Category: entertainment

The Treasure of Ownership: Personal Music, Vinyl Resurgence, and the Human Hunger for Things That Are Truly Ours

A few years ago, the World Economic Forum floated this vision of the future captured in the phrase “you’ll own nothing and be happy.”¹ It sounded like one of those slick marketing pitches that ignores human nature entirely. People don’t like it. They push back in quiet, stubborn ways that reveal something deep about who we are as human beings wired for possession, autonomy, and legacy. I saw it clearly the other day when I was taking someone in their twenties to lunch in my car. They glanced at the dashboard and asked what that strange slot was. It was the CD player. My car isn’t ancient—I tend to drive vehicles for a decade or more—and yet to this young person, it was an artifact from another era.²

I explained that compact discs were once revolutionary. Developed through a collaboration between Philips and Sony starting in the late 1970s, with key demonstrations in 1979 and a commercial launch in 1982, CDs promised perfect digital sound without the pops, scratches, or degradation of vinyl records or the hiss of cassettes.³ By the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s, they dominated the market. I remember the excitement vividly. You could pop one in, skip tracks instantly, and take your music anywhere without worrying about needles or tape wear. I had built plenty of playlists on cassettes by recording songs off vinyl albums in the order I wanted, but CDs made sequencing seamless. You owned it outright. You could drive down the road at highway speeds—through Ohio’s potholes, storms, or whatever the Great Miami River valley threw at you—and the music played reliably. No internet required. No monthly subscription draining your account. No dependency on someone else’s servers.⁴

That young person couldn’t wrap their mind around it. Subscription services like Apple Music and Spotify have shaped their entire adult life. They rent access to a vast library that lives on someone else’s servers. Lose the subscription, the connection, or the company’s goodwill, and it vanishes. I told them that Walmart still carries CDs, though in smaller sections now, and that Cracker Barrel gift shops across the country have racks of vinyl albums selling briskly. People are buying physical music again. They want to own it—put it on the shelf, hold it in their hands, play it whenever they want without begging permission from a corporation. My grandkids notice the library of CDs on our entertainment center. They see the difference between something solid and tangible versus rented pixels in the cloud.⁵

The vinyl resurgence is one of the most astonishing cultural shifts I’ve witnessed. I grew up with LPs. They seemed archaic once CDs arrived with their superior convenience and durability for travel, but now younger generations are embracing records again. According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), vinyl has grown for 19 consecutive years. In 2025, U.S. vinyl sales surpassed $1 billion for the first time in decades, selling about 46.8 million units and generating nearly three times the revenue of CDs (which sold around 29.5 million units).⁶ Artists like Taylor Swift have driven special editions, but the trend runs deeper. Gen Z and millennials seek that tactile connection in a digital world. I’ve seen it at Target, Walmart, and Cracker Barrel during RV stops. People are hungry for ownership.⁷

This isn’t mere nostalgia. It’s a rejection of the rental economy pushed by globalist visions. The WEF’s 2016 essay by Ida Auken envisioned a 2030 where everything—housing, transportation, entertainment—is rented as a service, delivered conveniently, with no personal clutter of ownership.⁸ Critics rightly called it an attack on human dignity. We are not wired to be perpetual renters. We want our own refrigerator stocked with food we chose, our own yard to tend, our own spouse and children to raise as ours, our own books on the shelf that we can touch and mark. In my family, that physical library of CDs represents more than music—it represents independence.⁹

I remember the full arc of these formats. Vinyl offered warmth and ritual—the act of placing the needle, flipping sides, experiencing the album as intended. But it had drawbacks: bulk, susceptibility to warping, scratches, and the need for careful handling. Cassettes enabled homemade mixtapes and portability in cars, but their quality degraded. CDs felt like liberation when they emerged. Philips and Sony standardized the 12 cm disc to fit Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony entirely, about 74 minutes. The technology used laser reading for error correction, making it robust for travel. You could carry dozens in a slim case. I loved loading them into the car player and having on-demand music without internet or subscriptions.¹⁰

Then the market shifted dramatically. Streaming services offered convenience and unlimited access, but at the cost of true ownership. Apple Music has an enormous catalog—I appreciate the discovery aspect—but I despise the model. You pay monthly forever. Stop paying, and your library disappears. The same happened with movies. Remember rushing to buy the new release on DVD or Blu-ray and building a collection? Now it’s Netflix, HBO Max, or whichever service holds rights that month. Physical sales plummeted as streaming cannibalized them. Yet when content rotates off platforms, demand for ownership spikes again.¹¹

The push toward renting everything ties into deeper political desires for control. Centralized powers—global forums, big tech, financial interests—prefer recurring revenue and dependency. If you own it, you have sovereignty. If you rent, they can change terms, censor content, raise prices, or cut you off. This mirrors broader patterns I’ve seen in politics, aerospace, and culture. In The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, I discuss self-reliance and imposing your will on circumstances rather than leasing your life from others.¹² The same principle applies here. Look at the excitement around SpaceX’s IPO. People want to own a piece of something real, not just subscribe to access.¹³

During RV travels with my wife across the country—to the Space Coast, Gettysburg, or anywhere the road takes us—I’m reminded why ownership matters. There’s nothing like having your own bed, your own refrigerator with cold drinks and snacks, your own clean bathroom instead of relying on gas station facilities. You rent the campsite, but your stuff is yours. It provides a sense of autonomy even while moving. The same goes for books. I own physical copies. I like touching them, flipping pages, keeping them in my personal library. Downloading or using Audible has its convenience, but it lacks permanence. I’m not a fan of leasing intellectual or cultural space.¹⁴

Power outages here in Ohio—whether from big storms rolling up from the Gulf, tornadoes, or winter events—highlight another advantage. With a generator, you could still play a DVD, Blu-ray, or CD. Streaming dies without connectivity. Personal libraries provide resilience. Vinyl’s comeback, despite being larger and more fragile than CDs, shows the depth of this desire. Records take up space, can warp or scratch, and require more care, yet people buy them enthusiastically.¹⁵

The speed of change amazes me. My car still has a working CD player, yet new vehicles rarely include them. Manufacturers followed the connectivity and subscription trend. But the backlash is real. Who still makes CDs? Companies like Disc Makers and Bison Disc continue short-run and replication services for artists and collectors. Demand persists for reissues, independent releases, and audiophile formats. Given vinyl’s proof of concept, a modest CD revival is plausible—especially for durability, portability, and offline use. Collectors value the format’s sound quality and convenience over vinyl’s ritual.¹⁶

This hunger extends beyond music to the core of human nature. Americans especially cherish property rights. We want our homes, cars, guns, private spaces, and cultural artifacts that reflect our identity. Progressive globalist ideas of shared everything clash with that reality. Socialism’s communal experiments fail because they ignore our drive to build legacies. Music is deeply personal. The songs that shaped your youth, the albums discovered on your own—they become part of you. Renting them feels like renting your memories.¹⁷

I explained all this to that young person over lunch. They had recently bought a vinyl album at Target and were intrigued by the concept of true ownership. CDs seemed novel again. It’s not about rejecting technology—streaming has its place for discovery and variety. But the default shouldn’t be perpetual rental. Ownership provides resilience, no algorithmic control over your playlist, and the satisfaction of pointing to a shelf and saying, “That’s mine.” During family trips, we play our own music without signal drops or interruptions from navigation or texts.¹⁸

The WEF vision assumes adaptation to renting. Evidence suggests otherwise. Vinyl’s 19-year growth streak, physical media’s persistence, and resistance to woke content in Hollywood all signal a market shift. Big tech and entertainment pushed subscription models and certain narratives, alienating audiences. People retreat to what they can control.¹⁹

In my own life, this philosophy runs deep—from early experiences in Cincinnati to aerospace program management. Consultants and rented expertise come and go, but teams that own the mission endure—the same with culture. We want music, books, and stories that belong to us. In The Politics of Heaven, I explore these threads of spiritual, cultural, and economic sovereignty. Ownership isn’t greed; it’s dignity and agency.²⁰

There’s room for balance. Physical formats like vinyl and CDs offer tangible connection. Digital provides access. But forcing everything into rental models driven by political control rather than pure market demand has backfired. The serpent of ownership uncoils in the face of forced renting. People choose it every time they buy a record, a CD, a book, or build their own space. That’s the real future—not a 2030 rented utopia, but timeless human nature asserting itself.

I still pop in a CD when I drive. It works perfectly. And it’s mine. That feeling matters more than any subscription pitch. As I dictate this overlooking the Great Miami River or from the RV, I’m reminded how personal autonomy anchors everything. The market is speaking loudly. Vinyl proves it. CDs could follow. And humans will keep choosing what they can truly call their own—making tomorrow a better day through ownership, not rental.²¹

Footnotes

¹ World Economic Forum / Ida Auken essay “Welcome to 2030” (2016).

² Personal observation from recent interaction.

³ Philips/Sony CD development history, 1979–1982 standardization.

⁴ CD advantages for portability and reliability.

⁵ Retail observations at Walmart, Cracker Barrel, and Target.

⁶ RIAA 2025 Year-End Report: Vinyl $1B+, 46.8M units vs. CDs 29.5M.

⁷ Gen Z/millennial trends in tactile media.

⁸ WEF ownership predictions and criticism.

⁹ Family library of CDs.

¹⁰ Technical history of CD format.

¹¹ Streaming impact on physical media sales.

¹² The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business Principles.

¹³ SpaceX IPO and ownership desire.

¹⁴ RV travel and book ownership reflections.

¹⁵ Vinyl drawbacks vs. appeal.

¹⁶ Current CD manufacturing (Disc Makers, etc.) and revival potential.

¹⁷ Human nature and property rights.

¹⁸ Conversation with a young person.

¹⁹ Cultural and market backlash.

²⁰ Ties to The Politics of Heaven.

²¹ Closing personal philosophy.

Bibliography

•  Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). 2025 Year-End Recorded Music Revenue Report.

•  World Economic Forum. Ida Auken, “Welcome to 2030” (2016).

•  Philips/Sony historical documentation on CD development.

•  Rich Hoffman, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and The Politics of Heaven.

•  Industry reports on physical media trends (Disc Makers, retail observations).

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an author, political consultant, and strategic advisor based in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the creator of The Politics of Heaven—a unique framework that connects biblical theology, ancient history, and modern power structures to explain how moral alignment and spiritual forces shape global events. Blending real-world political experience with deep research into archaeology, UFO phenomena, and suppressed historical narratives, Hoffman offers compelling commentary on topics ranging from ancient civilizations and the Dead Sea Scrolls to modern populist movements, paranormal continuity, and leadership strategy in chaotic environments. As the author of The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business and the forthcoming Politics of Heaven, he brings a grounded yet provocative voice to media discussions, supported by firsthand experiences and a cross-disciplinary approach that bridges science, history, and theology. For interviews, speaking engagements, or expert analysis, visit richhoffmanbooks.com or contact directly via phone at 513-307-5815 or email at rhoffman@richhoffmanbooks.com.  If you’ve seen the movie, Disclosure Day and want to talk about it and the implications of Presidnet Trump’s UAP disclosures, let me know and we can bring some color to your coverage. https://richhoffmanbooks.com/media-inquiries-broadcast-topics-and-contact-info/?frame-nonce=ad51e7ecba I do have a firsthand UFO encounter to discuss.

The Moon: The Next Great Gold Rush and America’s Future Frontier

I remember the moment clearly. My wife and I were leaving the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C., a few weeks ago, arms loaded with heavy stacks of books from the gift shops. We had already bought plenty—typical for me when I travel. Books are what I bring home most. We were tired, heading back to the parking garage a couple of blocks away, when I spotted it on a rack near the cashier: a beautifully produced DK book on the Moon. DK books are special; they pack immense detail, vivid imagery, and love into every page. As someone deeply involved in aerospace and passionate about SpaceX, Blue Origin, NASA, and lunar exploration, I couldn’t resist. My wife looked at me with that knowing smile after nearly 40 years of marriage and said we should go back for it. We did. That book now sits on my shelf as a treasured reminder of that day, a tangible link to the excitement of the present and the vast possibilities ahead. 

That spontaneous purchase captures something larger: the Moon is not just a celestial body; it is the key to the next great American expansion, a modern gold rush that will generate wealth, innovation, and opportunity on a scale rivaling the Western frontier. Just as Theodore Roosevelt championed westward expansion, national parks, and the productive use of resources to build a stronger nation, we must embrace this new frontier without apology. The Moon holds resources—rare metals, thorium, helium-3, and more—that can power a Type I civilization, fuel energy independence, enable orbital manufacturing, and revitalize communities like those in my home region of Butler County, Ohio. 

A Personal Encounter with Lunar Wonder

Walking past the Easter Island statue and near the Department of Justice building at the Smithsonian, carrying those heavy stacks, I paused because the Moon has been central to my thinking for years. People who lunch with me or listen to my podcast know this: I constantly talk about lunar missions, the space economy, and manufacturing in space. I associate with skeptics who question Apollo, but evidence convinces me otherwise. We can see the landing sites with powerful telescopes. Other nations, including Japan and Firefly Aerospace, have landed near Apollo sites and confirmed the hardware. These are real achievements, not Hollywood sets. 

The DK book reinforced everything I believe. It covers the Moon’s history, what we know, and—crucially—its future. It details manufacturing potential, resource utilization, and why the Moon matters for industry. Flipping through it at home, with my reading light on and stacks of other books nearby (many from the Museum of the Bible’s Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit I visited on my birthday), I felt the same thrill as when launching model rockets with my grandsons or touring Kennedy Space Center facilities.

My youngest grandson, a brilliant young mind obsessed with space since age three (memorizing solar system bodies and Kuiper Belt objects), saw me reading it. He’s the one who launched that detailed Artemis model rocket we built and flew on a breezy day—overpowered engine, wind shear, pretzel rolls, but safe recovery. He wants to build, understand, and explore. This book and the future it represents are for him and his generation. They will inherit opportunities from this gold rush that make the California or Dakota rushes look small. 

The Moon as the New Gold Rush

Compare this to Teddy Roosevelt’s era. Roosevelt, whose biographies by Edmund Morris I admire and whose Netflix documentary I recommend, loved the West. He explained the moral and economic necessity of westward expansion. Gold funded infrastructure, mobility, and a great nation. Critics today decry the exploitation of indigenous peoples, but the truth is, those resources built America. On the Moon, there are no indigenous populations to displace. We can extract without controversy, using the science and archaeology we uncover along the way. 

Lunar resources are extraordinary. The solar wind has deposited vast amounts of helium-3—estimates run to over a million tons in the regolith. Helium-3 promises clean fusion energy with minimal waste and proliferation risks compared to other fuels. Rare earth elements, thorium, titanium, aluminum, and metals associated with KREEP (potassium, rare earths, phosphorus) terrains offer riches. Thorium concentrations signal nearby rare metals. One kilogram of helium-3 can produce enormous energy when fused with deuterium. Bringing these back via Starship or similar vehicles will transform economies. 

Thorium itself is abundant on the Moon and ideal for reactors. On Earth, thorium is three times more common than uranium. Small modular thorium reactors—some the size of a large air conditioner—could power homes for decades with minimal grid dependence, producing far less long-lived waste. Imagine every home with its own safe, perpetual-energy source—Africa’s poor gain electricity and internet via Starlink. Surplus power feeds grids or charges vehicles. This is abundance, not scarcity. I’ve advocated this for over a decade; lunar thorium accelerates it. 

Space Economy: Projections and Infrastructure

The numbers are staggering. The broader space economy could exceed $1 trillion by 2032. Space tourism alone may add $16 billion or more, with markets projected to grow from $10 billion to over $17 billion by 2030-2032, at CAGRs of 36-44%. Commercial space flight, satellites, manufacturing, and resource return will multiply this. 

SpaceX’s Starship is pivotal—reusable, high-cadence launches (aiming for weekly), orbital refueling, and lunar/planetary capability. Blue Origin’s Blue Moon landers and manufacturing facilities in Florida support Artemis. I toured these areas recently; the scale of Blue Origin’s facility dwarfs many terrestrial plants. Starship catching with “chopsticks,” successful Indian Ocean splashdowns—the cadence is building. Orbital factories in zero-G, powered by solar or nuclear power, produce chips, pharmaceuticals, and materials superior to those produced by Earth’s gravity-constrained methods. Precious metals mined on the Moon fuel superconductors and electronics, reducing reliance on terrestrial or Chinese supplies. 

Elon Musk’s vision, Tesla’s energy innovations (I love the charging stations at that Cracker Barrel north of Lima, Ohio, or Disney Springs), and Starlink complement this. I’m not against renewables or traditional fuels—Wawa, Bucky’s, gas stations built America. But nuclear power, including thorium, provides baseload capacity. Politicians who weakened the grid through poor policy must adapt. FirstEnergy and Ohio’s energy mix, plus lunar resources, are strengths.

Ohio’s Role: Spaceports, Data Centers, and Renewal

Ohio is primed. Butler County’s aquifers, the Great Miami River, the Trenton area, and proximity to the I-75/I-71 corridors make it ideal. I’ve walked these lands, showing the water resources that are perfect for data centers and manufacturing. Middletown and Monroe could host a spaceport. Farmland surrounds it; sonic booms are a manageable trade-off for vitality, unlike the decline and illicit economies some fear. Boca Chica proves it; Starships landing, cargo from lunar mines or orbital fabs unloaded like truck trailers. Chips manufactured in orbit return here, feeding Intel-like plants and restoring manufacturing. 

Hyperloop concepts in Monroe, spaceport infrastructure, and data centers powered by reliable energy create a corridor. With leaders like JD Vance (likely future President) and Vivek Ramaswamy (potential Governor), plus Ohio senators and locals like Sheriff Jones or Sen. Lang, bills are ready. This isn’t fantasy; it’s Rooseveltian vision meeting Musk-era execution. Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, and new dynasties emerge from such frontiers.

Critics worry about noise or change. But silence in cornfields while communities decay? No. This brings jobs, STEM excitement for youth (like my grandson’s rocketry), and wealth. Environmentalists note: no indigenous claims on the Moon. Archaeology of ancient civilizations or human origins may await—tying into my work on The Politics of Heaven, giants, and spiritual history.

Overcoming Skepticism and Embracing the Future

Some still doubt Moon landings. I understand distrust of government, but international verification, hardware visibility, and private successes (Firefly, Japanese landers) confirm the reality. The wreckage isn’t in a desert lot; it’s on the lunar surface. Artemis, Starship, and commercial partners accelerate what Apollo started.

Investment advice I give at lunch: aerospace, space infrastructure, Moon-related plays. SpaceX IPO talk, Starlink, Tesla synergies, lunar miners like Interlune for helium-3—these are paths to wealth. Re-read this essay back in a decade; those who invest in the gold rush will thrive. 

My wife and I carried those books, tired but joyful. That DK volume symbolizes commitment. Museums like the Smithsonian and Kennedy inspire; they show past triumphs and fund future ones. I devoured Dead Sea Scrolls books on my birthday; this Moon book joins them.

For my grandchildren: model rockets today, lunar bases and orbital factories tomorrow. They’ll read these pages, build, explore, and lead. As an aerospace executive, writer, and grandfather, I see resilience in imposing will on circumstances—like launching in wind or pushing through fatigue for one more book.

Call to Action for Leaders and Readers

To JD Vance, Vivek Ramaswamy, Elon Musk, President Trump, Ohio senators, and others: This is the moment. Support Artemis cadence, thorium R&D, spaceport incentives in Ohio, orbital manufacturing tax policy, and resource utilization. Fund archaeology tied to lunar discoveries. America leads; China or others will if we hesitate—no apologies—abundance for all.

The Moon is our Teddy Roosevelt frontier: productive, moral in expanding human potential, wealth-building without exploitation. Invest your paycheck, imagination, and policy here. Factories on the Moon and in orbit, Starships cycling constantly, homes powered by thorium the size of AC units, chips from zero-G, economic renewal in Middletown and beyond.

I stopped in my tracks for that book because the Moon is my place. It should be ours as a nation. The gold rush awaits. Let’s claim it.

Footnotes

1.  Personal observations from Smithsonian visit and family rocketry activities.

2.  DK The Moon book details lunar resources and future industry. 

3.  Helium-3 estimates from scientific literature. 

4.  Thorium advantages: abundance, waste reduction. 

5.  Space economy projections from market analyses. 

6.  Artemis/Blue Origin/SpaceX updates. 

7.  Ohio aerospace context. 

(Additional footnotes would expand on specific quotes, historical references to Roosevelt, Morris biographies, energy policy critiques, etc., drawing from verified sources and personal experience.)

Bibliography

•  DK Publishing. The Moon. (Recent edition available via Smithsonian and Amazon).

•  Morris, Edmund. Theodore Roosevelt trilogy.

•  NASA Artemis program documents and partner updates (SpaceX, Blue Origin).

•  Scientific papers on lunar resources (ESA, Wikipedia summaries of peer-reviewed data, USGS on REEs).

•  Market reports: Grand View Research, Market.us, Visual Capitalist on space economy.

•  Thorium energy literature (World Nuclear Association, etc.).

•  My previous works: The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, The Politics of Heaven manuscript.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events

The Arrest of “The Rooster” and the Need for Respect in Politics: He’s a progressive slob and an advocate for Marxism

I strongly support the recent arrest of independent journalist D.J. Byrnes, better known by his online moniker “The Rooster,” at the Ohio Statehouse in Columbus. On June 1, 2026, I watched with satisfaction as Byrnes was taken into custody by the Ohio State Highway Patrol on a misdemeanor charge of telecommunications harassment originating from a warrant in Lake County. For me, this is not merely a legal technicality or an isolated incident of poor judgment; it represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle I have long observed to restore dignity, professionalism, and accountability to Ohio’s political landscape. I have spent years covering and engaging with state politics, and I see this event as a clear signal that the days of unchecked disruption are coming to an end.

The details of the case are straightforward yet revealing in ways that confirm what I have been saying for some time. According to reports, Byrnes allegedly sent text messages on May 6 to a recipient identified as “J.C.,” widely understood to be State Senator Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland). These messages included an explicit image—a meme or photo depicting the cartoon character Shrek with a penis—accompanied by harassing commentary. This action led to a warrant being issued after a probable cause hearing, resulting in Byrnes’ detention at the Statehouse while he was covering a data-center hearing. He spent approximately 23 hours in the Franklin County Jail before being released on a $3,500 bond with a no-contact order in place. Byrnes has maintained his innocence, framing the arrest as political retaliation against his critical reporting. Supporters have rallied under hashtags like #FreeTheRooster, portraying him as a victim of Republican overreach. I reject this narrative entirely. In my view, the arrest signals that elected officials are no longer willing to tolerate unchecked harassment disguised as journalism. I operate from the perspective of someone who values real accountability, and I believe Byrnes has crossed every reasonable line.

I view Byrnes not as a fearless journalist holding power accountable, but as an arrogant, slovenly progressive activist who exploits the kindness and free-speech principles of Republican legislators. I operate my own platform and have seen firsthand how Byrnes runs The Rooster, a Substack newsletter known for its progressive slant and aggressive coverage of Ohio Republicans. While I acknowledge that independent journalism can play a valuable role in democracy when done responsibly, I argue that Byrnes crosses into activism and personal vendettas. His style—ambush interviews, provocative questions, and what I call “hit pieces”—targets not just policies but individuals, including Senator George Lang, Lang’s daughter Alicia, and prominent conservative figure Vivek Ramaswamy. These tactics, I contend, erode public trust rather than enhance it. I have spoken with legislators on both sides, and many share my frustration privately, even if they hesitate to say it publicly to avoid the “free speech” backlash.

To fully appreciate my position, one must delve into my broader philosophy on public life, which emphasizes respect for institutions, personal responsibility, and cultural standards. I have long criticized the casualization of American society, particularly in government settings. I recount personal experiences that underscore this point. During visits to the Statehouse, I have observed Byrnes parading around in unkempt clothing—sloppy outfits that I liken unfavorably to those of nearby homeless individuals. One memorable anecdote I included in my book The Politics of Heaven, which is currently in the review process, involves me arriving for a meeting with the governor and encountering a homeless man on the sidewalk with his pants down, defecating in public. Passersby ignored the scene out of discomfort or fear of judgment. I use this to illustrate a societal tolerance for disorder that parallels the acceptance of figures like Byrnes, who I believe disrespect the Capitol through both appearance and behavior. This is not a minor quibble about fashion; it is a symptom of a deeper cultural decline that I see eroding the foundations of our republic.

This theme of decorum extends throughout my own life and standards. My wife and I recently visited the White House, where we deliberated carefully over appropriate attire. I insisted on wearing a suit and tie, viewing it as a fundamental mark of respect for the “people’s house.” I argue passionately that public institutions such as the Statehouse, the Capitol in Washington, D.C., and the White House demand formality. Flip-flops, shorts, untucked shirts, or “slob” attire signal a lack of seriousness and erode the gravity of governance. In an era where progressive culture promotes “casual Fridays” as a virtue, I see this as symptomatic of deeper issues: a rejection of tradition, hierarchy, and excellence. Even in my busy schedule—often involving manual labor, exploring creeks, slogging through maintenance holes, or dealing with practical challenges like pressure washing grime off concrete—I prioritize dressing appropriately for official settings. My wide-brimmed hat serves both practical and symbolic purposes: it protects me from rain and elements while conveying respect. I have worn hats since the fourth grade, sometimes to tick off conformists purposefully, but always because I believe they show care for one’s appearance and mind. I value my brain and protect it, just as I believe we must protect the dignity of our institutions.

My critique of Byrnes ties directly into my larger concerns about public education and youth culture, which I have voiced repeatedly. I believe modern schooling produces “garbage”—entitled, rude individuals lacking basic manners or a work ethic. Byrnes, whom I describe as representing a “youth movement” of progressive radicals, embodies this failure in my eyes. His supporters, often Amy Acton backers or left-leaning activists, dismiss traditional values as outdated “boomer” thinking. I raised children who are now in their 30s, and I understand GameStop culture and millennial/Gen Z dynamics well, but I reject the disrespect they sometimes entail. Dressing poorly in the Statehouse is not harmless individualism; it disrespects voters, taxpayers, and the democratic process that placed Republicans in the majority. I see this every time I walk those blocks from parking to the Capitol, passing signs of disorder that polite society has learned to ignore. Why do we tolerate it? Because we fear being called judgmental. Yet judgment is necessary for a functioning society.

Expanding on Byrnes’ methods, I highlight specific grievances that have built over time. I have seen and heard accounts of Byrnes fabricating or twisting narratives around Alicia Lang, a private citizen who does not deserve public scrutiny simply because of her father’s position. Efforts to link Vivek Ramaswamy to unsubstantiated personal scandals strike me as baseless attacks on a talented conservative leader and his family. I like Vivek and his wife a great deal; they represent competence and vision that Ohio needs. Byrnes’ advocacy for Amy Acton, whom I associate with heavy-handed policies during the pandemic era, further solidifies my view of him as emblematic of big-government overreach and creeping socialism. The Rooster’s presence at the Statehouse—microphones thrust into faces, questions designed to provoke rather than inform—creates an atmosphere of intimidation rather than genuine inquiry. I have talked with many legislator types from the House and Senate, including friends like Senator Lang, and they express the same exhaustion. Many “nice” Republicans engage him to demonstrate openness, only to have their words weaponized later in hit pieces. I tell them directly: he knows you are polite and will abuse that tolerance. It is time to stop giving him the benefit of the doubt.

The legal foundation of the arrest merits detailed examination, as I have studied similar cases. Ohio Revised Code § 2917.21 defines telecommunications harassment as knowingly making communications to harass, intimidate, or abuse. A first offense is a first-degree misdemeanor, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and fines. Sending unsolicited explicit images, especially to a public official performing duties, can meet this threshold if intent to distress is shown. Courts will evaluate evidence, including the full text exchange, where Senator Cirino reportedly responded dismissively. I applaud Cirino—an experienced senator with decades of service—for refusing to endure such juvenile behavior. Older public servants like him deserve protection from punk-like provocations, not endless tolerance in the name of “free speech.” I understand Jerry Cirino is an older guy with a long record of service, and I believe he has earned the right not to have garbage like a Shrek dick pic land on his phone.

This brings me to the core tension I often debate: free speech versus harassment. I defend robust criticism and have many times spoken out for journalists’ rights in principle. Ambush journalism has a storied history in America, from muckrakers exposing real corruption to modern citizen reporters. However, I draw a sharp line here. Criticism of policy is protected; sending Shrek genitalia memes and repeated harassing texts is not. Public figures have reduced privacy expectations, but personal harassment invades that boundary. In my opinion, the “#FreeTheRooster” campaign mischaracterizes accountability as tyranny. True free speech advocates should condemn explicit harassment, not celebrate it as some badge of honor. Republicans, having endured years of lawfare and media bias during the first Trump term and beyond, are right to push back. The era of passive “turn the other cheek” politics, especially in light of what I have seen in political warfare, is ending. I am glad to see it.

I frame the arrest within the larger context of political warfare that I have documented across my writings and videos. I recall how Republicans were often too passive while facing one-sided attacks on election integrity and other issues. Those days, I declare based on my observations, are over. The Byrnes case exemplifies Republicans finally standing up for themselves rather than absorbing abuse. I draw a sharp contrast between the voters’ choice of Republican majorities in the Ohio House, Senate, and Governor’s office and the efforts of disruptive outsiders like Byrnes to undermine that mandate through slanted reporting and personal provocations. Ohio voters have chosen us for a reason. People like Byrnes treat those victories as illegitimate and use any tool—hit pieces, personal attacks, or institutional disruption—to erode them. This mirrors national patterns where left-leaning forces weaponize institutions against conservatives. I point to past energy deals, FirstEnergy trials, and related controversies as examples where Republicans played too nice and suffered consequences. The Byrnes arrest is a corrective measure: boundaries matter, and we must enforce them.

Furthermore, I address Byrnes’ personal background as part of my broader assessment. I note prior issues and marital troubles that, in my view, further disqualify him from serving as an impartial observer at the Statehouse, and he should be removed permanently because of it, because he poses a security problem just by his presence wherever he goes, he has a permanent history of violence and poor social choices.  No security area can allow him to enter and to consider the area secure. I argue that elected officials should not be forced to engage with someone who has demonstrated a pattern of disrespect and who uses journalism as a mask for ideological activism. This behavior, I contend, contributes to the very cynicism and distrust in government that critics then decry. True advocates of good governance would maintain basic respect for institutions and the people who serve in them. I do not enjoy seeing anyone jailed lightly, but when someone repeatedly pushes boundaries with crude, harassing tactics, consequences follow. I have always fought for free speech, but I also fight for the right of our elected leaders to do their jobs without constant personal torment.

In examining the symbolism that strikes me deeply, I see the Statehouse as more than bricks and mortar. It is the seat of representative government where Ohioans place their trust. Allowing slovenly dress and crude behavior normalizes decline, much like ignoring homeless encampments or public defecation blocks away. I argue that society must judge and enforce standards—discriminating between respect and chaos. My own style—suit and tie for videos and public appearances, hats for practicality and tradition—embodies this commitment. Since fourth grade, wearing bold hats has been both practical and an act of quiet defiance against those who conform to sloppiness. In business or politics, appearance signals care: a million-dollar deal or a meeting with constituents deserves collar shirts, jackets, and effort, not Key West casualness or Jimmy Buffett vibes. I reject the progressive mantra that casual is always better. It often masks laziness and disrespect.

Critics may label me as out of touch, a “cowboy hat-wearing boomer.” I embrace this label with pride because experience grants wisdom. Raising children through economic shifts, observing public education’s failures up close, and engaging directly with leaders at all levels give me a perspective that younger radicals lack. Progressive youth culture, influenced by social media echo chambers and failing schools, prioritizes “gotcha” moments over substance and respect. Byrnes’ new wife, being an attorney with progressive leanings, fits this pattern in my analysis. I question why officials gave Byrnes access in the first place, knowing his pattern. Tolerance was abused; now consequences are arriving. This is how we rebuild.

In considering the broader implications for education, the economy, and society that I explore in my work, I see public schools teaching entitlement as a root cause that produces adults unprepared for basic decorum. Socialism erodes self-reliance, mirroring sloppy dress as a rejection of excellence. My upcoming book, The Politics of Heaven, draws on these Statehouse experiences to argue for the restoration of standards of dress, speech, and conduct. It rebuilds trust. Voters chose Republicans to govern effectively; disruptors like Byrnes undermine that mandate at their peril. We must continue this firmness: defend our majorities, reject socialism, and demand respect. Figures like Cirino, Lang, and Ramaswamy represent the competence Ohio needs; undermining them harms all of us.

The cultural contrast I observe daily is stark. One side values suits, ties, and hats as outward signs of inner respect; the other celebrates slobs as authentic. I stand firmly with tradition, arguing that institutions deserve elevation rather than casual degradation. My wife’s choice of shoes for the White House trip, despite discomfort, highlights this principle: we accept minor inconvenience for dignity. Public servants and those covering them should model the same. Byrnes’ arrest enforces a necessary boundary. It is not about silencing criticism but about insisting that criticism remain within civilized bounds.

I expand this further by reflecting on years of patterns I have witnessed. From my early days discussing politics to thousands of videos and writings, I have seen the slow creep of disrespect. Casual dress led to casual attitudes toward rules, ethics, and institutions. Byrnes is a symptom, not the disease. The disease is the progressive push that teaches young people government is the enemy when it is Republican-led, that sloppiness equals rebellion, and that harassment is “speaking truth.” I reject all of it. My support for this arrest is part of a consistent worldview: we fought for majorities so we could govern, not endure endless sabotage.

Additionally, I consider how this fits national trends. After watching attacks on Trump and conservatives through lawfare, I am pleased to see reciprocity—not as vengeance, but as balance. A misdemeanor like this deters without broadly chilling legitimate speech. Real journalists criticize policies without explicit memes. Officials can set boundaries. I urge fellow Republicans to maintain this firmness while staying ethical. Destroy political enemies through legal and proper channels when they cross into harassment, but never descend to their level of pettiness.

To elaborate on my personal standards, I dress in a jacket and tie most days because my schedule demands readiness. Late-night videos still reflect that discipline even if I relax slightly for comfort. It drives some crazy, but it shows I take my platform seriously. I expect the same from those in or covering the people’s house—no silly flip-flops or shorts. Respect the space where laws are made.

I could continue for pages on related cultural failures—public education turning out disrespectful youth, media amplifying provocateurs, and voters’ will being undermined—but the core remains: this arrest is a win for standards. It tells Byrnes and his ilk that Ohio’s elected leaders will not be pushed around forever. I love seeing Republicans stand firm. It honors the voters. It restores dignity. And it pushes back against the socialist tide that Byrnes represents through his Acton support and hit pieces.

I see the arrest of “The Rooster” as a refreshing assertion of boundaries that I have long advocated. It is not an assault on free speech but a defense of civilized political discourse against those who would replace it with rudeness, entitlement, and ideological warfare. By demanding higher standards of dress, conduct, and professionalism, I believe Ohio can restore dignity to its public spaces and processes. Allowing progressive provocateurs to harass officials under the guise of journalism only weakens our republic. Instead, we must continue pushing back firmly against those who seek to impose disorder, honoring the will of the voters who placed us in office. This incident, though seemingly small, signals a cultural and political turning point where respect for the system is no longer optional. I stand by that fully.

(Word count: approximately 4,350)

Footnotes

1.  Signal Ohio report on the arrest and charges.

2.  Columbus Dispatch coverage detailing the incident.

3.  NBC4i on the Shrek image specifics.

4.  Ohio Revised Code § 2917.21 legal text.

5.  Background on Byrnes’ blogging style.

6.  Additional context from progressive reactions.

Bibliography

•  “Progressive blogger arrested outside Ohio statehouse.” Signal Ohio, June 2, 2026. https://signalohio.org/progressive-blogger-the-rooster-arrested-outside-statehouse-charged-with-harassment/

•  “Ohio blogger The Rooster arrested at Statehouse.” Columbus Dispatch, June 1, 2026. https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/2026/06/01/rooster-arrest-ohio-statehouse/90358157007/

•  “Columbus political blogger arrested on telecommunications harassment charge.” NBC4i, June 2026.

•  Ohio Revised Code § 2917.21. https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2917.21

•  “Who is The Rooster? See D.J. Byrnes in action.” Columbus Dispatch, March 17, 2026.

•  “Blogger ‘The Rooster’ Arrested for Alleged Telecom Harassment.” Trending reports, June 2026.

•  Additional sources from The Rooster Substack and related political commentary.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

When Democrats say,” You didn’t build that”: Wealth confiscation to fund evil in the eyes of a healthy society

In the quiet hours after dinner, when the house settles and the day’s demands fade, there is a ritual that has shaped much of my understanding of the world: reading. Four or five books a week, many of them compact volumes around 150 pages, devoured not in hurried skimming but in focused sessions that stretch from six in the evening until bedtime near eleven. This habit is no idle pastime. It is a deliberate investment in clarity, particularly when navigating the complexities of economics, politics, leadership, and personal initiative. Over the years, I have delved into texts on capitalism, risk-taking, and the historical role of government in society. These readings have reinforced a core conviction: true prosperity springs from individual effort, innovation, and the willingness to shoulder risk, not from the heavy hand of centralized authority. Yet, time and again, I hear prominent Democrats echo a different philosophy—one that diminishes the entrepreneur and elevates government as the indispensable architect of success. This notion, articulated by figures like Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Chuck Schumer, and Bernie Sanders, strikes me as not only misguided but deeply corrosive to the American spirit of mobility and achievement.

I recall Obama’s remarks on July 13, 2012, in Roanoke, Virginia, during a campaign event. He stated, “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” The context was his push against tax cuts and for greater government investment in infrastructure. He pointed to roads, bridges, and the broader system as the true enablers of private success. To me, this reflects a profound misunderstanding of how wealth is created. It dismisses the sleepless nights, the personal financial risks, the years of trial and error that entrepreneurs endure. Government may provide some foundational services, but it does not conceive the idea, secure the capital, hire the workers, or innovate the product. That burden falls on the individual willing to bet their own resources and reputation. Obama’s words, which drew sharp criticism at the time, encapsulate a worldview in which the state claims credit for outcomes it merely facilitates — at best—and often hinders through regulation and taxation. 

Elizabeth Warren expressed similar sentiments in 2011, declaring, “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.” She cited roads, police, fire protection, and public education as the invisible partners in every fortune. AOC has echoed this, arguing that corporations and individuals rely on public investment, taxpayers, and government systems to generate profit and thus owe a larger share back. Bernie Sanders, with his open socialist leanings and history of praising aspects of regimes like the Soviet Union during his honeymoon in Moscow, has repeated variations of this theme for decades. Chuck Schumer and others in the party reinforce it to justify expansive government programs. In my view, this rhetoric is not mere political posturing; it reveals a fundamental ignorance—or willful disregard—of how risk and investment drive economic growth. Karl Marx never fully grasped the entrepreneurial function, viewing capital as the extraction of surplus value rather than as the reward for foresight and courage. Modern Democrats, steeped in similar academic traditions, carry forward that flawed analysis.

I have spent considerable time reflecting on these ideas, especially in the context of my home in Butler County, Ohio, and the broader national landscape, now a couple of years into President Trump’s second term. Democrats appear to be struggling to regain their footing, doubling down on big-government justifications amid voter pushback against high taxes and inefficiency. After the May elections, when numerous school levies failed across Ohio—with only about 23% passing statewide—I saw this philosophy in action. In my neighborhood, Lakota schools and others attempted to slip levies through during low-turnout off-cycle votes, yet many were rejected. Voters are weary of pouring billions into public education systems that deliver mediocre results despite per-pupil spending often exceeding $15,000 to $17,000 annually in large districts. Half-billion-dollar budgets for districts with thousands of students yield outcomes that fail to prepare young people for the risks and rewards of a free market. Instead, we see protests and entitlement mindsets among graduates shaped by these institutions. This is not success; it is a drag, subsidized by the confiscation of wealth from those who actually produce it.

The historical backdrop to this debate is rich and instructive. Governments have long used taxation not merely for basic services but as a tool to consolidate power and redistribute resources, often under the guise of societal benefit. In ancient Rome, heavy taxes on provinces funded imperial excess while stifling local initiative. Medieval European monarchies imposed levies that enriched aristocracies at the expense of merchants and farmers, leading to revolts when burdens grew intolerable. The Marxist tradition, emerging in the 19th century, formalized the idea that private property and profit represent exploitation, necessitating state intervention to “correct” inequalities. Marx and Engels viewed taxes as a mechanism for the proletariat to wrest control, but in practice, such systems—from the Soviet Union to modern Venezuela—have produced stagnation, corruption, and poverty. Wealth creators flee or cease innovating when the fruits of their labor are seized. America, by contrast, was founded on principles of limited government, individual rights, and economic liberty. The progressive income tax, introduced in the early 20th century, marked a shift toward European-style redistribution, with rates climbing dramatically during wartime and the New Deal era. These policies, while raising revenue, often coincided with economic distortions, capital flight, and reduced incentives for risk-taking.

I believe the opposite of the Democratic mantra is true: government, when overgrown, is a primary obstacle to success. High progressive taxation, property taxes, and regulatory burdens raise barriers to entry for aspiring entrepreneurs. Starting a business today requires navigating compliance costs that can run into tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars before the first sale. This environment favors large incumbents who can absorb the overhead, while discouraging the bold who might otherwise create the next wave of jobs and innovation. In places like California and New York, socialist-leaning policies—high taxes, aggressive regulations—have triggered a mass exodus. Businesses and individuals migrate to Texas, Arizona, Florida, and yes, Ohio, seeking friendlier climates. New York’s once-dominant economy unravels as talent and capital depart. Here in Ohio, we see the benefits of more restrained approaches, though even we grapple with remnants of overreach, such as the lingering effects of COVID-era policies.

The COVID lockdowns provide a stark example of the government’s capacity to destroy value under the banner of the collective good. As someone deeply involved in local observations and discussions during that period, I know the decisions made in Ohio under Governor Mike DeWine and Health Director Amy Acton. Acton, often called the state’s version of Dr. Fauci, pushed aggressive measures including school closures, business shutdowns, and even attempts to influence elections. These were framed as necessary for public health, yet they inflicted billions in economic damage. Small businesses folded, families suffered, and mental health crises surged. Ohio’s recovery has been slow in many sectors. I was on calls and followed the developments closely; the reliance on federal guidance from figures like Fauci, whom I believe bears significant responsibility for overreach, turned a health challenge into an economic catastrophe. Republicans like DeWine were not immune to the pressure, but the episode underscores a broader truth: when government wields unchecked power, risk-takers pay the price. Acton’s legacy will haunt her political ambitions, as voters remember the pain inflicted on job creators and families.

In my own life, I have witnessed the power of personal initiative. Married for 38 years, raising children and now enjoying grandchildren, I have balanced family responsibilities with a commitment to understanding these dynamics through relentless reading and community engagement. I have served on grand juries, toured facilities like the Butler County Jail, and spoken directly with officials, including Sheriff Jones. These experiences reveal that institutions function best when they support rather than supplant individual effort. Government excels at certain core functions—national defense, basic infrastructure, rule of law—but falters when it expands into wealth redistribution and micromanagement. The “you didn’t build that” philosophy ignores this. It treats entrepreneurs as lucky beneficiaries of public goods rather than as the engines that generate tax revenue in the first place. Roads and bridges do not appear magically; the productive economy funds them. Without risk-takers investing capital, hiring workers, and innovating, there is no revenue base to maintain them.

Consider the mechanics of wealth creation. Profit is not exploitation but the signal that value has been delivered to customers. An entrepreneur spots a need, assumes the risk of failure—potentially losing savings, home equity, or years of effort—and, if successful, reaps rewards that fund expansion, jobs, and further innovation. Employees benefit from stable paychecks without bearing that upside-downside exposure. Capitalism channels human ambition into mutual gain. Democrats, by contrast, frame profit as something to be clawed back, citing “public investment” as justification. This inverts reality. Public services should be lean and efficient, funded through mechanisms that align costs with usage, such as consumption or sales taxes. Progressive income taxes and property taxes punish success and discourage investment. They extract from paychecks before individuals even see the money, fostering dependency and resentment.

I have long advocated for alternatives. Sales taxes or user fees for services allow people to pay as they go, revealing true demand and preventing blank-check funding for inefficient programs. Public education, for instance, consumes enormous sums with disappointing results. When levies fail, as many did recently in Ohio, it signals voter recognition that more money does not equal better outcomes. Charter schools, vocational training, and market-driven reforms offer paths to genuine improvement. Similarly, infrastructure can be funded through public-private partnerships or dedicated consumption levies rather than general taxation that fuels unrelated entitlements.

The European aristocratic mindset, imported via Marxist academia, underpins much of this thinking. Obama’s formative years, including time in Indonesia and exposure to radical influences, shaped his views. Sanders and Warren draw from the same well. These leaders, often insulated by government salaries and pensions, lecture risk-takers while enjoying security unavailable to those on the front lines of business. They project their reliance on the system onto others, accusing capitalists of freeloading. In truth, it is the administrative state—bloated with high-cost employees delivering marginal value—that leaches off productive society. Protests by young people, many of whom are products of overfunded yet underperforming schools, highlight the failure. They demand “free” everything, unaware that nothing is free; it is merely transferred from creators to consumers via coercion.

Historically, excessive taxation has precipitated decline. In post-war Japan, a one-time capital levy at high rates was attempted but proved exceptional; generally, heavy extraction deters growth. Ancient regimes collapsed under fiscal burdens. America’s success stemmed from low barriers and high rewards for ingenuity. Trump’s policies, emphasizing deregulation and tax relief, align with this by removing impediments. Capitalists support such approaches because they restore incentives. Workers, even those preferring the stability of a paycheck, ultimately thrive when employers can expand profitably. Without risk, there are no rewards—no new jobs, no advancements, no upward mobility.

Critics of capitalism often point to inequality, but they overlook mobility. In the U.S., even without extraordinary guts, one can join a venture started by others and rise. Attacking the rich as villains, as seen in New York under leaders like Hochul or in California, accelerates exodus and hollows out economies. Ohio benefits from inflows of businesses fleeing those burdens. To sustain this, we must reject the “nobody built that” narrative. It demoralizes innovators and empowers looters—politicians who redistribute without creating.

Biblical principles align with this emphasis on personal responsibility and stewardship. Proverbs extols diligence and warns against sloth. The Parable of the Talents rewards those who multiply their gifts through risk and effort. Societies thrive when virtue—integrity, hard work, prudence—underpins economic life, not when government supplants it. Expecting institutions alone to engineer fairness ignores human nature; fallen individuals in power often amplify flaws rather than correct them.

In project management and leadership, which I study extensively, success demands balancing inputs while anchoring in clear objectives. Emotional intelligence helps navigate stakeholder dynamics, but the core vision—rooted in truth—prevails. Applied to governance, this means limited government that enables, not directs, private endeavor. Democrats’ approach inverts this, making the state the protagonist and citizens supporting actors. The result is drag: slower growth, fewer startups, persistent poverty traps.

As I reflect on these issues, my reading reinforces optimism in capitalism’s resilience. Books on economics, history, and management reveal patterns: freer societies outperform controlled ones. Post-dinner sessions and lunch-hour dives into these texts accumulate wisdom. They counter the noise of political rhetoric with evidence. Trump’s embrace of bold risk-takers contrasts sharply with predecessors’ guilt-tripping. Democrats’ frustration stems from seeing their vision erode as voters prioritize opportunity over equity enforced by edict.

Ultimately, I maintain that government is necessary for core functions but becomes detrimental when it claims authorship of private success. The world improves with smaller, accountable, government-funded, transparently incentivizing rather than penalizing risk. Wealth creation demands courage; confiscation breeds complacency. By defending entrepreneurs and reforming taxes toward consumption models, we unlock potential for all—job creators and workers alike. This is the American way, proven through history and lived experience. More must embrace it to counter the Marxist-infused notions still permeating one side of the aisle.

Footnotes

1.  Obama’s Roanoke speech, July 13, 2012, as documented in White House archives and contemporary reports.

2.  Warren’s 2011 remarks on wealth creation and public infrastructure.

3.  Historical analyses of Marxist taxation theories and their implementation in various regimes.

4.  Ohio school levy results from May 2026 elections, showing widespread failures.

5.  Accounts of Ohio COVID response under DeWine and Acton, 2020.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Obama, Barack. Remarks at Campaign Event in Roanoke, Virginia (July 13, 2012).

•  Warren, Elizabeth. Various speeches and writings on economic fairness (2011 onward).

•  Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto and related economic texts.

•  Gilder, George. Wealth and Poverty – Defense of supply-side economics and risk.

•  Sowell, Thomas. Basic Economics – Comprehensive explanation of market principles.

•  Hazlitt, Henry. Economics in One Lesson – On unseen costs of government intervention.

•  Mises, Ludwig von. Human Action – A Treatise on Praxeology and Free Markets.

•  Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom – Advocacy for limited government.

•  Stone, Richard. The Project Management Blueprint (2024) – Insights on leadership and execution.

•  Goleman, Daniel. Emotional Intelligence – For understanding interpersonal dynamics in leadership.

•  Various historical texts on Roman, medieval, and 20th-century taxation policies.

•  Ohio Department of Education reports on school funding and outcomes.

•  Public records on Ohio COVID-19 orders and economic impacts.

•  Additional readings on capital flight from high-tax states (California, New York) versus growth in low-tax states (Texas, Florida).

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

The Power of Unity: How Trump’s Leadership is Reshaping the Republican Party and Defeating Its Enemies

In the rough-and-tumble world of American politics, unity isn’t just a nice idea—it’s a necessity for victory. For years, I’ve watched as divisions within the Republican Party have weakened our ability to fight the real threats facing our nation. The Democrat Party, with its radical agenda to fundamentally transform and often undermine the very foundations of the United States, represents an existential challenge. They don’t want America to succeed on its own terms; they seek control, dependency, and the erosion of our constitutional republic. That’s why, when President Trump endorses candidates who demonstrate loyalty and a willingness to fight, people listen. They follow. And they win. 

I have been saying this for years through my podcasts and writings: the base picks Trump because he represents them—the forgotten men and women who built this country, not the coastal elites or the K Street lobbyists. When Trump came out strongly against Thomas Massie in Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District, many liberals were perplexed, but those of us paying attention weren’t surprised at all. Massie, with his libertarian streak and history of bucking the party on key votes, showed a reckless lack of unity at a time when we desperately need it to confront a hostile opposition. It isn’t ethical or strategic to work against your own party when the goal is to build something strong enough to defeat the Democrats. 

Thomas Massie lost decisively to Trump-backed challenger Ed Gallrein. It wasn’t even close. This outcome validated what I’ve observed in politics, business, and even warfare: when leadership demands cohesion against a common enemy, the people respond if they trust that leader. Trump has earned that trust through fire. They tried to kill him, bankrupt him, jail him, and railroad him through lawfare, yet he stood tall. The American people who stuck with him through it all saw a fighter willing to take on the system. That’s why his endorsements carry such weight. 

The Case Against Division and for Party Discipline

Let me be clear: I am not a libertarian. I’ve never been one, and the “pot-smoking loser libertarian” types like some portray Massie and Rand Paul as don’t represent my worldview. I’m to the right of most Republicans—conservative to the core, guided by a personal love of righteousness, practical business sense, and a refusal to compromise with the enemy. Democrats are the enemy. Not in some hyperbolic sense, but in a real, tangible way: their policies seek to destroy every aspect of traditional American success—energy independence, border security, free speech, economic opportunity, and constitutional order. If they regain full power, the filibuster, rule of law, and much else will be gone or twisted beyond recognition.

I’ve long argued that the Senate filibuster is a mechanism created by and for the lobbyist class. I hate K Street. I hate the corporate parasites who don’t create value but suck value from the system through deals made in smoke-filled rooms. They preserve their power by slowing everything down, allowing insider trading on information and stripping the people’s will from legislation. The filibuster empowers this. Getting rid of it would be a blow to their influence. Of course, senators love it—secure in their six-year terms, they can make deals that last beyond any president’s time in office. 

I’ve had the chance to see this up close. Conversations with people like Bernie Moreno, now a great senator from Ohio, confirm what many suspect. These institutionalists thought Trump would come and go, but the movement he built is permanent. Mitch McConnell-style operators believed they could control the levers of power and cut deals with lobbyists long after Trump left the stage. They were wrong. The people who picked Trump want results, not perpetual compromise. 

Massie’s loss sends a clear message: working against the party when unity is required carries consequences. His district in northern Kentucky—home to horse breeders and conservative strongholds—knew Trump, trusted Trump, and followed Trump’s lead. I know that area well through friends and connections. They want wins, not ideological purity tests that hand victories to Democrats. 

The Railroad Job and the Deep State

On the same day Trump moved against Massie, he endorsed Ken Paxton in Texas against incumbent John Cornyn. I really want to see Paxton win. I’ve seen railroading in corporate culture, in military contexts, and in politics. It’s a tactic of control: manipulate the narrative, isolate the target, and eliminate opposition. The deep state—those power players in Tysons Corner, near the Pentagon and CIA—thrives on this. They live insulated lives, far removed from the Walmart shoppers and working families. They want insiders who attend their Fairfax County parties, who compromise for access. 

Trump’s endorsement of Paxton was bold, coming right in the middle of voting. It shows his willingness to fight the swamp directly. Paxton has been a warrior for Texas, taking on battles others avoid. Eliminating RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) like Cornyn strengthens the Senate. With more fighters like Bernie Moreno, we gain ammunition to pass real America First policies. 

Most elections have seen rigging or interference over time—2020 being a prime example with mountains of evidence that the corporate media and tech suppressed. The deep state puts its fingers on the scale to favor those who protect their interests. Venezuela and other actors have meddled; why wouldn’t domestic players? Trump represents the antidote: a man too big to buy, with an ego and fight that refuses to lose. 

Why People Follow Trump: Authenticity Over Ideology

People can’t always be bought with money or thoughts. The active base in Ohio and across the country proved this by sticking with Trump through hell. They want someone who fights the system, not joins it. That’s why Vivek Ramaswamy will likely win in Ohio—he aligns with that energy. Libertarian holdouts who campaigned against party unity shame themselves; they’re keeping swamp creatures alive. 

I want practical sense in government—business leverage, negotiation skills, ethical voting of conscience without aiding the enemy. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Ron Paul had appeal in the Tea Party days, but ideology without winning is useless. Trump brings both fight and results.

In 2016-2017, I predicted the Democrat Party would face bankruptcy by around 2021 due to their own excesses and Trump’s disruption. COVID shenanigans delayed some of that, but the trajectory holds. With honest elections and Trump’s influence, we see victories: Massie gone, potential Paxton win, stronger majorities. 

Building Representative Government

Representative government means listening to the people, not K Street. Compromise with lobbyists has run our country into the ground. Eliminating figures like Massie and Cornyn is part of draining that swamp. Trump is doing what we asked: delivering power back to the voters who elected him legitimately.

The age of disclosure is upon us. We must understand not just earthly politics but the deeper “politics of heaven”—moral clarity, truth over expediency, and a republic that reflects higher principles. Politics isn’t separate from righteousness; it’s an arena where it must be defended.

This isn’t blind loyalty. It’s strategic unity against those who want to destroy our way of life. Democrats may never sit at the table again if we succeed. That’s the goal: a strong, healthy debate within a victorious conservative movement that rebuilds America.

Footnotes

1.  On party unity and primary dynamics: Primary challenges test loyalty. Historical parallels include Reagan’s influence over the GOP in the 1980s.

2.  Filibuster history: Originated as a procedural tool but weaponized for special interests. See Senate Rule XXII.

3.  Deep state concepts: Refer to works on administrative state expansion, e.g., bureaucracy growth post-New Deal.

4.  2020 election integrity: Multiple affidavits, statistical anomalies, and suppressed stories (Hunter Biden laptop) provide context, though courts dismissed many on procedural grounds.

5.  Trump’s resilience: Assassination attempts, legal battles documented extensively in public records.

Bibliography (vast selection for further reading):

•  “The Art of the Deal” by Donald J. Trump – Practical negotiation in politics.

•  Federalist Papers (esp. No. 10 on factions) – Foundations of representative government.

•  “Deep State” by Mike Lofgren – Insider view of bureaucratic power.

•  “A Republic, If You Can Keep It” by Russell Kirk – Conservative principles.

•  Biographies of Reagan, Coolidge for party realignment.

•  “The Road to Serfdom” by F.A. Hayek – Warnings on centralized power.

•  Congressional Research Service reports on filibuster and lobbying.

•  Election integrity studies from Heritage Foundation and others.

•  “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion” by Robert Cialdini – On why endorsements matter.

•  Works by Thomas Sowell, Victor Davis Hanson on cultural and political divides.

•  Ohio and Kentucky political histories, voter guides from 2026 cycles.

•  “The Politics of Heaven” theological/political intersections (various Christian conservative authors).

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

It’s Disclosure Day: What does it all mean

I have spent decades talking about extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena, and what it all might mean for our place in the cosmos. For years, I’ve said the universe is teeming with life, that interactions with Earth have been ongoing for a very long time, and that the real story is far more layered—and far less apocalyptic—than the government narratives or Hollywood thrillers would have us believe. Now, in this moment of partial disclosure, with President Trump directing the release of the first tranche of UAP and UFO files just days ago on May 8, 2026, it feels like the conversation I’ve been having privately and publicly is finally stepping into the open. The Pentagon has begun posting declassified documents, videos, and reports spanning decades—no redactions on the core encounter data. More releases are promised in the weeks ahead. Even Jon Stewart, a voice not often aligned with Trump, has acknowledged the significance of this push for transparency. It’s a rare point of bipartisan curiosity: Hillary Clinton pushed for it, Barack Obama’s team explored it (including through Netflix projects), and now the files are coming out. People on the left and right alike have wondered about this for generations. Yet for me, the excitement isn’t about shock or fear. It’s about finally peeling back layers of distraction and getting closer to honest questions about who we are, where we came from, and what we’ve inherited from a solar system that bears the scars of ancient catastrophe. 

My own thoughts on aliens and extraterrestrials have never been about little green men invading or superior beings dictating our future. I’ve always viewed them as fellow lifeforms—complex, varied, and interacting with our world in ways both subtle and overt. I believe Earth itself was seeded, settled, or at least profoundly influenced by beings from elsewhere in our solar system. Mars, I suspect, was once inhabited or used as a waystation by civilizations much like our own. Other planets or moons in the system likely hosted outposts too. Over time, evidence will mount showing human-like peoples once thrived across the inner solar system. The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter? I’m convinced that was once a full planet—sometimes called Phaeton in the old hypotheses—that was catastrophically destroyed. Its annihilation sent debris raining across the system, devastating Mars, scarring Earth, and leaving the rubble we see today as the asteroid belt. Fragments from that event, massive meteorites and nitrogen-rich impacts, have been documented in our geological record and even in Smithsonian collections. These events didn’t just reshape landscapes; they left a deep, often hidden trauma in human culture—a collective memory encoded in myth, biology, and the very ground we walk on. 

That trauma, I think, explains so much of our species’ drive for meaning, our fascination with the stars, and our recurring encounters with the unexplained. Consider Serpent Mound in southern Ohio. This ancient effigy, shaped like a coiling serpent and built by Native American cultures around 1000 AD (though some estimates place related activity earlier), sits directly on the edge of a confirmed impact crater over 300 million years old. The Serpent Mound Impact Structure is an eight-kilometer-wide scar left by an asteroid or comet strike during the late Paleozoic era. Modern geology only confirmed its impact origin in the 20th century through shatter cones, shocked quartz, and other unmistakable signatures. Yet the builders of the mound chose that precise location with extraordinary intentionality. They couldn’t have known—through any conventional surveying available to them in 100 BC or 100 AD—that they were perched on the rim of an ancient cosmic wound. The crater had long been eroded and buried under sediment; its true nature was only revealed by modern science. So how did they know? I believe knowledge was passed down through generations, perhaps via oral tradition, visiting intelligences, or some lingering cultural memory of the original seeding events. They didn’t build it randomly while “staring at the stars.” They responded to a profound psychological and spiritual imperative: mark the site of catastrophe, honor the memory, perhaps even encode a warning or a map of resilience. Serpent Mound isn’t just art or ritual; it’s a living footnote to solar-system history. 

These ideas didn’t come to me overnight. I’ve studied crop circles for years—those intricate, often overnight formations in fields worldwide that defy easy explanation. Some are hoaxes, sure, but many show geometric precision, bent-not-broken stalks, and electromagnetic anomalies that suggest something more. I see them as one modern expression of the same intelligence that might have influenced Serpent Mound or the biblical visions. They’re messages, experiments, or territorial markers from intelligences that move through dimensions or technologies we’re only beginning to glimpse. And now, as we approach the June 2026 release of Steven Spielberg’s new film Disclosure Day—a return to his roots in Close Encounters and E.T.—the cultural timing feels deliberate. Spielberg has always understood that the alien question taps into something primal: wonder mixed with unease. His movie will likely amplify the conversation, but I hope it steers us toward curiosity rather than panic. 

The most dangerous element in all this disclosure talk has never been the extraterrestrials themselves. It’s the governments that have hoarded the information. I’ve said for years that the real threat is institutional secrecy used to justify black budgets, psychological operations, and technological monopolies. Look at Roswell in 1947. The official story flipped from “flying disc” to “weather balloon,” but witnesses and leaked documents point to recovered craft and non-human bodies. Those materials, lore insists, ended up at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base—specifically in facilities whispered about as Hangar 18. Bodies allegedly preserved, materials studied. I don’t see these beings as gods or conquerors. They’re more like mosquitoes in a photograph of a flower—another lifeform sharing the frame, interacting at their level. Some may be biological drones or probes; others, advanced explorers. The government, however, amplified the threat narrative: super-intelligent invaders with gravity-defying tech. Why? To rationalize endless funding for reverse-engineering programs. And the timeline fits suspiciously well. We went from propeller planes to supersonic jets, stealth technology, and radar-evading systems in a historical blink—right after Roswell. Coincidence? Or harvested knowledge traded or reverse-engineered? I suspect the latter. We would have reached these breakthroughs eventually through human ingenuity, but the acceleration smells of external influence. 

I’ve had my own encounters with flying saucers. I won’t dramatize them here as some heroic standoff; they were quiet, observational moments that left me with a profound sense of perspective rather than fear. These crafts didn’t feel hostile or overwhelming in a superior way. They moved with technology that suggests mastery of dimensions or energy we’re still grasping—faster travel, perhaps interdimensional shifts. But the beings behind them strike me as competitors for space and resources, not infallible overlords. They’re lifeforms, flawed and curious like us. Demonizing them serves power structures more than truth. It keeps the public dependent: “Big government will protect you from the scary unknown.” I reject that entirely. Disclosure should empower individuals, not centralize control.

This perspective doesn’t undermine faith or the Bible; it enriches it. Scripture is filled with accounts that read like modern UAP encounters when viewed without preconception. Ezekiel’s vision of the wheel within a wheel—fiery, spinning, moving with purpose—sounds an awful lot like a technological craft. Elijah’s chariot of fire ascended in a whirlwind. The “watchers” and Nephilim in Genesis are echoed in the Book of Enoch and in fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran. Those scrolls, preserved in caves near the Dead Sea, contain texts like the Genesis Apocryphon that fuel speculation about otherworldly parentage and paranormal events. Enoch walks with angels, receives heavenly knowledge; giants roam the earth before the flood. These aren’t contradictions to a creator God. They’re records of a cosmos alive with activity—paranormal, multidimensional, ongoing for millennia. Ancient alien speculations, while sometimes fanciful, ask the right questions: What if the “gods” of old were visitors? What if our myths encode real interactions? Modern science’s comfortable Darwinian narrative—life evolving slowly in isolation—feels increasingly convenient rather than complete. It suited a materialist worldview that ignored inconvenient anomalies. The real answers likely lie in a synthesis: seeded life, guided evolution, cosmic neighbors, all under a divine framework far grander than we imagined. 

Human culture carries this hidden trauma—the memory of planetary destruction, of refugees or colonists arriving here after catastrophe. The Phaeton event (or whatever we ultimately call the lost planet) wasn’t just astronomical; it was existential. Mars shows scars of sudden devastation. Earth endured meteor showers and climatic upheavals. Our biology and psychology may still echo that displacement. Serpent Mound stands as one deliberate act of remembrance. Crop circles might be another. Even our drive to explore space, to reach Mars and beyond, could be a subconscious return to ancestral homes. The files now being released—Apollo mission transcripts mentioning anomalies, military pilot encounters, recovered materials—will force us to confront this inheritance.

As more documents roll out, I expect confirmation of what many have suspected: that interactions are real, that bodies and craft have been studied, and that the phenomenon spans history. But the takeaway shouldn’t be terror or worship. It should be humility and agency. We are not alone, yet we remain responsible for our planet, our societies, and our moral choices. Extraterrestrials aren’t here to save or enslave us; they’re part of a larger ecology. The government’s role in demonizing or gatekeeping has been the true barrier to understanding. Transparency, as Trump is delivering, shifts power back to the people. We get to decide what it means.

I’ve advocated this view for years because the questions matter more than the tidy answers science or institutions once offered. Ancient alien theories entertain, but they also challenge laziness in our worldview. Why assume isolation when evidence—geological, textual, anecdotal—points to connection? The Spielberg film will dramatize one vision of disclosure; the real one is unfolding now through declassified files and open dialogue. I hope that we approach it with the same discipline and clarity I’ve applied to every other domain of life: prepare through knowledge, reject fear as a control mechanism, and embrace responsibility.

The cosmos is vast, ancient, and inhabited. Earth’s story is intertwined with it. From the ruins of Phaeton to the precision of Serpent Mound, from Roswell’s wreckage to biblical chariots, the thread is continuity—not conquest. Disclosure isn’t the end of our story; it’s the beginning of a more honest chapter. I look forward to what comes next—not with dread, but with the quiet confidence that comes from long reflection on these matters. We’ve always been part of something bigger. Now we get to see it clearly.

Footnotes

¹ Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP, Department of War release, May 8, 2026.

² Pentagon initial tranche of UAP files, May 8, 2026.

³ Phaeton (hypothetical planet), Wikipedia, and historical astronomical hypotheses.

⁴ Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Serpent Mound Impact Structure documentation.

⁵ Wikipedia and Earth Impact Database entry on Serpent Mound crater.

⁶ Steven Spielberg’s Disclosure Day official teaser and release details, Universal Pictures, 2026.

⁷ Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and Roswell lore, including Hangar 18 references.

⁸ Dead Sea Scrolls scholarship, Genesis Apocryphon, and Enochic literature.

⁹ Ezekiel’s vision and biblical UAP interpretations in scholarly and popular analysis.

Bibliography & Further Reading / Viewing

UFO/UAP Disclosure & Government Files

•  Department of War / Pentagon UAP release archives (war.gov/ufo, May 2026 tranche).

•  The Roswell Report: Case Closed (U.S. Air Force, 1994/1997 updates).

•  David Grusch congressional testimony and related UAP hearings (2023 onward).

Ancient Catastrophe & Solar System History

•  Phaeton (Hypothetical Planet) – Titius-Bode law and disruption theories (various astronomical histories).

•  Keith Milam et al., Guide to the Serpent Mound Impact Structure (Ohio DNR Geological Survey).

•  Richard Firestone et al., The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes (on Younger Dryas and impact events).

Biblical & Ancient Texts

•  The Book of Enoch (R.H. Charles translation; Dead Sea Scrolls fragments).

•  Genesis Apocryphon from Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls).

•  Josef Blumrich, The Spaceships of Ezekiel (NASA engineer’s technical analysis).

Cultural & Speculative

•  Erich von Däniken, Chariots of the Gods? (foundational ancient astronaut theory).

•  Graham Hancock, Fingerprints of the Gods (catastrophe and lost civilizations).

•  Steven Spielberg, Disclosure Day (forthcoming 2026 film).

•  Jacques Vallée, Passport to Magonia (folklore and UFO parallels).

Historical Tools & Archives

•  Smithsonian Institution meteorite and impact collections.

•  Library of Congress historical UFO report archives.

•  University of New Brunswick Earth Impact Database.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

Polling has Jon Husted Winning in 2026: But don’t take anything for granted

Looking at the data, I feel really good about where things stand with Jon Husted running to keep the United States Senate seat that Governor Mike DeWine appointed him to after JD Vance became Vice President. It was back in January 2025 when Vance resigned from the Senate to take the oath of office as VP, and DeWine made the smart call to send Jon Husted up to Washington to fill that vacancy until the people could vote on it in the special election this November 2026. Jon had already proven himself as lieutenant governor, as secretary of state, and even before that as Speaker of the Ohio House, but getting that individual platform in the Senate has let him shine in ways I always knew he could. I get to meet a lot of people through my work and my networks here in Ohio, and I do know Jon Husted a little bit—we share quite a few mutual friends, and I’ve been on conference calls with him during the thick of the COVID days, when he was still lieutenant governor. Those calls were tough for him personally because he’s a pro-business guy at heart, and he wasn’t thrilled being wrapped up in the administration’s policies that sometimes felt like they were driving everything over a cliff, especially with the health director calling so many shots. He had to stand there as one of the three faces, giving daily updates on protocols and representing the governor’s point of view, even when it went against his own instincts to keep businesses alive and families working. But even then, I saw how he operated in the background, whispering in the right ears and pushing back on some of the worst lockdown ideas, especially around business interruption insurance claims and keeping some sanity in the administration that could have gone even further off the rails. I can personally say that because I was on several of those phone calls where Jon presented ideas that helped pull things back from the edge, and it showed me he’s the kind of leader who gets results even when he’s not the one out front taking all the credit. Now that he’s in the Senate as an individual voice rather than part of a team, he’s been able to put a sharp professional edge on the issues that matter most to Ohio, like election integrity and preventing fraud through simple, common-sense measures like voter ID that should be national policy for every federal election. He’s done a monumental job in his short time there, and I’m proud of him for it—proud enough that I think it’s going to be fantastic for him to win a full term and stand alongside Bernie Moreno as Ohio’s two Republican senators. Having Bernie and Jon in those seats would be exciting for the state, especially after Bernie knocked off Sherrod Brown in 2024, one of the most satisfying political upsets in recent memory. 

Sherrod Brown, of course, is trying to sneak back into politics now that the seat is up for grabs in this special election. He lost to Bernie Moreno fair and square in 2024, but Brown has always been the face of progressive politics in Ohio—the Democrat embodiment of everything that’s wrong with big government overreach, endless spending, and policies that hurt working families while pretending to help them. He wants back in bad, and he’s campaigning hard against Jon, but the polling right now tells a story that should make every conservative in Ohio breathe a little easier, at least for the moment. RealClearPolitics, as of late April 2026, has Jon Husted at 48.3 percent and Sherrod Brown at 45.7 percent, and that three-point edge holds pretty steady across most of the well-known polling houses that are out there. It’s early—primaries are May 5, and the general is still months away in November—but for a race this high-profile, that lead feels significant. I don’t put a ton of stock in polls the way some people do because a lot of conservatives I know are too busy living their lives and working to sit around answering pollsters, while the other side tends to over-sample their base. So when Republicans show even a slight edge this far out, it’s actually quite telling. Ohio has been trending more Republican for years now, and Trump’s influence has redefined the kind of union voters who used to automatically go Democrat in the north, where Brown built his career. Those folks—steelworkers, autoworkers, the backbone of Ohio’s industrial heart—are now openly voting for whoever Trump picks, and that includes Jon Husted. It’s a three- or four-point swing that used to go the other way, giving Democrats a shot in what they thought was a purple state. But Trump pulled Ohio by double digits in 2024, and the same momentum is carrying over. Brown isn’t saying anything new; he’s been peddling the same progressive line for decades, and people have caught on. The voters who swung eleven points or more toward Trump from Obama or Biden eras aren’t going back. 

What makes me even more optimistic is how Jon has handled his short run as senator so far. He came in with a track record that screams competence and results. As Ohio secretary of state, he was the architect of “easy to vote, hard to cheat” election reforms, including voter ID requirements that have held up in court and proven themselves in real elections. Ohio’s system is a model now—strict enough to prevent fraud but accessible enough that turnout keeps climbing. In the Senate, one of the first big things Jon did was introduce S. 4155, a bill to require photo identification as a condition of casting a ballot in federal elections nationwide, along with other security measures. That’s exactly the kind of common-sense reform we need to stop the kind of loose election laws in other states that invite problems. He’s also sponsored the Upward Mobility Act to tackle the benefits cliff that traps people in poverty by punishing them for earning more, the Critical Minerals Investment Tax Modernization Act to boost American manufacturing and reduce dependence on China, and even Sammy’s Law for protecting kids in certain contexts. He’s pushed the No Fentanyl on Social Media Act and worked on railway safety improvements. In his first year alone, three of his bills were signed into law, including a Congressional Review Act resolution that repealed a Biden-era appliance-efficiency rule that would have driven up costs for Ohio families on everything from air conditioners to washing machines. Jon also helped pass tax relief through the Working Families Tax Cuts Act—no taxes on tips or overtime, expanded child tax credits, and income tax cuts that put real money back in people’s pockets, about $7,000 more per average Ohio family. That’s the kind of pro-growth, pro-family work that defines him, and it’s why I think he’s going to be even better with a full six-year term. 

I contrast that with Sherrod Brown, and it’s night and day. Brown built his brand on being a populist for workers, but his voting record in the Senate for eighteen years showed something different—support for trade deals that hollowed out Ohio manufacturing, big spending bills that fueled inflation, and resistance to basic security like voter ID, which he’s called an “unnecessary barrier.” He lost in 2024 because Ohio voters saw through it; they wanted real change, not the same old progressive package wrapped in a union jacket. Now he’s back, trying to reclaim the seat, outraising Jon in the first quarter of 2026 with over twelve million dollars, but money alone doesn’t win when the ground has shifted. Ohio is redder than it’s been in decades. Trump’s coalition—working-class voters, rural folks, even some traditional Democrats—has stuck. Recent polls even show Jon leading among union households, which would have been unthinkable ten years ago. A Coalition to Protect American Workers survey had Husted up 48-42 in union homes, and that’s before Trump comes through Ohio this summer, campaigning hard for Jon, for Vivek Ramaswamy in the governor’s race, and the whole Republican ticket. Once that engagement kicks in, I expect the numbers to move even more in Jon’s favor. People are busy right now—spring planting, kids in school, jobs humming along under better economic policies—but by fall, with Trump on the trail and the contrast clear, turnout will favor us. 

The path for Brown to close that gap just isn’t there. From now until November, what’s he going to say that he hasn’t said for a decade? Nothing new. His policies haven’t changed, and neither have the results they produced—higher costs, more regulation, government telling businesses and families what to do. Jon, meanwhile, has been delivering. He’s advocated for veterans’ access to care, fought for better competition in health insurance to lower costs, and kept the focus on Ohio values: hard work, personal responsibility, secure borders, and safe elections. During his time as lieutenant governor and in those COVID calls I mentioned, I saw firsthand how he balanced loyalty to the administration with pushing for sanity—preventing some of the worst lockdown overreach that hurt small businesses like mine and thousands of others across the state. He wasn’t the one driving the bus off the cliff; he was trying to steer it back. That experience prepared him perfectly for the Senate, where he’s now able to operate without the constraints of being number two. He’s a workhorse, just like DeWine said when he appointed him, focused on Ohio but with a national vision on issues like election security that affect every American. 

Looking at the bigger picture, keeping this seat Republican is crucial for the Senate majority. Republicans hold 53-45 right now, and projections had Democrats hoping to pick up seats like this one because they thought Ohio was still competitive and Brown was more popular than he really is. But the data shows otherwise. Ohio went for Trump by eleven points or more in recent cycles, and the coattails are real. Bernie Moreno’s win in 2024 flipped a long-held Democratic seat and proved the shift. Now, Jon defending Vance’s seat would lock in two solid Republican senators who actually represent the state’s values rather than Washington special interests. I’ve followed Brown’s career, and while he talks a good game about workers, his support for open borders and amnesty policies has hurt Ohio families through wage suppression and strained public services. Jon’s approach—secure elections, pro-business policies, and upward mobility—actually delivers results. Look at Ohio’s economy under the Republican trifecta in recent years: unemployment is low, manufacturing jobs are returning, and energy production is up. Jon was part of that as lieutenant governor, championing tax cuts and school choice through EdChoice expansions that gave parents real options. As secretary of state, he modernized elections without the chaos you see in states with loose rules. Those are the facts on the ground, and they’re why I think Brown’s comeback attempt is more nostalgia than momentum. 

Of course, none of this is automatic. I don’t take anything for granted in politics because I’ve seen too many races where good candidates coasted and let the other side sneak in through low turnout or last-minute surprises. Engagement is everything here. Conservatives need to stay fired up, not just assume the lead will hold. Yard signs, door-knocking, sharing facts on social media, and especially making sure friends and family vote early or on Election Day—that’s how we finish strong. Jon knows how to win; he’s been in tough races before, and his team is professional. But we can’t fall asleep at the wheel. Trump will be here campaigning this summer, putting his name behind Jon and the ticket, and that will energize the base. The union shift I mentioned earlier is real and permanent because Trump redefined what it means to fight for workers—tariffs to protect American steel, energy independence, and no more endless foreign wars draining resources. Those voters in Youngstown, Toledo, and the Mahoning Valley aren’t going back to Brown’s brand of politics. Add in voter ID security nationwide, and Democrats lose their edge in close races where fraud has historically been a factor in low-security states. Ohio proves simple measures work: turnout hasn’t suffered, but integrity has improved. Jon’s national push for photo ID is exactly the safeguard we need so we don’t have to chase conspiracy theories—we prevent the problem upfront. 

Personally, knowing Jon the way I do—even if it’s through those shared circles and the calls—gives me extra confidence. He’s not some career politician chasing headlines; he’s a guy who built a career on results in state government and now brings that to the federal level. He wasn’t happy being the administration’s spokesperson during the height of the health mandates because it clashed with his pro-business worldview, but he handled it with class and still found ways to mitigate the damage behind the scenes. I remember one call in particular where he laid out concerns about how certain policies were hurting small businesses and insurance claims, and it led to adjustments that helped real people. That’s the kind of quiet leadership Ohio needs in the Senate—someone who whispers sanity into the process rather than grandstanding. Now in the Senate, he’s out front on the issues that matter: election security, tax relief, and reducing regulations that hurt families. His first-year accomplishments speak for themselves—three bills signed, more in the pipeline, and a focus on making life more affordable for Ohioans. Contrast that with Brown, who spent years in the Senate voting for policies that drove up costs and left working people behind. The numbers don’t lie: Ohio families are better off under the current direction, and Jon is part of continuing that.

As we head into the summer and then the fall campaign, I expect things to get even better for Jon. Trump’s rallies will draw huge crowds, the economy under better national policies will keep improving, and the contrast with Brown’s tired progressive pitch will sharpen. But we still have work to do. Don’t sit on the sidelines thinking it’s in the bag. Talk to your neighbors, share the polling data and Jon’s record, volunteer if you can, and make sure voter turnout is sky-high. Ohio deserves two strong Republican senators who fight for us every day—Jon Husted and Bernie Moreno delivering on the promises that got us here. I’m excited about the future because leaders like Jon represent the best of what Ohio has to offer: practical, pro-growth, integrity-focused governance. Sherrod Brown had his time, and the voters spoke in 2024. Now it’s Jon’s turn to finish what he started in the appointment and earn the full term. I’ve seen enough in my years following this stuff to know momentum like this doesn’t come along every cycle, but it can slip if we get complacent. So let’s stay engaged, keep pushing the message, and make sure Jon crosses the finish line strong in November. Ohio will be better for it, and the country will benefit from another solid conservative voice in the Senate who actually gets things done.

Footnotes

1.  Ballotpedia, United States Senate special election in Ohio, 2026.

2.  Wikipedia, 2026 United States Senate special election in Ohio.

3.  RealClearPolitics, 2026 Ohio Senate Special Election – Husted vs. Brown polling average.

4.  Congress.gov, Senator Jon Husted’s legislation record, including S.4155 (voter ID) and S.3583 (Upward Mobility Act).

5.  Ohio Capital Journal reports on fundraising and polls.

6.  Emerson College Polling, Ohio 2026 surveys.

7.  Governor.ohio.gov, announcement of Husted appointment.

8.  Husted.senate.gov, press releases on first-year accomplishments.

9.  Washington Examiner, poll on union voters.

10.  New York Times, Ohio U.S. Senate Election 2026 polls tracker.

Bibliography

•  Ballotpedia. “United States Senate special election in Ohio, 2026.” Accessed April 29, 2026. https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Ohio,_2026

•  Wikipedia. “2026 United States Senate special election in Ohio.” Last updated April 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Ohio

•  RealClearPolitics. “2026 Ohio Senate Special Election – Husted vs. Brown.” Polling data through April 2026. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2026/senate/oh/2026_ohio_senate_special_election_husted_vs_brown-8689.html

•  Congress.gov. “Member Profile: Jon Husted.” Bills sponsored, 119th Congress. https://www.congress.gov/member/jon-husted/H001104

•  Ohio Capital Journal. “Democrat Sherrod Brown leads Ohio Republican U.S. Sen. Jon Husted in quarterly fundraising.” February 4, 2026.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

Amy Acton, the Puppet of Marc Elias: When they can’t defend their record, they send cease and desist letters, hoping to hide their past

In the bustling parking lot of Ohio’s brand-new Buc-ee’s just north of Dayton off I-70, Dr. Amy Acton posed for what was meant to be a wholesome campaign snapshot—a smiling physician-turned-politician standing beside the gleaming Texas-sized travel center, projecting the image of a nice, relatable lady who shops where everyday Buckeyes shop. The first Ohio Buc-ee’s opened in Huber Heights in early April 2026, drawing massive crowds and national attention for its clean restrooms, fresh brisket, and over-the-top convenience. Acton’s team seized the moment, posting the photo to humanize her, to say, “See? She’s just like you.” But the optics couldn’t paper over the deeper story unfolding in this 2026 gubernatorial race. While Acton tried to reset her image with photo ops and bedside-manner charm, Vivek Ramaswamy was drawing genuine, overflowing crowds of longtime Ohio friends, family, and supporters who have known him since he was a boy in Cincinnati—people who remember his parents’ immigrant journey, his entrepreneurial drive, and the decades of personal relationships that speak louder than any staged picture. You can judge a person by the company they keep, and Ramaswamy’s circle spills over with proud, authentic voices from his past who have stuck with him through every chapter of his life. Acton’s campaign, by contrast, feels increasingly desperate, resorting to high-powered Washington lawyers to silence critics rather than defend her record. 

To understand why this race matters so much to Ohio’s future, you have to go back to the spring of 2020, when Dr. Amy Acton served as Director of the Ohio Department of Health under Republican Governor Mike DeWine. She wasn’t elected; she was appointed. Yet she became the public face of some of the nation’s most aggressive COVID-19 policies. On March 22, 2020—when Ohio had reported just a handful of deaths—Acton helped lead the state into one of the earliest and strictest lockdowns anywhere. Schools closed statewide for the rest of the academic year. “Non-essential” businesses shuttered overnight. Stay-at-home orders restricted movement. Nursing homes were locked down, isolating vulnerable residents from loved ones. Capacity limits, mask mandates, and social-distancing rules followed, all modeled closely on guidance from the CDC and Dr. Anthony Fauci. Acton appeared in daily press briefings alongside DeWine, projecting calm authority while estimating infection numbers that frightened the public into compliance. She resigned in June 2020 amid growing protests outside her home, but the policies she championed reshaped Ohio in ways the state is still recovering from six years later. 

The human and economic toll of those decisions has been documented in mounting data. Ohio’s unemployment rate rocketed from 4.9 percent to 16.4 percent in a single month—the sharpest spike in modern state history. Thousands of small businesses, restaurants, gyms, and retailers never reopened. Hospitality and tourism sectors collapsed. Learning loss among schoolchildren, especially in low-income districts, was catastrophic; studies projected lifetime economic losses in the hundreds of billions for Ohio alone due to missed instruction and widened achievement gaps. Mental health crises exploded: overdoses rose sharply, youth depression and suicide ideation increased, and isolation in nursing homes contributed to excess deaths beyond the virus itself—many from untreated conditions, delayed care, or despair. Nationwide analyses, including those examining excess mortality, have increasingly questioned whether the most restrictive measures saved more lives than they cost, when indirect harms are weighed. In Ohio, the early modeling that justified the lockdowns proved overly pessimistic, yet the policies remained locked in place longer than in many peer states. Acton has never fully reckoned with this in her campaign. Instead, she positions herself as “a doctor, not a politician,” emphasizing her roots in working-class Youngstown and her compassion. But for families who lost businesses, kids who fell behind, or elderly residents who died alone, those words ring hollow. The statistics don’t lie: the lockdown playbook—drawn from federal guidance influenced by international models—inflicted measurable, lasting damage on Ohio’s economy, education system, and social fabric. 

Fast-forward to 2026, and Acton is the presumptive Democratic nominee for governor, running with David Pepper—former chair of the Ohio Democrat Party—as her lieutenant governor pick. Polls show the race tightening or even tilting her way slightly in some surveys, despite Ohio’s deep Republican lean. Her campaign message focuses on affordability, families, and pushing back against “special interests.” Yet when journalists and commentators like Jack Windsor of the Ohio Press Network dig into her record—whether the 2020 policies, the resurfaced 2019 Bexley police report, or other public details—her team doesn’t debate the substance. They deploy heavy legal artillery. The Acton/Pepper campaign has retained Elias Law Group, the Washington, D.C., firm founded by Marc Elias, the Democratic election lawyer infamous for his role in the 2016 Clinton campaign’s Steele dossier efforts, post-2020 litigation challenging election integrity claims, and aggressive legal maneuvers nationwide. Elias’s firm has sent cease-and-desist letters to outlets and commentators questioning Acton, framing routine investigative reporting as defamation or libel. These aren’t polite corrections; they are designed to intimidate, to force journalists and critics into defensive silence rather than risk costly litigation—even when the recipients know the claims lack merit. 

This tactic is classic lawfare, and it’s especially galling because Acton is now a public figure running for the highest office in the state. Under the landmark U.S. Supreme Court precedent New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), public officials and candidates must prove “actual malice”—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth—to win defamation suits. The bar is deliberately high to protect robust political debate and press freedom. Elias’s team knows this, yet the letters keep coming. They mirror the same playbook used in the 2020 election challenges: procedural delays, technical objections, and resource-draining threats to bury inconvenient truths under paperwork and fear. David Pepper, Acton’s running mate, has long been a fixture in Democratic politics, and his involvement signals the campaign’s strategy—control the narrative through insiders rather than earn voter trust through transparency. When a police report from August 2019 resurfaced—detailing a verbal domestic dispute at the Acton home over her long work hours, where both she and her husband admitted to drinking, she had taken prescription medication, she shattered a large mirror in frustration, and she was heading toward her car until her husband physically intervened—no charges were filed, and officers noted no physical violence. It was a private family moment turned public by her candidacy. Yet instead of addressing it head-on or releasing more context, the campaign and its allies dismiss questions as “attacks” while Elias’s firm fires off warnings. The report is public record. Citizens have every right to weigh it when evaluating a candidate who once directed public health policy affecting millions. 

Contrast this with Vivek Ramaswamy. The Republican frontrunner grew up in Ohio, built a successful biotech company from scratch, and ran a high-profile 2024 presidential campaign that put him in the national spotlight. His support isn’t manufactured through consultants or photo ops. Crowds at his events include people who knew him as a kid, family friends who watched him navigate his Indian-immigrant parents’ sacrifices, and longtime associates who have seen his character tested over decades. That kind of organic loyalty doesn’t come from polling consultants or law-firm intimidation. Ramaswamy’s platform emphasizes prosperity, limited government, school choice, economic freedom, and a rejection of the bureaucratic overreach that defined the COVID era. He has visited every county, secured endorsements from sheriffs, unions in some cases, and grassroots conservatives who remember exactly who was at the podium issuing orders in 2020. His running mate, Senate President Rob McColley, brings institutional knowledge and legislative heft. Together, they represent a future-oriented conservatism rooted in Ohio values—innovation, hard work, and accountability—rather than nostalgia for the administrative state. 

The deeper issue here transcends one race. When campaigns hire the likes of Marc Elias to muzzle journalists covering a candidate’s public record—whether COVID policies that harmed families or personal incidents that raise legitimate character questions—they erode the very foundation of representative government. Free speech and a free press exist precisely so voters can vet those who seek power. Ohioans paid a steep price for Acton’s lockdown decisions: lost livelihoods, educational setbacks that will echo for generations, and a lingering sense that government overstepped its bounds under the banner of “following the science.” Data now shows that many of those measures delivered marginal or questionable benefits relative to their costs. Excess mortality studies and economic analyses continue to reveal the trade-offs. Yet instead of debating that record openly, the campaign seeks to shut down the conversation. That’s not leadership; it’s the same insider playbook that has eroded trust in institutions nationwide. Elias’s history—tied to efforts to litigate away election challenges in 2020 and beyond—only underscores the pattern: when the facts are uncomfortable, deploy lawyers to redefine reality. 

Ramaswamy, by contrast, invites scrutiny of his record because it stands on merit—entrepreneurial success, family values, and a clear-eyed rejection of the bureaucratic excesses that hurt working families. His supporters aren’t fringe; they’re the backbone of Ohio communities who remember the pre-lockdown economy, the joy of school events, and the freedom to live without constant government edict. They see in him someone who judges people by character and results, not by elite credentials or media spin. The 2026 race is more than a choice between two candidates; it’s a referendum on whether Ohio learns from 2020 or repeats the mistakes. Voters who value prosperity, honest accountability, and open debate have every reason to reject the politics of intimidation and nostalgia for administrative control.

Acton’s team may believe a few more Buc-ee’s photo ops and some strategic legal letters will paper over the past. But Ohioans have long memories. The lockdown lady’s policies didn’t just inconvenience people—they upended lives, and the data backs that up. Police reports, public records, and economic statistics don’t vanish because a Washington law firm sends a letter. When the votes are counted in November 2026, character, record, and authenticity will decide it. Vivek Ramaswamy brings the relationships, the vision, and the backbone to move Ohio forward. Amy Acton’s campaign, built on image management and legal threats, reveals exactly why voters should send a different message. The truth doesn’t need cease-and-desist letters to survive—it just needs voters willing to remember.

Footnotes

1.  Ohio’s first Buc-ee’s location details and Acton’s visit: Campaign site and local news coverage, April 2026.

2.  Acton’s role as Health Director and lockdown timeline: Contemporary reporting and her Wikipedia entry.

3.  Economic and educational impacts of 2020 lockdowns in Ohio: Unemployment data from state labor statistics; learning loss projections from education analyses.

4.  2019 Bexley police report: Public records as covered by NBC News and Ohio outlets, April 2026.

5.  Elias Law Group retainers and cease-and-desist letters: Reporting by Jack Windsor/Ohio Press Network and related commentary, 2026.

6.  New York Times v. Sullivan precedent: U.S. Supreme Court, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).

7.  Vivek Ramaswamy’s Ohio roots and campaign: Polling and news coverage of his events and endorsements.

8.  Broader COVID policy critiques: Peer-reviewed studies on excess mortality, mental health, and economic costs (various sources, including PMC and state-specific analyses).

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Wikipedia: 2026 Ohio gubernatorial election (for candidate overview and polling).

•  Ohio Capital Journal and Dispatch articles on the 2019 police incident and campaign responses (April 2026).

•  NBC News coverage of Acton’s domestic dispute report.

•  Jack Windsor/Ohio Press Network commentary on Elias Law Group letters.

•  Signal Ohio and local reporting on Buc-ee’s opening and Acton’s photo op.

•  Historical coverage of Ohio COVID response (Washington Post, NBC4, 2020).

•  Economic analyses of lockdown impacts (state labor data, education studies).

•  U.S. Supreme Court case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (full opinion available via legal archives).

Extended Footnote on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) and the “Sullivan Doctrine”

The landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York Times Company v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), fundamentally reshaped American libel law and remains the cornerstone of First Amendment protections for political speech and press freedom. Often called the “Sullivan case,” it gave rise to what legal scholars refer to as the “Sullivan doctrine” or “actual malice” rule—a constitutional standard that has been extended and refined in a line of subsequent Supreme Court cases (collectively the “Sullivan cases”). This body of law was born directly out of the Civil Rights Movement and was designed to prevent public officials from using defamation suits as a weapon to silence criticism. 

Facts and Historical Context

In March 1960, amid the escalating sit-in protests and violence against Black students in Montgomery, Alabama, the Committee to Defend Martin Luther King and the Struggle for Freedom in the South placed a full-page advertisement titled “Heed Their Rising Voices” in The New York Times. The ad solicited donations to support King’s legal defense and the broader civil rights cause. It criticized “an unprecedented wave of terror” by Southern officials and police, describing incidents such as the padlocking of a dining hall at Alabama State College and police actions against demonstrators. The advertisement contained several minor factual inaccuracies (e.g., the exact number of times King had been arrested, the songs sung by students, and whether the dining hall was actually padlocked). It was signed by 64 prominent figures (including Eleanor Roosevelt and Jackie Robinson) and listed the names of four Alabama ministers associated with King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference—some of whose names had been added without their explicit prior approval. 

L.B. Sullivan, the elected Montgomery Public Safety Commissioner who oversaw the police department, was not named in the ad. Nevertheless, he sued The New York Times and the four ministers in Alabama state court, claiming the criticism of police conduct defamed him by implication. Under then-prevailing Alabama common-law libel rules, a plaintiff could recover substantial damages merely by showing the statement was false and tended to harm reputation; no proof of actual harm or malicious intent was required, and damages were often presumed. An all-white jury awarded Sullivan $500,000—a staggering sum in 1960. The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the verdict. Similar libel suits were filed by other Alabama officials, part of a coordinated “libel attack” strategy by segregationists to bankrupt newspapers and intimidate national coverage of the Civil Rights Movement. 

The Supreme Court’s Unanimous Ruling

On March 9, 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the judgment in a 9-0 decision written by Justice William J. Brennan Jr. The Court held that Alabama’s libel law unconstitutionally infringed on the First and Fourteenth Amendments when applied to criticism of public officials’ conduct. Brennan famously declared that the First Amendment “prohibits a State from awarding damages to a public official for defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with ‘actual malice’—that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” The standard must be proven with “convincing clarity.” 

The opinion emphasized that “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.” Erroneous statements, Brennan noted, are “inevitable in free debate” and must be protected lest the fear of liability chill essential political discourse. The ruling explicitly rejected the idea that the press could be held to the strict liability standards of ordinary private libel suits when reporting on matters of public concern. 

Expansion to Public Figures and the “Sullivan Progeny”

The Sullivan rule was not limited to elected officials. In the companion cases Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts and Associated Press v. Walker (388 U.S. 130, 1967), the Court extended the actual-malice requirement to “public figures”—prominent private citizens who thrust themselves into public controversies or are drawn into them. Justice Harlan’s plurality opinion refined the standard slightly but preserved the core protection.

Later, in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (418 U.S. 323, 1974), the Court drew a clearer line: private individuals (who have not voluntarily entered the public arena) need only show negligence by the defendant for compensatory damages, but public figures and officials must still meet the higher actual-malice threshold. Subsequent cases such as Time, Inc. v. Hill (1967) applied similar protections to false-light privacy claims, and Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988) extended First Amendment safeguards to parody and emotional-distress claims involving public figures. 

Enduring Significance

Sullivan and its progeny were a direct response to the use of libel law as a tool of political suppression during the Civil Rights era. By placing the burden of proof on the plaintiff and raising the fault standard dramatically, the doctrine has made it extraordinarily difficult for public officials or public figures to win defamation suits against the press or critics—precisely the point. It has shielded investigative journalism, opinion writing, and robust political debate for more than six decades, even as critics (including some modern Supreme Court justices) have questioned whether the internet age requires recalibration. 

In the context of modern political campaigns, the rule remains vital: candidates who voluntarily seek public office become public figures and must tolerate sharp scrutiny of their records, statements, and character. Cease-and-desist letters or threats of litigation that rely on pre-Sullivan common-law standards rarely survive constitutional review when aimed at commentary on a candidate’s official acts or fitness for office. The doctrine ensures that voters—not lawyers—ultimately decide the truth through open debate.

This historical and legal framework underscores why public-figure plaintiffs today face such a high bar: the Supreme Court deliberately chose to err on the side of protecting speech to safeguard democracy itself. For further reading, see the full opinion at 376 U.S. 254 and analyses in Actual Malice by Samantha Barbas (2023) or the Stanford Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute’s primary-source collection.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

It Was Always Only Going To Be, Vivek Ramaswamy: Amy Acton, the Lockdown Lady is a complete and total disaster

The excitement I feel about Vivek Ramaswamy running for governor of Ohio is not some fleeting campaign cheer. It is a deep, personal conviction rooted in years of watching Ohio politics from the inside, knowing the players, and seeing what has been stalled under the current administration. When I first learned Vivek wanted to run, it felt like a natural extension of everything I have observed about effective leadership in this state. I have known some of the people working quietly in the background on his behalf, and I have seen how the legislative agenda that has been bottled up under Mike DeWine would finally break loose under someone with Vivek’s energy, vision, and willingness to align with the changes happening at the national level. I have talked with Vivek directly about these things, and every conversation reinforces my belief that he is the right person at the right time.

I have been following Ohio politics for decades, and I have seen governors come and go. Some were solid, some were centrist placeholders, and a few were outright disasters. Mike DeWine has been a steady hand in many ways, but he has also represented the old guard that plays it safe, avoids bold moves, and leaves too many good ideas on the table because they might rock the boat with the establishment. That is where Vivek Ramaswamy stands apart. He is not a career politician. He built real businesses, created jobs, and proved he can execute under pressure. I see him as the perfect fit for the governor’s mansion because he brings fresh thinking to economic expansion, regulatory reform, and the kind of pro-growth policies that Ohio desperately needs after years of incrementalism. When he is in that seat, I believe we will see a vigorous, aggressive push on everything from attracting new industry to streamlining government—things that have been talked about but never fully delivered.

The primary process right now, in the spring of 2026, is noisy, as primaries always are. You have critics throwing everything at Vivek—his Indian heritage, how he made his money, his youth. I have heard it all, and I dismiss most of it as the predictable noise that comes when someone surges to the front. I supported Donald Trump long before he announced his first run in 2015. I was with him back in 1999, when he and Pat Buchanan were battling it out in the Reform Party. I have watched this cycle repeat itself with Reagan, with Trump, and now with Vivek. People who are frontrunners always draw fire. The media loves to amplify the drama because it sells advertising. Pollsters release numbers that seem tight because they sample in ways that lean one direction or another. But I have been around long enough to know that spring polling in a primary year is not the final story. By July and August, things clarify dramatically. The peripheral candidates fade, the serious ones consolidate, and the voters who matter—the ones who show up in primaries—make their choice based on substance, not sound bites.

I have spoken with Vivek about the critics, including those questioning his background or wealth. His response was straightforward and mature: if everyone is always on your side, something is wrong. That is the mark of someone who understands leadership. You do not get rattled by the noise. You win people over with results. Vivek has shown he can do that. He has been out speaking at Lincoln dinners, fundraising events, and town halls across the state. He is articulate, energetic, and has a strong partner in his wife. Those are the qualities that translate to governing. I have watched him handle crowds, including the occasional boo from a handful of people who had too much to drink at a St. Patrick’s Day event at an Irish pub where he made an unannounced appearance. The cheers far outnumbered the jeers, and he took it in stride. That is the kind of poise Ohio needs in the governor’s office.

On the other side, the Democrats’ best option is Amy Acton. That alone tells you how weak their bench is. Acton was the face of Ohio’s COVID lockdowns, and her record is one of economic devastation and overreach. She has a one-trick pony: “I’m a doctor, I care about health.” But when you look at the results, her policies crushed businesses, schools, and families. The 2019 police incident involving her husband or a family member only adds to the picture of someone whose personal life has intersected with public scrutiny in ways that raise questions about judgment. I have followed her career closely, and every time she speaks, she reinforces why she should not be anywhere near the governor’s mansion again. Polling showing her competitiveness is skewed by sampling in heavily Democratic areas like Cuyahoga County, where the same lockdown supporters still hold on to nostalgia for her “bedside manner.” But real-world results matter more than nostalgia. Ohio cannot afford another round of that.

The horse race today looks tighter than it will be in a few months because primaries are designed to be messy. You have candidates like Casey, the car guy, and Nick Fuentes-style voices on the fringes throwing darts, trying to peel off a few percentage points by questioning Vivek’s heritage or his business success. That is standard primary theater. I remember the same thing with Trump—people saying he was too much of an outsider, too wealthy, too whatever. Reagan faced it too; he was a former Democrat who had to prove himself to the base. I have never been anything but a Republican, but I respect people who evolve toward conservatism because they see the failure of the alternative. Vivek has been a Republican from early on, and he brings conservative principles with the added advantage of being young, articulate, and unburdened by decades of insider baggage. He is not a middle-grounder. He is the kind of conservative who can actually get things done because he knows how to talk to business leaders, legislators, and everyday voters.

I have roots in this state’s politics. I have consulted with candidates, watched the legislature up close, and seen how the Senate and House work together—or fail to—under different governors. Vivek already has strong relationships there. He has been building them for years through events and direct conversations. When he wins the primary, which I fully expect, those relationships will accelerate. The legislative agenda that has been stalled will move. Economic expansion will follow because business leaders trust someone who has built companies himself. Trump’s endorsement is not just symbolic. It is practical. Trump will campaign in Ohio in 2026 the way he campaigned for president because he needs strong Republican majorities at the state level to support his national agenda. He will be on the ground with Vivek, and that combination will be unstoppable.

Critics who say Vivek does not have full Republican support are the same voices who said the same about Trump in 2015 and 2016. They are lazy analysts who read polls taken in Democrat-heavy zip codes and declare the race close. Real polling—the kind that matters—is what happens when Vivek walks into a packed Irish pub on St. Patrick’s Day, and the crowd cheers louder than the handful of boos. That is the energy that wins primaries and general elections. Casey the car guy and the fringe voices will get their 7 or 8 percent, but they will not have the resources, the organization, or the broad appeal to compete once the field narrows. Independents and traditional Republicans will consolidate behind the frontrunner who has Trump’s backing and a proven track record of execution.

I have been through enough cycles to know how this plays out. The Tea Party movement evolved into the MAGA movement because people got tired of centrists who talked conservatively but governed like the other side. Vivek represents the next step: a young, articulate conservative who is not afraid to challenge the status quo. He has the temperament to win over skeptics without compromising principles. His wife is a strong partner in the effort. Together, they project the kind of stability and vision Ohio needs after years of incremental leadership.

The contrast with Amy Acton could not be sharper. She is the lockdown lady who turned Ohio’s economy into a cautionary tale. Her policies hurt working families, small businesses, and schools in ways we are still recovering from. The idea that polling shows her even close is a function of media hype and skewed samples. When the real campaign begins, when Trump is in the state campaigning like it is 2024 all over again, and when Vivek is out there speaking directly to voters about jobs, freedom, and growth, the numbers will shift dramatically. That is how primaries work. The noise in spring gives way to clarity by summer.

I am excited because I see the potential for real change. I have talked with Vivek about the critics, about the primary grind, and about what governing Ohio would look like. He gets it. He knows leadership means winning people over, not just preaching to the choir. He has the resources, the relationships, and the resolve to deliver. When he is in the governor’s mansion, we will finally see the vigorous economic expansion that has been promised but never fully realized. The peripheral discussions—the heritage questions, the wealth attacks, the fringe candidates—will fall away quickly once the primary is over. Republicans will unify because the alternative is unacceptable.

That is why I support Vivek Ramaswamy without hesitation. I have been a Republican my entire life, rooting for the party even as a kid. I have watched outsiders like Trump and Reagan prove the skeptics wrong. Vivek fits that mold, but with the added advantage of being a conservative from the beginning. He is the clear frontrunner for good reason. The primary process is doing its job—vetting him, testing him, and ultimately strengthening him. By the time the general election arrives, the choice will be obvious to anyone paying attention. Ohio cannot afford another lockdown-era disaster. It needs leadership that builds, not restricts. Vivek Ramaswamy is that leader.

The horse race today is a theater. The real race will be decided by voters who show up, who listen to the candidates, and who remember what Ohio went through under the previous administration. I have confidence in the outcome because I have seen Vivek in action, talked with him personally, and watched the pieces fall into place. The critics will keep talking, but the results will speak louder. This is going to be a good year for Ohio, and I am excited to be part of it.

Footnotes

1.  Ohio Secretary of State records and public reporting on the 2026 gubernatorial primary field, including Vivek Ramaswamy’s announcement and early polling trends as of April 2026.

2.  Public statements and campaign events featuring Vivek Ramaswamy at Lincoln dinners and St. Patrick’s Day gatherings in Ohio, 2025–2026.

3.  Amy Acton’s tenure as Ohio Department of Health Director during COVID-19 lockdowns, documented in state economic impact reports and legislative hearings.

4.  2019 police incident involving Amy Acton and a family member, as reported in local Ohio news outlets and public records.

5.  Donald Trump’s endorsement of Vivek Ramaswamy for Ohio governor was announced in early 2026 campaign communications.

6.  Historical polling data from Gallup and Rasmussen on voter ID support and election integrity measures in Ohio, 2024–2026.

7.  Ohio legislative records on stalled bills under the DeWine administration, contrasted with potential reforms under a Ramaswamy governorship.

Bibliography

•  Ohio Secretary of State. 2026 Gubernatorial Primary Candidate Filings and Polling Summaries.

•  Ramaswamy, Vivek. Campaign speeches and public appearances, Ohio Lincoln dinners, 2025–2026.

•  Acton, Amy. Ohio Department of Health records and COVID policy impact assessments, 2020–2021.

•  Local news archives (Cleveland Plain Dealer, Columbus Dispatch). Coverage of the 2019 Acton family incident and the 2026 campaign developments.

•  Trump, Donald. Official endorsement statements for the 2026 Ohio governor race.

•  Pew Research Center and Gallup. Polling on election security and voter ID, 2024–2026.

•  Ohio Legislative Service Commission. Bill status reports under DeWine administration, 2022–2026.

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.

Taxes Have Consequences: The scam of big government is over and people don’t want to pay for it

It’s April 2026, and the Ohio governor’s race is already heating up in ways that feel both predictable and strangely urgent, like a storm that’s been building for years but nobody wants to admit is finally here. Vivek Ramaswamy is out there every day talking about the real meat and potatoes of governance—tax policy, education reform, rebuilding an economy that still hasn’t fully shaken off the damage from the COVID lockdowns, and figuring out how to make Ohio competitive again in a world that’s changing faster than most politicians can keep up with. He’s smart, he’s successful, he’s got that background as a wealthy entrepreneur who actually built something instead of just talking about it, and that’s exactly why a certain segment of voters is going to find him intimidating or unrelatable. Not because they dislike success, but because campaigns are long marathons, and policy deep dives can start to feel like the same speech over and over by the time November rolls around. People get bored. They tune out. And that’s where the Democrats have their opening, even if their candidate is Amy Acton—the very same lockdown lady whose policies helped crater Ohio’s economy back in 2020, a hit from which we’re still recovering in ways that show up in empty storefronts, struggling small businesses, and families stretched thinner than they were a decade ago. 

Acton’s going to campaign on “nice,” on compassion, on remembering the good old days of masks and mandates, and there’s going to be a certain number of suckers who fall for it because memories are short. People don’t remember yesterday, let alone six years ago, when those shutdowns destroyed livelihoods and left scars that never quite healed. The Democrats have nothing else, so they’ll try to kill you with kindness and revisionist history while the rest of us are left holding the bag. Vivek knows this. He talks policies because he’s serious about fixing things, but seriousness alone isn’t enough in a primary and general election cycle that stretches out for months. You’ve got to fill the time, keep the crowds engaged, and capture the narrative before the media or some Hollywood production does it for you. That’s why I’ve been saying for weeks now that Vivek should talk to the people who’ve been seeing Bigfoot lately. Yeah, you read that right—Bigfoot. There’s been a genuine cluster of sightings in Northeast Ohio, especially in Portage County between Youngstown and Cleveland, with multiple credible reports coming in since early March 2026. Witnesses describe creatures six to ten feet tall, moving through wooded areas, leaving behind evidence that’s got even skeptics paying attention. The Bigfoot Society podcast and local news outlets have been all over it—seven encounters in just a few days, videos going viral, people genuinely traumatized or at least rattled by what they saw. 

Ohio has a long history with paranormal activity, from Bigfoot legends tied to the state’s dense forests and old mining towns to UFO sightings and ghostly encounters that locals swear by. It’s a liberal issue by default in the way mainstream media frames it—something Republicans shy away from because it sounds too “out there,” too unscientific for the buttoned-up policy wonk crowd. But that’s exactly why Vivek should lean into it. Trump understood this instinctively. He’d talk policy for hours, but then he’d drop the snake metaphor, tell stories about women’s sports being invaded by biological males, or do the YMCA dance at rallies to get the crowd laughing and energized. Entertainment isn’t fluff; it’s how you break through the noise, create shareable clips for TikTok and YouTube, and make people remember you not just as the smart guy with the tax plan but as someone who listens to regular folks about the weird, unexplainable things happening in their backyards. Those Bigfoot witnesses in the Youngstown-Cleveland corridor? They’re active voters in swing areas that could decide the race. Going there, sitting down with them, hearing their stories without dismissing them as crazy—that builds trust. It shows you’re not some elitist from out of state (even though Vivek’s a Cincinnati native who gets Ohio). It captures the high ground on “disclosure” before a new Spielberg movie or the Democrats turn it into their issue. JD Vance has already been dipping his toe into UAP and government transparency talk as Vice President; Republicans should run with it, not cede the paranormal and extraterrestrial conversation to the left. Tie it to the bigger picture of government overreach—why should we trust the same institutions that lied about COVID or hid economic data if they’re also stonewalling on what’s really flying around in our skies or walking through our woods? Vivek talking Bigfoot wouldn’t be a gimmick; it’d be strategic storytelling that keeps the campaign fresh through the long summer-and-fall grind. 

And let’s be clear: this isn’t about abandoning the serious stuff. The meat and potatoes still matter most. But campaigns are won in the gaps between policy papers, in the moments when voters feel seen on the things that actually touch their daily lives—including the strange ones. I’ve heard chatter about alternatives in the Republican primary, like Casey Putsch, the “car guy” from Northwest Ohio who’s positioning himself as the working-class everyman against Vivek’s success story. Casey’s got his appeal, no doubt—he’s a local entrepreneur, designer, and he talks a good game about being the anti-establishment choice. But let’s be real: Vivek’s the one with the vision, the endorsement from Trump, the Ohio Republican Party backing, and the track record that actually matches the moment. Some of the noise around him is uglier than that, drifting into racist framing that claims he’s not “really” qualified because his parents came from India. You’ll see it bubbling up from the fringes—the Tucker Carlson types who’ve lost their audiences by trying to drag MAGA into some fascist or openly bigoted territory. It’s nonsense. Vivek’s an American success story, and anybody pushing that kind of sympathy for racial purity tests is playing the same game as the social justice left, just from the other side. They’re not conservatives; they’re just different flavors of the same divisive poison. Republicans win when we reject that outright and focus on ideas, merit, and results. Vivek gets that. He’s not flip-flopping on property taxes; he’s being pragmatic about how you actually govern in a representative system. 

I’ve been following this closely because property taxes are the boiling point in Ohio right now, especially here in Butler County, where I live. Vivek’s talked about rolling them back, not waving a magic wand and eliminating them overnight on day one, and that’s smart politics even if some purists want the full nuclear option. Why? Because taxes have consequences—real, devastating ones that ripple through economies, families, and entire communities. My good friend Senator George Lang, the majority whip up in the statehouse and a guy who actually gets it, handed me a copy of the book Taxes Have Consequences: An Income Tax History of the United States not long ago when I was in his office talking shop. It’s a great read, and Trump himself wrote the foreword during his time out of office. The book lays out how the income tax experiment since 1913 has been a social Marxist disaster wrapped in good intentions, a pyramid scheme that’s warped everything from personal freedom to economic growth. Progressive taxation, the 16th Amendment, the way it funded bigger and bigger government—it didn’t build prosperity; it siphoned it off and created dependency. And property taxes? They’re the local version of that same trap, especially in places like Butler County. 

Let me give you the supplemental background here because this isn’t abstract theory; it’s what’s happening on the ground in Wetherington and every suburb like it across Ohio. Butler County used to be farmland—viable farms where families grew beans, corn, raised cattle, baled hay, and made a living off the land without needing massive government intervention. Then came the post-World War II boom, the Federal Reserve’s money printing since 1913, and the real estate developers who saw opportunity. They bought up that farmland cheap, subdivided it into half-acre lots, built houses, and sold them for maybe $100,000 twenty or thirty years ago. Every five or six years, those homes compounded in value—$150k, $200k, $300k today—because of inflation, low interest rates for a while, and the illusion of endless growth. Homeowners felt rich on paper. They paid their $1,500, $2,000, or $5,000 a year in property taxes for schools, fire departments, police, senior services, and roads, figuring it was worth it because their equity was growing. But it was a pyramid scheme all along. Banks financed it, the government taxed the appreciation, and local levies kept passing because people had “money in their pockets” from refinancing or selling at a profit. 

Fast-forward to now: those original buyers’ kids have grown up, the houses have aged, cheap materials have started showing their wear, and neighborhoods have gotten denser than anyone planned. New families come in facing $300k, $400k, or even $500k mortgages on 40-year-old homes that aren’t worth the cost of rebuilding. Two-income households stretch to make ends meet, but inflation has robbed wage growth; raises don’t keep pace, and suddenly the property tax bill feels like a noose. Butler County saw a 37% jump in values during the last triennial update, pushing tax bills up double digits for many. Schools built their budgets assuming perpetual increases; local governments did the same. You can’t just flip the switch to zero property taxes without chaos—mass layoffs in education, crumbling infrastructure, seniors losing services they paid into for decades. That’s not conservative governance; that’s ideological arson that hurts the very people you’re trying to help. Vivek gets this. He’s talking rollback, a gradual phase-down, and legislative buy-in from the House and Senate (where folks like George Lang have already been pushing reforms—billions in relief passed recently to cap runaway increases without voter approval). It’s the realistic path: wind it down month by month, year by year, while creating wealth elsewhere—through fossil fuels, space-economy innovation, and deregulation—so people can actually afford the basics again. Trump’s forward in that book nails it: taxes destroy incentives, harm the social fabric, and turn government into a beast that eats its own tail. Ohio’s feeling that now, because the runway on endless spending and taxing has officially run out. 

People are fed up. They see the size of government and get nothing good back. Republicans in the legislature and any serious governor know you can’t just “blow it all up” and expect 92% of voters to cheer while their schools close and roads crumble. You build coalitions. You explain the consequences. You show how the pyramid scheme of real estate appreciation—fueled by easy money and federal policies—hit the wall when inflation ate real wages and younger generations looked at half-million-dollar fixer-uppers and said, “No thanks.” That’s where the generational shift comes in, and it’s one of the most hopeful things I’ve seen in a long time. Watch the beer commercials lately—sales are way down among under-18 and young adults. They’re not smoking as much, not chasing the reckless party lifestyle their parents modeled. They’ve seen the dumb decisions up close: the divorces from financial stress, the two-income grind that left families fractured, the housing trap that turned the American Dream into a nightmare. The best rebellion now is being good—opting out of the Democrat-saturated culture of dependency, choosing smaller homes or conservative values early on, and building real wealth instead of chasing illusions. They’re not interested in the kings protesting in the streets or the victimhood Olympics. They want stability, and that starts with an honest tax policy that doesn’t punish success or trap people in overvalued assets. Vivek’s plan aligns with that future. He’s not backing away from his word; he’s building the political capital to pass legislation that delivers real relief without the chaos. It’s going to take guts, debate, and time—maybe decades to fully unwind—but it’s the only path. Gold standard ideas, wealth creation through energy and innovation, rolling back the 2%+ inflation scam that devalues the dollar year after year: that’s how you make homes affordable again without the pyramid collapsing on everyone’s heads. 

Sprinkling in those Bigfoot interviews or paranormal town halls isn’t a distraction from this hard work; it’s the spoonful of sugar that helps the medicine go down. People are sick of heavy government lectures. They want leaders who engage the full spectrum of life—the policy grind and the mysterious wonders that remind us there’s more to existence than spreadsheets and levies. Ohio’s got active paranormal hotspots for a reason; the state’s geography, history of industry and settlement, and even Native American lore feed into it. Capturing that narrative keeps the campaign alive, draws in voters who feel dismissed by the elites, and prevents Democrats or Hollywood from owning the “disclosure” conversation. JD Vance is already positioned there as part of the Trump administration’s push for transparency on UAPs and beyond; Vivek tying it to the local level would be brilliant. It worked for Trump because he made politics fun again amid the seriousness. It’ll work here too.

Taxes have consequences, as that book makes crystal clear. The income tax, since 1913, turned America from a limited-government republic into a welfare-warfare state experiment that’s now hitting its natural limits. Property taxes in Ohio are the canary in the coal mine—Butler County’s farmland-to-subdivision story is playing out statewide. We’ve got to roll them back intelligently, not recklessly, while infusing real wealth into the economy so the next generation isn’t saddled with our mistakes. Vivek’s the guy to do it, but he’ll need to keep the crowds laughing and listening with stories from the weird side of Ohio life along the way. The Democrats will throw everything at him—lockdown nostalgia, racial smears, fear of change—but facts and engagement will win. Ohio’s ready for a governor who understands both the pyramid scheme that’s collapsing around us and the human need for wonder in the middle of the fight. The next few months are going to test everyone, but if Vivek plays it this way—policy plus personality, seriousness plus the unexpected—he’ll not only win; he’ll reshape what Republican governance looks like in the post-Trump era. And that’s a future worth voting for, Bigfoot sightings and all.

Footnotes

[1] Details on Amy Acton’s role in Ohio’s COVID response and her current gubernatorial bid are drawn from public records and campaign coverage.

[2] Recent Bigfoot reports compiled from local news and eyewitness accounts in Portage County, March 2026.

[3] Property tax reform legislation supported by Sen. George Lang, Ohio Senate records, 2025 sessions.

[4] Taxes Have Consequences: An Income Tax History of the United States by Arthur B. Laffer et al., with foreword by Donald J. Trump—core analysis of 1913 income tax impacts.

[5] Butler County property value updates and tax rollbacks, county auditor reports, and commission actions, 2025.

[6] Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign platform and primary positioning, official site, and polling data as of April 2026.

[7] Casey Putsch’s primary challenge context from candidate statements and Ohio Capital Journal coverage.

[8] JD Vance and broader disclosure/UAP discussions referenced in public interviews and the administration context.

Bibliography

Laffer, Arthur B., et al. Taxes Have Consequences: An Income Tax History of the United States. (Foreword by Donald J. Trump). Post Hill Press, recent edition.

Ohio Senate Records. “Lang Supports Billions in Long-Term Relief for Ohio Property Taxpayers.” November 2025.

WKYC and NewsNation. Reports on Northeast Ohio Bigfoot sightings, March 2026.

Ballotpedia and Signal Ohio. “Ohio Gubernatorial Election 2026” candidate profiles.

Butler County Auditor’s Office. Property tax billing and valuation updates, 2023–2026.

Ramaswamy Campaign Site (vivekforohio.com). Platform documents, April 2026.

Ohio Capital Journal. Coverage of primary challengers and tax reform debates, 2025–2026.

Trump, Donald J. Foreword to Taxes Have Consequences. As referenced in Sen. George Lang’s distribution and public commentary.

Additional supplemental reading: Historical texts on the 16th Amendment and Federal Reserve Act of 1913; local folklore collections on Ohio cryptids (e.g., Bigfoot in the Midwest).

Rich Hoffman

More about me

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

About the Author: Rich Hoffman

Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, political strategist, systems thinker, and independent researcher of ancient history, the paranormal, and the Dead Sea Scrolls tradition. His life in high‑stakes manufacturing, high‑level politics, and cross‑functional crisis management gives him a field‑tested understanding of power — both human and unseen.

He has advised candidates, executives, and public leaders, while conducting deep, hands‑on exploration of archaeological and supernatural hotspots across the world.

Hoffman writes with the credibility of a problem-solver, the curiosity of an archaeologist, and the courage of a frontline witness who has gone to very scary places and reported what lurked there. Hoffman has authored books including The Symposium of Justice, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business, and Tail of the Dragon, often exploring themes of freedom, individual will, and societal structures through a lens influenced by philosophy (e.g., Nietzschean overman concepts) and current events.