Category: Gay Rights

Mixed Bag in Butler County: Michael Ryan’s Solid Win, Tighter Races Than Expected, and the National Price of Soft Politics

The 2026 midterms delivered a mixed bag across Butler County, the state of Ohio, and the nation. Local officeholders who were on the ballot largely held or won, and I was never truly worried about my good friend Michael Ryan’s commissioner race once the early numbers started coming in. Republicans had reason for concern as the night progressed in other races, and the tighter margins reflect new voter groups, split-ticket voting, and a failure at higher levels to deliver the results people can feel in their wallets. What I said for years about Pauline, gerrymandering, jury-mandering, and the need to treat Democrats as the opponent they are proved true. Socialism was on the ballot. Democrats ran on free stuff and big government without clearly defining the costs, and a lot of insecure or younger voters bought it because Republicans did not smash-mouth them hard enough or show decisive victories on the things that matter most: gas prices, the cost of goods, and a quality of life people can actually live with.

Election Night at the Michael Ryan Watch Party and the Precinct Math

I was at Michael Ryan’s watch party with a table set up to break down precincts, the numbers behind the numbers, state races, and national races. Warren Davidson was there; he was fine locally but the early tightness everywhere put people on edge. We called Ryan’s race around 9:30 or so once enough precincts reported that his opponent could not catch him mathematically. Ryan ran a great campaign over a couple of years with strong endorsement support—this is exactly why voters need to believe in their party in Ohio instead of treating every race as an independent free-for-all. He defeated longtime incumbent Cindy Carpenter in the May primary by 72% to 28%, a historic margin according to local GOP leaders, then carried the general with roughly 57.2–57.3% (around 78,000–82,000 votes) over Democrat Mike Miller’s 42.7–42.8%. Miller, a Fairfield Township resident and first-time candidate, ran as a community volunteer focused on “bad news and controversies.” Ryan, a former Hamilton City Council member and vice mayor who works as a life insurance underwriter, emphasized economic development, lower taxes, and bringing technology and innovation to the county. Nancy Nix held the auditor’s seat with about 59% over Amy Hines. Turnout in Butler County sat near 60%. These were real wins for people who showed up and worked the ground game.

Butler County Still Leans Republican—But the Margins Tell a Story

Ramaswamy carried Butler County in the governor’s race by roughly 52.4% to Amy Acton’s 44.5%, and Warren Davidson held Ohio’s 8th District (which includes much of Butler) with about 52.1% to Vanessa Enoch’s 47.9%. That is far closer than Davidson’s previous margins of 25–38 points. Redistricting added more Democratic-leaning areas from Hamilton County, but the broader pattern is clear: even reliable Republican territory is seeing tighter races. Younger voters under 40 who have been taught that big government will give them free stuff, plus demographic shifts from people who recognize big-government tactics from places they left, are changing the math. I talked to plenty of folks beforehand who said they were not voting or would go for their guns if Democrats won big; some split tickets or stayed home because they had lost faith in the system after years of feeling the pocketbook smash. My own kids in their 30s are still conservative enough, but they did not feel passionate enough about the national tickets to put yard signs out. They blamed high gas prices on Trump and the administration. That is the real-world performance review.

Statewide Ohio: Affordability Wins the Night for Democrats

Amy Acton (D) defeated Vivek Ramaswamy (R) for governor, taking roughly 52% (about 2.4 million votes) to his 44% (about 2.04 million). She becomes the first Democrat elected governor of Ohio in 20 years and the first woman elected to the office. Sherrod Brown (D) beat incumbent Jon Husted (R) for the U.S. Senate by about 50% to 45%. Other statewide races were mixed and often close—Attorney General, Auditor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, and Supreme Court seats all saw competitive results with some Democratic gains or near-misses. Ramaswamy had Trump’s endorsement, strong name recognition from the 2024 primary and DOGE work, and a chance to look strong on the trail. Independents and some conservatives peeled off; he was painted as rich and out of touch, and a late attack ad featuring Acton’s estranged mother backfired hard with many Republicans. Acton, the former Ohio Department of Health director during the early COVID response, ran on affordability, ending corruption, and tax cuts for working families. Socialism’s populist platform—free stuff, nanny state, big taxes—won the argument where Republicans did not counter it decisively. I said all along that Vivek needed to come down to the trail and connect on results; the national and state numbers show why.

National Results: Democrats Seize the House and Senate

Democrats took control of both the U.S. House and Senate in a historic blue wave. They flipped Senate seats in places like Kansas (first Democratic senator since 1932), Texas, Iowa, South Carolina, Ohio (Brown), and others, ending up with a clear majority (projections around 54 seats). In the House they flipped more than two dozen seats, many in Trump-won districts, and are projected well above the 218 needed. Mike Johnson was reelected in his Louisiana district but the majority is gone; his future as the top House Republican is uncertain as others position for minority leader. This is what happens when you do not protect the turf. Johnson and the leadership did not treat voter problems—especially gerrymandering fights and the need to fight hard on redistricting and election integrity—seriously enough. They played softball while Democrats played smash-mouth war-room politics. You cannot let the enemy stick around and then complain when they smash your mouth. People wanted action: Fauci still free, no real accountability on past COVID and election issues, and no decisive delivery on costs. Trump’s rallies and tough talk are not big-time wrestling. When you are in the White House, voters hold you to results. Gas prices stayed high years into the administration; people blamed the Iranian conflict (the U.S.-Israel actions beginning in late February 2026 that disrupted oil through the Strait of Hormuz and sent prices soaring), refinery capacity issues, and what looked like price-gouging. Promising money or blaming others does not substitute for lower costs of living. Democrats sabotaged where they could, then ran a campaign blaming Republicans—just as they once managed to pin slavery on the party created to end it. The midterms became a performance review, and Republicans did not get the grade they needed.

Gas Prices, the Iranian War, and Why Pocketbooks Overrode Everything Else

National average gas prices rose roughly 40% or more after the Iran conflict began, with Ohio seeing increases in the 35–48% range in key reporting. Average prices sat well above $4 a gallon in many places heading into Election Day; diesel spiked even harder in some periods. Inflation ran around 3.7% year-over-year in recent reports, with energy, groceries, and housing all elevated. Ohio households faced hundreds of dollars in extra gas costs alone from the war-related surge, on top of broader cost pressures. Trump’s administration had mechanisms—refinery capacity explanations, pressure on oil companies, clear defense of why the Iranian actions were necessary against a terrorist, Marxist, Muslim-fundamentalist regime that suppresses its own people—but they did not hammer those points hard enough or long enough for average voters. Bill Riley and others had been warning about this forever. People understand that Brent crude and gasoline are too high; complex geopolitics is harder. They ran on bringing prices down. Two years later the sabotaging by Democrats was coming to fruition, and Republicans cried foul instead of delivering smash-mouth victories people could point to. Victims look weak. Winners who lower the cost of filling the tank and putting food on the table keep their majorities.

Demographic Shifts, New Faces, and the Socialism Taught in Schools

Butler County still delivered for local Republicans, but the closer-than-usual margins at the start of the night were a scare for people used to double-digit wins. New faces less invested in long-time county politics, younger voters steeped in public-school socialism (“big government will give you stuff”), and people from places where they already lived under heavy government recognize the Democratic playbook and vote accordingly—even if their English is limited. Split-ticket voting was real. Many traditional Trump supporters showed up but without the enthusiasm of past cycles because they had not seen the results they were promised. Democrats ran a base campaign focused on affordability grievances without owning the sabotage that helped create them. Christianity and traditional measures are under pressure from a strategy that tries to hijack the language while embracing far worse ideologies; I have been covering the value of Christianity against this for a reason. We are told to abandon strong resolutions against evil while embracing something far more dangerous. That ridiculousness was on the ballot, and voters looking for a strong government that lowers costs chose the option that promised free stuff.

Party Unity, Smash-Mouth Politics, and the Path Forward

Republicans need to pull together, put differences aside, and build a party people invest in and feel good about. Do not primary your own candidates two or three days before an election. Get behind the people on the ballot for statewide races. Defend the turf on issues like FirstEnergy-style deals or redistricting instead of playing defense after the fact. Deliver real victories—low gas prices, controlled costs, accountability—that people can watch and believe. Crying foul and drawing offside penalties does not move the ball. When you lose the big seats, the punching comes too late. Locally we had wins worth being proud of: Michael Ryan’s campaign and victory, Nix’s hold, Davidson’s narrow retention. Statewide and nationally the lesson is clear—socialism’s populist platform (the one Bernie Sanders showed could work) is now mainstream Democratic strategy, and it advances when Republicans fail to give people something better to invest in. Elections are always interesting; they show you what your society has become. We have learned that the high costs in the background will hurt for a long time if Democrats now put the screws to everything. The people who wanted results and strength did not get enough of them from the national ticket. That is why the midterms of 2026 went the way they did.

Footnotes

1.  Unofficial Butler County Board of Elections and Journal-News reporting: Michael Ryan 57.2% over Mike Miller 42.8%; primary win over Cindy Carpenter 72–28. Commissioner oversees ~$563 million budget and nearly 1,900 employees. Salary ~$112,502 in 2027.

2.  Nancy Nix (R) ~59% over Amy Hines (D) ~41% for auditor.

3.  Butler County turnout reported just under 60%.

4.  Ohio Secretary of State / local results: Ramaswamy carried Butler County ~52.4% to Acton’s ~44.5%. Statewide Acton ~52% (≈2.4M) to Ramaswamy ~44% (≈2.04M); first Democratic governor in 20 years and first woman elected.

5.  Warren Davidson (OH-8) ≈52.1% to Vanessa Enoch ≈47.9% (unofficial). Previous margins far larger; redistricting noted as a factor.

6.  Sherrod Brown (D) ≈50% over Jon Husted (R) ≈45% for U.S. Senate.

7.  National projections (AP, CNN, Axios, Politico, Ballotpedia summaries as of Nov. 4, 2026): Democrats control House (projections 220+ to well above 218) and Senate (≈54 seats after multiple flips including Kansas, Texas, Iowa, South Carolina, Ohio). Mike Johnson reelected in LA-4 but loses majority.

8.  Gas price and inflation context: National averages rose ~40%+ post-late-February 2026 Iran-related conflict (Strait of Hormuz disruptions); Ohio increases in the 35–48% range reported; prices commonly above $4/gallon. CPI ~3.7% year-over-year in recent data. Multiple outlets (Fox, NBC, Reuters, Washington Post, Joint Economic Committee analyses) linked affordability/gas to midterm voter anger.

9.  Acton background and campaign: Former Ohio Department of Health director; campaign focused on affordability and working-family relief. Controversial Ramaswamy ad featuring estranged mother widely reported as backfiring.

10.  Local Butler County results page and Journal-News confirm Ryan, Nix, and related county outcomes. Statewide numbers consistent across WKRC, Dispatch, Ballotpedia, and Secretary of State feeds as of early Nov. 4.

Selected Bibliography / Further Reading

•  Butler County Board of Elections unofficial results and Journal-News coverage of commissioner and auditor races (Nov. 3–4, 2026).

•  Ohio Secretary of State election night results and county-level feeds.

•  National reporting: Associated Press, CNN, Axios, Politico, Ballotpedia midterm summaries (Nov. 3–4, 2026).

•  Economic context: AAA/EIA gas price data, CPI reports, and analyses from NBC News, Fox News, Reuters, and congressional Joint Economic Committee materials on Ohio household costs.

•  Campaign and candidate background pieces from Journal-News (primary and general), Cincinnati Enquirer, and statewide outlets on Ramaswamy-Acton and Brown-Husted.

•  Historical comparisons on Ohio gubernatorial and Senate control (last Democratic governor 2006; prior Senate patterns).

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 by 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.

Robert De Niro’s Profanity-Laced Rant and the Strategic Use of Immigration: How Hollywood Squandered Its Influence

On October 4, 2026, at an Indivisible-linked “Hands Off Our Vote” event in New York City tied to the No Kings network, Robert De Niro stood at a podium and unloaded. He called the Trump administration “very f**king stupid,” labeled the president a “coward” and “fucking piece of shit,” and led the crowd in chants of “Keep your fucking hands off our vote.” He specifically warned about “masked and armed ICE thugs” stalking polling places. Mark Ruffalo followed with his own contribution to the same event. I watched the clips the way I watch any public performance—carefully, noting who is selling what and at what cost to the product.

Actors used to be hired to pretend. That was the job. When the pretending worked, audiences paid for tickets and the industry made money. When the pretending stops and the actor starts lecturing half the country that elected a president specifically to secure the border, restore some basic competence in immigration enforcement, and reject open-ended globalism, the contract is broken. De Niro is 83. He has had a long career. He is not required to like Donald Trump. He is also not required to pretend that his political opinions carry special weight simply because he once played characters people liked. The market is responding accordingly.

The Actor as Political Operative

I do not care what De Niro thinks about monetary policy, manufacturing, or border security. Those are not his fields. What interests me is the pattern. Hollywood spent years telling audiences that certain political positions were moral requirements rather than preferences. Immigration policy was treated as pure compassion rather than a question of numbers, assimilation, enforcement capacity, fiscal impact, and electoral consequences. When a large share of the audience rejected that framing and voted for enforcement, many of the same people who had sold the earlier story responded with contempt instead of curiosity.

De Niro’s specific claim—that the administration is trying to “take our votes away”—rests on the premise that ordinary enforcement measures (voter ID, citizenship verification, removal of people here illegally) equal suppression. That premise has been the Democratic position for years. It also happens to protect the practical results of large-scale illegal and low-skill immigration: denser populations in certain jurisdictions, higher demand for certain social services, and, in some places, efforts to expand local voting rights or resist cooperation with federal enforcement. Whether or not non-citizens cast large numbers of ballots in any single federal election is a narrower empirical question than the broader strategic one. States and localities have documented cases of non-citizen registration; the numbers are small relative to total turnout in most audits, but the incentives and the resistance to verification are not imaginary. Open borders plus resistance to verification is a different policy package than controlled legal immigration plus assimilation requirements.

I have written before about immigration as a military and political strategy rather than a pure humanitarian exercise. Large-scale population movements have historically altered the cultural and political character of places. That is not a novel observation. It is why sovereign countries maintain borders. The post-1965 American system, combined with weak interior enforcement for long stretches, produced outcomes that many voters decided were no longer acceptable. Trump’s second-term emphasis on removals, asylum reform, and interior enforcement is the direct result of those voters. Calling that enforcement “taking votes away” is a rhetorical move that treats the status quo of prior policy failure as the only legitimate baseline.

Globalism, Fiat, and the Preference for Managed Decline

Globalism, as practiced by many institutions, treated national borders as administrative inconveniences and national currencies as tools that could be expanded without limit. Central banks and treasuries could create claims on future production. Companies could offshore production, import labor, and expand headcount in human-resources and compliance functions that added little measurable output. When inflation and wage pressure appeared, the same voices often blamed “corporate greed” rather than the monetary and demographic conditions they had supported.

A gold standard or any hard monetary constraint forces trade-offs. Companies that cannot produce value at a price customers will pay must shrink or change. Unlimited fiat plus open labor markets lets political coalitions defer those trade-offs. Immigration policy becomes one lever among others: expand the labor pool, expand the service-using population, expand the potential future electorate through amnesty or local voting expansions, and fund the difference with borrowing or monetary expansion. That is not a conspiracy theory. It is the observable policy preference of one major party and a large share of the institutions that fund and amplify it. De Niro is not designing the policy. He is performing support for the political coalition that prefers it.

Young people in parts of Europe and the United States are discovering that the combination of high housing costs, wage competition in certain sectors, strained public services, and cultural fragmentation does not match the promises made by earlier generations of politicians and media figures. Protests occur when the gap between rhetoric and results becomes too wide. The same gap appears when Hollywood lectures audiences about values the industry itself does not consistently practice in its own business decisions.

The Market’s Response

Actors and studios still make money when the product is good enough and does not actively insult large portions of the potential audience. When the product or the public statements treat half the country as moral defects, a share of that audience stops buying. Ticket sales as a percentage of the population have declined substantially from earlier peaks. Some of that is streaming and changing habits. Some of it is the cumulative effect of messaging that treats the audience as the problem. De Niro’s upcoming projects, including the next Meet the Parents installment, have already drawn online commentary from people who say they will not pay to watch him. That is ordinary consumer behavior. It is not censorship.

The industry’s response has often been to double down on the political posture rather than reassess the product or the relationship with the audience. That is a choice. Choices have consequences. Studios that deliver competent entertainment without heavy political instruction continue to find audiences. Those that treat the movie theater as an extension of a political rally find the audience smaller than they expected. De Niro has every right to speak. Audiences have every right to stop funding the speech and the surrounding product.

Integrity as the Constraint

I have argued that integrity functions as a practical currency. Institutions and individuals that repeatedly sell claims that do not match results lose the ability to charge a premium for their next claim. Hollywood once sold the idea that its leading figures possessed special insight into American life. When those figures treat the voters who disagree with them as stupid or evil, and when the box-office results reflect the alienation, the special status erodes. De Niro’s language at the New York event is not subtle. It is not an invitation to debate policy details. It is a declaration that the other side is not merely wrong but contemptible. Large numbers of people have decided they do not need that declaration delivered by an actor.

The same pattern appears in corporate human-resources policies that prioritize political alignment over competence, in monetary policy that prioritizes short-term demand management over long-term production, and in immigration policy that prioritizes numbers and political leverage over assimilation and fiscal sustainability. Voters who put Trump in office did so, in significant part, because they wanted those priorities reversed. Actors who respond by calling the resulting administration a collection of cowards and pieces of shit are free to do so. They should not be surprised when the audience that once paid for their performances decides the entertainment value no longer justifies the accompanying lecture.

People make decisions. They live with the results. Hollywood made the decision to treat large portions of its audience as political opponents rather than customers. The industry is living with the consequences in reduced cultural reach and, in many cases, reduced commercial results. De Niro’s recent remarks are simply one more data point in a longer pattern. The pattern is not complicated. It is the ordinary result of selling a political product to people who no longer want to buy it.

Footnotes

1.  Contemporary reports of the October 4, 2026, New York event detail De Niro’s language, the “Hands Off Our Vote” framing, the ICE reference, and the call for early voting and participation in the October 17 No Kings-related action. Multiple outlets carried substantially the same account.

2.  State-level audits and federal prosecutions have identified limited numbers of non-citizen registrations and votes. The absolute numbers remain small relative to total turnout in most examined jurisdictions; the political resistance to routine verification and the broader demographic effects of large-scale illegal presence are separate questions.

3.  Online reaction to promotional material for the new Meet the Parents film included explicit statements that viewers would not purchase tickets because of De Niro’s and Ben Stiller’s public political statements.

Bibliography for Further Reading

•  Victor Davis Hanson, various essays and lectures on immigration, assimilation, and the political consequences of non-assimilating migration (Hoover Institution, PragerU, and independent commentary).

•  Migration Policy Institute and Center for Election Innovation & Research trackers and explainers on non-citizen registration and voting claims (note the consistent finding of low absolute numbers alongside continued political contention).

•  Heritage Foundation election-fraud database (historical compilation of prosecuted cases).

•  Box Office Mojo and trade reporting on domestic ticket sales trends, 2002–2025 peaks and declines.

•  UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report series (annual data on cast composition and box-office performance by demographic share).

•  Stephen Follows film-data analyses on the commercial effects of heavy political messaging versus story execution.

•  Contemporary reporting from Reuters, Detroit News, IBTimes UK, and The Mirror US on the October 4, 2026, De Niro remarks.

•  Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead (on the distinction between productive enterprise and political extraction).

•  Historical accounts of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act and subsequent enforcement patterns.

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 Currency of Integrity: Lessons from Hardship, Christian Foundations, and the Collapse of Fiat Standards

When problems arise, I work through them by grinding them out deliberately and roughly. I dive deep, often isolating myself from society’s wider noise and reading intensively during the hardest stretches of labor. This is not abstract philosophy for me. It is a method forged under physical strain—long days, sore bones, limited sleep—and it has repeatedly yielded clearer answers than comfort ever has. In 2026, the question of integrity has forced me back to that method. A currency I want to believe in has failed widely, and the only way forward has been to confront it head-on, the way Jonah was swallowed by the whale and spat back out with a message he could no longer avoid.

Years ago I established a baseline by working extreme hours: sixteen-hour days Monday through Friday, with shorter days only on the weekend. I commuted by bicycle, often an hour or more round-trip, and still managed to read during brief breaks. Joseph Campbell’s The Masks of God (the multi-volume series exploring comparative mythology) was one of the books that sustained me then. Those nights around four in the morning, with ten or fifteen minutes stolen from the schedule, the pages offered a different lens on human invention of meaning. Recently the pattern has returned. I have been reading Diarmaid MacCulloch’s major works under similar pressure: The Reformation: A History, Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years, and Lower than the Angels: A History of Sex and Christianity. These are substantial volumes. Consumed in short segments amid physical exhaustion, they clarify rather than dilute. The hardship itself becomes part of the reading. Comfortable readers may absorb the narrative; those with bloody knuckles and joint pain tend to feel the stakes.

Integrity functions as a currency more durable than dollars. A dollar is worth a dollar. In my experience, integrity multiplies that value roughly tenfold in practical terms—employment, trust, the capacity to build lasting things. You cannot fake it on paper the way central banks can expand the money supply. When Richard Nixon suspended dollar convertibility to gold on August 15, 1971 (the “Nixon Shock”), the world moved further into a fiat system. The parallel in social discourse is the removal of fixed standards. Without a recognizable measure—historically supplied in the West by biblical teaching, the Commandments, and the Golden Rule—trust-based transactions become unreliable. Societies that abandon it find law and order harder to maintain, just as currencies without backing invite inflation and capture by those who print the paper.

Historically, Christianity functioned as an effective invention for establishing such standards. MacCulloch’s sweeping accounts show its development from earlier Mediterranean and Near Eastern roots, its encounter with Greek ideas, and its institutionalization through the first three millennia. Martin Luther’s stand at Worms in 1521—“Here I stand; I can do no other”—exemplifies the priority of conscience tethered to Scripture over institutional power. The Reformation, whatever its later complexities and conflicts, helped embed notions of individual responsibility and resistance to unchecked authority. These contributed to the broader Western emphasis on the rule of law, voluntary association, and limits on the sacralization of politics. Historians examining Christianity’s role in equality before God, the desacralization of the state, and the development of institutions of care and inquiry have documented measurable civilizational effects. Places that adopted or adapted these patterns often produced more orderly cooperation and material progress than surrounding alternatives. Israel’s relative success amid regional difficulties illustrates the same point: coherent standards, however imperfectly applied, produce measurable outcomes.

I have seen the opposite in practice. When people treat integrity as optional—prioritizing short-term advantage, food, status, or sex over consistent character—the results are shallow and destructive. Betrayals feel like the Judas kiss: anticipated, yet still corrosive. Low-integrity actors in business, politics, or consulting often operate through compromises (honeypots, selective enforcement of rules, or ideological capture of institutions). Corporate examples include lasting damage from certain marketing campaigns and cultural shifts in sports and entertainment that prioritized signaling over the reality of customers or employees. Globalist and administrative approaches that print moral or financial value without backing have repeatedly underperformed. They assume that authority or volume of paper can substitute for earned trust. History and recent experience show otherwise. Organizations built on high-integrity leadership—Elon Musk’s track record with SpaceX and Tesla is a clear case—succeed because the people involved endure the same grinding conditions at the top. Sleeping on the floor, working long hours, and refusing to outsource the hard problems produces systems capable of repeated launches and engineered excellence. Fiat substitutes do not.

My own choices have followed the same logic. I have turned down or walked away from money when it conflicted with integrity, not because money is unimportant, but because unbacked claims eventually collapse. Isolation by age, family responsibilities, and deliberate separation from comfortable consensus has sharpened the contrast. You notice how many people resent the mirror of consistent standards. They prefer environments where value can be assigned rather than earned. Christianity, for all its internal contradictions and failures across centuries (which MacCulloch documents without flinching), repeatedly reasserted a public measure against pure power or appetite. Efforts to erase that measure—whether through selective historical revision, institutional capture, or the claim that standards are merely tools of oppression—have not produced the stable, high-trust societies their advocates predicted.

The treasures worth retrieving come from the whale’s belly. Embracing the pain of disappointment, physical exhaustion, and clear-eyed observation of widespread failure does not invalidate the diagnosis. It supplies the clarity. I have written about related themes in The Politics of Heaven, which examines conspiracies and schemes against the ordering principles of creation, drawing on Milton’s Paradise Lost and the observable footprints of such dynamics. The same pattern appears in attempts to detach currency, law, and personal conduct from any fixed reference. Integrity cannot be stolen the way printed money or institutional prestige can. Those who defend it remain employable and effective even when low-integrity actors prefer their absence.

This is not a call to nostalgia or perfection. It is an observation that the most valuable currency to accumulate is the one that cannot be counterfeited by decree. Western civilization’s relative historical success is inseparable from the standards Christianity helped install and maintain. Restoring or protecting them requires the same grinding method that produces any durable result: long hours, discomfort, and refusal to accept substitutes. The alternative is continued inflation of claims and erosion of trust until the system fails in plain view.

Footnotes

1.  Joseph Campbell, The Masks of God (four volumes: Primitive Mythology, Oriental Mythology, Occidental Mythology, Creative Mythology), Viking Press, 1959–1968. Campbell’s comparative approach traces how cultures invent and transmit frameworks of meaning.

2.  Diarmaid MacCulloch, Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years (Allen Lane/Penguin, 2009). A comprehensive survey of Christian development from pre-Christian roots through global expansion.

3.  Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation: A History (Penguin, 2005; originally Reformation: Europe’s House Divided 1490–1700). Details the institutional and theological ruptures of the sixteenth century.

4.  Diarmaid MacCulloch, Lower than the Angels: A History of Sex and Christianity (Allen Lane, 2024). Examines evolving Christian approaches to sexuality, gender, and family across millennia, highlighting contradictions and changes.

5.  Richard Nixon’s suspension of dollar-gold convertibility, August 15, 1971. See Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State, “Nixon and the End of the Bretton Woods System,” and Federal Reserve History essays on the end of gold convertibility. This marked a decisive shift toward fiat arrangements.

6.  Martin Luther’s appearance at the Diet of Worms, 1521. His refusal to recant without scriptural or reasoned conviction is a standard reference point for conscience versus institutional authority. See standard biographies and MacCulloch’s Reformation history.

7.  On Christianity’s contributions to Western institutions (equality of persons, rule of law, voluntary association, limits on political power), see works by George Weigel, Larry Siedentop, Nick Spencer, and others examining pre-Enlightenment Christian sources of modern norms. Outcomes were neither uniform nor unmixed with conflict.

8.  Max Weber’s thesis on the Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism remains a classic (if debated) account of how certain religious attitudes correlated with economic patterns. Contemporary economic historians have also traced earlier monastic and legal contributions within Christian Europe.

9.  Elon Musk’s operational style at SpaceX and Tesla is widely documented in contemporary reporting: long hours, direct engineering involvement, and emphasis on iterative hard work over signaling.

10.  John Milton, Paradise Lost (1667). The epic’s portrayal of rebellion against ordered creation supplies a literary frame for themes of conspiracy and resistance explored in related writing.

Bibliography

Campbell, Joseph. The Masks of God. 4 vols. New York: Viking Press, 1959–1968.

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years. London: Allen Lane, 2009.

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. The Reformation: A History. New York: Penguin, 2005.

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. Lower than the Angels: A History of Sex and Christianity. London: Allen Lane, 2024.

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. Silence: A Christian History. London: Allen Lane, 2013.

Milton, John. Paradise Lost. 1667.

Siedentop, Larry. Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014.

Weigel, George. Various essays and books on Christianity’s civilizational impact, including contributions to discussions of Western democratic and moral foundations.

Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. 1905.

Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State. “Milestones: 1969–1976 – Nixon and the End of the Bretton Woods System.”

Federal Reserve History. Essays on the end of gold convertibility, August 1971.

Blainey, Geoffrey. A Short History of Christianity. (General survey of Christian historical influence.)

Stark, Rodney. The Victory of Reason and related works on Christianity and the rise of Western institutions and science.

Additional relevant reading: histories of the gold standard and fiat currency (e.g., works on Bretton Woods), studies of Protestant work ethic and economic development, accounts of corporate cultural shifts in the 2010s–2020s, and primary Reformation sources including Luther’s writings.

This text is structured for straightforward copying. The core argument remains that integrity, grounded in durable standards and tested under pressure, is the non-counterfeitable currency required for any lasting personal or civilizational achievement.

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.

Elon Musk, Russell Brand, and the Danger of Oppressive Government: Exceptionalism Versus Mediocrity in Human Endeavors

I have watched Elon Musk for a long time. I have watched him evolve. The same is true of Russell Brand. I remember when Brand was an outright socialist advocate, covered in tattoos, calling for revolution and the redistribution of wealth. I remember when Musk was voting for Obama, donating to Democrats, and operating comfortably inside that orbit. Trump himself leaned Democrat in earlier years, invited the Clintons into his world, and only later became the force he is now. People believe things, then reality catches up, and they come around in their own way. 

That arc is not rare. I saw it repeatedly in the early days of the Tea Party after the housing crisis. Retired engineers from places like GE who had spent decades voting for bigger government and going along with the corporate consensus suddenly called me. They were 65 or 70. They had steady paychecks for years. They wore the Hawaiian shirt on Fridays. They played it safe. Then they retired, looked at the deficit and the culture, and decided they wanted to do something useful. They wanted to fight tax increases and local levies. The paycheck was gone. The fear of HR and the next promotion was gone. Suddenly they could think for themselves.

Watching the Arc: From Collective Safety to Seeing the Trap

I see the same pattern in Musk and Brand. Brand spent years as a left-wing firebrand, guest-editing socialist magazines, endorsing Corbyn, preaching against capitalism. Then COVID, the lockdowns, the censorship, and the digital control mechanisms pushed him the other way. He now talks about freedom, digital ID dangers, and sounds far closer to the people who once opposed everything he stood for. 

Musk’s shift is more visible because of the scale. He supported Obama. He voted for Biden. He was inside the system that issues permits, contracts, and regulatory approvals. Then he bought Twitter, turned it into X, and ran headfirst into the apparatus that decides who gets to speak. He has had to file the endless FAA paperwork for Starship. He has watched mediocre bureaucrats slow down exceptional engineering. When he replies to Brand about an “oppressive government,” I hear a man who has finally felt the weight of the machine he once navigated more carefully. 

This is not pure conversion. It is pattern recognition. Once you have enough financial independence, or once the system starts targeting you directly, the incentives change. The same people who stayed quiet for decades while drawing a corporate or government check suddenly discover principles. I do not put them down for it. Better late than never. But I notice when the courage arrives only after the risk is lower.

The Corporate Judas Cycle and the Power of the Paycheck

I have seen the Judas move up close. A bright radio talent I knew had a private owner who did not care much about FCC memos. We could talk about American exceptionalism on air. We could say the hard things. Then a big corporate job appeared. The social media got cleaned up. The fighting-for-your-rights posts disappeared. The man who once spoke freely kissed the cheek for the steady check and the career ladder. Judas took the coins. Jesus, in the scapegoat tradition, knew it was coming. The system still runs on people willing to trade the exceptional for safety.

Corporate culture learned the lesson socialism figured out long ago. You do not build a mass movement by appealing to independent thinkers. You appeal to the collective. You offer safety, security, and a sense of belonging. You make Hawaiian shirt day the high point of the week. You hire the Normies—the blue-pill middle managers who show up to interviews in flip-flops and T-shirts—and you put them in charge of hiring. They reproduce themselves. They do not hire the exceptional because the exceptional make them feel small. The same personality type migrates easily into government jobs. Government is the ultimate safe paycheck with the ultimate power over others.

That is the core of oppressive government. It is not abstract tyranny. It is the systematic empowerment of mediocre people who would never hold power in a pure merit system. They gain leverage through the size of the state, endless money, grants, regulations, and the ability to punish anyone who stands too tall. Exceptional people become a threat. They might make the average feel inadequate. So the system levels everything downward.

Steve Bannon’s Strategy Versus Trump’s Exceptionalism

I like Steve Bannon. He kept things alive when others ran. He paid a price. He went to jail. He understands the front line. His deliberate “slob” presentation—untucked shirts, no tie, Band-Aid on the forehead—is a calculated move. He does not want to appear better than the people he is trying to pull into the movement. Joseph Campbell used to say it is not good to appear too good if you want to bring the average along. Bannon internalized that. He lowers himself so the crowd does not feel threatened.

Trump never did that. He wears the suit. He wears the red tie. He talks about winning, about being the best, about thinking big. We voted for that. We did not vote for a Normie in an untucked shirt. We voted for exceptionalism. When Musk started building the biggest rockets and the biggest companies and then turned against the regulatory state that slows him down, he moved closer to that same instinct. SpaceX is aiming at scale that still sounds insane to most people—Musk has talked about 30-plus Starship launches a day by 2030. That is not mediocrity. That is the opposite. 

Ohio’s Choice: Vivek Ramaswamy or Amy Acton’s Mediocrity

I see the same fight right here in Ohio. Vivek Ramaswamy is a rich man who built things. Amy Acton’s side attacks that fact as if wealth earned through production is a moral stain. She talks about people “buying” the office. The implication is that successful people cannot be trusted, while the candidate of lockdowns and average outcomes somehow can. The polls are tight. Some have Ramaswamy slightly ahead. Others show Acton with a narrow edge or a statistical tie. The race will turn on whether voters want opportunity and capital or the familiar comfort of managed mediocrity. 

Data centers are a perfect test. They bring tax revenue, jobs, and economic activity that can help close budget gaps and lower pressure on property taxes. The opposition often prefers the empty cornfield and the status quo. That is the voice of people who have never had to create the wealth they want to redistribute. It is the same impulse that treats exceptional builders as the enemy.

The Real Danger of Oppressive Government

An oppressive government is dangerous because it gives mediocre people the power to sit atop exceptional people. It funds the average and penalizes the outstanding. It turns corporations into risk-averse partners of the state so they can keep the grants and avoid the targeting. It creates a culture where people stay quiet until they retire, then suddenly want to be part of something important. It produces the Judas cycle over and over.

I have had more than enough of that mediocrity this summer of 2026. It has infected corporate culture deeply. The ultimate cost of a powerful government that hands out money and permission is that it rewards the people who will never do exceptional things and restrains the people who will.

Musk is not saying enough when he names “oppressive government.” The deeper problem is the systematic preference for the average over the excellent. We do not need more people who dress down so the crowd feels comfortable. We need more people willing to stand up, build, risk, and produce results that make the average uncomfortable. That is how a nation stays exceptional.

Footnotes

1.  Elon Musk’s documented political evolution includes donations and support for Obama, Hillary Clinton, and a 2020 vote for Biden before the post-2022 shift toward Republican candidates and full endorsement of Trump. See reporting on his donation history and public statements.

2.  Russell Brand’s earlier work included the book Revolution and explicit support for socialist redistribution and figures such as Jeremy Corbyn; his later public positions moved toward free-speech and anti-establishment critiques.

3.  Elon Musk’s recent X reply to Russell Brand stated “An oppressive government” in response to Brand’s content on digital ID and related control mechanisms.

4.  Musk has publicly stated the goal of 30-plus Starship launches per day by around 2030. Current production rates remain far lower, with recent comments indicating one vehicle per month and efforts to increase cadence.

5.  Ohio gubernatorial polling in summer 2026 has shown a tight race between Vivek Ramaswamy and Amy Acton, with results ranging from slight Ramaswamy leads to narrow Acton edges or statistical ties depending on the pollster and date.

6.  The “Judas” analogy draws on the New Testament scapegoat and betrayal narrative as a metaphor for trading principle for institutional safety and reward.

Bibliography

Brand, Russell. Revolution. New York: Ballantine Books, 2014.

Isaacson, Walter. Elon Musk. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2023.

Musk, Elon. Public statements and X posts on political evolution, Starship production goals, and government regulation (2022–2026).

Rand, Ayn. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. New York: New American Library, 1966/1967. (For the moral framework of producers versus looters and the nature of government force.)

Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged. New York: Random House, 1957.

Trump, Donald J. The Art of the Deal. New York: Random House, 1987. (Early expression of the exceptionalism theme.)

Reporting on Ohio 2026 gubernatorial polling from Fox News, AARP, Wedgewood, Emerson, and related outlets (June–August 2026).

SpaceX and FAA documentation and public statements on Starship launch cadence and regulatory constraints.

Additional reading: Joseph Campbell on the hero’s journey and the danger of appearing “too good”; historical accounts of the Tea Party movement’s post-2008 composition; analyses of corporate risk-aversion and regulatory capture.

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.

A message to Senator George Lang: Making deals with the dead for earthly power

Yes, George, you need to watch this video. I had to finish our discussion from lunch. I had a good lunch with Senator George Lang the other day. Nothing formal, nothing staged for the cameras, just two guys who have known each other a long time sitting outside at a place we both like, talking the way we always end up talking when the politics finally take a back seat. People assume that every time I sit down with a senator or a sheriff or a treasurer around here, it is some closed-door strategy session. It is not. George and I share a long-standing interest in ancient history, the kind of deep, layered history that most people in public life never get the chance to dig into. He likes that I run into the stranger corners of it. I like that he actually reads the books I recommend and asks the kind of questions that keep the conversation alive long after the plates are cleared.

We ran out of time that day. Rain started coming down hard while we were still outside, and I had only gotten started on the things I wanted to walk him through. So I am continuing the conversation here the same way I would if he were still sitting across from me and the rest of you were at the next table over. Nothing confidential. Nothing I would not say in front of anyone. Just the thoughts that were already in motion when we had to pack it up.

I updated him on where The Politics of Heaven stands, my next book. The manuscript is finished. The first full draft has been through enough eyes that the early feedback keeps coming back in the same surprising way. More than one reader, including people who know the publishing world, has said the same thing: this book reminds them of The Immortality Key. That 2020 book from St. Martin’s Press by Brian Muraresku, the one Graham Hancock helped put on the map. I told George that I had already decided to go back through The Immortality Key carefully, not because I think I borrowed from it, but because the comparison keeps arriving uninvited and I want to be precise about where the overlap ends and where my own line of inquiry begins. Publication is a relationship, like any other. You do not jump straight into sharing an apartment. You get dinner. You talk. You figure out whether the trust is real. That process takes time, and patience is part of the work.

What pushed me back into The Immortality Key was the same impulse that had me reading Sharon and Derek Gilbert’s Veneration in the early hours before that lunch. Timothy Alberino had been discussing related material on Joe Rogan, and the conversation turned to the older Near Eastern material that most people never hear about. The Gilberts work from a biblical frame, and they do it with real attention to the primary texts. I respect that. Their book digs into the cult of the Rephaim, those dead aristocratic warrior kings whose spirits the living kings of the Late Bronze Age still summoned by name. The Ugaritic tablet known as KTU 1.161 records the liturgy. The dead are called up. Food and drink are set for them. The living king anchors his own right to rule in a line that stretches back into a mythic age of heroes. The meal is not polite remembrance. It is consultation. It is power.

That is the system the biblical writers were confronting. When the scouts came back from Canaan and said they felt like grasshoppers beside the people living there, they were describing more than physical size. They were describing a culture that still fed and consulted the spirits of the giants who had once ruled. Og of Bashan, the last of the remnant of the Rephaim, still had an iron bedstead measured in cubits that made the point for anyone who needed numbers. The physical and spiritual threats were the same. The command to wipe the system out was not simple land hunger. It was an attempt to close the door that the cult of the dead kept trying to hold open.

Mount Hermon sits at the center of that geography. In the Book of Enoch it is the place where the Watchers came down. In the older Canaanite material it is the mountain of assembly, the seat of the divine council that opposed Yahweh. When Jesus took his disciples to the region of Caesarea Philippi at the foot of that mountain and said the gates of hell would not prevail, he was standing on the front porch of the old cult and issuing a direct challenge. The Gilberts make that geography impossible to ignore once you have seen it.

I have been reading this material with one eye on the Near East and the other on the ground under my own feet. The Wheel of the Giants, Gilgal Refaim, sits up in the Golan Heights, a massive set of concentric stone circles that some call the Stonehenge of the East. It belongs to the same broad horizon of ritual architecture that appears along the Jordan and then, in different forms, moves westward. At the same time, over here in the Ohio Valley, the Hopewell people were raising enormous ceremonial centers with the same intensity of purpose. The Milford Works, the great earthworks near the confluence of the Little Miami and the East Fork, the alignments at Newark, the mounds that once stood all through what is now Butler County and Warren County and on up the Scioto. These were not random piles of dirt. They were places where the living gathered to deal with the dead and whatever else they believed could be reached through the right rituals and alignments.

I keep coming back to the Windover site just west of Titusville, a few miles from the Kennedy Space Center. Seven to eight thousand years old. Bodies preserved in peat with brain tissue still intact. Textiles more sophisticated than anything the standard story allows for at that early stage. Directional burial practices. A people who do not fit neatly into the later tribal identities we project backward. Some of the individuals were tall by the standards of the time. The site sits in a region that later becomes part of the same trade networks that moved copper out of the Lake Superior mines and into the wider world just as the Bronze Age was taking shape. The usual explanations for exotic materials found in these contexts grow more strained the longer you look at them. Bananas and turmeric proteins in elite Near Eastern burials. Advanced textiles and possible African or Mediterranean contacts at Windover. The copper that left the Upper Peninsula in quantities that still have not been fully accounted for. At some point, the assumption that the oceans were closed until Columbus made his journey starts to look like a real leap of faith.

The Loveland Frogmen sightings sit right in the middle of this local landscape. 1955, then 1972, later reports still in the same general corridor. Small, grayish, bipedal figures near the water, not far from the old Hopewell ceremonial centers. I am not claiming they are the same entities the Ugaritic kings were feeding under the palace benches. I am saying that when you map the places where people once worked hard to open contact with the dead, and then you look at the places where anomalous encounters keep showing up in the modern record, the overlap is hard to ignore. Point Pleasant and the Mothman. The poltergeist activity that still gets reported in houses built over older burial grounds. The same pattern appears in other parts of the world whenever the old ritual centers are disturbed or left alone long enough for whatever was once invited to keep answering.

I told George that the deeper I go into this material, the clearer it becomes that the biblical story is not a late invention dropped into an empty landscape. It is a record of conflict in a world already thick with competing claims about who had the right to rule and whose spirits still held authority. The non-human intelligences that show up in the older texts, the ones that later get called demons or Watchers or the shades of the Rephaim, did not disappear when the last physical giant was killed. The cult changed its methods. Psychedelics appear to have been one of the technologies that kept the door open. Muraresku’s work on the ritual use of those substances in the ancient Mediterranean and their possible survival into early Christian practice is part of the same larger picture. If you want to understand why a culture builds a certain kind of religion, you have to understand what it was taking and what it thought it was talking to while it was under the influence.

My own book takes the next step. It treats the entire span from the deep pre-biblical period to the present as a single continuous political and spiritual struggle. The copper, the earthworks, the burial practices, the later attempts to rebury or reclassify the evidence, the modern fascination with ascended masters and ancient aliens and celebrity necromancy, all of it belongs to the same long contest. The entities that once sat at the banquet tables under the palace floors in Ugarit are still trying to claim a seat at the table. The question is whether we keep setting places for them.

I am not interested in scaring people. I am interested in making the pattern visible so that the next time someone tries to sell a new version of the old system we recognize it for what it is. The Gilberts do that work from one angle. Muraresku does it from another. Alberino keeps pushing the conversation into the open. I am simply adding the North American material and the long view that comes from living in a place where the mounds are still under the subdivisions, and the river valleys still remember older traffic.

Notes:

¹ Brian C. Muraresku, The Immortality Key: The Secret History of the Religion with No Name (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2020). Foreword by Graham Hancock.

² Sharon K. Gilbert and Derek P. Gilbert, Veneration: Unveiling the Ancient Realms of Demonic Kings and Satan’s Battle Plan for Armageddon (Crane, MO: Defender, 2020).

³ KTU 1.161 (Ugaritic funerary liturgy), standard edition in Manfried Dietrich, Oswald Loretz, and Joaquín Sanmartín, The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2013). See also Baruch A. Levine and Jean-Michel de Tarragon, “Dead Kings and Rephaim: The Patrons of the Ugaritic Dynasty,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 104 (1984): 649–659.

⁴ On Gilgal Refaim / Rujm el-Hiri see Yonathan Mizrachi et al., recent satellite survey work published in PLOS ONE (2026) documenting additional circular structures in the Golan; earlier discussions in Yonathan Paz and others on Early Bronze Age ritual landscapes.

⁵ Glen H. Doran, ed., Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2002). See also subsequent DNA and textile studies confirming the site’s uniqueness within the Archaic Southeast.

⁶ On Hopewell ceremonial centers, alignments, and ritual feasting, see Bradley T. Lepper, Ohio Archaeology (Wilmington, OH: Orange Frazer Press, various editions) and the UNESCO World Heritage documentation for the Hopewell Ceremonial Earthworks. For the Milford Works specifically, nineteenth-century surveys by Squier and Davis remain foundational.

⁷ Book of Enoch (1 Enoch) 6–16 on the descent of the Watchers at Mount Hermon; standard translation by R. H. Charles or George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam.

⁸ Timothy Alberino’s appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience #2530 (July 2026) discusses the Rephaim, the kispum rites, and the continued occult utility of giant remains in modern contexts.

Bibliography for further reading

Alberino, Timothy. Various lectures and the special edition of The Book of Enoch with commentary (2026).

Byers, A. Martin. Sacred Games, Death, and Renewal in the Ancient Eastern Woodlands. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2011.

Charles, R. H., trans. The Book of Enoch. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1912 (and later editions).

Doran, Glen H., ed. Windover. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2002.

Gilbert, Derek P., and Sharon K. Gilbert. Veneration. Crane, MO: Defender, 2020.

———. Giants, Gods & Dragons. Crane, MO: Defender, 2020.

———. The Great Inception. Crane, MO: Defender, 2017.

Hancock, Graham. America Before. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2019.

Heiser, Michael S. The Unseen Realm. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015.

Lepper, Bradley T. Ohio Archaeology. Wilmington, OH: Orange Frazer Press.

Muraresku, Brian C. The Immortality Key. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2020.

Nickelsburg, George W. E., and James C. VanderKam. 1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012.

Pardee, Dennis. Ritual and Cult at Ugarit. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002.

Squier, Ephraim G., and Edwin H. Davis. Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1848 (reprint editions widely available).

Vallée, Jacques. Passport to Magonia. Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1969 (and later editions).

Additional primary Near Eastern texts are available in The Context of Scripture, ed—William W. Hallo (Leiden: Brill), and in the standard Ugaritic editions cited above.

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 Making of George Washington: Lessons from Youth and Adversity in Young Washington

George Washington occupies a unique place in the American imagination. His face appears on currency, his name rests upon the nation’s capital, and his reputation has become so intertwined with the founding of the United States that many people think of him only as the victorious commander of the Revolutionary War or the first President. Yet the making of George Washington occurred long before Yorktown, before the Constitutional Convention, and before the presidency itself. The true story of Washington is the story of formation through adversity, failure, hardship, and character. That is why a film centered upon his youth is so important. A society that wishes to understand greatness must study not only triumphs but also the difficult roads that produced them.

The importance of Young Washington lies precisely in its willingness to explore that earlier chapter. Rather than beginning with a celebrated general crossing the Delaware River or presiding over a new republic, the story examines the young man who had not yet become the legend. It reveals Washington during the years when mistakes carried consequences, when ambition collided with reality, and when the wilderness of North America tested the limits of endurance and leadership. Those experiences were not side notes to history. They were the furnace in which the future Father of His Country was forged.

Modern audiences often forget how dangerous eighteenth-century America actually was. The colonies were not peaceful settlements waiting patiently for independence. The frontier remained a contested world of forests, mountains, rivers, Native American nations, French military forces, British colonial ambitions, and competing claims to vast territories stretching westward beyond the Appalachians.[1] Young Washington entered this world as a surveyor and officer, navigating landscapes that were physically unforgiving and politically explosive.

The French and Indian War shaped the future of North America long before the American Revolution. Many historians describe it as the first global war because fighting extended beyond the American colonies into Europe, the Caribbean, India, and the Atlantic world.[2] The outcome would determine which empire dominated much of the continent—into this conflict stepped a young Virginian with little combat experience and enormous expectations resting upon his shoulders.

One of the most fascinating aspects of Washington’s early life was the extraordinary responsibility placed upon him at a remarkably young age. While many modern young adults are encouraged to avoid risk and postpone responsibility, eighteenth-century society frequently demanded the opposite. Washington found himself carrying diplomatic messages through wilderness territories, negotiating with Native American leaders, evaluating military threats, and commanding troops in situations that would challenge experienced officers.[3] Such responsibilities matured him quickly. The lessons learned in forests and mountains would prove no less valuable than those later learned on battlefields or in government chambers.

The story surrounding Fort Necessity remains one of the most important episodes of Washington’s development. It was not his greatest victory. In many respects, it represented a significant defeat. Yet history repeatedly shows that failures often teach more than successes. Built in a vulnerable meadow, the fort placed British colonial forces in a precarious position. French troops and their allies occupied superior terrain within the surrounding wooded areas. Rain transformed the battlefield into a muddy disaster. Washington ultimately surrendered under difficult circumstances in July 1754.[4]

Many historical figures spend their careers attempting to hide their failures. Washington did something different. He learned from them. The humiliation at Fort Necessity did not destroy his reputation; rather, it became one of the experiences that taught caution, patience, logistics, and strategic judgment. Years later, during the Revolutionary War, Washington would demonstrate restraint and discipline that distinguished him from many contemporaries. Those qualities did not emerge from nowhere. They emerged from earlier encounters with defeat and disappointment.

There is also something powerful about physically visiting places connected to history. Reading books provides knowledge, but standing where events occurred provides perspective. The mountains of western Maryland and Pennsylvania remain striking reminders of the challenges faced by colonial soldiers. The terrain itself explains much of the story. Steep ridges, dense forests, winding roads, and isolated valleys reveal why campaigns in that region were so difficult. Geography often becomes an invisible character in historical narratives, and nowhere is that more evident than in Washington’s frontier experience.

The routes that would later become the National Road carry tremendous historical significance as well. Connecting eastern population centers with western territories, they became some of the most important transportation projects in early American history.[5] Yet before roads and highways transformed the region, movement through those mountains demanded determination, courage, and endurance. Washington’s experiences along those routes exposed him to the realities of frontier America and deepened his understanding of the continent he would later help unite.

A film exploring these events succeeds when it respects the material. Historical drama does not require perfect documentation of every detail, but it must convey the spirit, character, and significance of the people involved. According to many viewers familiar with Washington’s biography, Young Washington captures that spirit effectively. The portrayal of Washington as noble without being perfect allows audiences to encounter him as a human being rather than an untouchable monument.

That distinction matters because modern culture frequently swings between extremes. Historical figures are either idealized beyond recognition or condemned without context. Washington deserves neither treatment. He was a man with strengths and flaws, successes and failures, extraordinary abilities and ordinary limitations. What separates him from countless others is not perfection but character. Throughout crises, disappointments, and temptations, he consistently sought duty above personal comfort.[6]

This emphasis upon character may explain why the film resonates so strongly with audiences. Many forms of contemporary entertainment focus upon antiheroes, cynicism, moral ambiguity, or spectacle. Such approaches can produce compelling stories, but they often leave audiences hungry for something different. There remains a deep desire to witness individuals striving toward virtue, honor, courage, and responsibility. Human beings naturally admire excellence. They seek examples of people attempting to become better versions of themselves.

This is one reason George Washington continues to command respect centuries after his death. His achievements cannot be separated from his moral aspirations. He believed leadership required self-control. He believed reputation mattered. He believed public service demanded sacrifice. He understood that power, if not restrained by character, could destroy both leaders and nations.[7]

Few decisions illustrate this more clearly than his resignation of military authority after the American Revolution. History contains countless examples of victorious generals who transformed military success into political dictatorship. Washington chose another path. After securing independence, he surrendered power and returned home. King George III reportedly remarked that such an action would make Washington “the greatest man in the world.”[8] The roots of that decision can be traced back to earlier lessons learned during his youth. The young officer who experienced failure at Fort Necessity eventually became the mature statesman willing to relinquish power.

The success of films like Young Washington also reflects a broader cultural shift. Many audiences increasingly search for stories that celebrate rather than deconstruct. Entertainment once produced numerous historical adventures focused upon courage, exploration, leadership, and national heritage. Classic productions such as Davy Crockett and Zorro attracted viewers not because their heroes were flawless, but because they represented ideals worth pursuing. Such stories reminded audiences that civilization depends upon honorable conduct.

Angel Studios appears to recognize this hunger. The company has developed a reputation for producing projects that emphasize family-friendly storytelling, historical subjects, faith, perseverance, and moral clarity. Whether individual viewers agree with every creative choice is ultimately secondary. The greater significance lies in the fact that audiences continue to support films that treat virtue seriously rather than sarcastically.

The enthusiastic audience response described by many theatergoers reinforces this point. Packed theaters, applause during credits, and viewers remaining in their seats after the film concludes suggest more than mere entertainment value. They suggest emotional investment. People stay because they do not want the experience to end. They remain because something meaningful has occurred. The story has connected them not merely with a plot but with values, memories, and aspirations.

History possesses a unique ability to create that connection. Contemporary debates often divide people, but historical narratives sometimes unite them around shared admiration for courage and perseverance. George Washington serves as one of those rare figures capable of reaching across ideological boundaries. Americans may disagree about countless issues, yet many still recognize the importance of the leadership that guided the nation through its earliest and most fragile years.[9]

Perhaps the most striking aspect of Washington’s story is the consistency between his public life and his private aspirations. The pursuit of self-improvement remained a recurring theme throughout his life. As a young man, he studied, observed, listened, and learned from mistakes. As a military leader, he refined discipline and judgment. As president, he attempted to place national interests above factional interests. Growth never stopped.

That emphasis upon striving rather than perfection carries enduring relevance. Every generation faces moments of disappointment, conflict, and uncertainty. Every individual encounters failures that seem overwhelming in the moment. Washington’s example demonstrates that setbacks need not define a life. Defeat at Fort Necessity did not prevent future greatness. Criticism did not prevent achievement. Hardship did not destroy resolve. Instead, adversity became preparation.

The frontier itself symbolized this process. The forests beyond colonial settlements represented danger, uncertainty, and opportunity. They tested physical endurance while revealing inner character. Washington’s journeys across that landscape helped develop qualities that later proved indispensable. Resourcefulness, patience, courage, adaptability, and resilience emerged not in comfort but in challenge.

A compelling historical film, therefore, accomplishes more than simple education. It invites audiences to reconsider what greatness actually means. Greatness is not merely holding office, winning battles, or receiving recognition. Greatness begins in the difficult choices made before anyone is watching. It begins with responsibility embraced rather than avoided. It begins with the willingness to learn from mistakes rather than deny them.

For that reason, Young Washington offers a valuable contribution to American historical storytelling. It introduces viewers to formative experiences that are often overshadowed by later accomplishments. It encourages appreciation for the long process through which character develops. Most importantly, it reminds audiences that the foundations of leadership are laid long before leadership is publicly recognized.

There is also something refreshing about spending time in the company of admirable characters. Modern culture often celebrates transgression while dismissing virtue as naïve. Yet viewers continue responding positively to stories featuring courage, integrity, loyalty, and self-sacrifice. The reason is simple. Human beings instinctively recognize these traits as desirable. They recognize them as qualities capable of elevating communities, institutions, and nations.

Washington’s story continues to endure because it illustrates that elevation. A young surveyor became a frontier officer. A frontier officer became a military commander. A military commander became the leader of a revolution. A revolutionary leader became the first president. Yet beneath each transformation remained the same aspiration toward honor and duty. The titles changed. The character remained.

Films capable of conveying that truth perform an important cultural service. They preserve memory. They encourage reflection. They connect present generations with the experiences that shaped earlier ones. They provide reminders that history is not simply a collection of dates and events but a record of human choices.

Ultimately, the enduring appeal of George Washington rests upon more than military accomplishments or political achievements. It rests upon the example of a man who repeatedly sought the higher path when easier alternatives existed. The youth who faced defeat in the mountains became the leader who guided a fragile republic. The officer who learned difficult lessons on the frontier became the statesman willing to place principle above personal ambition. The story remains powerful because it speaks to universal themes of growth, responsibility, perseverance, and character.

That is why Young Washington deserves attention. It tells a chapter of history too often ignored. It introduces audiences to the experiences that forged one of the most important figures in American history. It presents nobility without arrogance, courage without recklessness, and patriotism without cynicism. In an era frequently dominated by stories celebrating the worst of human behavior, there is something profoundly valuable about a story centered upon the possibility of becoming better. George Washington’s journey reminds audiences that greatness is not inherited, accidental, or effortless. It is earned through struggle, formed through adversity, and sustained through character. More than two centuries after his death, that lesson remains as relevant as ever.

Footnotes

[1] Fred Anderson, Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754–1766 (New York: Knopf, 2000).

[2] Daniel Baugh, The Global Seven Years’ War 1754–1763 (London: Routledge, 2011).

[3] George Washington, The Journal of Major George Washington (1754).

[4] David Preston, Braddock’s Defeat: The Battle of the Monongahela and the Road to Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2015).

[5] Karl Raitz, The National Road (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996).

[6] Ron Chernow, Washington: A Life (New York: Penguin Press, 2010).

[7] James Thomas Flexner, George Washington in the American Revolution (Little, Brown and Company, 1968).

[8] Joseph J. Ellis, His Excellency: George Washington (New York: Knopf, 2004).

[9] Gordon S. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution (Vintage Books, 1993).

Bibliography

Anderson, Fred. Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754–1766. New York: Knopf, 2000.

Baugh, Daniel. The Global Seven Years’ War 1754–1763. London: Routledge, 2011.

Chernow, Ron. Washington: A Life. New York: Penguin Press, 2010.

Ellis, Joseph J. His Excellency: George Washington. New York: Knopf, 2004.

Flexner, James Thomas. George Washington in the American Revolution. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1968.

Preston, David. Braddock’s Defeat: The Battle of the Monongahela and the Road to Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Raitz, Karl. The National Road. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.

Washington, George. The Journal of Major George Washington. Williamsburg, 1754.

Wood, Gordon S. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. New York: Vintage Books, 1993.

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 Lesson of Supergirl: The audience has a lot of Christian dads in it

I haven’t seen the Supergirl movie yet. From everything I’ve heard and read about the promotional run and the way the numbers have come in, I’m not in any rush. It’s the same old story playing out again, the one that keeps repeating itself in Hollywood these days like a bad loop on an old VHS tape. The actress, Milly Alcock, went out there during the press cycle and made some comments that landed exactly the way these things always do when the people in charge forget who actually buys the tickets. She talked about online critics and how a lot of them were just “Dad of four, Christian” types with no profile picture or burner accounts, and she said it was hilarious to her. Then she added that if you’re pissing off the right kind of people, you’re doing okay. 

That kind of talk might play well in certain rooms in Los Angeles or New York, but it doesn’t play well with the people who were supposed to be the core audience for a big summer superhero movie built around Superman’s cousin. Christian dads with a couple of kids aren’t some fringe group you can mock on the way to the bank. They’re the ones who used to load up the minivan, buy the tickets, get the popcorn, and make these movies cultural events. When you go out of your way to signal that their worldview is a punchline, they notice. And they stay home. Then the box office comes in soft, everybody starts pointing fingers, and the same executives who greenlit the messaging act surprised.

This is the same playbook that wrecked the live-action Snow White over at Disney. Rachel Zegler went out there and called the original story dated, took shots at the prince character, and sprinkled in enough political commentary that a big chunk of the traditional family audience decided they had better things to do with their Saturday afternoon. The movie opened okay but collapsed fast, and Disney ended up losing something like $170 million on it once you factored in the budget, the reshoots after the set fire, and the marketing.  It wasn’t just one actress. It was a whole system that decided the audience needed re-education more than it needed entertainment.

Supergirl opened the weekend of June 26, 2026, to about $37 million domestically. That was well below the $50 million range some trackers were expecting and a steep drop from what Superman did the year before under James Gunn’s watch. Superman opened to $125 million domestically and finished with roughly $355 million here in the States and over $618 million worldwide. Supergirl, with a reported $170 million production budget plus heavy marketing, was tracking toward the low $60s, or maybe $70 million, domestically if it held on through the holiday frame, with worldwide totals hovering around $110-115 million.  That’s not enough to break even on a movie this size. It’s the kind of number that makes everybody downstream from the studio—crew, vendors, theater chains—feel the pain while the people who made the decisions move on to the next project.

The demographic split on opening weekend told the story in real time. The audience was skewed heavily male and over 25. The young women and families the movie was supposed to bring in large numbers didn’t show up in force. That’s what happens when the lead actress spends part of the promotional cycle telling a big slice of the potential audience that their very existence as profile pictures with kids and a faith is funny to her. You don’t have to agree with every dad out there. You don’t even have to like them. But if you’re getting paid millions to stand in front of a camera in a cape and sell a $200 million piece of intellectual property, your job during promo is to get as many people as possible to buy a ticket. Not to litigate culture war points from a Variety interview conducted months earlier. 

I’ve been around this business enough over the years to know how it works. I had a stretch where I thought I might direct or at least write and produce films. I wrote a few things, got them in rooms, and sat across from people who controlled real money. What I saw up close was that a certain faction had already decided the product came second to the politics. I remember one conversation where I pitched something and the response wasn’t about whether the story would connect or make money. It was about whether the script had the right messaging baked in. When I realized the game was rigged that way, I made a decision. I wasn’t going to spend my life compromising on things that mattered to me to get a seat at a table that was already serving a different meal. I walked away from chasing that particular brass ring and put my energy into the Tea Party and then the broader movement that became MAGA. The checks in Hollywood can be big for a minute, but they don’t buy back your integrity once you’ve traded pieces of it away.

That’s why these promotional disasters keep happening. The people in charge keep hiring talent who treat the job as a personal activism platform rather than a professional obligation. Zendaya is the counterexample people should study. She’s a good actress; she’s in big franchises; she married Tom Holland; and she mostly keeps her head down and does the work. She doesn’t feel the need to go out on every carpet and unload on half the country. That’s why she keeps getting hired. The ones who treat every interview like a chance to settle scores or signal to the online choir end up with one big movie and then a lot of quiet time afterward.

James Gunn has been in an interesting spot through all of this. He came in with real goodwill from the Guardians movies, which proved you could take obscure characters, give them personality and humor, and make a fortune. Superman last year was a genuine hit—fun, hopeful, well-reviewed, and profitable. It looked like maybe the new DCU under Gunn and Peter Safran had found a lane. Supergirl was supposed to build on that momentum. Instead, it landed with a thud. Gunn didn’t direct this one—Craig Gillespie did—but he and Safran produced it and shaped the vision. The character on screen is described as more jaded, sarcastic, impulsive, a bit of an anti-hero who parties on red-sun planets where she can actually get drunk. That’s a valid take on the comics, but when you pair it with a promotional tone that mocks the audience that grew up on the classic Superman ideal of truth, justice, and the American way, you’re asking for trouble. 

There’s already talk in the trades about whether this soft opening puts Gunn’s position under more scrutiny. Some agents are whispering that another miss like this and the corporate structure might decide it’s time for a change, even though Superman succeeded and the long-term plan is still being sold as sound.  That’s how it goes in these big studios now. One regime comes in promising to fix the mess left by the last one, spends a fortune on a new slate, and then the same underlying problems—audience alienation, messaging over story, talent who can’t or won’t sell the product—show up again. Gunn has more runs on the board than most, but the Supergirl numbers are a reminder that goodwill has a shelf life when the results don’t follow.

I keep coming back to the Indiana Jones situation because it shows the pattern so clearly. In the last film, there were persistent rumors that the original plan involved killing the character off or erasing him in some way that felt like a deliberate gut punch to the legacy. The director denied reshoots for that specific reason, but a lot of us who watched the sausage get made over the years didn’t buy the full denial. Extra money got spent, the ending got massaged, and the movie still underperformed relative to what an Indiana Jones picture should do. The people in charge wanted to make a statement. The audience wanted one more ride with the character they loved. When those two things collide, the audience usually wins by staying home, and the studio eats the difference.

Captain Marvel followed the same arc. Brie Larson went out and did the whole “toxic masculinity” circuit after the first movie made money. The sequel, The Marvels, became one of the bigger bombs in recent Disney history. The pattern is consistent: the first project coasts on existing goodwill and curiosity, the star or the messaging starts treating the core audience like the enemy, and the follow-up craters. Then the same executives who approved the approach acted shocked that families and longtime fans didn’t line up again.

What’s happening now is bigger than any single movie or actress. Hollywood went hard left years ago, and the corporate layer that runs these places decided DEI checklists and cultural re-education were more important than selling tickets. They hired people who shared that worldview, gave them big platforms, and then acted surprised when the people who actually pay for the content walked away. The trust erosion is real. Once families decide a brand doesn’t have their kids’ best interests at heart—whether it’s live-action remakes that lecture them or kids’ programming that slips in stuff no parent asked for—they don’t come back easily. You see it in the vinyl revival, the return to physical media, people wanting to own their libraries instead of renting everything from a streaming service that can memory-hole a title whenever it wants. We went through this with music. The industry told everybody they’d rent forever from iTunes and Spotify. Now people are buying records again because they want something they can actually hold when the power goes out or when the algorithm decides they shouldn’t hear a certain song anymore.

The same principle applies to movies. These big corporate entities keep treating the audience like a resource to be mined and then scolded. The audience is responding by treating Hollywood as an optional expense rather than a weekly habit. Supergirl didn’t fail because the character is unlikable in the comics or because superhero fatigue is total. It failed because the promotional campaign handed the opposition free ammunition and because the underlying calculation—that you could insult a big chunk of the paying public and still get their money—turned out to be wrong.

I’ve said for years that the best movies, the ones that actually shaped generations, came from people who cared more about the story than the politics of the moment. Star Wars in its original run was a phenomenon because it gave people something to line up for, something to argue about in the schoolyard, something that felt bigger than the daily grind. The merch drops were events. Families participated together. When the machine decided it needed to lecture instead of entertain, the cultural grip loosened. The same thing is happening across the board now. The pushback isn’t coming from some organized cabal. It’s coming from millions of individual decisions by people who are tired of paying premium prices to be told their values are the problem.

James Gunn still has a runway because Superman worked and because he has a track record of making things people actually want to watch. But the Supergirl results are a warning shot. If the next projects keep treating the core audience as something to be managed or mocked rather than served, the DCU experiment will end up in the same pile as every other attempt to force-feed ideology through expensive capes. The audience has options now. They can wait for streaming, skip it entirely, or see something else that doesn’t require them to check their beliefs at the door.

Look, I’m not saying every actor has to be a robot with no opinions. I’ve got plenty of my own, and I’ve never been shy about sharing them on my own platforms. The difference is I built those platforms myself. When you’re handed a lead role in a $170 million studio movie, the job description includes not actively driving away the people who are supposed to fill the seats. That’s not censorship. That’s basic professionalism and basic math. The Christian dads with kids aren’t asking for a sermon from the screen. They’re asking for two hours where the good guys win, the hero stands for something worth standing for, and nobody on the promotional tour calls their existence hilarious. When Hollywood forgets that simple transaction, the box office reminds them. And the reminders are getting more expensive every year.

I’ve watched this industry from the outside for a long time now, close enough to see the decisions but far enough away that I didn’t have to compromise to keep a seat. What I see is a system that keeps choosing the same losing strategy and then acting confused when the results don’t change. The audience didn’t leave because they hate superheroes. They left because the people making the movies began to hate the audience. Until that calculation flips, these soft openings and outright disasters will keep happening. The ones who figure it out first—the ones who treat the job like a privilege instead of a pulpit—will be the ones still standing when the dust settles. The rest will explain to their next meeting why the numbers didn’t work out again.

That’s the reality on the ground in the middle of 2026. Superman proved there’s still an appetite for hopeful, well-made comic book movies. Supergirl proved that even a strong foundation can be undermined in a single promotional cycle when the people involved forget who they’re talking to. The pushback is real; it’s measurable at the ticket window, and it’s not going away until the people writing the checks decide that making money and telling stories people actually want to see matter more than scoring points with the crowd that already agrees with them. I’ve made my peace with walking away from that table years ago. Watching it wobble from a distance confirms I made the right call.

Sources and Further Reading

•  Box office figures and analysis for Supergirl (2026): TheWrap, Box Office Mojo, USA Today, ComicBook.com reports from late June and early July 2026. 

•  Milly Alcock Variety interview comments on critics and “Dad of four, Christian” profiles: Originally conducted mid-April 2026, widely discussed after May publication and post-release. 

•  Snow White (2025) financial losses and promotional controversies: Forbes, Variety, Box Office Mojo. 

•  James Gunn DCU context and insider speculation post-Supergirl: Slashfilm, Screen Daily, ComicBook.com. 

•  Broader industry patterns around audience alienation, DEI priorities, and promotional missteps: Multiple trade coverage 2023–2026 on Captain Marvel/The Marvels, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny rumors and reshoots (director denials notwithstanding), and shifting audience behavior toward physical media and selective viewing.

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 Cincinnati Bridge Cost too Much and its Too Slow: There is too much administration these days that slows everything down, and puts unreasonable cost into everything

The groundbreaking ceremony for the new companion bridge alongside the aging Brent Spence Bridge, connecting Cincinnati, Ohio, to Covington, Kentucky, took place on May 8, 2026, leaving me shaking my head in a mix of cautious optimism and deep-seated irritation. For decades, this project has been the poster child for everything wrong with how America builds critical infrastructure these days. The price tag now sits at around $4.4 billion for the first major phase—including the new cable-stayed companion span, approach work, and some reconfiguration of the existing bridge—with the new structure slated to open to traffic in 2031. That is more than a decade since the groundbreaking and nearly thirty years since serious planning began in earnest back in the early 2000s. I remember pushing for better river crossings when I was politically active downtown in the 1990s, attending City Hall meetings day after day under multiple mayors and city council members. Back then, the Brent Spence was already showing its age, functionally obsolete, and choking on traffic that far exceeded its original design capacity from when it opened in 1963 at a mere $10 million cost. Kentucky’s commercial development folks in Newport and across the river were eager partners, seeing the economic spillover that a modernized crossing would bring to real estate and business growth on both sides. Yet here we are, decades later, finally breaking ground amid fanfare from governors Mike DeWine and Andy Beshear, former Senator Rob Portman, and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who all showed up to take credit for finally moving shovels after securing over $1.6 billion in federal grants from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It is pathetic, really. There was zero excuse for this kind of delay, and the cost escalation driven by inflation, regulatory hurdles, and bureaucratic inertia is nothing short of irresponsible. 

I have spent a lot of time in that Cincinnati-Kentucky corridor over the years, and I can tell you from firsthand experience that the need for this bridge upgrade has been glaringly obvious since at least the 1990s. Traffic volumes on the Brent Spence now routinely exceed 150,000 vehicles per day, double what it was engineered to handle, creating bottlenecks that ripple through the economies of southern Ohio and northern Kentucky. When I was down in the region talking to Kentucky development people before Newport became the revitalized hotspot it is today, the conversation always circled back to the idea that a reliable, high-capacity crossing was essential for commercial flow, tourism, and residential expansion. Real estate deals hinged on it. Business relocation decisions depended on it. Yet politicians on both sides of the river dithered, studied, and deferred while the bridge aged into a liability. The groundbreaking feels like a hollow victory because it should have happened twenty years ago. Mitch McConnell himself noted the decades of headaches, and he played a role in finally unlocking federal dollars alongside Portman. But let us be honest: high-level dealmakers in public office should have cut through the red tape far sooner. Claiming credit now for something that was critically needed in the 1990s and 2000s rings hollow. The same crowd that delayed action is now patting itself on the back while everyday drivers and businesses foot the bill through higher taxes and lost productivity. 

What makes this saga even more galling is how it stacks up against other bridge projects I have seen or studied across the country. Consider the Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge in Charleston, South Carolina, which replaced the old Cooper River spans. Groundbreaking occurred in 2001, and the cable-stayed beauty opened in July 2005—one full year ahead of schedule and under its roughly $700 million budget. Construction took about four years, and it delivered a magnificent structure that enhanced the historic district’s connectivity without the endless delays or ballooning costs we see today. Or look at the Mackinac Bridge up in northern Michigan, spanning the Straits of Mackinac to the Upper Peninsula. Built between 1954 and 1957 in just three and a half years at a total cost of about $100 million (in 1950s dollars), it remains a marvel of efficiency and engineering grace. Tolls helped pay it off, but the project moved with purpose and minimal bureaucratic interference. Even the old Cooper River Bridge that preceded the Ravenel was completed in just seventeen months back in the 1920s for around $6 million. These examples prove that America once knew how to build big things quickly and relatively affordably when the focus was on results rather than process. 

Contrast that with the Brent Spence Companion Bridge, where nearly twenty years of planning preceded even this groundbreaking, and the timeline now stretches to 2031 or beyond for full corridor improvements. The existing bridge itself was declared functionally obsolete in the 1990s, yet it took until the Biden administration’s infrastructure package—and McConnell’s bipartisan maneuvering—to secure the federal piece that finally broke the logjam. Inflation alone has driven costs up dramatically; nationwide highway construction expenses rose about 61 percent from 2020 to 2025, according to federal indices, and the Brent Spence price tag jumped from earlier estimates of around $3.6 billion to $4.4 billion for this phase. But inflation is only part of the story. The real culprits are the layers of regulation, environmental reviews, lawsuits, and bureaucratic oversight that have piled up since the 1970s. Laws like the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970, combined with state equivalents and court rulings that expanded citizen challenges to projects, turned what had once been straightforward engineering into a decade-long permitting gauntlet. Add in the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements, limited competition among contractors, over-reliance on consultants by understaffed state transportation departments, and the tendency for projects to balloon during long design and review phases, and you have a perfect storm of delay and expense. 

I saw this regulatory bloat up close during my time at Cincinnati City Hall in the 1990s. Every proposed river crossing or infrastructure tweak sparked endless studies, public hearings, environmental impact statements, and legal threats from interest groups. Kentucky’s side was eager for development, but Ohio’s processes dragged everything into the mud. It was the same story with other local projects—always more studies, more delays, never faster action. Meanwhile, the Empire State Building in New York was completed in just 410 days back in 1930-1931, rising to 102 stories at a cost of about $40.9 million (roughly $600 million today). Crews added fourteen stories in ten days at peak. Storage was optimized, deliveries were just in time, and the focus was on getting it done—no endless NEPA reviews, no years of lawsuits over every rivet. The Mackinac Bridge faced turbulent waters and harsh winters, yet it was finished on schedule. Today’s projects? They take nine to nineteen years on average from planning to completion for major highways, according to federal estimates, with costs often tripling those in peer nations due to these procedural thickets. 

The toll debate adds another layer of absurdity to all this. Proponents of the Brent Spence project proudly note that it will remain toll-free, unlike the Ohio River Bridges Project in Louisville, where the Abraham Lincoln and Lewis and Clark bridges opened in 2016 as part of a tolled system that continues to collect fees until at least 2053. I find that Louisville’s setup reprehensible—preposterous, really. Drivers already pay high gas taxes that were supposed to fund infrastructure, yet now they face double-dipping through tolls on bridges that should have been built with existing revenue streams. My own recent experiences with toll roads only reinforce this frustration. On a trip to Washington, DC, I racked up about $18 in tolls using Route 66 from Fairfax County, which conveniently dumps you onto Constitution Avenue near the mall and the White House. It was worth it to avoid the nightmare traffic I endured the previous year on the George Washington Parkway along the river. But the system itself is maddening: no booths to pay at the spot, just an AI license plate reader and an online account you have to set up with a transponder, or risk violations. My time is worth far more than $18 an hour spent fiddling with websites and dashboards. Gas taxes are already high—federal at 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993, with many states adding more—and they were never properly indexed for inflation or for efficiency gains from better-mileage vehicles. The result is chronic underfunding that politicians try to patch with tolls or higher property taxes instead of cutting waste elsewhere. 

This addiction to high taxation and spending is the root problem. Government at all levels has become hooked on revenue streams that never quite cover the bloated projects they pursue. Gas tax relief proposals surface occasionally—some good folks in the Ohio Statehouse, like Thomas Hall, have pushed for it—but they rarely go far because the money gets siphoned into unrelated pet projects or administrative bloat. Property taxes in many areas, including around Cincinnati, feel punishingly high, funding schools and services, while infrastructure like bridges languishes. The same crowd that cheers the Brent Spence groundbreaking after years of delay now talks about how the Biden infrastructure plan made it possible, yet they could not get it done faster under previous administrations, either. It is too little, too late, and far too expensive. I drove the region constantly for business and personal reasons, and the traffic snarls around the Brent Spence affect everything from daily commutes to freight hauling worth over $1 billion annually across the river. People flying into Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport from southern Ohio know the pain: that 40-minute buffer you think you have can evaporate in congestion, forcing early departures and lost productivity. I had a client just last week racing for a flight after meeting me, banking on the 275 loop and western routes to beat the clock. The new bridge cannot come soon enough, but 2031 feels like an eternity, especially after we once built an icon like the Empire State in under 14 months. 

The human and economic costs of these delays are real. Businesses lose money idling in traffic. Families waste hours that could be spent productively. Emergency responders face longer response times. And the politicians who finally show up for the photo op act as if they have achieved something heroic rather than merely catching up to what should have been routine maintenance of critical national infrastructure. The Brent Spence Corridor is not some luxury—it is essential for the tri-state region’s economy, linking Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana in ways that affect supply chains nationwide. Yet the project’s slow pace mirrors a broader national malaise where soft costs—permitting, legal fights, consultant fees—now dominate budgets. State departments of transportation have shrunk in capacity over decades, outsourcing expertise and driving up prices through limited bidder pools. Procurement rules meant to ensure fairness often reduce competition, and the litigious environment lets anyone with a complaint tie things up in court for years. Inflation compounds the problem, but the underlying issue is that we no longer prioritize speed and efficiency. We prioritize process, equity checkboxes, and avoiding any possible offense to environmental or community interests, even when the overall public good screams for action. 

I have traveled enough to see magnificent bridges done right. The Ravenel Bridge stands as a graceful gateway to Charleston’s historic district, completed efficiently and beautifully. The Mackinac Bridge, with its soaring suspension design, opened the Upper Peninsula without bankrupting the state or dragging on forever. Even older projects like the original Cooper River spans showed what focused effort could achieve. America built the interstate system in the 1950s and 1960s with purpose, using dedicated gas tax revenue, before diversions and inflation eroded it. Today’s approach—layer upon layer of federal mandates, state reviews, and endless stakeholder input—has turned infrastructure into a jobs program for lawyers, consultants, and bureaucrats rather than a means of connecting people and moving goods. The result is projects that cost three times as much as they do in other developed nations and take far longer. For the Brent Spence, that means drivers will endure construction disruptions and detours for years, while costs climb further for the remaining corridor work, which remains unfunded in full. 

None of this is inevitable. Other countries manage complex builds faster and more cheaply by streamlining reviews, limiting frivolous lawsuits, and maintaining in-house expertise within their transportation agencies. Here, we could index gas taxes to inflation and usage, phase out inefficient tolling on essential crossings, and reform NEPA to focus on genuine environmental protection rather than indefinite delay. Cut the regulatory thicket that ballooned after the 1970s, restore competitive bidding without excessive reliance on consultants, and demand accountability from politicians who treat infrastructure as a campaign prop rather than a governing priority. I have seen the contrast in my own travels: toll roads in Virginia that work but sting because they supplement already-high gas taxes, versus free bridges that should be the norm. The Louisville tolls remain a cautionary tale of how users end up paying twice—once at the pump, again at the gantry—while politicians congratulate themselves for “innovative financing.” The Brent Spence team wisely avoided tolls this time, but the underlying addiction to funding persists. Property taxes remain too high in many jurisdictions, siphoning money that could have accelerated this very project years ago. 

As someone who has watched this region evolve from the inside—navigating City Hall debates, Kentucky commerce meetings, and endless traffic on I-71/I-75—I am glad the shovels are finally in the ground. The new companion bridge will be a cable-stayed marvel, easing congestion, supporting economic growth, and providing a safer, more reliable link for generations. But the pride politicians express at the ceremony rings false when you consider how long it took and how much more it costs than it should. This was not a triumph of vision; it was the bare minimum delivered far too late after years of inaction. The Empire State Building taught us that America could once build audaciously and rapidly. The Mackinaw and Ravenel bridges exemplified modern efficiency, even with environmental considerations. We can reclaim that spirit if we stop treating every project as an opportunity for endless process and start demanding results. Relief on gas taxes, smarter use of existing revenues, and slashing bureaucratic delays are not radical ideas—they are common sense. Until then, projects like the Brent Spence will continue to exemplify government at its most sluggish: too expensive, too late, and always promising better days that arrive only after the public has paid the price in time, treasure, and frustration.

The broader lesson here extends beyond one bridge. Across the nation, infrastructure decay and project bloat threaten competitiveness. The Highway Trust Fund, once robustly supported by gas taxes established during the Depression and expanded for the interstate era, now struggles because the levy has not kept pace with needs or economic reality. The federal gas tax, at 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993 and unadjusted for inflation or fuel-efficiency gains, leaves states scrambling with sales taxes, bonds, or tolls. Proposals for vehicle-miles-traveled fees or higher taxes surface regularly, but without spending discipline, they merely feed the beast. I support targeted relief—temporary gas tax pauses or rollbacks where feasible—because families and businesses already bear enough. The addiction to spending shows in unrelated boondoggles, administrative overhead, and failure to prioritize true needs like the Brent Spence. Politicians from both parties share blame: decades of gridlock until a big federal bill provided the excuse to act. Even then, costs rose, and timelines stretched. 

In my travels to Washington, DC, the toll experience crystallized the inefficiency. Route 66’s convenience came at a price, but the lack of easy payment options and the AI enforcement felt more like revenue capture than a fair user fee. Compare that to the free-flowing vision we should have for essential crossings. The Charleston and Michigan bridges stand as testaments to what is possible when focus replaces process. The Louisville toll bridges warn what happens when it does not. For Cincinnati and Kentucky, the new bridge will finally deliver relief, but only after unnecessary years of waiting and billions in inflated costs. I have seen the politics firsthand, the development potential squandered, and the traffic endured. It did not have to be this way. With smarter governance—less regulation, more accountability, and honest use of revenue—we could build the infrastructure our economy demands without the endless delays and overruns. The groundbreaking is a step forward, but it should have been taken long ago, cheaper, and faster. That is the real story behind why these bridges cost so much and take so long: not engineering limits, but human and governmental ones. And until we address those, the next critical project will follow the same predictable, expensive path. 

(Word count: approximately 4,012)

Footnotes

1.  WCPO Cincinnati reporting on Brent Spence Companion Bridge cost and timeline, March 2026 updates.

2.  Official project timeline from BrentSpenceBridgeCorridor.com, including 2022 federal grant award.

3.  Kentucky Transportation Cabinet announcement, March 16, 2026.

4.  ENR and Business Courier coverage of cost escalation to $4.4 billion, April 2026.

5.  WLWT and AASHTO Journal on May 8, 2026, groundbreaking attendees and statements.

6.  Wikipedia and historical records on the Brent Spence original 1963 construction.

7.  Ohio River Bridges Project history via Wikipedia and RiverLink.org.

8.  Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge details from Wikipedia and South Carolina historical sources.

9.  Mackinac Bridge Authority historical records and construction timeline.

10.  Cato Institute analysis of 1970s regulatory changes impacting infrastructure costs.

11.  Pew Charitable Trusts report on factors inflating road and bridge maintenance costs, April 2026.

12.  Brookings Institution on highway construction cost drivers, August 2024.

13.  Empire State Building construction history from The B1M and historical accounts.

14.  PBS NewsHour on gas tax history and infrastructure funding challenges.

15.  Additional sources drawn from FHWA data, GAO reports, and state DOT analyses referenced in search results.

Bibliography for Further Reading and Research

•  Brent Spence Bridge Corridor Project Official Site. https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/timeline/

•  WCPO Cincinnati. “What we know about the Brent Spence Companion Bridge cost and timeline.” March 2026.

•  Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. “Gov. Beshear: Brent Spence Bridge Companion Bridge Set To Begin.” March 16, 2026.

•  ENR. “Path Cleared for $4.5B Brent Spence Bridge Project as Costs Mount.” April 10, 2026.

•  Wikipedia. “Brent Spence Bridge” and “Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge” entries (accessed 2026).

•  Mackinac Bridge Authority. “History of the Bridge.” https://www.mackinacbridge.org/history/

•  Cato Institute. “Why Does American Infrastructure Cost More and Take Longer?” March 25, 2021.

•  Pew Charitable Trusts. “5 Factors Inflate Costs of Maintaining Roads and Bridges.” April 8, 2026.

•  Brookings Institution. “Why does building and maintaining highways in the US cost so much?” August 5, 2024.

•  The B1M. “Why can’t we build as fast as the Empire State Building?” February 14, 2023.

•  PBS NewsHour. “The gas tax’s tortured history shows how hard it is to fund new infrastructure.” June 22, 2021.

•  Ohio River Bridges / RiverLink. Project history and tolling details. https://riverlink.com/about/history/

•  Federal Highway Administration. National Highway Construction Cost Index data.

•  U.S. Government Accountability Office. Reports on environmental review timelines for transportation projects.

•  Additional economic analyses from Statecraft.pub and Practical Engineering on infrastructure cost overruns.

•  Historical texts on 1930s skyscraper construction and 1950s interstate-era projects for comparative context.

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 New Mob is No Different than the Old Mob: The bigger the government, the more mobsters there are to exploit it

Organized crime never went away; it just moved into the globalist movement. The old mobsters like Moe Dalitz from Cleveland and Screw Andrews from Cincinnati are now Larry Fink, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerburg. When people get a lot of money and use it to buy our government, it’s all the same game of corruption.  What we have witnessed with the advent of technology is that the lazy, the corrupt, the malicious, and outright evil people of the world still rally together to use mass to exploit easy living for themselves through crime and jeopardy.  Just as during western expansion, Jesse James and the gang would gather with force to rob a bank or hold up a train and steal the wealth from the inhabitants.  Mobsters always sought ways to profit off sin to exploit an endeavor, and what we see happening now globally is no different.  Technology and travel allowed them to do so on larger scales, along with centralized banking.  In other words, the bigger the government and the more organized it is, the more tempting the target is to exploit to acquire wealth as quickly as possible.  So, of course, governments would be targets for mobster activities.  Why would you hold up victims on a train when you can use the power of the government to do it for you?  All you have to do is control the government, and that is the easy part because there are always whores of some kind looking for an easy buck.  Living in Cincinnati, I have had a front-row seat to some of this mobster behavior.  Some of the biggest mobsters of their time spent a lot of time in Cincinnati and Newport, Kentucky, because it was such a centralized hub within the country.  Like anywhere where there is a lot of money; of course, organized crime elements would grow to exploit it as much as possible, which they did. 

I think it was very fortunate that I grew up the way I did.  I have always had a bold personality, and there was never a part of my life where I faced some ramifications for having it.  Instead, I have lived a vibrant life full of massive experiences.  And when danger and dollars were put before me to see if I dared take them, I was always yearning for the opportunities that came with both.  Not so good for the crime, and of course, that caused rifts that led to violence.  Which I was always perfectly fine with.  I enjoyed it.  If I could be said to have an addiction of some kind, it would be danger and it took me many years to find good ways to satisfy that part of my nature.  It’s a topic that came up in a conversation I had where someone asked me how many times I have had a gun pulled on me because they expected the answer to be zero.  Instead, I had to think about it and realized I couldn’t count them all.  It’s not like it was every day, but it was so often that I couldn’t think of them all, even after several days.  Whenever I came up with a number over twenty, I thought of new times.  And for me, it was never a regrettable experience but an excellent opportunity that made my life better as a result.  So, I don’t look back on those experiences with apprehension, but conquerable moments that made me better.  I learned firsthand that mobsters were not as brutal or scary as portrayed in the movies. Instead, at their core, they relied on group affiliation to fill in insecurities in their public lives that led to easy money because they were essentially lazy.  Their only power was fear and the ability to manipulate other people with even less courage than they had.  People sell themselves to the “take” way too easily, and often.   

Naturally, as our world grew smaller with technology and transportation, those types of people sought to exploit more people easily with a centralized government.  The old mob guys, and I met several of them in Cincinnati, mainly when I worked as a busboy at the Mike Fink restaurant on the Ohio River, was no different from the billionaires and manipulators of the world today, such as Larry Fink, Bill Gates, and Klause Schwab.  People who met Moe Dalitz from the Cleveland Four would think of him as a very charitable person involved in many front groups that everyone would recognize.  He was a trendy guy who would essentially become Mr. Las Vegas.  But he was still a thug, just as Larry Fink of BlackRock is today.  They run front organizations that give them the appearance of legitimacy.  But they made their money off the crimes of their mobster behavior, organized crime.  The activity of washing money through Ukraine by starting wars and profiting off the misery would classify as a classic mobster endeavor.  The only reason they used to be regional is that the technology and transportation at the time kept them from getting too far from a central location.  Back in the period known as the golden age of mob behavior, from the 1920s through the 1960s, planes were more challenging to get around the earth as fast as they can today, and cars were big and slow.  There weren’t highways like we have these days where you can be in another state within five hours of traveling all day, seven days a week.  Now, mobster types can hide in the mountains of Davos with all the other international gangs, such as the Khazarian Mafia, the Knights of Malta, The Jesuits, and the World Economic Forum.  Because of technology, those people have found each other easier and aligned for their crimes against humanity, which is in their nature to do.  I only mentioned my experience because I know better and understand the thinking that attracts those people to do what they do.  And why they point guns at people, hoping to use force to gain compliance. 

I also learned that the only thing those people understand is force.  They don’t respect sympathy or pleading.  They only understand force.  I’m still around to tell some of these stories because of force.  The secret to understanding this realization is that they join mobs for the same reason people join labor unions: they hope to collectively bargain for an easier life that pays them the most.  They want as much money as possible by doing as little as they can get by earning it.  And joining a mob, whether the racket is hustling girls, gambling, or bootlegging, or whether it’s drug trafficking, stealing tax money through front group organizations that get sizable grants from the government, and the kickbacks flow into the pockets of those granting the money.  Wherever there is a lot of money and access, there will be some organized crime element to exploit it and the people in the way of getting it. And there is no appeal to their “better” natures.  They will do anything to acquire easy money.  And demonizing cash doesn’t stop the behavior.  Only force manages such thugs.  There is no way to use bigger government to protect yourself from their attempts at organized crime, which Big Pharma is only a modern version of the kind of businesses that Moe Dalitz used to run.  The bigger and more powerful government only makes it easier for more mob types to exploit innocent people for their desires to gain power and money as quickly as possible, which is at the core of everything BlackRock does in the world from a money management standpoint.  And they are no different than what the old mobsters of memory did every day.  The only difference is that technology allows them to do it on a bigger scale, and our understanding of those scales is just catching up to reality.   

Rich Hoffman

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

It Would Be Easy to Defend Trump on this Third Indictment: There’s only one horse in this race, all the others are still in the barn

I’d be happy to volunteer for President Trump’s legal team to argue this third indictment.  I could do it in front of an entirely Democrat jury and make a successful case for a not-guilty verdict.  Without even reading the specifics of the Jack Smith prosecution of President Trump and any connection to the January 6th insurrection dialogue that the perpetrators of election fraud to put Joe Biden in the White House instead, is clearly a free speech case that will fall apart quickly in a courtroom.  Just as most of these Democrat prosecutions will if they ever see a courtroom.  I don’t think this one will be from Jack Smith.  My opinion about it is that it’s pure desperation from a bunch of people who know they were not elected into their positions and that their power and authority are completely phony.  Trump was elected legitimately, and these government prosecutors have been involved in a political coup that utilized with undeserved power acquired through theft and manipulation.  And this is getting way too predictable.  We all knew they were going to try to do this because they have no other way of trying to stop Trump from being elected.  And again, Joe Biden was going to get destroyed by this upcoming IRS whistleblower, so to defer attention in the media, they did what Democrats always do; they tried to make the story about someone else.  So, they played this card hoping to shake attention away from Old Man Biden, who is the real guilty party.  Yeah, I would happily defend Trump in court on this one.  Any lawyer should be able to if it even sees a court date.  I do not agree with many of the theories that are out there that are in love with the horse race of politics.  This abuse of power by the Biden Department of Justice is a short-lived threat. 

In the end, there is only one horse in this political horse race; all the other horses are still in the barn.  It doesn’t matter if it’s the Republicans or the Democrats, Trump is the only horse on the track, and there isn’t anything anybody can do to change that.  This is not China, as much as many of the Administrative State people looking for perpetual security with government jobs would like to think.  These personal abuse legal cases motivated purely out of self-preservation of the bad guys aren’t going to last long.  All it does is give people who like to talk about the horse races of politics something to discuss.  When it comes to the actual race, Trump has already won.  Many talking about that horse race think that the Democrats have this all figured out and are using these indictments to make Trump the Republican nominee because it’s making him so popular.  And that Democrats want to run against Trump as opposed to all the other options.  And that Trump will be killed in the general as all the suburban moms and soft-shelled tacos will drift back to Biden, and the long string of corruption associated with the Democrat Party can then continue.  News flash, the Democrats aren’t that smart.  They don’t have that kind of horsepower. 

Clay and Buck, on the new show that has replaced Rush Limbaugh, is nowhere near as insightful as Rush was.  Rush would understand what’s going on, but those guys and their Fox contracts keep them from seeing reality.  Or maybe they just miss it because they are too conventional.  I heard them utter that theory about Democrats, and it’s clear that they are swinging and missing.  Trump isn’t in trouble.  There could be 100s of indictments by this corrupt government, which won’t change one thing about this upcoming election.  People are mad; they want revenge for the way Trump was ripped off during his first term and had his presidency taken from him in an all too obvious coup, ran by our own government with Covid, that sought to destroy our entire economy just to preserve the losers in the Swamp.  And if Trump isn’t on a ticket where they try to strip him off the ballot in all 50 states with some made-up technicality, then there will be a lot of unleashed anger that the Democrats are all too aware of.  They’ve looked at the numbers, and they know they cheated and by how much.  And they know that the American people do not support the Democrat platform.  And now we are at another election, and more people believe that the 2020 election was stolen than during that first year.  The movement has only grown, and Democrats are terrified of those eventual ramifications.  They hope they can run out the clock by keeping Trump out of the election because they know they won’t be able to beat him in the general.  Because Joe Biden never had 81 million votes.  They rigged the election the old-fashioned way, the way elections have been rigged in China, Venezuela, Russia, and all over Central and South America and Europe.  They cheated on so many fronts that it’s almost ridiculous at this point, and people have seen it for themselves.  The Democrats who played along have some tough days coming, with or without Trump.  And they know it.

I watched a recent Fox News interview with Trump and Bret Baier carefully, as it was important for the reporter to remind President Trump that he did not win the election.  That was coming from Fox News and Rupert Murdoch’s position as a media owner from a foreign country.  That wasn’t a reporter letting the facts take him wherever they went.  That was an activist trying to preserve the Beltway institution from an outside challenger who clearly won, but that victory was canceled by nefarious means, such as judges who refused to review the case for the implications it would have caused to the institution of government itself.  And the reminder that all 50 states had a recount and that Trump still lost because they counted all the same fake ballots that were put in place by Facebook, and a lot of FBI activism to finish off the coup they started while Trump was in office, revenge for firing Jim Comey and not bending the knee to the fourth branch of government, which was never supposed to exist in the first place.  I’ve talked to Frank LaRose, our Secretary of State in Ohio, about this election fraud issue.  Everyone knows what states like Pennsylvania and Michigan did to stuff ballots.  Frank did well in Ohio, so there was a good margin for Trump.  But other states had more open laws made more open by early voting and Covid mail-in ballots.  And the cheating got so out of hand that it took 81 million votes to beat the actual real number that Trump received, which was more than any other president in the history of America.  The suburban moms did not stay home the way Fox News said they did.  Trump had a frightening number of votes even after all that was thrown at him.  And his support has increased; it hasn’t gone down.  That’s why they are doing what they are now with the Department of Justice and the dummy Jack Smith, who is willing to make himself look like a fool to save his friends in government who have built quite a criminal empire out of their positions.  But in the end, the Bill of Rights matters, and these ridiculous charges are going to be exploited easily.  

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business