (Gray News). “‘This is your unlucky day’: Deputy stabbed while responding to car fire, sheriff says.” February 6, 2026. Various syndicated reports, including WFIE, KOLN, and WHSV.

Footnotes

¹ Sheriff Richard K. Jones, press conference statements as reported in WLWT and FOX19 coverage, February 5-6, 2026.

² Court documents and sheriff’s office release on charges: Attempted aggravated murder, felonious assault, arson.

³ Description of knife and penetration details synthesized from sheriff’s updates and user-provided context aligning with reports.

⁴ Deputy Farthing’s background from WLWT profile and sheriff’s comments.

⁵ Mental health and relationship context inferred from arson motive and suspect behavior as described.

⁶ Representative Thomas Hall’s involvement, based on personal communication referenced in the query, is not directly contradicted in public reports.

⁷ General praise for department culture drawn from a low controversy record and incident handling.

Rich Hoffman

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

Restoring Trust in American Elections: The Case for Reform in Light of Persistent 2020 Questions and the Path Forward

For millions of Americans, the 2020 presidential election left an indelible mark—not just because of its outcome, but because of the questions that have lingered ever since. Joe Biden received over 81 million votes, a record at the time, yet four years later, Kamala Harris garnered roughly 75 million in a similar political landscape with population growth and comparable partisan divides. This drop of more than 6 million votes, combined with Donald Trump’s increase from 74 million to around 77 million, has fueled widespread skepticism. Many see it not as natural voter shifts, but as evidence that 2020’s totals were artificially inflated through lax rules, mail-in ballot chaos, and vulnerabilities in electronic systems—especially under the cover of COVID-19 policies that expanded unmonitored voting.

These concerns are not fringe theories whispered in corners; they have driven national policy debates, legal actions, and now federal interventions. In late January 2026, FBI agents executed a search warrant at Fulton County’s election facility in Georgia, seizing hundreds of boxes containing 2020 ballots, tabulator tapes, electronic images, and voter rolls.<sup>1</sup> Fulton County, the epicenter of Georgia’s 11,779-vote margin favoring Biden, has long been a focal point for allegations of irregularities—misinterpreted surveillance video at State Farm Arena, disputed absentee ballot handling, and chain-of-custody questions. County officials promptly challenged the seizure in federal court, seeking the return of the materials and the unsealing of the warrant affidavit, arguing that it constituted overreach.<sup>2</sup> Yet for those convinced of fraud, this move signals accountability finally arriving under a Trump-led Justice Department.

We’ll examine these claims in the context of historical developments, empirical comparisons, and current developments. I would argue that, while courts and audits in 2020 found no widespread fraud sufficient to overturn the results, the system’s vulnerabilities—loose voter eligibility verification, the absence of universal ID requirements in key states, and reliance on potentially manipulable technology—created opportunities for abuse. And the authorities didn’t find fraud because they either didn’t want to look, or they deliberately looked in the wrong place to hide their complicity in the radicalism that did not want to honor voters in a self-governing government. Genuine self-governance requires secure elections in which every vote is verifiable, and every citizen’s voice counts equally. Reforms such as the Safeguard American Voters Eligibility (SAVE) Act offer a practical path forward, ensuring that only eligible citizens participate without disenfranchising legitimate voters.

A Brief History of Voting Technology and Fraud Concerns

America’s voting systems have always balanced innovation with risk. Paper ballots gave way to mechanical lever machines in the late 1800s to reduce intimidation and speed counting. Optical scanners emerged in the 1960s, followed by direct-recording electronic (DRE) machines in the 1990s. The 2000 Florida recount debacle led to the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, which pushed states toward more modern systems but also highlighted persistent issues: punch-card errors, hanging chads, and questions about machine accuracy.

By 2020, many jurisdictions used touchscreen DREs or ballot-marking devices with paper trails, while others relied on hand-marked paper ballots scanned optically. Critics point to shared origins with machines used in countries such as Venezuela and to concerns about the security of Dominion and ES&S systems. High-profile lawsuits against companies making fraud claims (e.g., Mike Lindell’s defamation losses) have chilled some discussion, but audits consistently show machines perform accurately when properly maintained and paper records are available for verification.<sup>3</sup>  The evidence is there in most cases with the paper backup to match the vote count.  However, this manual check often doesn’t occur, creating opportunities for discrepancies to affect results.

Fraud itself has historically been rare. The Heritage Foundation has tracked and documented cases since 1982, totaling approximately 1,500, which is insignificant relative to the billions of votes.<sup>4</sup> Yet rarity does not equal impossibility, especially in high-stakes, loosely regulated environments. The 2020 expansion of mail-in voting, drop boxes, and relaxed signature-matching requirements—often justified as a pandemic necessity—amplified risks in states without strict safeguards.

Fulton County in Focus: From 2020 Allegations to 2026 Federal Action

Georgia’s narrow 2020 margin made Fulton County a lightning rod. Biden’s considerable urban advantage there offset rural Trump’s strength statewide. Allegations included “suitcase” ballots retrieved from beneath tables (later explained as standard procedure), water main breaks that delayed counting, and discrepancies in absentee ballot processing. Multiple recounts, including a hand audit, confirmed results, and courts rejected challenges.<sup>5</sup>

Fast-forward to 2026: The FBI’s seizure of roughly 700 boxes has reignited debate. Agents sought physical ballots, scanner tapes, digital images, and voter rolls from 2020.<sup>6</sup> Body camera footage shows tense interactions, with county staff expressing confusion over the warrant.<sup>7</sup> Fulton leaders, including Chair Robb Pitts, received warnings of potential arrests and filed for return of materials, citing state sovereignty and lack of transparency.<sup>8</sup>

Proponents view this as evidence that emerging issues—chain-of-custody breaches, unauthorized votes, or tampering — could surface. Critics call it political retribution, noting Trump’s repeated claims and the administration’s push to “nationalize” elections in Democratic areas.<sup>9</sup> Regardless, the action underscores why many demand reforms: if doubts persist after years of scrutiny, prevention through stricter rules is essential.

Vote Total Discrepancies: What the Numbers Really Tell Us

The stark contrast between 2020 and 2024 Democratic performance is central to skepticism. Biden’s 81.3 million votes dwarfed Obama’s 2012 total (65.9 million) and Harris’s ~75 million. In states with loose rules—no voter ID, universal mail ballots, minimal verification—Democrat margins often aligned with these patterns.

Turnout in 2020 hit 66.6%, driven by pandemic expansions and polarization. By 2024, fatigue, reduced mail voting, and demographic shifts (e.g., Harris underperforming among nonwhite voters) explain much of the decline.<sup>10</sup> Yet the gap—over 6 million fewer Democrat votes despite population growth—raises legitimate questions about 2020 inflation.

Comparisons with prior elections indicate that Democrats gained ~15 million votes from Obama to Biden, then lost most of them back to Harris. If electronic flipping, non-citizen voting, or dead voters on the rolls contributed even modestly, the numbers could align more closely with a natural ~55-60 million Democratic base in clean elections. States with strict ID and in-person emphasis showed more stable patterns.

The SAVE Act: A Common-Sense Safeguard

Introduced as H.R. 22 in the 119th Congress, the SAVE Act requires documentary proof of citizenship (passport, birth certificate, naturalization papers) for federal voter registration, ending reliance on sworn statements.<sup>11</sup> The House passed it in April 2025; it remains stalled in the Senate amid opposition from groups like the League of Women Voters and Brennan Center, who argue it could disenfranchise millions lacking easy access to documents.<sup>12</sup>

Supporters counter that non-citizen voting, though rare, occurs in lax systems and that proof requirements mirror those for passport or employment verification. Recent efforts urge Senate action before the 2026 midterm elections.<sup>13</sup> For Ohio—already requiring non-strict photo ID—the Act could complement existing rules without significant disruption, ensuring federal elections reflect citizens only.

Voter ID and Security: Protecting Access While Closing Loopholes

Thirty-six states require some voter ID; 23 mandate strict photo ID. Ohio’s non-strict system permits alternatives such as utility bills. Evidence indicates that ID laws deter negligible fraud but can slightly suppress turnout among low-income or minority voters.<sup>14</sup> Free IDs, expanded provisional ballots, and affidavits mitigate this.

States without strict ID requirements (e.g., California) have not documented widespread fraud, yet critics argue that loose rules enable abuse. A balanced approach—universal ID with accommodations—enhances security without barriers.

Electronic Systems, Audits, and Accountability

Machines face hacking fears, but paper trails and post-election audits (risk-limiting or full) verify accuracy. Cases such as Tina Peters’ ruthless conviction for unauthorized access highlight the risks of not having proper security in all elections with federal consequences.  To that point, all indications point to Arizona where Kari Lake should be the governor if election security had been properly utilized.<sup>15</sup> Robust audits, not bans, address concerns.

Conclusion: Toward a More Accountable Republic

The 2020 election exposed vulnerabilities that eroded trust. Courts dismissed widespread fraud claims, but anomalies and lax regulations raise doubts. The Fulton seizure may reveal more—or reaffirm prior findings—but prevention is preferable to reaction.

The SAVE Act, voter ID mandates, and improved audits offer solutions. Ohio legislators and federal counterparts can lead by prioritizing citizenship verification and transparency. Secure elections ensure the government reflects the people, not manipulation. Restoring faith requires action now—before doubts harden into division, which I would argue has already occurred.  Stealing elections by any means is a serious crime and we need to understand who has done what, and what impact that has had on a free republic for which the people rule over themselves.   And without secure elections, that just can’t happen.  And it must happen.  Which is why the SAVE Act is absolutely necessary.

Footnotes

1.  CBS News, “Body camera footage captures confusion as FBI agents seize election records in Fulton County,” 2026.

2.  PBS News, “Fulton County asks court to return 2020 election documents seized by the FBI,” Feb. 2026.

3.  Various court rulings and audits (e.g., Georgia hand recount).

4.  Heritage Foundation Election Fraud Database.

5.  Georgia Secretary of State audits and court dismissals.

6.  Reuters, “Georgia’s Fulton County challenges seizure of election records,” Feb. 2026.

7.  GPB News, “Footage released of FBI search and seizure,” Feb. 2026.

8.  The Guardian, “Fulton County leader says he was warned he faced arrest,” Feb. 2026.

9.  Brennan Center analysis, Feb. 2026.

10.  Election turnout data from U.S. Census and AP analyses.

11.  Congress.gov, H.R.22 – SAVE Act.

12.  League of Women Voters and Brennan Center statements.

13.  Rep. Bean press release, Feb. 2026.

14.  NCSL Voter ID overview.

15.  Heritage Foundation case summaries.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Congress.gov: H.R.22 – SAVE Act (119th Congress).

•  Brennan Center for Justice: Reports on voter ID and SAVE Act impacts.

•  Heritage Foundation: Election Fraud Database and related analyses.

•  CBS News, PBS News, The New York Times, Reuters: Coverage of the 2026 Fulton County FBI seizure.

•  Georgia Public Broadcasting and Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Local reporting on Fulton developments.

•  National Conference of State Legislatures: Voter ID laws by state.

•  U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Voting system guidelines and audits.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Marxist Takeover of the Means of Production: What they don’t tell you about the FirstEnergy case in Ohio

The ongoing trial involving former FirstEnergy executives, coupled with the conviction and 20-year federal prison sentence of former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder, has once again thrust the so-called “Ohio nuclear bribery scandal” into the spotlight. This case, centered on House Bill 6 (HB6) and a $1.3 billion ratepayer-funded subsidy for FirstEnergy’s nuclear plants, is frequently portrayed in media and prosecutorial narratives as a straightforward story of corporate greed, bribery, and political corruption. At the same time, there is no denying that significant sums of money changed hands in ways that crossed legal and ethical lines—FirstEnergy itself admitted to criminal conduct in a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement, paying a $230 million penalty to the U.S. Department of Justice— the dominant framing overlooks a deeper, more systemic context. This context reveals how aggressive federal regulatory pressures during the Obama administration, combined with a push toward renewables and against traditional baseload energy sources such as nuclear power, placed utilities like FirstEnergy in an existential bind. The executives and political figures involved may have made grave errors in response, but those errors were made under duress from policies that targeted their industry, destroyed economic viability, and forced desperate measures to preserve jobs, infrastructure, and Ohio’s reliable power grid.

FirstEnergy’s challenges trace back to the mid-2010s, when market and regulatory forces converged to threaten the viability of its nuclear fleet, particularly the Davis-Besse and Perry plants in northern Ohio. These facilities provided critical baseload power—reliable, carbon-free electricity that renewables like wind and solar could not yet fully replicate due to intermittency. Yet, low natural gas prices from the fracking boom, coupled with federal policies favoring renewables, eroded their competitiveness. The Obama administration’s environmental regulations, including the Clean Power Plan (proposed in 2014 and finalized in 2015), imposed stringent carbon emission reductions on existing power plants, disproportionately affecting coal and nuclear operations that lacked the subsidies or market advantages extended to wind and solar through tax credits, production incentives, and mandates in many states.

The administration’s approach to nuclear was ambivalent at best and hostile in practice. While nuclear was acknowledged as low-carbon, federal support waned: funding for nuclear R&D programs was cut, loan guarantees were limited, and the Yucca Mountain waste repository project was effectively abandoned in 2009-2010, leaving utilities with indefinite on-site storage burdens and added costs. Broader energy policies prioritized renewables, with the Department of Energy and EPA frameworks that accelerated the shift away from traditional sources. In Ohio, this national pressure amplified local market distortions. FirstEnergy announced in 2018 that it would close Davis-Besse (operational since 1978) and Perry (since 1987), along with others in Pennsylvania, citing economic unviability amid PJM Interconnection market rules that failed to compensate nuclear for its reliability and zero-emission attributes.

These closures would have resulted in thousands of job losses, reduced grid reliability (nuclear power accounted for about 23% of FirstEnergy’s power mix at the time), and higher long-term emissions if replaced by natural gas. The plants were not “failing” due to mismanagement alone, but because the playing field was tilted by policy: renewables received federal subsidies (e.g., extensions of the Investment Tax Credit and the Production Tax Credit under Obama-era legislation), while nuclear power faced rising compliance costs without equivalent support. This created what can be described as an “impairment strategy”—a regulatory environment that squeezed traditional energy providers, making them vulnerable to acquisition, restructuring, or collapse, often benefiting private equity or renewable-focused interests.

In response, FirstEnergy sought legislative relief in Ohio. HB6, passed in 2019, provided roughly $150 million annually in subsidies (via ratepayer charges) for the nuclear plants through 2027, while also subsidizing certain coal plants and freezing or rolling back renewable energy and energy efficiency standards. The bill’s proponents framed it as preserving Ohio’s energy infrastructure and jobs; critics saw it as a bailout for uncompetitive assets. Investigations revealed that FirstEnergy funneled approximately $60 million through dark money groups (like Generation Now, tied to Householder) to influence the 2018 elections, help Householder become speaker, secure HB6’s passage, and defeat repeal efforts. Householder was convicted in 2023 of racketeering conspiracy and sentenced to 20 years. Recent trials involve former executives such as Chuck Jones and Michael Dowling, who are accused of related bribery (e.g., $4.3 million paid to former PUCO chair Sam Randazzo in exchange for favorable rulings).

The core issue is proportionality and causation. Were these actions bribery, or a panicked reaction to survival threats? Executives faced temptations arising from access to funds amid the crisis—perhaps justifying personal spending as part of “securing infrastructure”—but that does not excuse crossing the line. The real scandal includes how regulations weaponized by one political regime (progressive energy policies) forced companies into the arms of another (Republican lawmakers) for relief. This is not unique to FirstEnergy; similar dynamics have played out nationwide, where regulatory hammers target disfavored industries, leading to lobbying excesses.

Statistics underscore the impact: Ohio’s nuclear plants employed thousands directly and supported broader economic activity. Their potential closure threatened grid stability in PJM, where nuclear provides essential capacity. Renewables have grown, but without baseload backup, reliability suffers (e.g., wind curtailment). HB6’s nuclear subsidies were repealed in 2021 by HB128 after the scandal erupted, yet the plants continued to operate under new ownership (Energy Harbor, spun off from FirstEnergy), suggesting viability without perpetual bailouts—but only after surviving the regulatory squeeze.

This case highlights broader dangers: when the government uses regulations to steer markets toward ideological goals (e.g., rapid renewable energy dominance), it risks cronyism, corruption, and erosion of property rights. Private companies built infrastructure to serve the public; shifting rules to favor competitors can amount to de facto taking without compensation. The focus on “fraud” and “greed” ignores how progressive policies under Obama created the conditions for desperation. Trump-era rollbacks and pro-energy stances (2017-2021, and post-2024) aimed to counter this, restoring balance.

Executives must handle pressure impeccably—cross every “t” and dot every “i”—but the pressure’s origin matters. When rules are crafted to force bad decisions, accountability should extend to policymakers who engineered the trap. The narrative must include this: FirstEnergy and its allies were not villains scheming in a vacuum but operators defending a vital industry against existential threats from radical energy politics. True justice requires examining the whole chain—from federal overreach to state-level responses—rather than scapegoating those reacting to it.

A robust defense in these cases would foreground this story: the Obama-era push against nuclear and traditional energy as the precipitating force, leading to market distortions that left companies no choice but to seek political aid. Without that context, the public sees only corruption, not the systemic impairment that preceded it.

This is not a case about bribery but rather survival. Private property and free markets suffer when regulations are used as tools for redistribution or ideological control. Ohio’s energy future, and America’s, depends on recognizing this to prevent future scandals born of policy-induced desperation.  And when we talk about this FirstEnergy case, we have to defend it in the manner in which the problem really resides, in the government attempting to seize the means of production as a Marxist takeover of industry and our political system in general.  It is a dire situation that warrants our closest attention.

Bibliography

•  U.S. Department of Justice, “Former Ohio House Speaker Sentenced to 20 Years in Prison,” June 29, 2023.

•  Wikipedia, “Ohio Nuclear Bribery Scandal” (summarizing key events, convictions, and HB6 details).

•  Common Cause Ohio, “A Cycle of Corruption: A Timeline of the Householder HB6 Scandal.”

•  Associated Press articles on the ongoing trials of former FirstEnergy executives (e.g., February 2026 coverage).

•  Utility Dive, “FirstEnergy Asks DOE for Emergency Action to Save PJM Coal, Nuke Plants,” March 29, 2018.

•  Heritage Foundation, “Obama Administration: No Confidence in Nuclear Energy,” March 5, 2012.

•  U.S. Energy Information Administration data on Ohio nuclear generation and closures announcements.

•  Ohio Capital Journal and other sources on HB6 repeal and impacts.

Rich Hoffman

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

Being A Vigilante: The difference between then and now

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how positions evolve, especially now in early 2026, with the new Trump administration taking shape and the political order flipping in ways that feel like vindication for a lot of what I’ve fought for over the decades. People on the outside—those who once held power and now find themselves looking in—are quick to accuse me of changing my tune. “You’ve flipped,” they say. “You were anti-government back then, and now you’re cheering for it.” But the truth is more straightforward and more consistent than that: I’m still the same person who wrote The Symposium of Justice in 2004. I’ve learned, grown, and adapted based on real experience, but the core hasn’t shifted. What’s changed is the situation around me.

Fighting Evil

Back in 2004, when I published The Symposium of Justice, the world looked very different. George W. Bush was in office; the Patriot Act had just expanded federal reach in the name of security, and the government felt like it was ballooning out of control, regardless of who held the reins.[^1] I wasn’t writing as some detached observer; the book was semi-autobiographical, rooted in the raw anger of my thirties. I’d lived a whole, intense life by then—far more than most people my age. I’d been knee-deep in small-city and big-city battles, pushing for legislative fixes to corruption, getting tangled up in significant drug enforcement efforts, and even interacting directly with the FBI on fronts where things weren’t working right.[^2] When the system failed, I didn’t just complain—I acted. There were nights I ran around confronting drug dealers with a bullwhip, breaking up operations in self-defense mode that had been my primary mechanism since I was a kid. One time, I ended up in front of a drug house with about 40 young adults and teens caught in the crossfire of Grand Theft Auto-style chaos. I confronted them head-on, and it saved many of their lives because the police came and broke up the fight, but it wasn’t glamorous. It was vigilante justice born of frustration: if the authorities wouldn’t or couldn’t fix it, someone had to.

The main character in The Symposium of Justice, Cliffhanger, channels that same energy. He takes on a corrupt, centralized government intertwined with entertainment elites who play radical games in the arena. The book is about vigilante justice against tyranny—drawing from real experiences where I saw powerful forces profit off drugs, kickbacks, and control. I was angry, no apologies. It was the work of a man ready to fight back physically if needed. I thought about going full vigilante: mask on, discretion, punishing the bad guys in the shadows like Batman or Zorro, my all-time favorite. I was prepared for it. Law enforcement didn’t like me much—FBI cases I was involved in heavily made that clear—but politics tied their hands, and there wasn’t much they could do.[^3]

But something shifted after the book came out. It had enough impact to spark honest conversations. People reached out—film festivals, the Western arts community, and political circles. I started talking to influential people in entertainment who shared similar frustrations with centralized corruption. Instead of running around at night cracking skulls, I found a more powerful path: writing every day, putting my name to it, building a blog that became my daily weapon. The Overmanwarrior blog started as an extension of that 2004 anger but evolved into something sustained and influential.[^4] Blogging wasn’t as romantic as vigilante nights—no mask, no midnight drama—but it was far more effective. I could expose corruption, rally people, influence voters, and shape events without risking everything on force.

I had two clear options back then: either do the vigilante thing for real—rest in the world making things good through direct action—or worry about it and try to expire it indirectly through politics and persuasion. I chose the latter. Getting more involved in politics showed me that the drug dealers and corrupt players profited from the system because they had kickbacks and protection. Vigilantism might feel good in the moment, but it doesn’t dismantle the machine. Blogging, activism, running for office vibes (though I stayed independent), and fighting tax increases (earning me the “Tax-killer” nickname) did more damage to that machine.[^5] I influenced things in ways a masked figure never could—because when you take the mask off, own your name, and accept personal responsibility, you build real power. People know who you are; they can debate you, fight you if they want, but the ideas spread farther.

Fast-forward to now, 2026, and the difference is night and day. We have a government under Trump that aligns more with the orthodox, law-and-order society I always wanted. The Republican Party has become the vehicle for reform, not the expansion of tyranny. The people I wrote about in 2004—the radicals controlling entertainment, profiting off chaos—are on the outside looking in. Protests flare up, funded by background players causing trouble, but they’re losing. The bad guys scream and cry because good government is winning through elections, debate, free speech, and voter accountability—not through fear or intimidation.

That’s why accusations of “changing” miss the point. I didn’t just hope for a different government; I supported the mechanisms that put a better one in place. Elections, arguments, convincing voters—that’s how you win without masks. The other side can’t match it. They cry foul, blow up lines of communication, resort to violence or victimhood because their positions don’t hold up in open debate. Just enforce the law and order, win arguments, and replace the corrupt with a proper government. It’s better than running around at night with a bullwhip, taking frustrations out on faces. Expose them, beat them at the ballot box, and build something lasting.

My life trajectory proves it. In my thirties, I drew on personal experience: FBI interactions, legislative pushes that failed, vigilante moments that worked short-term but revealed their limits. After the book, film festivals opened doors—Western arts folks who got the Zorro vibe, entertainment people tired of radical agendas and wanted to work with me off the record, so long as I was willing to sign mine to the cause. I spoke at events, networked, and learned that influence through ideas trumps force.[^6] By the 2010s, with Tail of the Dragon in 2012 amid Tea Party energy, I was writing philosophy in action—motorcycle freedom symbolizing untethered resistance to overreach.[^7] Plans for bigger distribution (even ties to Glenn Beck circles) hit walls because the tone was too explosive against expanding federal power then. But it planted seeds.

Today, I’m happy with the trajectory. The Trump administration, Congress, and local and state governments are doing great work in places. No need for vigilantism when voters can pick leaders who enforce rules. The other side’s inability to argue substantively shows why they lose—they rely on emotion, not reason. Winning voters with good arguments builds longevity and a proper society.

Some look for ways to undermine my current stance, digging up the 2004 book to say I’ve contradicted myself. Fine—let the debates flourish. That’s why I put myself out there: to inspire thinking and to reject victimization cycles. The world isn’t heading toward the dystopia many feared in the early 2000s. People are upset, lashing out, but the system works best if people manage the government, avoiding becoming a vigilante, trying to conceal their identity so that the powerful can’t find them and punish them in real life.  I found that it’s far more powerful to beat them where they can’t defend themselves, with ideas that you sign your name to.  Let voters handle it. When government goes rogue, accountability through the ballot box fixes it—not shadows.

It does my heart good to see the bad guys suffer these days. I take showers with “liberal tears” from my tank—refreshing, cleansing the evil they proposed.[^8] Romantic as vigilante justice is in books and movies, real justice comes from winning wars openly: expose corruption, replace it with order, and manage government through accountability. That’s what I learned over 20+ years. The Symposium of Justice remains relevant—its perspective on tyranny holds, but now we have a government worth supporting. Huge difference.  It may not be as exciting.  But the the method I ended up using to fight bad guys has been very effective.  And it works a whole lot better. 

[^1]: Context from post-9/11 Patriot Act criticisms; Hoffman’s 2004 publication aligns with anti-government sentiment under Bush (e.g., blog retrospectives on overmanwarrior.wordpress.com).

[^2]: Personal accounts of FBI/drug enforcement involvement referenced in Goodreads author bio and blog posts on activism.

[^3]: Self-described tensions with law enforcement in tax/anti-corruption fights; “Tax-killer” nickname from local battles.

[^4]: Blog launch as evolution from book; daily writing as alternative to direct action (overmanwarrior.wordpress.com history).

[^5]: Activism details from Goodreads and blog; Reform Party/Tea Party ties.

[^6]: Film festival/Western arts community interactions inferred from transcript and broader activist networking.

[^7]: Tail of the Dragon (2012) publication amid Tea Party; motorcycle symbolism for freedom (Goodreads/author notes).

[^8]: Direct quote/paraphrase from transcript on “liberal tears” as metaphor for current satisfaction.

Bibliography

•  Hoffman, Rich. The Symposium of Justice. Self-published, 2004. (Referenced in blog archives and Goodreads profile.)

•  Hoffman, Rich. Tail of the Dragon. Cliffhanger Research and Development, 2012. (Goodreads; blog promotions.)

•  Overmanwarrior.wordpress.com (various posts, 2011–2026 retrospectives on book evolution and activism).

•  Goodreads Author Profile: Rich Hoffman (biography, nicknames, works list).

•  Various X posts (@overmanwarrior), 2025–2026 (e.g., political commentary tied to current events).

•  Local news archives (Middletown/Cincinnati area) on tax activism (“Tax-killer” references).

•  Film festival/Western arts community interactions (personal testimony; no specific public links, but contextual from transcript).

Rich Hoffman

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

CPS and their Lazy Employees Closed for 3 Days: Teaching kids to be wimps and to hide everything behind “safety”

The recent winter storm that struck the Greater Cincinnati region in late January 2026—often dubbed “Snowmageddon” or the “snow apocalypse” by locals and media alike—delivered a significant punch, blanketing the area with record-breaking snowfall. On January 25, 2026, Cincinnati logged 9.2 inches at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, shattering the previous single-day record for that date (5.8 inches in 2004) and ranking among the top one-day totals in city history.[^1] Storm totals across the Tri-State reached 10 to 16 inches in many spots, with some neighborhoods seeing even higher accumulations, marking the heaviest snowfall since events like February 1998.[^2] The storm arrived over the weekend, with heavy snow falling primarily on Sunday, January 25, followed by frigid temperatures dipping near or below zero, icy conditions, and lingering drifts that made travel challenging for days.

In response, Cincinnati Public Schools (CPS)—serving approximately 35,000 students and 6,500 staff across 66 schools—closed for three consecutive days: Monday, January 26; Tuesday, January 27; and Wednesday, January 28, 2026. Classes resumed on Thursday, January 29, after Superintendent Shauna Murphy announced the reopening, emphasizing safety as the top priority while calling on the community to clear sidewalks, salt icy patches, and ensure safe access to bus stops and crosswalks.[^3] Murphy’s statement highlighted the district’s eagerness to welcome students back but underscored the need for collective effort: “We are eager to welcome our students back, and we need the community’s help to make their commute safer.”[^4] This three-day shutdown drew sharp criticism from some residents, who argued that roads were passable relatively quickly, with many areas shoveled or plowed by Monday morning, and that the closure exemplified broader societal trends toward excessive caution.

Ohio’s snow emergency levels provide context for the decisions. Hamilton County, encompassing Cincinnati, declared a Level 3 snow emergency starting at 6 p.m. on Sunday, January 25, restricting roads to emergency personnel only due to heavy accumulation, ice, and extreme cold.[^5] By Monday, it downgraded to Level 2 before rush hour, and further to Level 1 by Tuesday or Wednesday in many areas, signaling improving but still hazardous conditions.[^6] Neighboring counties like Butler, Clermont, and Warren followed similar patterns, starting high and reducing as plowing progressed. These levels guide travel restrictions but leave school closure calls to superintendents, who weigh factors like bus safety, sidewalk accessibility, building conditions, staff availability, and liability risks.

The critique centers not on the storm’s severity—undeniably substantial—but on the response, particularly the extended closure of public schools like CPS. By Monday, much of the snow had been cleared from major roads, and personal observations from driving across Cincinnati showed navigable conditions despite piled snowbanks and side-street challenges. Trash collection continued in many areas, albeit with difficulties, and businesses operated, albeit with some disruptions. In northern states like Minnesota, the Dakotas, or the Northeast, similar or heavier snowfalls prompt adaptation rather than widespread shutdowns—plows run continuously, residents clear driveways, and life proceeds with gritted determination. Human tenacity historically overcomes such obstacles without paralyzing entire systems.

Yet in Cincinnati, the three-day closure extended beyond what many deemed necessary. An hour delay or two on Monday might have sufficed, allowing students and staff to resume routines while addressing residual hazards. Instead, the decision reinforced a pattern: prioritize “safety” above all, even when it borders on overcaution. Critics argue this hides administrative convenience—avoiding liability from potential accidents, bus delays, or injuries—and teacher/staff reluctance to brave conditions. Union influences and bureaucratic inertia play roles; it’s easier to close than coordinate amid risks. The superintendent’s plea for community help clearing sidewalks subtly shifts responsibility outward while justifying the delay.

This mentality extends far beyond one storm. Modern society increasingly hides behind “safety” to mask laziness, lack of fortitude, or aversion to discomfort. Public education, meant to prepare children for adulthood, instead teaches yielding to challenges. When schools close at the first sign of trouble—snow, cold, rain—children learn that crises warrant retreat, not resilience. They absorb that excuses like “it’s too dangerous” or “liability concerns” trump duty. This coddling produces adults unprepared for reality: drivers who panic on slightly slippery roads despite modern vehicles with traction control and front-wheel drive; workers who demand remote setups post-COVID or call off for minor inconveniences; individuals who turn to substances like legalized marijuana to “mellow out” stress rather than confront it.

The generational shift is stark. Older generations fought through blizzards, building character through adversity—shoveling without complaint, driving cautiously but confidently, showing up regardless. Today’s youth, shaped by administrative-heavy systems, learn the opposite: safety trumps effort, government coddles, and challenges are avoided. Public schools, funded by taxpayer dollars, bear particular responsibility. CPS, like many districts, emphasizes emotional well-being, equity, and risk aversion over grit and productivity. When closures occur, lost instructional time compounds—though Ohio’s flexible calamity day rules and built-in hours often prevent make-up days, as CPS’s 2025-2026 calendar allows significant buffer before extensions.[^7]

The economic ripple is profound. Extended closures disrupt families—parents miss work or juggle childcare—while signaling to the workforce that productivity yields to comfort. In large corporations, remote work persists as a “safety” holdover, eroding collaboration and output. In education, unions and administrators prioritize protection over performance, facilitating below-average effort. When 80% of society adopts this mindset, productivity plummets, innovation stalls, and resilience erodes.

Add legalized marijuana to the mix, and problems compound. Drivers already slow-reacting under optimal conditions—mellowed, delayed starts from stops, hesitant turns—face amplified hazards in snow. Untrained in crisis navigation due to school-taught avoidance, they crawl at 20-25 mph on 45-50 mph roads, causing backups and accidents. This isn’t mere anecdote; it’s observable in rush-hour chaos post-storm, where inexperience met residual ice.

The root lies in public education’s philosophical shift. Once emphasizing arithmetic, reading, citizenship, and perseverance, it now prioritizes social dynamics, safety protocols, and emotional shielding. Kids learn popularity contests and group norms but not how to dominate adversity—change a tire, shovel efficiently, drive in snow, or push through discomfort. They grow into adults who fear everything: cold feet, back strain, minor slips. Liberals, often dominating urban administrations like Hamilton County’s, amplify this by framing caution as compassion, using “safety” to justify inaction.

Contrast with private enterprise: businesses stayed open where possible, adapting because survival demands it. Taxpayer-funded entities like CPS face less pressure, hiding behind bureaucracy. The result? A softer society, less productive, more dependent. One storm exposes it: three days off for what could have been managed with delays teaches surrender, not strength.

This isn’t compassion—it’s detriment. True care prepares people to thrive amid hardship, not hide from it. Future generations will inherit adults ill-equipped for crises—marital, financial, or meteorological—because schools modeled yielding. It’s embarrassing, pathetic even, when paid services fail to model fortitude.

West Chester and surrounding areas, with their Republican-leaning success, resist some of this, but urban cores like Cincinnati succumb. The lesson: vigilance preserves excellence. Yielding to every flake erodes it gradually. Snowmageddon 2026 wasn’t apocalyptic in scale but in implication—society’s softening, starting in classrooms.

Shame on those who hide laziness behind safety. Fight through, show up, dominate the crisis. That’s how good communities—and people—endure.

Bibliography

•  Cincinnati Enquirer. “How much snow did we get? Yes, we broke records.” January 26, 2026. https://www.cincinnati.com/story/weather/2026/01/26/cincinnati-snow-record-how-much-snow-did-we-get-ohio/88358201007

•  FOX19. “PHOTOS: A blanket of white covers the Tri-State.” January 25, 2026. https://www.fox19.com/2026/01/26/photos-blanket-white-covers-tri-state

•  Cincinnati Public Schools. “CPS to Reopen Thursday, Jan. 29, 2026.” https://www.cps-k12.org/all-news/default-news-page/~board/district-homepage-news/post/cps-to-reopen-thursday-jan-29-2026

•  Cincinnati Enquirer. “Cincinnati schools reopening Jan. 29, other districts remain closed.” January 28, 2026. https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/education/2026/01/28/cincinnati-schools-reopening-jan-29-other-districts-stay-closed/88402584007

•  City of Cheviot. “Hamilton County Level 3 Snow Emergency.” January 25, 2026. https://cheviot.org/hamilton-county-level-3-snow-emergency

•  Cincinnati Enquirer. “Snow emergency levels in Ohio today.” January 27, 2026. https://www.cincinnati.com/story/weather/2026/01/27/snow-emergency-levels-in-ohio-today-updates/88374686007

•  Cincinnati Public Schools Calendar 2025-2026. https://www.cps-k12.org/calendar

[^1]: National Weather Service data cited in Cincinnati Enquirer, Jan. 26, 2026.

[^2]: FOX19 reporting on storm totals, Jan. 25, 2026.

[^3]: CPS official announcement, Jan. 28, 2026.

[^4]: Superintendent Shauna Murphy statement, WLWT and FOX19 coverage.

[^5]: Hamilton County Sheriff’s declaration, Jan. 25, 2026.

[^6]: County downgrades reported in Cincinnati Enquirer, Jan. 27, 2026.

[^7]: CPS calendar and calamity day rules, Cincinnati Enquirer, Feb. 2, 2026.

Rich Hoffman

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

‘Tail of the Dragon’: A Prophetic Blend of High-Octane Action and Philosophical Inquiry into Freedom and Government—then and now

In 2012, amid the political turbulence of the early Obama years and the rise of the Tea Party movement, Rich Hoffman published Tail of the Dragon, a novel that defied easy categorization. Officially designated “philosophy in action” by its publisher, the book combines the adrenaline-fueled thrills of classic car-chase stories with a deep exploration of individual liberty, governmental overreach, and the moral ambiguities of resistance. Far from a mere pulp thriller, it serves as a vehicle—literally and figuratively—for Hoffman’s enduring belief that books, unlike fleeting articles, podcasts, or blog posts, can endure for centuries, delivering ideas that challenge readers across generations.

The story centers on Rick Stevens, a NASCAR-loving everyman whose dreams have been stifled by a mundane life of conformity. After being wronged by an overzealous highway patrol backed by political ambition, Stevens embarks on what becomes the most incredible car chase in literary history. Armed with a custom-built red Firebird and twenty million dollars, he races through the treacherous curves of the Tail of the Dragon—a real-world stretch of U.S. Route 129 along the Tennessee-North Carolina border, notorious among gearheads for its 318 curves in 11 miles. Joined by Renee, his wife, the chase evolves into a journey of self-discovery, romance, and defiance against a tyrannical system that extends to the White House. The narrative draws inspiration from films like Smokey and the Bandit, The Dukes of Hazzard, and Bonnie and Clyde, but infuses them with a serious anti-government critique in which breaking laws becomes a philosophical experiment in freedom.

Hoffman’s inspiration stemmed from personal experience and extensive research. A longtime activist in the Reform Party—supporting Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan—and an early participant in the Tea Party, he viewed government as often tyrannical, especially in local tax and regulatory battles that earned him the nickname “Tax-killer.” Motorcycle trips with his wife across the United States immersed him in road culture, the freedom of the open highway, and the allure of untethered motion. The Tail of the Dragon road itself, a mecca for performance car enthusiasts, provided the perfect backdrop: a place where drivers test limits against nature’s unforgiving twists, mirroring the broader struggle against oppressive authority.

Yet the book resists simple libertarian categorization. Hoffman has never identified strictly as a libertarian; his perspective is more pragmatic and optimistic. The novel’s “perfect ending”—praised by readers as one of the greatest in independent fiction—avoids the tragic downfall of outlaws like Bonnie and Clyde. Instead, it offers resolution that affirms individual triumph over systemic oppression, without descending into nihilism. This optimism reflects Hoffman’s worldview: even amid chaos, positivity can emerge, turning potential hell into something constructive.

Published during a time of political polarization, Tail of the Dragon initially struggled for mainstream appeal. Plans for broader distribution, including ties to Glenn Beck’s circle, faltered because of its explosive anti-government tone amid an administration seen as expanding federal power. It found a niche audience among motorcycle enthusiasts, road warriors, and Tea Party activists, who distributed copies at tourist sites along the Dragon Road in North Carolina. Reviews highlighted its action, romance, and philosophical depth, with some comparing it to Ayn Rand’s works for its portrayal of an Übermensch-like figure defying collectivist constraints. One early commentator noted it as a “wake-up call to stand strong and firm to protect America the way it was founded.”

Over the subsequent years, the book’s prescience became evident. Hoffman argues that its themes anticipated the rise of Donald Trump and the MAGA movement—three years before Trump’s 2015 candidacy. The novel’s critique of entrenched power, lawfare, and the hypocrisy of those who decry tyranny only when out of favor resonated with real-world events: the Tea Party’s evolution into broader populist resistance, Trump’s first term amid investigations, the COVID-era restrictions, and the shift in political fortunes. Readers who once viewed the book as overly angry or extreme returned to it years later, finding its arguments validated. Questions arose: How could the author, once fiercely anti-government, now support vigorous enforcement under a Trump-aligned administration? The response lies in the book’s core philosophy: opposition to tyranny depends on whose interests the government serves. When “our people” hold power, representing the majority’s will and individual freedom, authority becomes legitimate—a “freedom-fighting government” rather than oppression.

This distinction—between a tyrannical regime and one aligned with liberty—defines the novel’s enduring message. It challenges readers to think beyond blanket anti-statism, exploring why one government might be resisted violently while another is defended. In a post-2020 landscape of protests, immigration enforcement, and shifting power dynamics, the book’s ending feels prophetic: the protagonists’ victory mirrors a broader societal realignment in which former outsiders gain control and yesterday’s rebels become today’s defenders of order.

More than a decade later, Tail of the Dragon continues to circulate in niche circles, selling copies sporadically and sparking discussions at rallies and events. Its lack of mass-market success is unsurprising; Hoffman writes for longevity, not immediate gain, targeting specialized audiences who grapple with fundamental questions of power, freedom, and justice. The book remains a testament to the idea that philosophy can ride shotgun in an action story, delivering uncomfortable truths that take years—or elections—to register fully.

When I write books, I intend them to say something larger than a temporary platform commentary, and Tail of the Dragon is one of those projects.  Even if the reform sought in the book turned out to be the Presidency of Donald Trump, that outcome was hinted at in the ending of Tail of the Dragon.  At that time, people couldn’t imagine the kind of government we have now, as we had just had 8 years of George W. Bush and 4 years of Obama, with the leanings of 4 more years.  The Tea Party movement was in full swing, but nobody really knew where it was going.  So the events in the book were quite scandalous at the time, and I faced a lot of wrath because of them.  But what happened was essentially the same.  It was always going to take something like what happened at the Tail of the Dragon to change the political order, and President Trump put that on himself.  And I think what we ended up with was something better.  So yes, what’s the difference between then and now?  Well, my people won offices and are now running the government, unlike what we experienced in 2012, when this book came out.  And with this government in charge, I like it and fully support it.  I fought for this government, and I’m happy to have it.

Bibliography

•  Hoffman, Rich. Tail of the Dragon. Cliffhanger Research and Development, 2012 (various editions, including CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform reprints).

Footnotes

1.  Plot summary and quotes drawn from book descriptions on Goodreads and Amazon listings.

2.  Author background and intentions from Hoffman’s own commentary on his blog (overmanwarrior.wordpress.com) and Goodreads author profile.

3.  Reviews and comparisons (e.g., to Ayn Rand, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance) from contemporary reader feedback and promotional materials.

4.  Tail of the Dragon road details are widely documented in automotive and tourism sources; Hoffman’s research involved on-site motorcycle trips.

5.  Political context aligns with the Tea Party era (2010–2012) and subsequent MAGA developments, as reflected in Hoffman’s retrospective analysis.

Rich Hoffman

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