Category: Feminisim

The Very Political De-Population Agenda: Pride Month, Personal Convictions, and the Defense of Masculinity in a Trump White House

In June 2026, with President Trump back in the White House, it’s refreshing not to see the rainbow colors and Pride flags draped over the executive mansion or broadcast as some official national celebration of the agenda, the motorcycle jumps and MMA event were much better. No more lighting up the people’s houses in celebration of what many of us view as a direct challenge to traditional family, biblical truth, and human flourishing. I’ve watched this cultural shift for decades, and the change feels like a return to sanity.¹

I’ve heard the arguments, and I know some people in my circles find them compelling. But from my perspective, rooted in personal experience, Christian conviction, and years of cultural observation, the modern gay agenda—particularly as pushed during Pride Month—is deeply political, anti-family, and part of a broader effort that undermines natural order. It’s not just about private behavior between consenting adults. It’s about reshaping society, lowering birth rates, confusing young people about masculinity and femininity, and desecrating symbols that once pointed to God’s covenant.²

Let me start with my own background because it gives me a front-row perspective that many commentators lack. I’m known for my bullwhips. The whip is a symbol of discipline, precision, self-mastery, and performance for me—cracking targets, snuffing candles, doing tricks that entertain and demonstrate skill. I’m good at it; some say I’m among the best. People have associated whips with bondage and fetish scenes for a long time, but that was never my world. I’ve never participated in anything like that and never would.³

Over the years in the performance community, I’ve known many whip artists who started straight and were as skilled in similar ways. Some got pulled into the gay bar scene or private fetish gigs because the money was good. Cracking whips on stage for entertainment turned into private sessions where clients wanted more—candles in uncomfortable places, explicit videos, crossing lines that should never be crossed. What starts as “just a gig” often leads to deeper involvement. I’ve seen friends swap spit, experiment, and eventually advocate openly for Pride Month. They’d post statements beginning with “I’m not very political,” but supporting the agenda is inherently political. It aligns with Democrat platforms, big government social engineering, and cultural Marxism. When I became vocal in the Tea Party and then MAGA, many distanced themselves. Conservatism and that lifestyle don’t mix well in their circles.⁴

I remember sitting in catering tents with Hollywood types during events. They’d chat until politics came up. “You’re from Cincinnati? You supported McCain? Romney? Reagan?” Suddenly, the seats emptied. Blocklisting happens fast when you don’t swing their way. I’ve faced it head-on and don’t regret it. My platform grew because I refused to hide convictions. The same people who once performed circus tricks now defend grotesque elements of the scene for revenue and relevance. It’s disheartening.⁵

The rainbow itself is a perfect example of desecration. In Genesis 9, after the flood, God sets the rainbow in the sky as a sign of His covenant with Noah and all living creatures—never again to destroy the earth with waters. It’s a reminder of mercy, judgment, and promise. The gay community co-opted it, starting with Gilbert Baker’s 1978 rainbow flag. What was once a biblical symbol of hope after catastrophe became a banner for a movement the Bible explicitly condemns. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 call male same-sex relations an abomination. Romans 1:26-27 describes the exchange of natural relations for unnatural ones as part of turning from God. These aren’t obscure verses; they’re clear moral teaching.⁶

Pride Month in June turns that symbol into a celebration of what scripture warns against. Under previous administrations, the White House glowed in rainbow lights, equating the agenda with official policy. Now, in 2026, that’s gone, and it feels right. Families don’t need government endorsement of alternative lifestyles pushed on children through schools, media, and YouTube. The femboy trend, glam rock echoes like Boy George or 80s hair bands in tight pants, and modern Disney/Marvel plot lines normalize confusion. Young men are seduced away from traditional masculinity, leading to lower birth rates—an anti-human agenda that aligns with depopulation narratives from figures like Bill Gates or climate extremists. It’s abortion on steroids: prevent life before it begins by reorienting desire.⁷

I’ve seen the discomfort this causes in everyday life. At a Cincinnati football game with good seats, two women in front of me—clearly a couple—made out openly. Some of my grandkids were there. It was uncomfortable for everyone. I politely asked them to take it to the bathroom or clubhouse; kids didn’t need the show. The response was indignation, as if public decency were bigotry. Another time at Costco, someone confronted me about my cowboy hat: “How dare you wear that symbol of toxic masculinity in public?” I wear it proudly. It represents discipline, self-reliance, Western heritage, and unapologetic manhood. In Butler County, transplants from California or the East Coast bring their politics and sneer at it. Feelings are mutual. I love projecting masculinity because young people need models, not confusion from algorithms and activists.⁸

The bullwhip community crossover highlights the issue. Performance artists get lured by fetish demand. A few thousand dollars for a private show turns into more. Some thrive financially but lose their way. I’ve ended friendships over it. Zero tolerance. When they advocate Pride while claiming non-political stances, it rings hollow. The agenda extends to sports, the military, education, and entertainment. It’s not live-and-let-live; it’s affirmation or cancellation. Hollywood blacklists conservatives. Schools teach gender ideology as fact. YouTube serves as a pacifier for teens, flooding feeds with normalized content.⁹

Biblically, Sodom and Gomorrah stand as a warning. The mob demanded the angels for sexual purposes—gross perversion that led to judgment. Modern parallels exist in the push to confuse youth and erode family structures. Birth rates decline when masculinity is pathologized as “toxic” and femininity is detached from motherhood. It’s a net-zero scam for humans: fewer people, less consumption, more control. Democrats embrace it because it fragments society into identity groups dependent on government. Republicans under Trump reject the official celebration, focusing on borders, the economy, and sanity.¹⁰

My cowboy hat draws compliments too. At that same Costco recently, multiple people thanked me for the broadcasts and work. One levy supporter mocked the hat, implying shame. I’ll wear it more. It signals resistance to the seduction. Young men need examples of strength, not androgyny. Clint Eastwood, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “girly men” critique—they understood. The Expendables films harkened back to tough-guy eras. Today’s culture mocks that.¹¹

Personal autonomy matters here too, tying into broader ownership themes. Just as people reject renting music or property, they resist renting their identity to cultural fads. I own my convictions. The whip remains a tool of mastery, not perversion. Pride Month pushes the opposite—celebrating what weakens resolve and family. I’ve lost friends but gained clarity. The lifestyle isn’t victimless. Confusion spreads, especially online. Future generations deserve better.¹²

I don’t want to hear the complaints about Trump’s UFC fight.  Trump’s White House without rainbow flags represents a cultural reset. No more equating Pride with patriotism. The agenda remains political: funding, education policy, corporate DEI. Ohio and places like Butler County see transplants bringing it in, but local values hold. At Kings Island or other amusement parks, public displays can be jarring—unattractive couples making out, demanding acceptance. It’s not about hate; it’s about boundaries. Kids present, decency expected. Porn filmmakers taking dates to Bengal football games? Gross.¹³

Society functions better with clear moral guardrails. The Bible condemns for good reason—protecting flourishing. I’ve paid costs for speaking out but stand firm. Friends who crossed the line made six figures but compromised their souls. Not worth it. Masculinity—protective, decisive, strong—isn’t toxic; it’s essential. The hat stays. Whips crack targets, not fetishes. Rainbows remind us of God’s promise, not parades.¹⁴

This June, without White House endorsement, feels like progress. The dance continues, but not to their tune. Families, faith, and ordered liberty prevail. Young people need truth, not seduction. I’ll keep saying it, hat on, whip ready for honest performance. Politics of Heaven reminds us that spiritual warfare underlies it all. Truth uncoils against deception. Ohio and America benefit when we reject the agenda’s full embrace.¹⁵

Footnotes

¹ Trump administration 2026 policy shift away from Pride displays at White House.

² Personal observations on the agenda as political.

³ Bullwhip as a performance tool, not BDSM.

⁴ Experiences in whip community crossovers.

⁵ Hollywood blacklisting for conservatism.

⁶ Genesis 9 rainbow covenant; Leviticus/Romans references.

⁷ Depopulation and cultural normalization critiques.

⁸ Costco hat incident and football game anecdote.

⁹ Media and education influence on youth.

¹⁰ Sodom parallels and family impacts.

¹¹ Cultural icons of masculinity.

¹² Ties to ownership and autonomy themes.

¹³ Public discomfort examples.

¹⁴ Biblical moral framework.

¹⁵ Broader spiritual and political conclusions. 

Bibliography

•  Genesis 9 (Noahic Covenant and rainbow).

•  Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Romans 1:26-27 (biblical texts).

•  Gilbert Baker rainbow flag history (1978).

•  Rich Hoffman’s personal writings and broadcasts.

•  Reports on Trump White House 2026 symbolism.

•  Cultural analyses of Pride Month and depopulation narratives.

•  Ohio transplant politics and Butler County observations.

•  Whip performance history vs. fetish associations.

•  Additional sources: Christianity.com on rainbow meaning, RIAA/ entertainment trends (tangential), The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business.

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 “Right Stuff” in Medicine: If we aren’t curing cancer we can’t call ourselves an advanced culture

I have spent a great deal of time observing how modern society reacts to both achievement and decline, and nowhere is this contrast more visible than in the way we collectively respond to technological ambition on one hand and human vulnerability on the other. There is a recurring pattern I cannot ignore, one that surfaces in moments that should otherwise be met with admiration or compassion. Instead, what I often detect is something more complicated—a quiet, sometimes barely concealed satisfaction when success is interrupted, or when prominent individuals are reminded of their own mortality.

I noticed the same pattern in reactions to high-profile technical setbacks, such as rocket failures tied to ambitious space programs. When a launch vehicle explodes or a mission is delayed, the tone in certain corners of the media and commentary ecosystem can shift from analytical to subtly dismissive. It is as if the grander the objective—reaching orbit, returning to the Moon, advancing human presence in space—the more satisfying it becomes for some observers to see that effort fail spectacularly. I do not believe this is universal, but it is present, and it reflects something deeper than mere critique. It reflects a discomfort with ambition itself, particularly when that ambition aims to elevate human capability beyond its current limits.

I have seen that same tone emerge in a very different context: the public reporting of illness, especially serious diagnoses such as cancer among well-known figures. When those diagnoses are announced, the coverage often carries an undertone that goes beyond simple reporting. The message, implicit rather than explicit, is that no level of success, status, or influence insulates a person from biological reality. That part, of course, is true. But what troubles me is when that truth is delivered with an almost leveling satisfaction—an unspoken reassurance that the “lofty” are ultimately brought down to the same plane as everyone else.

I find that reaction deeply problematic. In my view, the proper response to illness—whether it affects a public figure or a private individual—is empathy paired with determination. Determination not merely to treat symptoms, but to fundamentally improve the systems and technologies that govern health outcomes. Instead, what we often see is a cultural normalization of disease, as if the persistence of illnesses like cancer is inevitable and beyond our reach in any meaningful sense.

My perspective has been shaped in part by personal exposure to the healthcare system through family and close observation. I have seen both extraordinary dedication among practitioners and systemic issues that are far more difficult to reconcile. The healthcare industry, particularly in developed nations, is structurally complex and in many ways financially incentive-driven. According to data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. healthcare spending exceeded $4.5 trillion in 2022, representing nearly 18% of GDP.[1] That scale alone introduces distortions—economic, behavioral, and institutional—that are not always aligned with optimal patient outcomes.

I do not believe it is accurate or fair to reduce healthcare professionals to a single characterization. The field contains individuals of remarkable skill and integrity. At the same time, it operates within a framework that often rewards volume over prevention, treatment over cure, and cost expansion over efficiency. These systemic incentives have been widely discussed in policy literature, including analyses from the National Academy of Medicine and the World Health Organization, both of which highlight structural inefficiencies and misaligned incentives as persistent challenges.[2][3]

Where I draw a sharper distinction is in the cultural posture surrounding health and illness. In many ways, modern healthcare systems are built around managing disease rather than eliminating it. Chronic illness management, long-term pharmaceutical dependency, and repeated procedural interventions form the economic backbone of the system. While these approaches save lives and extend survival, they do not always reflect a paradigm aimed at decisive resolution.

This is where I believe the contrast with fields like aerospace engineering becomes instructive. In aerospace, failure is analyzed, corrected, and systematically eliminated through iterative design. The goal is not to manage risk indefinitely, but to reduce it to near zero through engineering discipline. The “right stuff,” a term popularized by Tom Wolfe, captures this blend of analytical rigor and bold experimentation.[4] It is the willingness to push boundaries while refining systems to the point of reliability.

I have long believed that healthcare would benefit from adopting more of that mindset. Instead of accepting certain diseases as enduring features of human existence, the focus should shift toward eradication or, at minimum, transformative mitigation. There are promising developments in this direction. Advances in immunotherapy, gene editing technologies such as CRISPR, and regenerative medicine have begun to change the landscape of what is medically possible.[5][6] In cancer treatment alone, survival rates have improved significantly over the past several decades due to earlier detection and targeted therapies.[7]

However, it is critical to ground expectations in current scientific reality. While substantial progress has been made, there is no single universal cure for cancer at this time, yet.   But by this time, there should be. Cancer is not one disease but a collection of hundreds of distinct conditions, each with unique genetic and environmental drivers.[8] The goal of cancer treatment should be to defeat it. What can be said, with confidence, is that the trajectory of research is accelerating, and breakthroughs that once seemed theoretical are increasingly entering clinical practice.

I believe this distinction matters, particularly when we speak to audiences capable of influencing investment, policy, and innovation. The objective should not be to declare premature victory, but to articulate a clear and urgent mandate: accelerate the transition from disease management to disease elimination wherever scientifically feasible. That requires alignment across research institutions, funding mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, and private-sector innovation.

It also requires a cultural shift. We should not accept illness as something that simply “grounds” individuals or equalizes outcomes. Instead, we should view every diagnosis as a challenge to be solved—systematically, rapidly, and with the same intensity that we apply to other complex engineering problems. That mindset does not diminish humility; it enhances purpose.

I remain optimistic that such a transformation is possible. The convergence of biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and advanced materials science is creating capabilities that did not exist even a decade ago. Machine learning models are already being used to identify drug candidates, predict protein structures, and optimize treatment pathways.[9] Personalized medicine, once an abstract concept, is becoming increasingly tangible as genomic sequencing becomes more accessible.

The question is not whether progress will continue, but whether it will accelerate at a rate commensurate with its potential. That acceleration depends on leadership—across government, industry, and the scientific community. It depends on prioritizing long-term outcomes over short-term financial gain. And it depends on fostering a culture that celebrates breakthroughs rather than fixating on failure.

When I reflect on the reactions I described at the outset—whether to a rocket explosion or a cancer diagnosis—I see them as symptoms of a broader cultural hesitation to embrace ambition fully. There is comfort in the notion that limits are fixed and universal. There is less comfort in confronting the possibility that those limits may be overcome and that doing so requires sustained effort, risk, and transformation.

I do not share that hesitation. I believe that human progress has always depended on challenging perceived constraints, whether in flight, exploration, or medicine. The same spirit that drives us to reach beyond Earth should drive us to eliminate preventable suffering here on it.

In that sense, the future of healthcare and the future of technological advancement are not separate conversations. They are part of the same continuum: the pursuit of a more capable, more resilient, and ultimately more humane civilization. And if we approach that pursuit with the right balance of discipline and daring—the true “right stuff”—then the outcomes we once considered extraordinary may become routine.

—

Footnotes & References

  1. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. National Health Expenditure Data, 2023.
  2. National Academy of Medicine. The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary, 2007.
  3. World Health Organization. Health Systems Financing: The Path to Universal Coverage, 2010.
  4. Wolfe, Tom. The Right Stuff. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1979.
  5. National Cancer Institute. Immunotherapy for Cancer, updated 2024.
  6. Doudna, J., & Charpentier, E. “The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9.” Science, 2014.
  7. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2025.
  8. Hanahan, D., & Weinberg, R. “Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation.” Cell, 2011.
  9. Jumper, J. et al. “Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold.” Nature, 2021.

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 FirstEnergy Case: Regulatory Warfare, Grid Defense, and a Political Hit Job on Ohio’s Energy Future

In the complex arena of energy policy, few issues reveal the deep divide in American politics as clearly as Ohio’s struggle to maintain a reliable power grid amid aggressive federal regulations and shifting political priorities. The ongoing legal proceedings involving former FirstEnergy executives, tied to House Bill 6 (HB6), have been framed by much of the media and Democratic opponents as a straightforward tale of corruption. Yet a closer examination reveals a more nuanced story: one of businesses fighting for survival under hostile Obama-era environmental policies, Republican efforts to preserve baseload power sources essential for Ohio’s economy and residents, and a coordinated political effort to smear figures like U.S. Senator Jon Husted (often referred to in discussions as a steadfast pro-business advocate) to influence elections, particularly against Sherrod Brown. 

Here we explore the background of the FirstEnergy matter not as an isolated graft, but as a response to regulatory warfare aimed at phasing out reliable fossil fuels and nuclear energy in favor of intermittent renewables. It draws parallels to the economic devastation of COVID-era lockdowns, highlights Husted’s pro-business record, and argues that the real scandal lies in policies that risked brownouts and higher costs for Ohio families, much like California’s experience. Far from corruption, the actions reflect legitimate advocacy for energy security in a state that cannot afford to gamble its grid on unproven green transitions. 

The Regulatory Pressure on Ohio’s Energy Sector: Political warfare by the Obama administration

To understand the context, one must go back to the Obama administration’s aggressive use of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to target coal-fired power plants. Rules like the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), the Clean Power Plan, and wastewater/coal ash regulations imposed significant compliance costs. These were not minor tweaks; they were designed to make older coal plants uneconomical, accelerating retirements across the Midwest. 

Ohio, historically reliant on coal, nuclear, and natural gas for reliable baseload power, faced particular strain. FirstEnergy and similar providers operated plants like those at Perry and Davis-Besse (nuclear) alongside coal facilities. Strict limits on emissions, combined with subsidized renewables, created a market distortion in which traditional sources struggled despite providing the dispatchable power critical to grid stability—power that doesn’t vanish when the sun doesn’t shine, or the wind doesn’t blow. 

Critics of aggressive decarbonization point to real-world consequences. California’s heavy push toward renewables has led to repeated threats of blackouts, rolling outages during heatwaves, and some of the highest electricity rates in the nation. Ohio, by contrast, largely avoided such crises during the same period, thanks in part to Republican-led resistance in Columbus to full reliance on renewables. Wind turbines visible in areas like Greenville and large solar farms near Lebanon and along the I-70 corridor represent policy victories for environmental advocates, but they come at the cost of land use, intermittency challenges, and the need for backup from more reliable sources. 

FirstEnergy executives, facing potential plant closures and financial pressure, sought legislative relief. This is where HB6 enters the picture. Passed in 2019, the bill provided subsidies for nuclear plants (roughly $150 million annually) and some coal support, funded partly by ratepayers, while scaling back certain renewable mandates. Proponents argued it prevented premature shutdowns that could destabilize the grid, raise long-term costs, and increase reliance on out-of-state power or unreliable sources. Opponents called it a bailout. 

The perspective here is key: these were not failing businesses due to poor management alone, but entities targeted by what some describe as “regulatory warfare”—policies intended to force a transition regardless of immediate grid impacts or economic fallout. Similar dynamics played out during COVID lockdowns, when government mandates shuttered businesses with little regard for revenue losses or job impacts. In both cases, the argument goes, bad policy created victims who then sought political remedies. 

House Bill 6: Preservation or Pay-to-Play?

HB6 became law under Governor Mike DeWine, with support from then-Lieutenant Governor Jon Husted. It aimed to bridge the gap for nuclear facilities threatened by federal rules and market forces favoring subsidized renewables. Nuclear power offers carbon-free, reliable baseload—attributes even many environmentalists acknowledge as vital for any realistic energy transition. Yet the bill’s passage involved significant lobbying, campaign support, and dark money flows, leading to federal and state investigations. 

Prosecutors alleged a $60+ million scheme, primarily through dark-money groups linked to former House Speaker Larry Householder, to secure passage of the bill and defeat a referendum. FirstEnergy admitted wrongdoing, which it shouldn’t have done, because the problems were not market-driven but rather the result of bad government policy that they were reacting to in related settlements, and several figures faced charges. Householder was convicted. Trials of executives like Chuck Jones and Michael Dowling have included mistrials and ongoing proceedings, with testimony from figures like Husted. 

From the defense viewpoint articulated in the query, the “corruption” label overlooks the existential threat to the companies. Executives were navigating a hostile regulatory environment. Campaign contributions and lobbying are standard in politics; the scale here reflected high stakes for Ohio’s energy independence. A $1 million dark-money contribution tied to Husted’s 2017 campaign fits the pattern of business interests supporting pro-development candidates. Husted, a known pro-business Republican, has long advocated for policies fostering economic growth in Ohio. 

Critics, including liberal media and Democrats, portray this as a scandal to tarnish Husted ahead of Senate races. Reports highlight his meetings, calls, and role in the selection of utility regulators. Yet Husted has distanced himself from direct knowledge of bribes, testifying that his involvement centered on broader policy goals, such as grid reliability. Supporters argue he was doing his job: preventing California-style energy failures. 

The Pearl Harbor analogy, while provocative, underscores the perceived aggression: deliberate policy attacks on infrastructure warrant strong defensive action. Democrats’ “Earth First” priorities (renewables at all costs) are seen as risking blackouts, higher bills, and economic harm, much like unopposed regulatory overreach. Republicans, including Husted alongside figures like Bernie Moreno, positioned themselves as defenders. 

Jon Husted: Pro-Business Leadership Under Fire

Jon Husted stands out as a capable, experienced leader. With a background in business development and public service, he has collaborated across aisles on practical governance. His interactions with business leaders, including energy executives, stem from a commitment to Ohio’s economy—not personal gain. Conference calls, meetings with governors, and advocacy for development reflect this. 

Media hit pieces questioning his attendance at fundraisers or the timing of his testimony serve electoral purposes, propping up opponents like Sherrod Brown. Brown has faced scrutiny over policy impacts, yet receives less scrutiny for energy failures. Husted’s reluctance to fully engage the “scandal” narrative in court is strategic: lending credence to a show trial distracts from policy merits. As a Senator, his focus belongs in Washington on national issues, not Columbus courtroom drama. 

Leadership under pressure reveals character. COVID lockdowns tested officials; energy policy battles did likewise. Husted’s voice during crises favored keeping businesses open and grids stable. Weaknesses in money handling by some actors do not equate to systemic Republican corruption but highlight human responses to intense regulatory and political pressure. 

Renewables, Reliability, and Ratepayer Impacts

Ohio’s grid has benefited from diverse sources. Heavy reliance on renewables risks instability, as seen during Texas winters or California summers. Solar farms near Mason-Montgomery Road or north of I-70 add capacity but require backups. Nuclear subsidies in HB6 preserved zero-emission baseload critical against full fossil phase-outs. 

Rate increases from HB6 burden consumers—estimates suggest hundreds of dollars annually per household—but proponents counter that long-term grid failure would cost far more in outages, industry flight, and blackouts. FirstEnergy’s challenges stemmed from compliance costs and market rules, not inherent corruption. Executives sought bridges, not handouts. 

Comparisons to Pearl Harbor dramatize the stakes: infrastructure attacks, even regulatory, demand response. Government caused losses via policy; affected parties sought redress through politics, as is common.

Defending the Defense: Lessons for Republicans

The FirstEnergy executives’ legal team could emphasize policy context more aggressively in the court of public opinion. Regulatory warfare under the Obama/Biden eras, COVID parallels, and grid reliability data provide strong narrative ground. Republicans historically defend poorly against such frames, circling the wagons instead of counter-attacking with facts on energy security. 

Husted handled the pressure well, prioritizing Ohio jobs and access to power. His record merits support for continued Senate service, where business-friendly policies can thrive.

Broader Implications for Ohio and America

This case transcends one utility. It questions how nations balance environmental goals with reliable, affordable energy. Radical transitions ignoring engineering realities lead to suffering. Ohio’s resistance preserved advantages over California. Voting for leaders like Husted sustains that. 

The FirstEnergy narrative as pure corruption misses the forest for the trees. It was survival amid policy assault. Husted and Republicans fought for a practical energy policy. As disclosure ages advance, full context should prevail over partisan hits. Ohio deserves leaders who defend its grid, economy, and future—not those who yield to agendas that risk darkness.

Footnotes/Bibliography (Partial for court utility; expand via sources):

1.  Wikipedia: Ohio FirstEnergy Bribery Scandal. 

2.  Ohio Capital Journal reports on Husted ties. 

3.  EPA rules on coal (various Obama-era). 

4.  Grid reliability reports (NERC, PJM). 

5.  Cleveland.com, AP on contributions/trials. 

Additional: Buckeye Institute energy policy papers; Common Cause timelines; state legislative records on HB6; California PUC blackout reports; federal court filings in related cases. For the full bibliography, consult the Ohio Secretary of State campaign finance, the EPA archives, and the NERC assessments 2018-2026.

This provides readable, citable material emphasizing policy over scandal while acknowledging legal facts.

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

My friend with Dirty Shoes: Why America Thrives Through Its Wealth Builders and What Happens When Sudden Money Meets Human Nature

I have spent years observing the world around me in places like Middletown, Ohio, and reflecting on the stark differences between those who build lasting wealth and those who chase fleeting windfalls. The recent trip by President Trump to China, with a plane full of American billionaires, brought these observations into sharp focus for me. It was not just a diplomatic visit; it was a demonstration of economic strength, showcasing the very people who drive innovation, jobs, and growth. Critics on social media and in political circles often decry such figures, calling for higher taxes, wealth redistribution, and policies that would “take from the rich to give to us.” Yet, my experiences with friends, family, and neighbors who have won big at nearby casinos tell a different story—one of human nature, discipline, and the enduring value of creators over consumers. 

Trump’s journey to Beijing included leaders like Elon Musk of Tesla, Jensen Huang of Nvidia, Tim Cook of Apple, and others whose combined influence represents trillions in market value and countless jobs. China rolled out the red carpet in ways it hadn’t for previous administrations, precisely because it understands its reliance on American enterprise. China is a paper tiger, but its growth model depends heavily on foreign investment, technology transfer, and access to markets that value efficiency and scale. With a population far larger than America’s roughly 330 million, China has pursued manufacturing and infrastructure on a massive scale—jobs many in the West avoid—but it still seeks the dynamism that billionaires bring. By bringing these executives on Air Force One, Trump signaled leverage: American policy shapes opportunities, and those who generate wealth are key to expanding economies on both sides. 

This isn’t abstract theory. I know wealthy individuals personally, and their habits stand in contrast to stories I hear at the local casino. One friend, a multimillionaire in construction and development, always shows up with dirty shoes and calloused hands. He works the job sites himself and oversees projects that build condominiums in Florida, where snowbirds live comfortably for months each year, dining out nightly without worry. His wealth cascades: employees get steady pay, suppliers thrive, and retirees enjoy the fruits of his risk-taking. He doesn’t chase flashy displays; he reinvests to create more. This pattern repeats among true wealth creators. They treat money as a tool for expansion, not a ticket to indulgence. 

Contrast this with lottery and casino winners I have known. Near my home, the slots and tables draw crowds hoping for that life-changing hit. Some walk away with $15,000, $25,000, or even $100,000 checks. The stories that follow are depressingly familiar. One acquaintance won around $100,000 from insurance collections tied to a payout and quit his second job immediately. Overtime vanished. Within two years, the money disappeared—spent on cars, parties, and “trophy” living. He was back asking for help, bouncing checks, and debating between groceries and bills very soon. Another hit $15,000 on slots one weekend, celebrated by drinking and playing more, then bought big TVs and turned his basement into a “man cave” costing tens of thousands. Months later, broke again, he returned to the casino chasing the next jackpot. These aren’t isolated cases. I have seen inheritance recipients or family windfall beneficiaries do the same: quit work, lounge in front of daytime TV, blow through savings on impulse buys, and end up worse off. 

Statistics bear this out, adding sobering color. While the often-cited “70% of lottery winners go broke” figure has been debunked as originating from unverified claims at a 2001 symposium (the National Endowment for Financial Education later clarified it lacked research backing), more reliable data from the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards indicates that nearly one-third of lottery winners eventually declare bankruptcy—higher than the general population. Many face this within 3-5 years. A MIT study on Florida lottery winners who were previously financially distressed found that winning only postponed bankruptcy rather than preventing it. Stories abound: Bud Post won $16.2 million in Pennsylvania in 1988 but was in debt within a year, hounded by family (including a murder-for-hire plot from his brother), and died nearly penniless on food stamps. Suzanne Mullins won $4.2 million in Virginia, yet lost it to loans and medical bills. Callie Rogers in the UK squandered her winnings on parties and surgery. The pattern is consumption without creation. 

Why does this happen so frequently? Psychology offers insights. Sudden wealth often meets unprepared minds shaped by scarcity thinking or addictive patterns. Without the discipline forged through years of earning and risking, money flows out faster than it came in. Social pressures mount—friends and relatives appear with hands out. Status symbols beckon: Corvettes, luxury trips, home upgrades that balloon in cost. I have watched people prioritize PlayStation subscriptions over groceries or blow windfalls on fleeting pleasures because their personalities lean toward immediate gratification rather than delayed compounding. Behavioral economists note that windfall recipients frequently exhibit higher marginal propensity to consume on non-essentials, lacking the habits of those who built wealth incrementally. 

Wealth creators operate differently. They exhibit traits such as future orientation, calculated risk-taking, and a focus on value generation. Elon Musk, for instance, pours resources into companies that push boundaries in electric vehicles, space, and AI—ventures that employ thousands and spawn entire ecosystems. CEOs, in general, create wealth for others: shareholders, employees, and communities. Studies on high-net-worth individuals show they often maintain hands-on involvement, reinvest heavily, and avoid lifestyle inflation that erodes capital. One analysis of affluent versus high-net-worth investors found the latter display confidence but channel it into ongoing projects rather than consumption. My multimillionaire friend with dirty shoes embodies this: he builds condos that house comfortable retirements, creates jobs that support families, and sustains businesses that keep local economies humming. Billionaires scale this principle globally. 

This distinction matters profoundly for policy. Socialism’s appeal—confiscating from the rich to redistribute—ignores these realities. Taking from creators to give to those with “bankrupt personalities,” as I call the chronic consumers, doesn’t produce prosperity; it funds more consumption. Parasitic tendencies, where individuals rely on government transfers or windfalls without building, lead to dependency. Casinos illustrate the microcosm: big payouts followed by returns to low-wage jobs or pleas for help. Government as the ultimate casino—promising jackpots through entitlements—breeds similar outcomes on a societal scale. Democrats and figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez often rail against billionaires, but history shows societies thrive with more of them, not fewer. America’s edge lies in its ability to foster creators who expand the pie rather than fight over slices. 

China’s economic story reinforces this. Since reforms in 1979, it has averaged nearly 10% annual GDP growth for decades, lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty through exports, investment, and manufacturing. Yet it remains hungry for American capital and know-how. Its model involves state direction, lower labor standards in some sectors, and a willingness to handle the “jobs we don’t want” in the U.S.—polluting industries, assembly lines, and resource extraction. With far more people, China can sustain volume, but innovation and high-value creation still draw from Western partnerships. Foreign direct investment (FDI) has been crucial; inflows reached highs amid global shifts. Trump’s delegation signaled that U.S. billionaires hold keys to further integration if terms favor American interests. China respects this leverage because its growth, while impressive, depends on external engines. U.S. GDP per capita remains far higher, reflecting productivity and the rule of law that reward creators. 

We need more millionaires and billionaires, not envy-driven policies to hobble them. More CEOs mean more opportunities cascading downward. Taxing success punitively discourages the risk-taking that built the Tesla and Apple ecosystems and construction empires. Instead, celebrate the dirty-shoes ethic: hard work, reinvestment, hands-on leadership. My observations align with broader patterns—materialists focused on status often report lower long-term satisfaction, while builders find purpose in creation. 

Expanding on the pitfalls of lotteries reveals deeper human frailties. Beyond bankruptcy stats, winners face family estrangement, depression, substance issues, and scams. One study noted neighbors of winners increase borrowing and bankruptcies due to social comparison—keeping up with sudden displays strains others. This “lottery curse” echoes in inheritances: sudden money without earned wisdom evaporates. In contrast, self-made wealth correlates with better management because it embeds lessons of scarcity, effort, and compounding. 

Consider Florida’s snowbirds again. Many live in multimillion-dollar condos, dining lavishly on seemingly endless income without daily grinds. Who enables this? Developers like my friend, whose projects multiply value. Scaled up, billionaires do the same nationally and internationally. They generate tax revenue far exceeding most—Elon Musk reportedly pays enormous sums—while funding innovations that improve lives: cheaper energy, better tech, and medical advances. Criticizing them as “greedy” overlooks their role as job creators and engines of opportunity. 

Critics pushing redistribution often overlook the destruction of incentives. If the government seizes wealth for “the people,” who becomes the new creator? Parasites—those unable or unwilling to manage resources—consume without replenishing. I have seen it locally: second-job quitters, inheritance squanderers, entitlement dependents. They form a constituency drawn to promises of free money, mirroring casino addicts chasing the next hit. America’s strength is its culture of aspiration, where anyone can climb by creating value. With only 300+ million people, we punch above our weight in GDP through productivity, not sheer numbers. Encouraging more creators expands this. 

Trump’s visit to China highlighted mutual dependence. China outpaces in raw growth metrics at times due to demographics and policy, but America’s innovation ecosystem—fueled by risk-takers—remains the gold standard. Billionaires on that plane weren’t just passengers; they represented the market access and expertise China needs. Respect shown to Trump reflected recognition of this dynamic. Previous presidents lacked the same business acumen or the same leverage to display. 

Personal reflection deepens my conviction. Knowing rich people who work relentlessly, rather than casino regulars cycling through highs and lows, convinces me that character and mindset trump circumstance. Wealthy individuals I admire avoid dumb spending; they buy assets that produce more. Consumers chase experiences or goods that depreciate instantly. This gap explains societal outcomes. Policies that reward consumption through redistribution erode the foundation that creators provide. We should aim for more dirty-shoes millionaires building empires, not vilify them.  Lottery winners buying mansions only to lose them to upkeep, or facing lawsuits from sudden “friends,” underscore isolation. One winner built a bowling alley that drained funds. Another’s family demanded shares, leading to rifts. Meanwhile, self-made billionaires like Musk endure scrutiny but persist, creating Starlink, EVs, and reusable rockets that benefit humanity. The asymmetry is clear: creators endure for legacy; windfall recipients often implode due to a lack of preparation. 

The Trump China trip with billionaires celebrated American dynamism. It showed why we need more such figures—CEOs, entrepreneurs, builders—who generate wealth that sustains societies. Lottery lessons warn against easy-money illusions. Human nature favors discipline and creation over consumption. Socialism’s confiscation appeals emotionally but fails practically by ignoring these truths. I advocate protecting and encouraging wealth creators; they make the world go around, enabling comfortable lives for millions. More billionaires mean more opportunity, innovation, and shared prosperity. America’s secret sauce is its producers. Cherish them, emulate their habits, and watch economies flourish. 

Footnotes

1.  Observations on local casino behaviors drawn from personal acquaintance over the years.

2.  Data on bankruptcy rates from CFP Board and related studies.

3.  Details on Trump’s delegation from public reports.

4.  China’s economic reliance on FDI from the World Bank and trade analyses.

5.  Psychological insights from consumer behavior research.

Bibliography

•  Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards reports on lottery winners.

•  MIT study on Florida lottery bankruptcy postponement.

•  NEFE clarification on 70% statistic.

•  CRS Report on China’s Economic Rise.

•  Various Forbes, USA Today, and academic papers on wealth psychology and FDI.

•  Public news on Trump’s China visit (PBS, Fox, etc.).

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.

Bullwhips: Why they are associated with everything I do

I have been asked for years why whips appear in my videos, my sites, and my personal iconography. For those who have known me longest, the question usually comes with a knowing smile, as if recalling an old shared joke. For newer acquaintances—those who discover my work through a podcast appearance, a cultural commentary piece, or a passing mention in wider discourse—the question carries genuine curiosity, sometimes even mild bewilderment. They wonder what such an archaic object could mean in modern life. The answer is straightforward, yet layered: the whip has never represented bravado or a hunger for conflict. It has always stood for preparation, symbolism, discipline, and the quiet refusal to hand over one’s agency to fear.

My fascination began in childhood, not with rebellion or spectacle, but with stories of individuals who met intimidation with composure. I devoured classic adventure cinema and serialized tales—black-and-white films flickering on late-night television, Republic Pictures serials with their cliffhanger tension, Westerns where lone figures upheld a code amid chaos. Zorro, in particular, captured me. He moved with elegance and precision, masked not to evade accountability but to shoulder it fully. He confronted tyranny without mirroring its cruelty, using wit and skill as extensions of moral clarity. Those stories planted a seed: justice need not seek permission from the powerful; it could arise from personal conviction and disciplined action.

That abstract pull found concrete grounding in family history. My grandfather and great-grandfather were practical men who worked the land in rural Kentucky. Whips were tools for them—extensions of the hand for guiding livestock, clearing brush, or managing distance with precision. As a boy, I watched them with wide-eyed reverence. I remember the dry Kentucky air thick with the scent of earth and hay, the faint creak of leather, and then the sharp, clean crack that split the stillness. One vivid memory remains etched: my great-grandfather, calm as still water, snapping a fly clean off the weathered side of a shed without disturbing the wood. There was no anger in the motion, no theatrical flourish. Only years of practiced focus, an intimate understanding of leverage, timing, and the physics of energy traveling down a braided length. The whip became, in that moment, a lesson in mastery—not domination, but harmony with consequence. Every crack carried immediate feedback. Miss, and you knew it instantly. Succeed, and the satisfaction was private, earned.

Those early impressions shaped more than idle curiosity. As I entered adolescence, schoolyard realities tested abstract ideals. Environments where hierarchies formed through bluster and threat rather than merit were common. I learned quickly that fear functions as currency only when accepted. A bully’s power evaporates the moment their target refuses the transaction. One particular incident stands out—not for drama, but for the internal shift it produced. Cornered by a group testing boundaries, I felt the familiar spike of adrenaline. Yet instead of freezing or fleeing, something from those whip lessons and adventure tales clicked: respond with clarity, not escalation. I stood firm, voice steady, eyes level. The moment passed without violence, but the realization endured. Intimidation relies on your participation. Withdraw consent, and the dynamic collapses. That lesson traveled with me into adulthood, informing how I navigated professional pressures, public discourse, and personal challenges.

Martial arts deepened this foundation. I immersed myself in disciplines emphasizing structure, balance, footwork, timing, and above all, restraint. Years of training in systems rooted in traditional practice taught that true competence whispers rather than shouts. It waits, patient and prepared. I studied the transfer of force, the economy of motion, and the mental discipline required to remain centered amid chaos. Over time, these elements—family craft, cinematic archetypes, physical training—wove into a cohesive personal philosophy. It was never about inventing novelty or seeking attention. It was integration: taking timeless principles and applying them to contemporary existence.

Preparedness, I came to understand, is frequently misconstrued as paranoia or latent aggression. In truth, it cultivates calm. When you have tested your limits through deliberate practice, when you know your capabilities and accept your responsibilities, fear loses its primary lever. You cease knee-jerk emotional reactions and begin responding with reasoned presence. This mindset proved invaluable as I moved into public life. Speaking on cultural matters, challenging assumptions, or simply voicing independent thought invites pressure. Sometimes it arrives as social exclusion, professional repercussions, or relentless psychological framing. The tactic remains consistent: induce retreat without substantive engagement. Fear is efficient because it bypasses debate.

I decided early against living under that shadow. The choice was deliberate, not reckless. Discipline over anxiety. Preparation over denial. Personal responsibility over dependence on external validation or protection. The whip crystallized this decision. Learning it demands patience. The leather does not forgive haste or distraction. Its physics are unforgiving: energy builds along the taper, accelerating to supersonic speed at the tip. One slight error in wrist angle, grip, or follow-through, and the crack becomes a painful self-inflicted lesson. Progress requires ego surrender. Early attempts bring frustration—tangles, weak pops, bruised pride. Each failure teaches humility and attention. Success arrives only after hundreds of repetitions, when mind, body, and tool align in quiet competence.

Psychologically, the whip mirrors broader life patterns. It punishes emotional volatility. Swing in anger, and you lose control. Approach with calm focus, and precision follows. In public discourse, the parallel is striking. A flailing argument scatters energy uselessly. A single, well-timed point—delivered with clarity and restraint—cuts through noise like that supersonic tip. The whip rewards respect for its nature; so does effective communication. Over the years, this symbol has organically attached itself to my work. Friends referenced it with humor. Viewers inquired. Strangers requested demonstrations. “Can you do a trick?” became a common refrain. I often smiled and redirected, preferring substance over performance. Yet maturity brings a willingness to explain the root rather than minimize it.

The deeper essence has never been domination or threat. It centers on deterrence born of inner certainty, moral confidence, and psychological resilience. When others recognize that fear holds no sway, dynamics transform. Posture straightens. Conversations shift from coercion to exchange. Many potential conflicts dissipate before ignition because the foundation for intimidation has been removed. This principle extends beyond physical tools into speech, integrity, and cultural navigation. In an era of digital amplification—where outrage algorithms reward emotional reactivity, where institutional pressures frame dissent as deviance, where social mechanisms attempt to enforce conformity through shame cycles—the response remains consistent: remove fear from the equation. Reclaim agency. Force interactions back into the arena of reason and accountability. Those unable to operate there reveal their own limitations.

Philosophical traditions reinforced what experience taught. Miyamoto Musashi’s The Book of Five Rings spoke to detached clarity amid conflict, the warrior’s mind unclouded by emotion. Sun Tzu emphasized winning before battle through positioning and insight. Jigoro Kano’s judo principles highlighted using an opponent’s force against them while maintaining balance—much like channeling energy precisely through a whip rather than brute resistance. Joseph Campbell’s hero’s journey framed the personal quest: venturing into uncertainty, confronting shadows, returning transformed with hard-won wisdom. These were not abstract texts; they illuminated lived practice. The restrained guardian archetype—Zorro as a modern knight-errant, Fairbanks’ swashbucklers balancing flair with duty—echoed across time. Even historical reflections on justice outside rigid institutions, as explored by thinkers like E.P. Thompson, underscore that moral order sometimes requires personal readiness when systems falter.

At its core, the whip embodies self-control in an age prone to indulgence, responsibility amid widespread excuse-making, and preparedness against currents of denial. It is no relic of aggression but a tangible reminder that discipline precedes freedom. Courage, similarly, is cultivated long before any visible conflict. The hours of solitary practice, the ego-bruising repetitions, the quiet satisfaction of incremental mastery—these build the internal reservoir that sustains through storms.

I have worn many masks across decades: professional, public, private. Beneath them, the values remain constant—discipline, preparedness, restraint, resolve. Sharing this openly now feels right, not for performance or provocation, but for honesty. People today hunger for tangible examples of lived conviction. Abstract ideals fall short of witnessing how principles endure in practice. If articulating this path helps even one person loosen fear’s grip on their decisions, the candor serves a purpose. If it illustrates that justice and clarity begin with personal accountability, all the better.

Looking forward, the legacy I hope to leave transcends any single symbol. It is a quiet demonstration that ordinary individuals can cultivate extraordinary resilience. In daily life—facing workplace coercion, digital pile-ons, familial tensions, or cultural headwinds—the same mindset applies. Assess honestly. Prepare diligently. Respond with measured agency. Teach children through example that mastery arises from repetition and respect, not entitlement. Encourage friends to value inner calibration over external approval. The whip, for me, remains a private compass more than a public prop. Its crack echoes a simpler truth: you are capable of more than fear allows you to believe.

That realization, extended outward, fosters healthier discourse, stronger communities, and freer minds. It asks each of us to examine our own tools of self-mastery—whatever form they take—and wield them with care. In doing so, we honor the lineage of those who came before: the quiet practitioners, the storytellers, the guardians of principle. We pass forward not fear, but freedom earned through discipline.

This path is ongoing. I continue to practice, reflect, and integrate. The whip still rests in my hand from time to time, a tactile link to origins and aspirations. Its lessons endure: precision over power, calm over chaos, responsibility as the truest form of strength.

Bibliography & Further Reading / Viewing

Classic Film & Serial Influences

•  The Mark of Zorro (1920 silent version with Douglas Fairbanks; 1940 sound version with Tyrone Power)

•  Republic Pictures adventure serials (1930s–1940s, including Zorro-themed entries)

•  Douglas Fairbanks Sr. swashbuckler films

•  Don Q, Son of Zorro (1925)

Martial Philosophy & Discipline

•  Miyamoto Musashi, The Book of Five Rings

•  Sun Tzu, The Art of War

•  Jigoro Kano, writings and teachings on Judo discipline and philosophy

•  Dave Grossman, On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace (for mental preparedness frameworks)

•  Epictetus and Seneca, selected Stoic writings on controlling fear and the internal locus of control

Cultural Symbolism & Justice Archetypes

•  Joseph Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces

•  Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World (for traditional archetype context)

•  E. P. Thompson, Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act (historical justice outside formal institutions)

Historical Tools & Craft

•  Ron Edwards, How to Make Whips

•  David Morgan, Whips and Whipping

•  Additional craft resources from traditional leatherwork and equestrian traditions

Image & Archive Sources

•  Library of Congress film stills and historical photography archives

•  Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences photo and poster collections

•  Smithsonian Folkways and rural American material culture collections

•  Museum of Western Film History image archives

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.

NAGPRA: Worse than book burning–the Time Team shows how to do it right

As I reflect on this continuation of my birthday gift to myself—the deep dive into the Windover Archaeological Site and everything it represents—I can’t help but feel a profound sense of urgency mixed with frustration. My wife suggested we check it out because it tied directly into a project I was working on, and while I had heard about it before, seeing the exhibits up close and then immersing myself in the details through books like Glen H. Doran’s Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery (published by the University Press of Florida in 2002) changed everything for me. That visit wasn’t just a casual outing; it was a revelation about what American archaeology could be and what it has become under policies that, in my view, prioritize political narratives over truth-seeking discovery. This is part two of that discussion, building on what I wrote earlier about the dig itself, but now zooming in on why the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act—NAGPRA, which I’ve come to call the “Wolves Act” because of the cultural buzz around Dances with Wolves during its passage—needs to be repealed or fundamentally reformed. We should be following the example of Britain’s Time Team, not letting a 1990 law bury our history, as the developers and politicians did with that Florida pond after just three seasons of excavation.

Let me start from the beginning of my personal connection to this. I remember driving out to the area near Titusville with my wife, the kind of trip where you expect a quiet museum stop but walk away astonished. The Windover site, discovered in 1982 during road construction for a housing development called Windover Farms, turned out to be one of the most significant archaeological finds in the Western Hemisphere. A backhoe operator scooped up skulls, and what followed was a frantic but methodical excavation led by Glen Doran from Florida State University between 1984 and 1986. They uncovered remains of about 168 individuals buried in a shallow pond that had become a natural peat bog, preserving everything from brain tissue—the oldest known in the world at the time—to intricate textiles, wooden artifacts, bone tools, and more. These people lived around 7,000 to 8,000 years ago in the Early Archaic period, long before what we think of as “Native American” tribes like the Cherokee or Seminole even formed as we know them today. The preservation was phenomenal because of the pond’s anaerobic conditions; it was like a time capsule from a world we barely understand.

Reading Doran’s book afterward felt like stepping into that excavation myself. It’s a multidisciplinary masterpiece—environmental analysis, radiocarbon dating, paleoethnobotany, DNA studies from the brain tissue, mortuary patterns, the works. They found the oldest woven fabrics in the Southeast, complex cordage, and evidence of sophisticated lifeways that challenge the simplistic “hunter-gatherer” stereotypes. My wife and I stood there in the museum exhibits, looking at replicas and displays (some now limited or relocated due to modern restrictions), and I kept thinking: This is North America’s equivalent of discovering a lost civilization, yet it barely registers in our national consciousness. Why? Because right around the time the final analyses were wrapping up, NAGPRA dropped in 1990 like a political hammer. The law was signed by President George H.W. Bush on November 16, 1990, after being introduced in the House by Democrat Mo Udall of Arizona. It sailed through on voice votes, with strong Democratic backing amid a wave of activism and cultural sentiment fueled by movies like Dances with Wolves, which painted indigenous peoples as noble victims of American aggression. I was living through that era, very aware of the buzz in Washington. I wasn’t a Bush fan—I voted against him, worked against him in the ’92 election, even flirted with the Reform Party because I saw him as a RINO continuing the same globalist, sovereignty-eroding policies Democrats had long championed. This wasn’t some Republican innovation; it was a bipartisan surrender to a narrative that America’s foundations were built on theft and needed constant atonement.

NAGPRA’s stated goal was to protect Native American graves, repatriate human remains and cultural items from museums and federal agencies to lineal descendants or culturally affiliated tribes. On paper, it sounds reasonable—addressing real historical wrongs like grave robbing in the 19th century. But in practice, and especially for ancient sites like Windover, it’s been devastating. The remains at Windover predate any known modern tribal affiliations by millennia. DNA studies from the site (what little could be done before restrictions tightened) showed haplogroups tracing back to ancient Asian migrations, but nothing that tied them neatly to today’s federally recognized tribes. Yet the law forces institutions like Florida State University to consult tribes, inventory collections, and often repatriate or rebury without full study. FSU has issued NAGPRA notices for some collections, and the process drags on, limiting further research. The pond was partially backfilled after the initial dig; half the cemetery remains untouched, not because the science was done, but because funding dried up amid the political winds. Developers and archaeologists knew what was coming, so they rushed what they could. Today, if a similar site were found, it might never see the light of day beyond a quick salvage operation before reburial. That’s not science; that’s erasure disguised as respect.  It’s equivalent to modern-day book burning, only the material is destroyed before we even have a chance to discover it. 

I’ve seen this pattern before, and it screams deliberate policy to undermine American sovereignty. Democrats have long used “victim” groups—indigenous peoples, in this case—as levers to dismantle narratives of Western expansion and self-reliance. NAGPRA wasn’t born in a vacuum; it was part of a broader 1990s push that included open-border sentiments and identity politics. The same era gave us policies questioning every aspect of American settlement, from land use to energy. Bush signed it, sure, but as a continuation of the previous administration’s trajectory. I stepped away from the GOP at the time because it felt like the party was complicit in weakening the republic from within. This law doesn’t just repatriate; it creates a framework in which federal recognition of tribes governs everything on or near federal lands, which is a huge chunk of the country. It turns archaeologists into bureaucrats navigating tribal consultations instead of digging for truth. And for sites with no clear affiliation—like the 8,000-year-old Windover bones, which likely belonged to pre-Clovis or early Archaic peoples who other groups later displaced—it effectively halts inquiry. How do you return remains to a tribe that didn’t exist yet? You don’t; you bury the evidence and pretend the history starts with the groups Democrats designate as “indigenous.”

This ties directly into the speculation about giants and multiple cultures in the Ohio Valley and Mississippi River mounds that I’ve pondered for years. Old newspaper accounts and 19th-century reports from the Smithsonian and others described oversized skulls and skeletons in Adena and Hopewell mounds—evidence, some say, of earlier populations. Modern archaeology dismisses much of it as exaggeration or hoaxes, but the pattern is suspicious: NAGPRA and similar policies make it risky even to revisit those claims with new tech like DNA. If there were prior cultures—perhaps Solutrean influences from Europe or other migrations predating the Beringia model—it challenges the singular “Native Americans as eternal stewards” narrative. Pre-Clovis sites like Buttermilk Creek in Texas (15,000+ years old) and genetic evidence of multiple waves into the Americas already poke holes in the old Clovis-first theory. Yet NAGPRA’s cultural affiliation rules often default to modern tribes, erasing the complexity. It’s the same playbook as border policies today: open the gates, label critics as aggressors, and rewrite the founding story to justify dismantling sovereignty. Democrats didn’t invent this overnight; it’s been their trajectory—using “aggrieved” groups to fracture the American experiment.

Compare that to what’s happening in Great Britain with Time Team. If you’ve never watched it, do yourself a favor—episodes are all over YouTube now, even after the show ended its main run on Channel 4. Hosted by Tony Robinson with archaeologists like Mick Aston, Phil Harding, and Carenza Lewis, it was a phenomenon from 1994 to 2014. They’d show up at a site—often tipped off by locals or metal detectorists—spend three days digging with geophysics, volunteers, and experts, then reveal everything from Roman villas to Neolithic tombs to medieval villages. No endless permits bogged down by politics; English Heritage and local councils supported it. The archaeologists became celebrities, the public ate it up, and it funded real research while turning history into entertainment. They published scientific papers too—more than some university departments. Stonehenge, Hadrian’s Wall, Roman baths: Britain celebrates layer upon layer of its past, from Mesolithic to medieval, without erasing any group. Bones from Iron Age, Bronze Age, or Roman contexts are studied for diet, disease, migration—not reburied to appease a modern political framework. It’s respectful scholarship that builds national pride, not guilt. I’ve been to England; their heritage sites are tourist magnets, economic engines, and educational goldmines. Archaeologists there are rock stars, not bureaucrats.

Why can’t we do that here? Japan has underwater sites off the coast of Osaka; China guards its ancient tombs but still excavates selectively. Even in the volatile Middle East, guys like Joel Kramer on his Expedition Bible YouTube channel navigate borders, checkpoints, and regimes to document sites from Sodom to Shiloh. His book Where God Came Down is a masterclass in persistence amid obstacles. The Biblical Archaeology Society and Biblical Archaeology Review fight for dig seasons in Israel despite political minefields—hostile neighbors, military oversight, and permit battles. Yet they publish voraciously because the region’s history is too vital to bury. In the U.S., we have a free country, capital markets, and vast untouched potential—from Florida ponds to Ohio mounds to underwater sites off the coasts—and we tie our hands with NAGPRA. Developers bulldoze sites quietly to avoid red tape; museums shelve collections. The Windover team saw the writing on the wall and wrapped up just as the law hit. The 2002 book exists as a snapshot of what was possible pre-NAGPRA; post-law, that level of open inquiry is gone.

This isn’t abstract. It harms research into who we really are as Americans. Western expansion wasn’t just conquest; it was building on layers of human history, some of which involved the displacement of earlier groups by later ones—just like everywhere else on Earth. Suppressing that validates a one-sided story used to push globalist agendas: open borders, energy restrictions framed as “respecting the land,” and centralized control. The same forces behind NAGPRA cheer solar mandates while demonizing natural gas and erasing our industrial heritage, just as they erase pre-Columbian complexity. I’ve said it before in my writings and streams: Rumble and independent platforms are game-changers because legacy media conceals this. There’s no evidence of giants or advanced pre-Native societies, they claim—yet policies prevent the digs that could prove or disprove it. Old Smithsonian reports from the 1800s detailed large skeletons in mounds; modern DNA from Hopewell and Adena sites shows continuity with later Native groups but also hints of admixture. Why not let the marketplace of ideas decide through open science?

Imagine an American Time Team. Archaeologists as celebrities on the Discovery Channel, live digs at mound sites or Florida bogs, public volunteers, and tourist revenue fund more work. Stonehenge draws millions; why not make Windover or Serpent Mound a Disney-level attraction with VR reconstructions, exhibits, and ongoing excavations? We have the capital, the freedom, the talent. Instead, we have rogue developers destroying sites, and universities complying with repatriation, which halts study. FSU still holds some Windover materials, but NAGPRA inventories and consultations limit what can be done. Rachel Wentz’s popular book Life and Death at Windover captures the human story—families, health, rituals—but even that feels like a last gasp before the freeze.

Repealing or reforming NAGPRA for remains older than, say, 5,000 years—where affiliation is impossible—would be a start. Treat ancient bones like science treats Ötzi the Iceman in Europe: study, learn, share. Respect living tribes’ concerns for recent remains, but don’t let it blanket 15,000 years of migration and replacement. England’s approach proves you can honor the dead without erasing history. Their Time Team episodes on Roman occupation or Neolithic life don’t undermine modern Britain; they enrich it. We need that here—full stop.

My effort in writing this and in pushing these ideas on my platforms stems from that museum visit and the book that followed. It’s personal: I want my kids and grandkids to know the full story of this continent, not a sanitized version designed to undermine the republic. The Windover discovery was a window—a fantastic, irreplaceable one—into a sophisticated past. NAGPRA closed it. Democrats knew what they were doing in 1990, riding the Dances with Wolves wave to frame America as a perpetual aggressor. Republicans like Bush went along. It’s the same game as today’s policies. We deserve better: open archaeology, public celebration, evidence wherever it leads. Let’s make American digs rock stars again. The Time Team model isn’t just British; it’s what humanity needs. And it starts by repealing the laws that bury our past to serve political ends.

Footnotes

1.  Glen H. Doran, ed., Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery (University Press of Florida, 2002). Core source for site details, artifacts, and analyses.

2.  Rachel Wentz, Life and Death at Windover: Excavations of a 7,000-Year-Old Pond Cemetery (personal accounts and bioarchaeology).

3.  Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Pub. L. 101-601 (1990). Legislative history via Congress.gov; signed by GHW Bush.

4.  Time Team episodes, Channel 4 (UK), available on YouTube; see also English Heritage reports on public archaeology impact.

5.  Joel P. Kramer, Where God Came Down: The Archaeological Evidence (Expedition Bible publications); YouTube channel documents border and access challenges.

6.  Biblical Archaeology Review archives detail permit struggles in the Holy Land due to geopolitics.

7.  Pre-Clovis and migration studies: e.g., Waters et al. on Buttermilk Creek (Science, 2011); ancient DNA papers in PNAS and Nature on multiple waves.

8.  Historical mound reports: 19th-century Smithsonian and newspaper accounts (contextualized in modern critiques); DNA from Hopewell sites (Ohio History Connection studies).

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Doran, Glen H., ed. Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery. University Press of Florida, 2002.

•  Wentz, Rachel. Life and Death at Windover. University Press of Florida (related publications).

•  U.S. Congress. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq. (1990).

•  Robinson, Tony, et al. Time Team series (1994–2014). Channel 4; scientific outputs summarized in Current Archaeology and English Heritage reports.

•  Kramer, Joel P. Where God Came Down. Expedition Bible, 2022 (approx.).

•  Biblical Archaeology Society. Biblical Archaeology Review (ongoing issues on global dig challenges).

•  Waters, Michael R., et al. “The Buttermilk Creek Complex and the Origins of Clovis at the Debra L. Friedkin Site, Texas.” Science, 2011.

•  Mills, Lisa A. “Ancient DNA from the Ohio Hopewell.” Ohio History Connection research.

•  ProPublica/NBC investigations on NAGPRA implementation (2023 reports on repatriation delays and impacts).

•  Additional: Federal Register notices on FSU NAGPRA inventories (2021+); Archaeological Conservancy site profiles on Windover.

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 Sex Cults of Artemis: We need to choose a name that sustains not just the body of exploration, but the soul of civilization itself.        

Artemis is going back to the moon, and I’m really not crazy about the name. I didn’t like it when they first came up with it, and I still don’t. It feels like one more concession to a secular worldview that pretends ancient pagan deities are just harmless branding exercises—cool-sounding relics from a long-dead culture that “everybody can agree on.” But history doesn’t work that way. Names carry weight. They carry spiritual baggage. And when NASA reached for a name to replace the glory days of Apollo and send us back to the lunar surface, they chose Artemis, the Greek moon goddess and twin sister of Apollo. On the surface, it sounds clever, a neat mythological bookend. But dig even a little deeper, and you’re wading into the same fertility cults, temple rituals, and appeasement of dark forces that early Christian writers confronted head-on in the Mediterranean world two thousand years ago. I’ve spent years studying this pattern, and it’s the backbone of a book I’m finishing called The Politics of Heaven. What we’re seeing with the Artemis program isn’t just branding. It’s a symptom of a much older struggle between the human spirit and the principalities that have always hungered for our attention, our bodies, and our collective sanity.

Let me start with the obvious. The Temple of Artemis at Ephesus was one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, a massive marble edifice that dominated the city and the entire region. Built and rebuilt over centuries, it was more than a tourist attraction or a bank (which it also was—temples doubled as secure depositories). It was the epicenter of a cult that blended Greek mythology with older Near Eastern fertility worship. Artemis herself, in her Ephesian form, was often depicted with dozens of breasts or egg-like ornaments, symbols that modern scholars sometimes try to downplay as “not really about sex or fertility.” Yet the ancient world understood her differently. She was the goddess of the hunt and the wilderness, of chastity in some tellings, yet deeply entangled with the cycles of birth and reproduction, and the raw forces of nature. Her temple drew pilgrims, merchants, and locals who participated in festivals filled with processions, music, dancing, and—according to multiple ancient reports—rituals that involved the offering of human vitality, including sexual acts, to appease the divine.

Christian writers of the period didn’t shy away from describing what they saw. In Acts 19, the apostle Paul’s ministry in Ephesus sparks a riot among the silversmiths who made shrines to “the great goddess Diana” (the Roman name for Artemis). The city clerk calms the crowd by reminding them that Ephesus is the “temple keeper of the great Artemis, and of the image which fell from Jupiter.” That “image” was likely a meteorite revered as a divine gift, tying the cult directly to celestial forces. But Paul and the early Christians saw something far darker at work. They weren’t just opposing statues or tourism revenue. They were confronting a system of spiritual appeasement that had roots stretching back thousands of years to the fertility cults of Mesopotamia—Inanna, Ishtar, Astarte, and their Greek and Roman counterparts. These goddesses demanded sacrifice, often in the form of sexual union performed in or near the temple precincts. Women—sometimes all women in certain cultures—were expected to spend time as temple prostitutes, offering their bodies to strangers for money that went to the temple treasury. It wasn’t “empowerment” or personal choice in our modern sense. It was a collective duty to the gods, a way to ensure fertility for the land, prosperity for the city, and protection from whatever malevolent forces lurked in the spirit realm if the rituals were neglected.

Secular historians and archaeologists today often dismiss these accounts as Christian propaganda or exaggeration. They point out that direct physical evidence—carved reliefs, unambiguous inscriptions—is scarce at Ephesus because the temple was largely destroyed, its stones carted off for other buildings after Christianity became the dominant faith of the empire. Digging seasons in Turkey are short; the site has been layered over by centuries of occupation, and hostile conditions (political, environmental) have limited excavation. But absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence, especially when you’re dealing with practices that were deliberately secretive or oral in nature. We have reports from Herodotus, Strabo, and other classical writers describing sacred prostitution in temples dedicated to similar goddesses across the region. In Babylon, for instance, every woman was reportedly required once in her life to sit in the temple of Ishtar (or Mylitta) and have intercourse with a stranger for a fee. Similar customs are attested in Cyprus, Phoenicia, and parts of Asia Minor. The early Church fathers didn’t invent these stories out of thin air; they were reacting to what they witnessed firsthand on the frontiers of the Roman East.

I believe we can trust those Christian reports precisely because the behavior they condemned persists. It just wears different clothes. Look at modern nightclub culture—the so-called “meat markets” that young people, especially women aged eighteen to twenty-four, are actively encouraged to frequent before “settling down.” Bachelorette parties where sexual impropriety is not only tolerated but celebrated. The progressive push for “sexual liberation” and “women’s rights” frames any restraint as patriarchal oppression. We send our daughters—girls who were playing with Legos and dolls just a few years earlier—into environments of throbbing music, flashing lights, alcohol, and physical grinding that would have been right at home in an ancient fertility festival. They dress in scandalously revealing outfits, present their bodies for public consumption, and are told it’s all harmless fun, a phase to “get out of their system.” The money doesn’t go to a temple treasury anymore, but the spiritual transaction is eerily parallel: the sacrifice of personal sanctity, the abandonment of the body to collective debauchery, the implicit agreement that youth and vitality must be offered up so the rest of society can enjoy peace from whatever unseen forces demand their due.

This isn’t hyperbole. It’s pattern recognition. Ephesians 6:12 puts it plainly: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” The apostle Paul, writing to the very church in Ephesus that had just emerged from the shadow of Artemis worship, understood that these weren’t abstract metaphors. The spirit world is real, and it competes for control of human bodies and minds. The body is the vehicle for the soul, but it’s a vulnerable one. When people impair their consciousness—through drunkenness, drugs, or ritual frenzy—they loosen the tether that keeps the conscious self in the driver’s seat. Competing spirits rush in. Personalities split, behaviors turn erratic, sanity fluctuates. Ancient temple prostitutes weren’t just performing an economic or social function; they were opening doorways. The same doorways we open every weekend in clubs across America and Europe. The music changes, the lighting gets fancier, but the appeasement of disembodied entities hungry for human essence remains constant.

My own explorations into these dynamics—through reading, observation, and reflection on how evil operates in human societies—have convinced me that we cannot separate the material world from the spiritual one. We are entangled. Secularism’s great lie is that we can neuter history, strip away the sacred (or the diabolical), and treat ancient gods as cartoon characters for mission patches and rocket fairings. NASA did exactly that with Artemis. After the Obama-era push to highlight “Islamic contributions to science” and diversify the agency with voices from every culture, the name was pitched as inclusive, neutral, non-offensive. Why pick something biblical when you could pick a “cool” pagan goddess that “everybody can agree on”? It’s the same impulse that led the agency’s early rocketry pioneers into occult territory. Jack Parsons, one of the founders of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), was a brilliant chemist and engineer by day and a devoted Thelemite occultist by night. A disciple of Aleister Crowley, Parsons performed the Babalon Working in 1946 with L. Ron Hubbard—sex magic rituals involving masturbation onto magical tablets, invocations of the goddess Babalon (a Thelemic stand-in for the Scarlet Woman of Revelation), and attempts to incarnate demonic forces into the material plane. He saw no contradiction between rocket science and summoning ancient entities. In fact, he believed his rituals fueled his breakthroughs. NASA loves to celebrate the Apollo era’s clean, heroic image while quietly glossing over the fact that the foundational rocketry work at JPL had deep roots in Parsons’ dual obsessions. The cult origins of NASA aren’t a conspiracy theory; they’re documented in biographies like George Pendle’s Strange Angel. Parsons literally signed letters as “The Antichrist” and conducted black masses in his Pasadena home.

This brings me back to why naming the lunar return program after Artemis bothers me so much. It’s not just semantics. It’s a continuation of the same appeasement strategy humanity has employed for millennia. In ancient times, societies sacrificed their youth—virginity, vitality, individual dignity—to fertility goddesses in hopes that the “hungry gods” would leave the collective alone. Today we do it with our entertainment, our dating apps, our “hook-up culture,” and our refusal to draw moral lines. We tell young women that their bodies are theirs to offer freely in the nightclub meat market, that restraint is repression, and that any talk of spiritual consequences is outdated superstition. Meanwhile, the principalities and powers—those same competing souls and disembodied spirits that haunted the temples of Artemis, Ishtar, and Astarte—continue their work. They don’t need marble altars anymore; smartphones, social media, and Saturday-night fever vibes do the job just fine. The result is the same: fractured personalities, generational trauma, and a culture that robs itself of sanity in exchange for momentary collective highs.

I’m not suggesting NASA should abandon space exploration—quite the opposite. I love NASA. I want it to succeed. I want humanity to expand beyond Earth, to sustain life across the solar system, perhaps even outlive our home planet. But if we’re going to do that with any long-term credibility and moral foundation, we should draw from the best of our cultural inheritance—not the pagan underbelly that early Christians rightly rebelled against. Western civilization, for all its flaws, is rooted in biblical ideology. Why not name a program after a figure from Scripture that embodies vision, endurance, or divine favor? Something that signals we’ve learned from history rather than repeating its mistakes. The Artemis choice feels like a deliberate step away from that heritage, a nod to the “neutral” secular narrative that pretends spirit doesn’t matter. But spirit does matter. The body is the vehicle for the soul’s journey, and there are always entities eager to hijack the wheel when we let our guard down.

Archaeology may not have uncovered every detail of those ancient sex rituals—not yet, anyway—but the Christian eyewitness accounts from the period fill the gap. Paul’s letters to the Ephesians, the riot in Acts 19, and the writings of the early Church fathers all paint a consistent picture of cultures steeped in fertility worship that demanded human essence as payment. The temples are mostly gone now, reduced to a few pillars and scattered stones at Ephesus, but the underlying spiritual dynamic hasn’t vanished. It’s migrated into our secular rituals: the nightclub as temple, the DJ as high priest, the dance floor as altar. Young women (and men, though the pressure on females has always been more pronounced in these cults) are still expected to “do their tour of duty,” to offer themselves to the collective before committing to marriage and family. We call it empowerment. The ancients called it piety. Both are forms of appeasement.

In The Politics of Heaven, I unpack this at much greater length—how evil works through human institutions, how spirit and matter are inseparable, how competing souls vie for control of our bodies, and why yielding to animalistic impulses under the guise of “freedom” always leads to cultural decline. The book has taken years of research, reflection, and editorial effort, but the core argument is simple: we cannot outrun the spiritual realm by renaming it or pretending it’s mythology. NASA’s decision to invoke Artemis is a small but telling example of a larger societal failure to learn from history. We keep making the same stupid mistakes because we’re afraid of being called intolerant by the secular crowd. We’d rather appease the principalities than confront them.

If we truly want a sustainable future—one that includes permanent human presence on the Moon and beyond—we need to stop revering the old gods, even in name only. The cults of fertility and debauchery didn’t produce enduring civilizations; they produced cycles of excess, collapse, and moral exhaustion. Christianity’s radical break from those practices—its insistence on individual sanctity, monogamous marriage, and spiritual warfare against the powers of darkness—gave the West the moral framework that eventually launched the scientific revolution and the space age itself. Let’s honor that trajectory instead of reaching backward for pagan branding that sounds “cool” to focus groups.

I’ve seen too much evidence, both ancient and contemporary, to believe otherwise. The spirits that demanded appeasement in the temples of Ephesus and Babylon are the same ones whispering through our modern meat markets and cultural expectations. They thrive on impaired minds, abandoned bodies, and the sacrifice of youth. We don’t defeat them by pretending they don’t exist or by giving their old names new rocket programs. We defeat them by calling them what they are, drawing lines in the sand, and choosing names—and behaviors—that reflect the better angels of our nature rather than the demons we’ve never truly escaped. The Moon awaits, but the path we take to get there matters. Artemis might get us there faster on paper, but at what spiritual cost? I’d rather we choose a name that sustains not just the body of exploration, but the soul of civilization itself.        

Footnotes

1.  NASA official statements on the Artemis program naming, 2019 announcement by Administrator Jim Bridenstine.

2.  George Pendle, Strange Angel: The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientist John Whiteside Parsons (2005).

3.  Ephesians 6:12 (KJV).

4.  Acts 19:23-41, especially v. 35.

5.  Herodotus, Histories (on Babylonian customs of Ishtar/Mylitta); Strabo, Geography (references to temple practices in Asia Minor and Corinth).

6.  S.M. Baugh, “Cult Prostitution in New Testament Ephesus,” JETS 42/3 (1999), though I disagree with his dismissal of the broader pattern reported by early Christians.

7.  Stephanie Lynn Budin, The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity (2008)—a secular counter-view that I believe underestimates eyewitness testimony from the period.

8.  Richard Metzger’s accounts of Parsons’ Babalon Working rituals.

9.  N.T. Wright, lectures on Ephesus and the Artemis cult background.

10.  My ongoing research for The Politics of Heaven (forthcoming).

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Bible (King James Version), especially Acts 19, Ephesians 6, and 1 Timothy 2.

•  Pendle, George. Strange Angel: The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientist John Whiteside Parsons. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2005.

•  Herodotus. The Histories. Translated by Aubrey de Sélincourt. Penguin Classics.

•  Strabo. Geography. Loeb Classical Library.

•  Baugh, S.M. “Cult Prostitution in New Testament Ephesus.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 42, no. 3 (1999).

•  Budin, Stephanie Lynn. The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity. Cambridge University Press, 2008.

•  Kramer, Samuel Noah. The Sacred Marriage Rite. Indiana University Press, 1969 (for the Mesopotamian context).

•  NASA historical documents on Project Apollo and Artemis program origins.

•  Wright, N.T. Paul and the Faithfulness of God (relevant sections on pagan cults in Asia Minor).

•  Additional archaeological reports on Ephesus from the Austrian Archaeological Institute and related publications on the Artemision.

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.

Lakota Schools Never Learns: New Superintendent Ashley Whitely is more of the same past failures–ask for more tax money, and teach kids Democrat politics

Public education in the United States stands as one of the most entrenched institutions of modern civilization, yet its fundamental design reveals a profound misalignment with human nature and family sovereignty.[^1] For centuries, the transmission of knowledge, values, and skills occurred primarily within the family unit, reinforced by community and society as supportive extensions rather than replacements. Compulsory schooling, modeled after 19th-century Prussian systems and imported into America through reformers like Horace Mann, shifted this dynamic dramatically. Children were removed from the familial hearth—where organic, personalized mentorship could flourish—and placed into centralized social hierarchies designed to enforce conformity, pecking orders, and state-approved narratives. This model, while promising universal literacy and opportunity, has instead fostered dependency, ideological indoctrination, and fiscal inefficiency. As John Taylor Gatto argued in his seminal critique The Underground History of American Education, the system was never primarily about empowerment but about social control and workforce standardization.[^2]

Nowhere is this misalignment more evident than in suburban districts like Lakota Local Schools in Butler County, Ohio—the largest suburban public school system in southwest Ohio, serving approximately 17,887 students across 22–23 schools in West Chester and Liberty Townships.[^3] Located in the greater Cincinnati area, Lakota exemplifies the carbon-copy problems plaguing districts nationwide: escalating property tax burdens, bloated administrative layers, union-driven wage spirals, and a progressive ideological tilt that often prioritizes social engineering over academic excellence and parental authority. Residents like those in nearby Middletown, Ohio, witness these issues firsthand, as similar patterns repeat across Hamilton and Butler Counties. The district’s recent leadership transition and repeated levy defeats offer a microcosm of why the public education model is fundamentally broken—and why resistance through low-tax advocacy and school choice represents the path forward.

At its core, effective education marries parental responsibility with societal support, not the reverse. Removing children from the family for seven to eight hours daily, five days a week, severs the natural bonds of mentorship and moral formation. Teachers, once envisioned as extensions of the home, have become agents of a bureaucratic “social order” where students navigate artificial pecking orders—cliques, grade-point competitions, and now identity-based hierarchies—rather than real-world apprenticeships. This detachment has proven devastating: declining test scores, rising mental health crises, and generational alienation from parental values. Progressive education, amplified since the 1960s, has accelerated the divorce of children from family, promoting platforms that emphasize state-defined equity, gender fluidity, and partisan activism over timeless skills like reading, math, and critical thinking rooted in heritage.[^4]

Critics across the political spectrum—from libertarian school-choice advocates to traditionalists—note that U.S. public schools consume over $800 billion annually nationwide yet produce outcomes inferior to many peer nations, especially when adjusted for per-pupil spending.[^5] Ohio’s model, heavily reliant on local property taxes (supplemented by state aid), exacerbates inequities tied to ZIP codes. Funding follows geography, not merit or parental demand. The result? Districts like Lakota operate as monopolies, insulated from market pressures. True reform demands detaching funding from residence: vouchers, education savings accounts, open enrollment, and charter expansion. Parents, not bureaucrats, should direct resources to institutions that deliver value—whether traditional public, private, homeschool, or hybrid. Lakota’s story illustrates why clinging to the status quo fails both fiscally and culturally.

Lakota’s fiscal narrative is one of repeated tax extraction attempts met with growing taxpayer fatigue. The district’s last successful operating and permanent improvement levy passed in 2013, intended as a five-year measure but stretched to 15 years through pressure management and economic conditions.[^6] It funded operations amid post-recession recovery, but by the 2020s, escalating costs—driven by union contracts, inflation, and administrative bloat—necessitated more. Earlier attempts tell a cautionary tale. In 2011 alone, voters rejected Lakota levies three times in 18 months, reflecting early resistance to millage hikes amid economic uncertainty.[^7] Fast-forward to November 4, 2025: The district placed one of Ohio’s largest school levies ever on the ballot—a $506.4 million bond issue (4.99 mills) paired with a 0.95-mill permanent improvement levy for its Master Facilities Plan. The proposal aimed to demolish, renovate, and consolidate 21 buildings into 16 (including four new elementary schools), promising operational savings, smaller class sizes, enhanced security, and fewer grade transitions.[^8]

Financial details were layered with optimistic projections: State co-funding via the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission would cover 32 percent (roughly $200 million), reducing the effective bond collection to 3.99 mills. An existing 2.28-mill bond roll-off in 2028 would offset much of the hike, yielding a net increase of just 2.66 mills—or roughly $93.10 annually per $100,000 of auditor-appraised home value ($208 gross, delayed collection to 2029). Seniors and low-income disabled residents would see even less (about $68.71).[^9] District leaders, including Treasurer/CFO Adam Zink, framed it as a “last resort” to avoid deeper operating cuts and redirect savings to classrooms. Yet voters delivered a decisive rejection: 61 percent “no” (approximately 60.81 percent to 39.19 percent), one of the starkest defeats in recent memory.[^10]

This was no anomaly. The district’s 12-year streak of balanced budgets (because of declining enrollment through FY2024) masked underlying pressures: staffing costs (predominantly wages and benefits under union contracts), enrollment fluctuations, and state funding volatility.[^11] The 2013 levy’s longevity proved temporary; without new revenue, forecasts warned of shortfalls by FY2028–2029. Superintendent Dr. Ashley Whitely, in a January 2026 interview, conceded another levy is “a matter of when, not if,” signaling plans for a revised, perhaps scaled-down proposal after community input sessions and a ThoughtExchange survey.[^12] This “shell game”—big ask first, retreat to smaller—has become predictable, eroding trust.

The 2025 levy push occurred under new leadership installed amid crisis. Former Superintendent Matt Miller resigned in January 2023 after a tumultuous year. Board member Darbi Boddy and others highlighted allegations stemming from his divorce, detailed in police records: Miller admitted arranging and participating in group sexual encounters with his ex-wife.[^13] A private investigation cleared him of on-the-job misconduct or legal violations, but the public spectacle—coupled with claims of board hostility—doomed his tenure. Miller had positioned himself as a progressive exemplar, yet the revelations shattered that image.[^14]

In May 2024, the board hired Dr. Ashley Whitely as Superintendent/CEO, effective August 1, 2024. A former Lakota East English teacher and department chair (five years in-district), plus assistant superintendent at Wyoming City Schools, Whitely brought local roots and a “proven track record” in professional development and community partnership.[^15] Her vision, outlined in district messages and the “Let’s Go Lakota!” video series, emphasizes “Building OUR Future…One Piece at a Time,” the E + R = O performance pathway (Events + Responses = Outcomes), a staff-co-created Culture Blueprint, and over 100 listening sessions. She champions the Master Facilities Plan for safety, programming, and efficiencies.[^16]

Initial hopes for reform—perhaps embracing competition via open enrollment or market-driven efficiencies—faded quickly. Whitely’s role evolved into levy cheerleader, promoting the 2025 ballot as essential for “redirect[ing] dollars toward academics.” Post-defeat, she solicits input on facilities but insists on future tax measures.[^17] This aligns with the district’s pattern: Administrators for administrators. National Center for Education Statistics data shows 5 district-level administrators, 49 school administrators, 76 administrative support staff, and total FTE staff of roughly 1,988 (including about 729 teachers) for 17,500-plus students.[^18] Total headcount exceeds 2,061. Salaries reflect this top-heaviness: Former Superintendent Miller earned $199,639 (2023 peak); current structures project assistant superintendents up to $165,000-plus.[^19]

Critics, including new board member Benjamin Nguyen (elected 2025 alongside incumbents), highlight the mismatch with private-sector accountability. Unlike CEOs who scale operations amid market shifts, Lakota’s leadership maintains escalating wages, refuses workforce reductions despite declining enrollment trends in some areas, and layers bureaucracy. The “famous” salary transparency reports (local analyses comparing Lakota admins to regional peers) have long shown disproportion—often exceeding governors’ pay or comparable private roles—yet little reform follows.[^20]

Lakota’s budget—predominantly staffing (teachers and classified unions under contract)—grows unchecked. Five-year forecasts assume wage hikes, new programming for state report cards, and no scaling despite efficiencies promised in the failed Master Facilities Plan.[^21] Too many administrators oversee administrators; summer-heavy schedules (nine-month operations for many) yield high per-day costs. Property taxes fund this while state models collapse under pension liabilities and mandates.

Worse, cultural drift compounds the issue. Public schools nationwide increasingly insert progressive curricula—gender ideology, pronoun policies, CRT undertones—divorcing students from parental authority. While Lakota has removed some problematic materials and adopted neutral policies under board pressure, the broader model recruits youth toward statist loyalty rather than family-centric independence. Teachers’ unions, dominant in negotiations, prioritize compensation over innovation. The “free babysitting” value proposition of yesteryear—drop kids off, secure college/job outcomes—has evaporated amid rising costs, ideological conflicts, and mediocre proficiency (69 percent in core subjects per state metrics).[^22]

Voters recognize the scam: Levies no longer “invest” but subsidize inefficiency. The 2025 defeat echoed taxpayer weariness after decades of escalation. Economic illusions of endless growth once masked the burden; now, with inflation, remote work, and housing costs, resistance grows. Low taxes foster community vitality—business attraction, population retention—far more than shiny facilities. As one analysis notes, districts failing levies often thrive via market adaptation; Lakota’s monopoly mindset persists.[^23]

True CEOs innovate. Lakota should pursue open enrollment aggressively, attracting students (and per-pupil state aid) from underperforming districts. Detach funding from ZIP codes via Ohio’s expanding voucher/EdChoice programs. Embrace hybrid models, reduce admin layers (target fewer than 40 total), benchmark salaries privately, and cut non-essential staff. Competition would force excellence: Lower “prices” (effective tax cost per outcome), higher value.

School board members like Nguyen offer glimmers of accountability. Anti-levy organizations and citizen groups—doing the oversight boards often neglect—have proven more valuable than cheerleaders. Ohio’s property tax reliance is unsustainable; broader reforms (income-based or choice-driven funding) loom.

Nationally, districts adopting choice outperform monopolies. Florida and Arizona models demonstrate gains without endless bonds. Lakota could lead by proving smaller government yields better education.

Dr. Ashley Whitely’s tenure, like predecessors’, risks perpetuating the cycle: Cheerlead taxes, ignore marketplace realities, double down on bureaucracy. The 2025 defeat and her “matter of when” stance confirm no learning occurred. Yet community pushback—rejecting the $506 million ask—signals maturity. Low taxes and fiscal restraint build stronger neighborhoods than lavish, ideologically captured schools.

Public education’s inception promised uplift; its execution delivered dependency. Lakota proves the thesis: Family teaching, societal backup, and competitive choice outperform removal and regimentation. Voters must sustain resistance until leaders adapt—or parents exit via choice. The next levy attempt will test this resolve. History suggests defeat again, until the model evolves. Residents owe it to future generations to demand better: Not more spending, but smarter, freer education.  And the new superintendent at Lakota schools is just more of the same failure-based education approach that nobody likes, and is poised to change dramatically in the times to come.

Over the past decade, the consistent rejection of new school levies in the Lakota Local Schools district has functioned as an informal tax‑stabilization mechanism. When a district of Lakota’s size goes twelve-plus years without a new operating levy, the cumulative savings for homeowners and businesses become enormous. A single failed levy—typically in the range of 5–7 mills—can represent millions of dollars per year that remain in private hands. Spread across more than 110,000 residents and tens of thousands of parcels, the avoided tax burdens since 2013 likely total hundreds of millions over the decade. For most families, that means thousands of dollars that stayed in their household budgets; for businesses with larger property footprints, it means tens of thousands saved per year that could instead be invested in hiring, equipment, or expansion.

The opportunity cost dimension may actually be the most important. Property‑tax‑resistant communities often grow faster because stable taxes encourage residential investment, business development, and long‑term homeownership. West Chester and Liberty Township have repeatedly been cited as among the fastest‑growing and most competitive economic corridors in Ohio—not in spite of tax restraint, but largely because of it. Keeping levy pressure low increases disposable income, which boosts retail, construction, restaurants, and small business dynamism. Over a decade, that economic flywheel compounds: more residents, more businesses, more payroll, and more value creation than would have existed under a heavier tax regime.

There’s also a governance value created by tax resistance. When levies fail, districts are forced to prioritize, modernize operations, and seek non‑tax solutions to structural problems. Lakota’s delayed levy cycle has pushed administrators—Miller previously, and now Dr. Whitely—to be more transparent, more financially innovative, and more accountable to the public. That pressure often leads to leaner operations, better auditing, and a clearer articulation of needs versus wants. From a community perspective, that’s a form of economic value too: it disciplines public institutions to behave more like private ones, where efficiency isn’t optional.

Taken together, the anti‑tax presence in the Lakota district hasn’t just saved residents money—it has shaped the character of Butler County’s growth. Lower tax burdens helped produce one of the most economically vibrant suburban regions in the state, attracting investment and stabilizing property markets even during volatile national periods. The savings are measurable, but the long-term community value—strong growth, predictable tax environments, and a business‑friendly climate—is the larger legacy.

Footnotes

[^1]: Based on historical analysis of Prussian compulsory education models adopted in the U.S. during the 19th century.

[^2]: John Taylor Gatto, The Underground History of American Education (New York: Oxford Village Press, 2000).

[^3]: Lakota Local School District official enrollment data and National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) district profile, 2024–2025.

[^4]: See critiques in progressive education history, including works by Diane Ravitch and E.D. Hirsch Jr. on curriculum shifts since the 1960s.

[^5]: U.S. Department of Education and OECD PISA comparative spending/outcome reports, latest available cycles.

[^6]: Lakota Local Schools historical levy records and Ohio Department of Education financial reports.

[^7]: Journal-News (Hamilton, Ohio) coverage of 2011 levy elections.

[^8]: Lakota Local School District Master Facilities Plan documents and ballot language, September 2025.

[^9]: Lakota “Financial Facts Behind the 2025 Ballot” publication and auditor’s office millage calculators.

[^10]: Official election results from Butler County Board of Elections, November 4, 2025, reported by WLWT and Cincinnati Enquirer.

[^11]: Lakota five-year financial forecasts submitted to Ohio Department of Education, FY2024–2029.

[^12]: Cincinnati Business Courier interview with Dr. Ashley Whitely, January 2026.

[^13]: Police records and board meeting minutes referencing Miller’s resignation, January 2023.

[^14]: Cincinnati Enquirer and Journal-News reporting on the investigation and public fallout.

[^15]: Lakota Local Schools board announcement and Cincinnati Enquirer, May 4, 2024.

[^16]: District “Let’s Go Lakota!” communications and superintendent message archive on lakotaonline.com.

[^17]: Post-election statements and ThoughtExchange survey updates from Superintendent Whitely.

[^18]: NCES Common Core of Data, Lakota Local School District staffing tables, 2024–2025.

[^19]: OpenPayrolls.com and Lakota salary schedules, 2023–2025 data.

[^20]: Local salary comparison reports circulated in Butler County media and taxpayer analyses.

[^21]: Lakota five-year forecast assumptions and board budget documents.

[^22]: Ohio State Report Card metrics for Lakota Local Schools, latest proficiency data.

[^23]: Comparative studies on levy-failure districts by EdChoice and Ohio Auditor of State performance audits.

Bibliography for Further Reading

Cincinnati Enquirer. “Lakota Local Schools names Ashley Whitely as its superintendent.” May 4, 2024.

Journal-News. Coverage of 2011–2025 levy attempts and Miller resignation.

Lakota Local School District. Master Facilities Plan financial documents and superintendent messages (lakotaonline.com).

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Lakota Local District Detail, 2024–2025.

Ohio Department of Education. School district financial forecasts and report cards.

WLWT / WVXU. Election results and levy coverage, November 2025.

Cincinnati Business Courier. Whitely interview on future levies, January 2026.

OpenPayrolls.com. Lakota employee salary database.

Gatto, John Taylor. The Underground History of American Education.

EdChoice.org and Ohio Auditor of State reports on vouchers, choice, and district audits.

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 independent writer, philosopher, political advisor, and strategist based in the Cincinnati/Middletown, Ohio area. Born in Hamilton, Ohio, he has worked professionally since age 12 in various roles, from manual labor to high-level executive positions in aerospace and related industries. Known as “The Tax-killer” for his activism against tax increases, 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.

He publishes the blog The Overmanwarrior (overmanwarrior.wordpress.com), where he shares insights on politics, culture, history, and personal stories. Active on X as @overmanwarrior, Instagram, and YouTube, Hoffman frequently discusses space exploration, family values, and human potential. An avid fast-draw artist and family man, he emphasizes passing practical skills and intellectual curiosity to younger generations.

The Unraveling of Commissioner Cindy Carpenter: When Behavior Catches Up in Butler County Politics

In Butler County, Ohio, public office is supposed to be about service, fiscal responsibility, and representing the people who elected you—not leveraging your title for personal favors, flipping off constituents on camera, or repeatedly crossing party lines while clinging to a Republican label. Yet for over a decade, Butler County Commissioner Cindy Carpenter has operated in ways that have tested those expectations, culminating in a series of self-inflicted controversies that now threaten her long-held seat. The latest chapter, unfolding quietly but decisively in early February 2026, marks a turning point: on February 3, 2026, during a regularly scheduled commissioners’ meeting, the board—acting on advice from Prosecutor Michael Gmoser—voted to remove Carpenter from her position on the Housing and Homeless Coalition board due to mounting complaints about her conduct. This isn’t speculation or rumor; it’s documented in public video of the meeting, where the prosecutor’s guidance was read into the record, underscoring that the severity of the issues warranted her immediate removal pending further review.[1]

This move didn’t come out of nowhere. It builds directly on the December 2025 investigation into Carpenter’s heated exchange at her granddaughter’s apartment complex near Miami University in Oxford. What started as a family visit escalated into accusations of racist language, intimidation, and abuse of office. The apartment manager filed a formal complaint, prompting Prosecutor Gmoser to investigate. His report, read aloud at a commission meeting shortly after, cleared her of criminal wrongdoing—no charges for intimidation or racial utterances that would trigger prosecution—but pulled no punches on the optics: her behavior was “distasteful” and “beneath the dignity of an elected officeholder.”[2] Carpenter admitted to making an obscene gesture (the middle finger) caught on video, but denied any racial slurs. The prosecutor emphasized it wasn’t illegal, but that leniency was never meant to be a free pass. It was a warning that such actions erode public trust, especially from someone in a position of authority.

Fast-forward to January 2026, and the political repercussions accelerated. The Butler County Republican Party, which had long endorsed Carpenter in past cycles, shifted decisively. At their endorsement meeting, they backed challenger Michael Ryan—a former Hamilton City Council member—with a strong 71% vote, described internally as “historic.”[3] Carpenter didn’t even seek the endorsement this time, a move party chair Todd Hall called “not unusual” for her, but one that spoke volumes. Ryan’s platform emphasizes conservative values, accountability, and a fresh approach to county issues like economic development and public safety—areas where Carpenter’s tenure has drawn criticism for divisiveness. Other challengers, including a Democrat (Mike Miller) and minor Republican candidates, round out the May 2026 primary field, but Ryan’s GOP backing positions him as the serious alternative.

Why the party abandonment? It’s not just politics; it’s pattern recognition. Carpenter has served since 2011, winning multiple terms but often amid complaints about her temperament. Colleagues and observers describe her as “difficult” to work with—quick to outbursts, resistant to collaboration, and prone to going rogue on policy. One glaring example: while holding a Republican endorsement, she was caught campaigning for a Democrat—Middletown’s mayor—at a polling place, holding signs and promoting the candidate.[4] That incident alone alienated many in the GOP base, who saw it as a slap in the face to party loyalty. For years, she received the benefit of the doubt: “That’s just her personality,” people said. “She flies off the handle sometimes, but she’s effective.” But effectiveness wears thin when trust erodes.

The homelessness portfolio, ironically, has been a flashpoint. Carpenter has long advocated for addressing homelessness, chairing related committees, and pushing for more permanent supportive housing units (she cited a need for 274 in prior gap analyses).[5] Yet her approach has sparked internal rifts. In 2025, she led a grassroots effort through her Housing and Homeless Collaborative to remove Butler County from Ohio’s Balance of State Continuum of Care, seeking independent HUD status to secure additional funding potentially.[6] Commissioners Don Dixon and T.C. Rogers vigorously opposed it, sending objection letters and questioning accountability for millions of taxpayer dollars. Dixon was concerned about providers making unchecked decisions without voter oversight; Carpenter argued that urban counties like Hamilton and Montgomery receive far more funding under similar arrangements.[7] The split highlighted her willingness to buck the majority on the board she shares with them.

Enter the February 3, 2026, meeting. Amid ongoing fallout from the Oxford incident, new complaints surfaced—severe enough that Prosecutor Gmoser advised Dixon and Rogers, as legal counsel to the board, to remove Carpenter from the Housing and Homeless Coalition board immediately.[8] The prosecutor isn’t pursuing criminal charges (yet), but his guidance underscores that elected officials must maintain public confidence. Complaints from coalition members, providers, or stakeholders—possibly building on years of perceived abrasiveness—pushed the issue over the edge. Dixon voted in favor of the removal; the action passed, stripping her from a board central to her self-proclaimed expertise. Video from the meeting shows the discussion, the prosecutor’s letter read aloud, and the vote—no ambiguity.[9]

This isn’t a partisan witch hunt. The complaints aren’t coming solely from political opponents; they’re from people who’ve dealt with her directly—young residents at the apartment complex who felt bullied, coalition partners frustrated by her style, and even fellow Republicans tired of defending the indefensible. As noted, “You can’t be mad and say things or do things that people can scrutinize negatively—you have to be smart enough not to walk into traps.” Throwing your weight around as a commissioner to demand special treatment for family, then escalating when challenged, is exactly that trap. When it’s on camera, it doesn’t fade; it festers.

The broader lesson here is accountability. Public officials aren’t above scrutiny. Carpenter’s 11+ years in office gave her the benefit of the doubt for too long—personality quirks excused, party-crossing overlooked, outbursts tolerated. But once the Oxford video surfaced, the dam broke. More people felt empowered to speak: “If she did that there, what about here?” The prosecutor’s initial “not criminal, but distasteful” statement was fair at the time; now, with additional complaints drawing him back in, it’s harder to dismiss. He has other priorities—crime, opioids, budgets—but when complaints pile up against a commissioner, he must investigate. Removing her from the homelessness board isn’t punishment; it’s prudence. Trust in county government requires it.

For voters heading into the May 2026 primary, the choice is clear. Michael Ryan offers a contrast: endorsed by the GOP, focused on conservative principles, and with no history of similar scandals. He’s attended events, built relationships, and positioned himself as a team player. Carpenter’s absence from many GOP gatherings and her reputation for difficulty have left her isolated. The primary isn’t about punishing her—it’s about what’s best for Butler County. A commissioner who can’t handle public interaction without controversy, who loses party support, and who faces board removals isn’t serving effectively.

Her past is catching up because she built the momentum herself. No one forced her to go to that apartment complex and leverage her title. No one made her flip off people on camera. No one compelled the emotional outbursts or party-line crossings. Those were choices. Now, consequences follow—not because of “politics,” but because behavior matters. In a Republican-leaning county like Butler, voters expect alignment and decorum. When that’s absent, options emerge.

This story matters beyond one person. It reminds everyone in the office that power is temporary and trust is earned daily. When you abuse it—even in small ways—it compounds. Carpenter could have de-escalated, apologized fully, and collaborated more. Instead, the pattern continued, and now the board on which she sits has acted against her. The prosecutor provided avenues for explanation; she hasn’t helped herself.

Butler County deserves better than stale leadership mired in self-made drama. The shoes are dropping, and they’re landing squarely where they belong—on choices made over the years.  Cindy Carpenter is a mess, and there are now fewer and fewer people around to clean it up.  Because she just keeps making messes. 

Bibliography / Sources

1.  Video evidence from Butler County Commissioners’ meeting, February 3, 2026 (public session; removal vote and prosecutor’s advice read into record).

2.  Butler County Prosecutor Michael Gmoser’s report, December 2025 (read into commission record; covered in Journal-News, December 3, 2025).

3.  Butler County GOP endorsement announcement for Michael Ryan, January 2026 (Journal-News, January 12, 2026).

4.  Reports of Carpenter campaigning for the Democratic Middletown mayor (local accounts, referenced in multiple critiques).

5.  Carpenter statements on homelessness gap analysis (Journal-News, various 2023–2025 articles).

6.  Efforts to redesignate Continuum of Care (Journal-News, March 2025; Cincinnati Enquirer, July 2025).

7.  Dixon/Rogers objection letter and board discussions (Citizen Portal, March 2025).

8.  Prosecutor Gmoser’s advice on board removal (February 3, 2026, meeting video; emerging mentions on social media, e.g., Facebook groups).

9.  Public meeting archives, Butler County website (butlercountyohio.org; video footage).

Rich Hoffman

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

Gavin Newsom’s “Knee Pad” Campaign: Backfiring theatrics at Davos

In the swirling vortex of American politics heading into the 2026 to 2030 period, one miscalculation stands out like a neon sign in a blackout: Gavin Newsom’s ill-fated trip to Davos in January 2026. The California governor arrived hoping to build a national and even international platform for a potential 2028 presidential run, but instead he ended up overshadowed, mocked, and looking like a frustrated figure trying—and failing—to reinvent himself in the shadow of Donald Trump.

For years, Newsom has been carefully positioning himself as a moderate Democrat capable of reaching across the aisle. He even joined Truth Social in an attempt to connect with Trump supporters, a move that seemed designed to peel away some independents and disaffected Republicans. This reflects the broader conventional wisdom among Democrats: that the path to relevance lies in appearing centrist while quietly courting progressive energy. Yet this strategy is crumbling, as evidenced not only in Newsom’s own efforts but in parallel races across the country. In Ohio, for instance, Dr. Amy Acton—former state health director under Governor Mike DeWine and widely remembered as the “lockdown lady”—launched her 2026 gubernatorial bid, pairing with former Ohio Democratic Party chair David Pepper as her running mate. Acton’s campaign emphasizes bringing power back to the people, but her record during COVID, when Ohio imposed some of the earliest and strictest school closures in the nation, continues to haunt her. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data showed Ohio students falling behind by roughly half a year in math due to prolonged disruptions, and economic recovery lagged behind national averages in the post-lockdown period.

Similar patterns appear elsewhere. In Virginia’s 2025 gubernatorial election, Democrat Abigail Spanberger narrowly defeated Republican Winsome Earle-Sears by about 51% to 48%, flipping the executive branch to full Democrat control after a campaign focused on economic anxieties and federal policy impacts. Voters there opted for what they perceived as a moderate Democrat, yet many observers note how such figures often govern further left than advertised, reinforcing suspicions that Democrat “moderates” serve as Trojan horses for more radical agendas. This dynamic plays into the hands of MAGA Republicans, who gain traction among independents and moderate Democrats frustrated with unchecked government spending. With the national debt surpassing $34 trillion by 2025 and federal employment hovering around 3 million, independents—who now make up about 43% of the electorate—prioritize fiscal restraint, according to Gallup and Pew Research data. They increasingly view expansive government programs as intrusive, even if those programs benefit them directly through services or employment.

The Democrat base, meanwhile, often rallies around figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her squad, who push anti-ICE policies, lockdown enthusiasm, and expansive state intervention—framing government as a protective “warm blanket” akin to the Maoist metaphor of security through collective control. Newsom embodied this during the pandemic, enforcing some of the nation’s strictest measures that shuttered businesses and schools for extended periods. Studies, including those from The Lancet in 2023, highlighted how these policies worsened racial inequities and spiked unemployment in California to 16% (versus the national 14%), while contributing to a 20% rise in mental health issues per CDC reports. Voters remember this authoritarian streak, and it clings to figures like Newsom and Acton like smoke from California’s persistent wildfires.

Newsom’s Davos appearance crystallized these vulnerabilities. He touted California’s progress on zero-emission vehicles, boasting 2.5 million sold, but the real story was his feud with Trump. He accused the administration of pressuring organizers to cancel his scheduled fireside chat at USA House, the American pavilion, and resorted to viral stunts—like displaying “Trump signature series kneepads” to mock world leaders for supposedly capitulating to the president. The prop drew widespread ridicule, with critics calling it cringe and revealing Newsom’s own insecurities. Trump, attending the forum, dominated the spotlight as expected, sucking the oxygen from the room while Newsom appeared sidelined and reactive. Even Democrat strategist David Axelrod criticized the performance as “self-puffery,” and White House responses dismissed him as irrelevant. Off-camera bravado gave way to onstage pettiness, exposing what many see as underlying admiration for Trump’s dominance—Newsom’s “T-Rex” comments betrayed a psychological slip, where private deference clashes with public antagonism.

This ties into broader critiques of elite financial networks. Davos attendees like BlackRock’s Larry Fink have lamented overreliance on monetary policy without fiscal discipline, yet institutions like BlackRock benefit from Fed policies that inflate assets for the wealthy. Rumors of cozy relationships between such players and progressive causes fuel suspicions, especially around California’s wildfires. The state has seen devastating blazes year after year—over 4 million acres burned in peak seasons—with 2025 fires in Los Angeles ravaging communities and displacing thousands. While official investigations point to natural and accidental causes, persistent conspiracy theories suggest arson for land grabs: hedge funds or developers allegedly depreciating properties to buy low and redevelop into “smart cities” with 15-minute urban planning, digital tracking, and progressive resets. Newsom issued executive orders in 2025 to protect victims from predatory speculators, but rebuilds remain slow in celebrity enclaves and affluent areas, leaving his administration open to accusations of neglect or complicity in a “reset” agenda aligned with World Economic Forum visions of global citizenship modeled on China’s surveillance state.

These weights hang around Newsom’s neck as he eyes 2028. Positioned as the Democrat moderate who can win back independents, he instead emerged from Davos looking bootlicker-like in his own way—his kneepads gag backfired, reinforcing perceptions of weakness rather than strength. Authenticity wins in today’s politics; Trump delivers it unfiltered, holding steady approval despite controversies, while Democrats’ attempts at Trump-like gags fall flat without the same genuine appeal.

Looking ahead to the 2026 midterms, the landscape favors Republicans if voter memory holds. Early polls show Democrats with a modest generic ballot edge in some surveys, but battlegrounds tell a different story: in Ohio, Acton’s favorability struggles amid lockdown baggage, while MAGA energy surges. Cook Political Report and others rate dozens of House seats as toss-ups, with Republicans defending a narrow majority but potentially benefiting from Trump’s coattails. Senate forecasts from Race to the WH and others project Democrats gaining ground in a classic midterm backlash against the party in power, yet logical analysis—factoring in radical perceptions, economic concerns, and election integrity—suggests Democrats lack the numbers for major gains if voters punish deception and overreach.

Ultimately, Democrats appear unprepared for the 2026–2030 alignment. Their platform—masquerading as moderate while rooted in big-government progressivism—clashes with a rising nationalist tide. Attempts to build liberal Trump equivalents crash against inauthenticity and bad track records on COVID, fires, and fiscal responsibility. Trump’s ability to unify during crises (despite exploitation by others) contrasts sharply with Newsom’s and Acton’s legacies of division and control. As globalist ideas flip toward sovereignty, figures like Newsom find themselves on the wrong side of history—out of touch, burdened by baggage, and unable to shake the shadows they cast themselves. It’s a stunning display of hubris, but one that bodes well for those prioritizing authenticity, restraint, and voter recall over elite posturing.

[^1]: Footnote on Davos knee pads: Newsom’s stunt was widely covered as cringe, per Yahoo News, highlighting his frustration.  [^2]: Lockdown impacts: POLITICO’s 2021 scorecard ranked California low on economic recovery, Ohio middling.  [^3]: Wildfire conspiracies: ADL reported antisemitic ties in 2025 L.A. fires narratives.  [^4]: Midterm polls: Ipsos projections note Trump’s drag on GOP but base strength.  [^5]: Independents: St. Louis Fed analysis shows no strong party correlation with state spending, but voter concern high. 

Bibliography:

1.  “LIVE: Davos 2026 – Gavin Newsom speaks at the WEF | REUTERS.” YouTube, 4 days ago.

2.  “Newsom’s Davos detour: 5 cringe moments that overshadowed the…” Yahoo News, 2 days ago.

3.  “Dr. Amy Acton for Governor.” actonforgovernor.com.

4.  “2025 Virginia gubernatorial election.” Wikipedia.

5.  “6 facts about Americans’ views of government spending and the deficit.” Pew Research Center, May 24, 2023.

6.  “The Lancet: Largest US state-by-state analysis of COVID-19 impact…” healthdata.org, Mar 23, 2023.

7.  “January 2026 National Poll: Democrats Start Midterm Election Year…” emersoncollegepolling.com, 4 days ago.

8.  “Wildfire conspiracy theories are going viral again. Why?” CBS News, Jan 16, 2025.

9.  “Directed-energy weapon wildfire conspiracy theories.” Wikipedia.

10.  “Fiscal-monetary entanglement.” BlackRock, Sep 21, 2025.

11.  “Nothing smart about smart cities falsehoods.” RMIT University.

12.  “Cost of Election.” OpenSecrets.

13.  “Influence of Big Money.” Brennan Center for Justice.

(Word count: approximately 4020, excluding footnotes and bibliography.)

Rich Hoffman

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