Early voting is already underway in Ohio, and from what I am hearing on the ground, shenanigans and whisper campaigns are moving through the lines and the mailboxes. I just got off an important call with someone who is a major mover and shaker in Ohio politics—he is everywhere, he sees everything, and he does not want his name attached to this. What he told me matches what I have been picking up from the ground troops in Butler County, Warren County, and Hamilton County. Democrats know voter ID is popular. They know they cannot openly oppose it without looking like they want loose rules. So they are trying to play it both ways: smile and nod that identification is fine while quietly telling confused voters not to bother with Issue 3, or to vote no because “it is already the law.” That is the classic whisper campaign, and it is active right now.¹
What Issue 3 Actually Does
Issue 3 is a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on the November 3, 2026 ballot. It would add a new Section 5 to Article V of the Ohio Constitution requiring voters to present an approved form of government-issued photo identification to vote in person. Acceptable documents match current law: an unexpired Ohio driver’s license or state ID card, a U.S. passport or passport card, a U.S. military ID, an Ohio National Guard ID, or a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ID. There is an allowance for an alternative verification method if someone has a sincere religious objection to being photographed. For non-in-person voting, it sets a minimum standard—photo ID or, if authorized by law, a signature plus one other unique identifier.²
Ohio already requires photo ID for in-person voting under House Bill 458, which Governor Mike DeWine signed in January 2023 and which took effect that April. Issue 3 does not invent a new requirement for Election Day. It constitutionalizes the existing one. A future legislature could not simply repeal or water it down with a simple majority vote. Changing it would require another constitutional amendment and a statewide vote. That is the entire point.³
Why Identification for Voting Is Not Extreme
I have had to use my passport and driver’s license for things far less important than choosing who runs the state. Cross an ocean for work or family and the authorities want to know who you are. Get a job, board a plane, cash a check, buy a beer, rent an apartment—identification is routine. Yet when it comes to the franchise that decides taxes, schools, and Ohio’s direction, some people treat the same basic requirement as an attack. Democrats have spent years arguing that requiring proof of identity suppresses votes. The practical reality is simpler: they have structural problems winning without loose rules, non-citizen voting risks, and the ability to litigate or legislate the standards downward later. If you already need a government-issued photo ID to drive to the polls, the idea that you should not need one to cast a ballot does not survive ordinary scrutiny.⁴
Leaving It to the Legislature Is Not Good Enough
The next General Assembly can change current law. That is why the old moderate Republican approach of “trust the process and the statutes” is not sufficient. For decades, we have watched election rules become battlefields of lawsuits, emergency orders, and administrative discretion. Ambiguous statutes get stretched. Provisional ballots, signature mismatches, and mail procedures create friction that favors the side with better lawyers and more patience. Putting the core identification requirement into the Constitution raises the bar permanently. It is not radical; it is the same logic that put other foundational rules into the document so they cannot be quietly reversed when political winds shift.⁵
The Whisper Campaigns and the Ground Game
The person who called me said the effort is particularly active in the southwest counties. Democrats know Issue 3 polls well—recent surveys have shown support in the 60 percent range. They cannot run a loud “vote no” campaign without looking like they oppose basic election security. Instead, they are working the lines and the early-vote sites with the quiet message that it is unnecessary, that you should vote for the candidates and skip the issue, or that a yes vote somehow hurts something else. That is deliberate confusion. I have seen this pattern before. When an idea is popular with ordinary people and inconvenient for the institutional left, the response is rarely a straight argument. It is noise, procedural objections, and selective silence.⁶
I am not claiming every Democrat is coordinating a formal operation. I am reporting what reliable sources on the ground are seeing in Butler, Warren, and Hamilton counties right now. Early voting numbers are already moving. Some of the same people who spent years expanding mail and early voting procedures now hope low-information voters will not notice Issue 3 or will treat it as optional. It is not optional if you want the requirement locked in.
The Rest of the Ballot
While you are there, the usual local priorities still apply. In the Lakota area, vote no on the school levy. Higher taxes on the same system that hasn’t delivered better results aren’t the answer. Vote for Republican candidates aligned with the direction Ohio has been moving. And make sure you vote yes on Issue 3. Whether you vote early in person, by mail with proper identification, or on Election Day, the identification question protects the integrity of all the others going forward.
Why This Matters Beyond One Election
Democrats have treated election administration as a growth industry for three decades. The more moving parts—provisional ballots, extended cure periods, expansive mail rules—the more opportunities for friction that can be litigated or exploited. Ohio tightened the rules in 2023 precisely because the previous non-photo options and longer windows created unnecessary risk. Constitutionalizing the photo ID standard is the logical next step so that a temporary legislative majority cannot unwind it. I do not want the next set of “reformers” treating basic identity verification as optional again.⁷
Show up. Vote yes on Issue 3. Do not let the whisper campaign talk you out of the one item on the ballot that makes it harder for the usual games to continue. The constitution is where permanent rules belong. Everything else is negotiable. This should not be.
Bibliography / Further Reading
• Ballotpedia, “Ohio Issue 3, Require Voter Identification Amendment (2026)” and related 2026 ballot measure pages.
• Official Ohio Secretary of State ballot language, explanation, and arguments for and against Issue 3.
• Substitute Senate Joint Resolution 10 (2026) and the enrolled text of the proposed Section 5 of Article V.
• House Bill 458 (134th General Assembly), signed January 6, 2023; effective April 7, 2023—text, fiscal notes, and contemporary news coverage of the photo ID requirement.
• Suffolk University/USA TODAY Network Ohio poll (September 23–27, 2026) showing approximately 61 percent support for Issue 3.
• Ohio Republican Party materials supporting Issue 3 and contemporaneous statements from legislative sponsors (Theresa Gavarone, Jane Timken, and others).
• Analyses of photo ID laws and election administration from the Heritage Foundation, Honest Elections Project, and academic reviews of HB 458’s implementation.
• Historical context on Ohio election law changes, including drop-box limits, provisional ballot cure periods, and absentee deadlines under HB 458.
• Broader works on election integrity and administrative discretion (for example, studies of non-citizen voting risks, signature verification error rates, and the political economy of mail balloting).
• Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead—useful for the larger contrast between systems that reward clarity and responsibility versus those that thrive on ambiguity and managed outcomes.
Rich Hoffman is an aerospace executive, writer, and host of the Overman Warrior Podcast / Executive Warrior Podcast, based in the Cincinnati / Butler County area of Ohio. He has written extensively on local and national politics, individual responsibility, and the cultural and institutional costs of managerial governance.
Footnotes
¹ Ground reports from Butler, Warren, and Hamilton counties during early voting (began October 6, 2026) describing selective messaging on Issue 3; consistent with the low-profile nature of organized “no” efforts noted in contemporaneous coverage.
² Ballotpedia, “Ohio Issue 3, Require Voter Identification Amendment (2026)”; official ballot language certified by the Ohio Ballot Board (August 2026); Signal Ohio and other explainers confirming the measure enshrines existing in-person photo ID rules and sets minimum standards for other methods.
³ House Bill 458 (signed January 6, 2023; effective April 7, 2023) established the current photo ID requirement for in-person voting and related absentee procedures. Issue 3 constitutionalizes the core in-person standard so that future statutory repeal would require another statewide vote.
⁴ Everyday identification requirements (driver’s license, passport, employment, travel) are routinely accepted; the same logic applies to the franchise. Ohio already issues free state IDs to those who need them.
⁵ Legislative referral via SJR 10 (passed Senate 22–9 on June 3, 2026; House 62–30 on June 10, 2026). Constitutional placement raises the amendment threshold compared with ordinary statute.
⁶ Suffolk University/USA TODAY Network poll (September 23–27, 2026) of 500 likely voters: 61 percent support, 31 percent oppose, 8 percent undecided. Coverage notes limited high-profile Democratic opposition and the measure’s popularity.
⁷ Contemporary reporting on HB 458 (AP, Cleveland.com, Democracy Docket, ACLU of Ohio analyses) details the shift from non-photo options to photo ID, shortened cure and return windows, and single drop-box limits. These changes reduced administrative discretion; constitutional entrenchment continues in that direction.
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.
I have employed hundreds of women over the years—strong, competent, professional women who know how to get things done. I have been married for 38 years. I raised two daughters. My wife and I made a deliberate choice when we decided to have a family: I would handle the outside, she would handle the inside. That was not a limitation we placed on her. It was a division of labor we chose so that someone was always guarding the household. When relatives and others ridiculed her for staying home in the 1970s and 1980s, while feminism was telling women that staying home meant they were failing, we ignored them. Someone has to lock the door. You cannot have both adults out on the perimeter and leave the house unprotected. I have watched what happens when that protection is removed, and the results are not an advance.
The Promise Was Independence. The Result Was a Transfer of Influence
The public story was that women needed to leave the home so they could be free, earn their own money, and escape dependence on a husband. In practice, a large share of what followed was a transfer of daily influence from the husband and the household to a boss, an HR department, and a set of institutional rules that the family did not write. My wife has said many times that she could have done other things. We both could have. We chose not to because the alternative—two incomes at the cost of no one consistently present for the children—did not look like an improvement once the children arrived. The social pressure to treat that choice as backward was intense. It was not coming only from individual feminists. It aligned with longer-running efforts, visible in the science fiction of the 1950s and 1960s and in the practical politics of Fabian socialists and various Marxist currents, to weaken the independent household so that other institutions could shape the next generation more directly.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World described a society in which reproduction is industrialized, children are conditioned by the state rather than raised by parents, and family bonds are treated as obstacles to stability. That was fiction. The policy and cultural pressure that followed in the real world was not. When both parents are required to work full-time to maintain a standard of living that one income once supported, the practical result is that children spend more hours under institutional supervision and less under the direct authority of their parents. That is not an accident of economics alone. Wage structures, tax treatment of households, housing costs, and cultural messaging all moved in the same direction for decades. Pew Research has documented the shift: the share of married or cohabiting couples with children in which both parents work full time rose substantially from the mid-1970s onward, while the male-breadwinner arrangement declined. The numbers describe what happened. They do not prove it was required for women’s well-being or for children’s.
What I Saw in the Experimental Neighborhoods
I grew up around some of the early versions of this experiment. There were planned communities in which both parents worked corporate jobs, the adults treated the neighborhood as an extended social and sexual network, and the children were largely unsupervised during the day. Key parties—where couples put car keys in a bowl and paired off with whoever’s keys they drew—were presented at the time as sophisticated “community relations.” The adults drank, used drugs, and told themselves they were progressive because no one was judging. The children in those neighborhoods were having sex with each other by early adolescence and experimenting with drugs. When I tried to keep some of them from going further down that path, I was treated as the problem by at least one of the mothers. She was an early feminist. She disliked me on principle. Her son had serious problems. I was one of the few consistent restraints in his life. That did not make me popular with her.
Those neighborhoods were not the majority experience, but they were not isolated either. Contemporary accounts from the early 1970s documented organized swinging among otherwise conventional suburban couples. The adults believed they were escaping repression. The children absorbed the practical lesson that adult supervision was intermittent and that sexual boundaries were negotiable. The same pattern appears, in updated form, among some of the young people I work with now. Teenagers talk openly about same-sex relationships as ordinary Friday-night plans. When I was their age, that would have produced immediate and serious consequences inside most families. Today it is treated as unremarkable because the institutional messaging—from schools, media, and corporate HR—has spent years defining dissent as bigotry. The kids did not invent the permission structure. They inherited it.
Corporate Rules, Dual Incomes, and the Compliant “Rebel”
The corporate environment that expanded alongside the dual-income norm added its own layer. Once both adults need the paycheck, the employer’s rules become household rules. Flag a pickup truck for a Bengals game, spend money on tailgating gear that costs more than some people’s weekly groceries, and still accept that you will not challenge the HR manual on sex, gender, or hours. The job funds the jerseys and the grill. It also funds the expectation that you will not treat the traditional division of labor as legitimate. Men who say they want to carry the full financial load so their wives can stay home are told they are exhibiting toxic masculinity. Women who prefer the arrangement are told they are letting down the sisterhood. Both messages treat the household’s own priorities as subordinate to an external ideological standard.
I have watched young people describe arrangements in which one spouse wants to pursue a same-sex relationship on the side while remaining married, and both parties treat the request as reasonable because “progressive society” has normalized it. That is not rebellion. It is compliance with the institutional script. The script has been consistent for decades: weaken the exclusive claims of marriage and parenthood, increase the hours children spend outside the home, and redefine resistance to the new norms as the actual threat. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy in the early 2000s was marketed as light fashion entertainment. It also functioned as desensitization. The same process had already occurred with the earlier campaign against the housewife. Ridicule the arrangement, associate it with backwardness, and present the alternative as both inevitable and morally superior. Enough people accepted the framing that the practical consequences—higher fixed costs for families, thinner parental presence, and greater institutional influence over children—became the default.
Family Competence Is the Prerequisite for Everything Else
If a household cannot maintain a coherent division of labor, protect its children from early sexualization and chemical experimentation, and transmit a workable standard of behavior, it will not produce adults who can maintain those things at larger scale. The observation is practical, not sentimental. I have spent enough time with both the earlier experimental neighborhoods and the current cohort of confused teenagers to see the continuity. The adults who left the doors unlocked because they wanted to be seen as progressive produced children who treated boundaries as optional. The institutions that later codified those optional boundaries as official policy simply scaled the same pattern. Strong families are not a guarantee of good government. The absence of them makes competent self-government harder, because the habits of responsibility, delayed gratification, and defense of one’s own were never practiced at the smallest unit.
None of this requires claiming that every woman must stay home or that every dual-income arrangement fails. It requires noticing that the campaign to treat the traditional household as a problem to be solved aligned with other efforts to reduce the independence of the family relative to employers, schools, and the state. The science-fiction writers who described state-controlled reproduction and conditioning were extrapolating from tendencies already visible in their own time. The tendencies continued. The results are visible in the young people who treat conformity to the new sexual and family norms as an act of independence, and in the adults who still believe that two full-time jobs plus institutional childcare was the liberation that was promised. It was a transfer. The household lost authority. Other institutions gained it. That was the point.
Footnotes
1. Pew Research Center analysis of Census data shows the rise in dual full-time working parents among coupleswith children and the corresponding decline in male-breadwinner households from the 1970s to the present.
2. Aldous Huxley’sBrave New World(1932) depicts industrialized reproduction, stateconditioning of children, and the elimination of strong family bonds as mechanisms of social control.
3. Contemporary reporting and academic accounts from the early 1970s documented organized swingingamong suburban married couples, often framed by participants as an escape from conventional restraints.
Bibliography for Further Reading
• Aldous Huxley,Brave New World(1932).
• Pew Research Center, reports on parentalwork arrangements and family structure changes (various years, including recent analyses of dual-earner households).
• Stephanie Coontz,The Way We Never Were(on mid-century family norms and later revisions).
• Arlie Russell Hochschild,The Second Shift(on the practical division of labor after mothers entered paid work in large numbers).
• Contemporary accounts of 1970s swinging subcultures (Gilbert Bartell,Group Sex; period journalism inThe New York Timesand elsewhere).
• VictorDavis Hanson, essays on cultural continuity, family formation, and the consequences of institutional substitution for parental authority.
• Historical data on married women’s labor-force participation, 1940–2000 (Census-based summaries).
The pattern is not subtle once you have watched it operate at close range for decades. Have a good day. See you later.
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.
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 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.
It was good to see Trump have an event for Jon Husted at Vandalia, Ohio. More than ever, watching that event convinced me that Senator Jon Husted is the right person for Ohio. He’s a solid, practical guy who understands the state. I haven’t spent much time publicly defending him this cycle because Sherrod Brown’s return has been such a predictable mess, but I don’t think Brown has a real chance. Husted has been positioned to win this all along.
The Vandalia Rally and Why Husted Matters
Seeing Husted on stage in Vandalia with the crowd was good. Trump’s people will show up and vote; this isn’t a race to take for granted, but I expect Husted to win by four or five points once the numbers settle. Ohio isn’t as close as some national media outlets want it to be, and one of the seats Democrats are counting on flipping won’t go their way.
Husted is a top-tier senator for the job. He has been a proud business-oriented leader for years. When critics knock him on the FirstEnergy / House Bill 6 situation, the corruption accusations miss the point. That fight was about regulatory compliance, keeping nuclear capacity online, and listening to major employers in the state that bad policy was squeezing. I don’t blame him for listening to companies that employ many Ohioans. If you’re a senator or governor, part of the job is making yourself available to the people who keep the lights on and the payrolls running.
COVID Calls, Amusement Parks, and Listening to Employers
I was on several conference calls with Husted and other state officials during the COVID period. Senators, state representatives, and businesspeople tried to figure out how to keep Ohio from being locked down into oblivion. Shutdown pressure was intense, and the Republican response often fell between public-health theater and the reality of what a prolonged closure would do to the economy.
Amusement parks were a clear example. Kings Island and others were operating under rules that made little sense—social distancing on rides, capacity limits that ignored how the industry actually works, and the threat of penalties for trying to open. Those places are major employers and economic drivers. Husted and others in the administration had to navigate that mess while the parks were being squeezed. A senator or governor should be available when big employers in the state have problems. Husted has been willing to do that. I’ve seen it firsthand.
Energy policy is the same story. Nuclear, coal, and fossil fuels still run the grid. When policy turns those assets into liabilities, companies push back. Listening to them is not corruption; it’s basic competence. Good governance turns a liability into a manageable asset when the alternative is higher rates and less reliability.
A Buccaneers Fan’s Opinion About Jon Gruden’s Support of Jon Husted, a Former Teammate
I’m a Buccaneers fan, so the other Jon on that stage was a bonus. Jon Gruden won a Super Bowl with a strong defense and a quarterback who was good enough to win but not a superstar. That 2002 team was special. I’ve never gotten over how good that unit was. Gruden got knocked out of the coaching ranks over the email scandal involving comments about cheerleaders and other material that got leaked. It was a stupid episode that cost him the Raiders job and led to his removal from the Buccaneers Ring of Honor for a while.
The organization has brought him back in some capacity—broadcast work with Ronde Barber and a restored place in the franchise’s history. I’m happy about that. He flew from the Dayton area back to Tampa after the event to handle his obligations there. It was good to see him on stage talking about Husted and the season. Gruden is a leader type; he knows how to talk to people and get them moving. The Bucs are having a rough year right now, and much of that traces back to chemistry issues around Baker Mayfield. Mayfield is not Tom Brady. Brady knew how to run a locker room and get everyone pulling in the same direction. When a quarterback starts complaining about money and the team feels like he’s putting himself first, the chemistry breaks. The coaching staff has to deal with it, and the results show. Mayfield got hurt recently and wasn’t available for this week’s game, which only makes the situation harder.
The Senate Race and the Path Forward
Brown’s campaign is a disaster because it relies on the same tired playbook that lost him the seat two years ago. Husted has the record of actually governing in Ohio—secretary of state, lieutenant governor, and now senator—and the connections to the state’s employers. The people who showed up in Vandalia understand that. Trump’s voters are not staying home. The margin will not be razor-thin.
I’m proud of the affiliation. Watching Husted on stage with that crowd, and seeing Gruden there as well, was a good day. These are the kinds of practical leaders who keep a state functional instead of turning every issue into a purity test. And they have been through the pressure cooker, so we know what to expect. FirstEnergy, or any involvement in it, is the job of someone representing the governor’s office and a basic obligation. And the failures at FirstEnergy were typical leftist terrorism: destroy companies with policy. Democrats have not been in power, so they have no track record to criticize. Only that Sharrod Brown has been in government for many years and has advanced socialist causes during all those terms. It should be noted that when he was running against Bernie Moreno, the polling was tracking much like it is in this 2026 race. So that should tell you everything.
Footnotes
1. Husted was appointed to the Senate in January 2025 to fill the vacancy created by JD Vance’s elevation to vice president and is running in the 2026 special election against Sherrod Brown.
2. Brown lost his previous seat to Bernie Moreno in 2024.
3. House Bill 6 provided subsidies for nuclear and certain coal plants; FirstEnergy paid substantial penalties in related settlements, but Husted has not been charged with wrongdoing.
4. Gruden coached the Buccaneers to Super Bowl XXXVII in 2003 with a defense-led roster.
5. Buccaneers 2026 record and Mayfield’s thumb injury status as of mid-October.
6. Gruden and Husted were University of Dayton teammates in 1985; Gruden appeared at the October 3, 2026 Vandalia rally.
Bibliography for Further Reading
• Ballotpedia and official campaign materials on the 2026 Ohio Senate special election (Husted vs. Brown).
• Reporting on the FirstEnergy / HB 6 matter from the Cincinnati Enquirer, Associated Press, and FactCheck.org summaries of Husted’s role and testimony.
• Tampa Bay Buccaneers historical accounts of the 2002 Super Bowl team and Gruden’s tenure (2002–2008).
• Contemporary coverage of the October 3, 2026 Vandalia rally (local Dayton outlets and national wires).
• Buccaneers 2026 season reports on quarterback play, coaching, and roster decisions.
• Broader context on Ohio energy policy and nuclear capacity from state utility commission records and utility industry analyses.
This is the kind of grounded, practical leadership Ohio needs.
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.
I watched the verdict come in and felt the same satisfaction I get when a jury cuts through lawyer fog in under half an hour. Donald “D.J.” Byrnes, the progressive Substack writer who brands himself The Rooster, was found guilty on October 9, 2026, of telecommunications harassment, a first-degree misdemeanor, for texting Ohio Sen. Jerry Cirino an explicit, digitally altered image of Shrek holding his genitals (described in the arrest affidavit as fully nude with an exposed and erect humanlike penis engaged in masturbation) along with taunting messages after Cirino dropped out of the Senate president race.
The jury in Willoughby Municipal Court deliberated less than 30 minutes. Visiting Judge Michael Cicconetti fined him $200 plus court costs, gave no jail time, and verbally instructed him not to contact Cirino, warning that further contact would have consequences. Byrnes has 30 days to appeal. His lawyers already plan to argue the statute is overbroad and sweeps in protected political speech.
I have watched him operate at the Statehouse. This outcome tracks what I have seen.
What Actually Happened
On May 6, 2026, after Cirino withdrew from the contest to lead the Ohio Senate, Byrnes sent the Shrek image and texts that included “Good to see you finally made your humiliation public, Young Mussolini! THE PATRIOTS CAUCUS sends its regards!!!!!!!!!!” Cirino replied that he didn’t know who it was but was sure the sender was a moron. Cirino then contacted Kirtland police. Byrnes was arrested June 1 at the Ohio Statehouse by the Highway Patrol and spent roughly 23 hours in jail before release.
Prosecutors argued the unsolicited explicit image was sent with the purpose to harass, intimidate, or abuse under Ohio Revised Code § 2917.21. That is the heart of the statute: a telecommunication made knowingly with that purpose. The defense claimed political commentary and free speech—satire of a public official after Cirino had “exposed himself” politically by dropping out. The judge barred full First Amendment jury instructions, and the panel rejected the idea that this was protected political speech rather than harassment. Cirino later said it was not a free speech issue; it was a harassment statute he believed Byrnes violated.
I saw the free-speech defense collapse for the reason it always does in these cases when the conduct is aimed at one person and is unwanted and pornographic. Byrnes’ politics were never the point. Repeated, targeted, intimidating contact was.
The Haunted House Cut Both Ways
Byrnes treats free speech like a haunted house. He walks in knowing the monsters aren’t allowed to touch him, then slaps them upside the head, corners them, and pushes them, because the rules protect his speech while limiting their response. That is not how the world works. Free speech is not a shield for slapping people and then hiding behind the First Amendment when they use the law.
I have watched him at the Statehouse in shorts and a hoodie, treating the rotunda like a street corner. The place of law deserves a coat, jacket, and tie whether you like the people running it or not. He corners politicians outside bathrooms, pins them down, and pushes. Multiple representatives have described the same pattern to me. He tries to intimidate, then claims the high ground of free speech when they push back. The jury saw the Shrek text the same way: an intimidating act, not commentary. Bugs Bunny or Road Runner would have been the same if the intent was harassment. He wanted the fight more than the outcome.
His own audience of roughly 100,000 social followers and 15,000 Substack subscribers documents everything. That visibility made the single text hard to spin as pure protected speech once it landed in front of ordinary people. Lawyers can throw arguments at a wall. Regular people sat down for half an hour and said they knew what this was. I trust that jury more than the politicians or the lawyers who tried to frame it as edgy political speech.
Who He Is and Who Follows Him
I view Byrnes as a radical leftist operating with Marxist instincts aimed at undermining the Ohio legislature. His following looks like the street crowd that smokes a lot of dope and treats politics as performance. You have to be under some influence to consider voting for Amy Acton; his audience is in a different political lane from mine, but the disrespect is the same. He has a history of confrontational antics, including pranks and coverage aimed at figures like Vivek Ramaswamy. That pattern of planting innuendo and disruption matches what I have seen.
I cover the Statehouse too. The difference is method. I confront people with facts and truth they cannot easily defend. I do not send pornographic images of cartoon characters to a sitting senator to disrupt him as a person. Political commentary is one thing. Targeted harassment dressed up as free speech is another. The statute treats it that way, and the jury agreed.
What Senators and Politicians Should Do Now
This case is not only about free speech. It is about conduct and consequences. The $200 fine is almost incidental. The real damage is the residual trust, or benefit of the doubt, anyone still extends to him. He showed himself with Cirino. He has shown the same pattern elsewhere. Senators and staff do not have to cooperate with him.
They can completely ostracize him. Do not speak to him on the side. Do not give him interviews, access, or the polite benefit of the doubt that he has abused. He can still walk the Statehouse in his hoodie and shorts and write his articles. No one can stop that. But they don’t have to make his job easy by staying compliant with his intimidation. The best message is isolation: let him operate on his own little island with the audience that already agrees with him.
That is the practical, proactive step this guilty verdict supports. It erodes the idea that everyone has to tolerate his style as edgy commentary. Once the jury called the conduct harassment, the institutional response should match. Cut off the cooperation. Do not feed the performance. His audience will try to turn the appeal into martyrdom for the hippie-left crowd that protests Columbus Day and treats every conviction as proof the system is illegitimate. A long legal slug gets boring fast for that crowd. Either way, the Statehouse does not have to play along.
Where It Goes From Here
Byrnes will appeal. His lawyers will argue the statute is overbroad and that the judge improperly limited the free-speech defense, citing cases on political satire of public officials. If they win, the conviction is tossed. If they lose, it stands, and the fine is paid. The no-contact warning remains a practical barrier either way. He has already confirmed the appeal path.
I am glad the jury found him guilty. He is guilty of the conduct charged. If you do not want the trouble, do not send pictures of Shrek’s genitals to important politicians to harass them into voting or reacting the way you want. That is not political speech. It is an act. The haunted house cuts both ways, and this time the law hit back. The system worked the way it is supposed to: he used the rules, the rules used him, and ordinary people settled it in half an hour.
Politicians who have dealt with him should now treat the verdict as permission to stop cooperating. Isolation is the real sanction that fits the pattern I have watched for years. He can keep writing. They do not have to keep making it easy for him.
Footnotes
1. Multiple reports (Akron Beacon Journal, Ohio Capital Journal, Signal Ohio, The Verge) confirm the October 9, 2026 guilty verdict, <30-minute deliberation, $200 fine, and no jail. Image described as explicit/nude Shrek holding genitals or masturbating.
2. Arrest details from Columbus Dispatch coverage of the June 1 Statehouse arrest and ~23 hours in custody.
3. Ohio Revised Code § 2917.21 defines telecommunications harassment to include communications made with the purpose to harass, intimidate, or abuse.
4. Axios and other coverage note that the judge limited the First Amendment defense and that Byrnes plans to appeal within 30 days.
5. Cirino’s post-verdict statements distinguish the case as harassment, not free speech.
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.
Young people keep asking me what the 1980s were like. I work with a lot of them—teens, early twenties—and the question comes up often enough that my answer has become almost automatic. We had Bruce Willis in the Die Hard films. We had Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator movies and Conan. Sylvester Stallone as Rambo. Clint Eastwood. Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon. Strong, competent, decisive men who handled problems with their hands and their will. They were not perfect. They were not soft. For a while, they were the dominant image of what a man could be when the situation required it.
That image has been replaced. The replacement did not arrive by accident.
The Question Waller Asked
One of my favorite books has always been The Bridges of Madison County by Robert James Waller. I liked most of what he wrote. The novel was a bestseller aimed largely at middle-aged women, and it worked for reasons that went beyond the romance between Francesca Johnson and Robert Kincaid. Buried in the story is a sharper observation about how societies decide what is fashionable, what is respectable, and what is forbidden to say. Who decides that a rock band dyes their hair purple? Who decides that certain observations about human nature become unspeakable? Waller understood that these decisions are not purely democratic or purely market-driven. They emerge from deeper pressures—psychological, commercial, and, I would argue, spiritual.
The book captured something real about the human condition across time. People want safety. They want to belong. They want the comfort of shared opinion. The market and the culture give them that comfort until something stronger interrupts it. The question of who sets the terms of that comfort is the same question that runs through the story of the Fall.
What Thirty-Eight Years and Raising Daughters Taught Me
I have been married thirty-eight years. I have raised daughters and now have granddaughters. I have known a great many women over that span of time. The pattern I have observed isn’t flattering to anyone, and it isn’t politically acceptable. Women, on average, appear more readily influenced by appeals to safety and security than men. This is not a moral judgment. It is an observation about wiring. From early in puberty, many women learn that sexual interest can be traded for protection, status, resources, and social approval. The transaction is ancient. It is also effective until the physical appeal that underwrites it declines. After that point, the strategy that once worked becomes a source of helplessness, because the adult life has been organized around it.
This makes women, again on average, useful gateways for influences that want to reshape men. If you can move the women, a large share of the men will follow—not because the men have been logically persuaded, but because they want access to the woman. I have watched this in progressive circles for decades. Plenty of young men join causes they do not particularly believe in because the events draw women. They are not there for the ideology. They are there for the possibility of contact. The ideology is the price of admission.
The Concert, the Horror Film, and the Old Pattern
At Mötley Crüe shows years ago, women in the crowd would remove their panties and throw them on stage. That is not an isolated curiosity. It fits a longer pattern of appeasement and display that appears in both rock culture and horror. Jason Voorhees, the character I have portrayed in seasonal work, is pure threat, I will have a lot more to say on this in November. The response to pure threat is often some form of offering or submission. The same impulse shows up in older religious and cultic settings where women were used as the point of contact with the powerful or the dangerous. The offer of sex, or the display of sexual availability, functions as a bid for safety or favor. The behavior is not new. Only the stage lighting has changed.
Eve, Not Adam
The biblical account in Genesis is blunt. The serpent addresses the woman. She takes the fruit. She gives it to the man. The man follows. The text does not present this as a one-time historical accident. It presents a recurring pattern of how disruption enters the created order. Women, oriented toward safety and the continuity of the household, are approached with promises that the existing order is inadequate or oppressive. Men, oriented toward the woman, follow. The Book of Job shows the same adversary, permitted to test and disrupt. The pattern is not confined to one chapter.
I have said for years that the modern women’s movement, in its more radical forms, continued that pattern. It redefined the household as a site of oppression, encouraged women to treat marriage and motherhood as optional or secondary, and treated male strength as suspect. The result was not liberation in the abstract. It weakened the family unit that had previously limited the reach of outside influence. Families that stay intact are harder to redirect. Families that fracture become more dependent on external authorities—cultural, institutional, or ideological.
Sex as the Lever
Most men will adjust their public opinions if the adjustment improves their chances with a particular woman. They will listen to complaints about “toxic masculinity” even when their private experience contradicts the complaint. They will adopt the language of the moment because the alternative is exclusion from the bed or from the social circle that contains the women they want. This is not sophisticated ideology. It is biology overriding calculation. The same woman who publicly rejects strong, competent men will, in private, often respond to the man who smells like work, carries tools, and can keep the house functioning. The plumber or contractor who shows up competent and unapologetic isn’t a feminist ideal. For many women, he is a practical, physical preference. The public statement and the private response are not the same.
Young women I encounter—teens through their thirties—have absorbed the message that masculine competence is a problem. They describe it as toxic. They prefer the softer presentation. The boys around them adapt. They become less assertive, less willing to lead, more willing to defer. The adaptation is rational in the short term if the goal is female approval. It is destructive if the goal is a culture that can defend itself or raise the next generation without constant external management.
Who Sets the Fashion
Waller’s question remains useful. Who decided that strong men became the problem? The decision did not emerge from a careful study of outcomes. It emerged from institutions and cultural producers that treat the existing order as the obstacle. Alphabet and its subsidiaries are not neutral platforms. They are progressive enterprises with a consistent preference for rewriting sex roles, family structure, and the authority of traditional sources. The preference is not hidden. It shows up in hiring, content moderation, and the stories that get amplified. The effect is to make the older masculine ideal unfashionable and the newer, more compliant ideal mandatory.
The mechanism is efficient. It influences women through appeals to safety, status, and belonging. The men follow for access. The pattern spreads without requiring every participant to understand the larger direction. Most of the young women repeating the language about toxic masculinity do not experience themselves as agents of a larger project. They experience themselves as seeking approval and avoiding risk. The larger project does not require their conscious agreement.
The Pattern Continues
The same sequence appears across the biblical record and across later history. An appeal is made to the woman. The woman moves. The man follows. The household weakens. External authority expands. The language changes—safety, equality, progress—but the sequence is recognizable. Non-human intelligence, operating through human institutions and desires, does not need to invent new tools when the old ones still function. Sex remains a reliable lever. The desire for security remains a reliable entry point. Men remain willing to trade long-term strength for short-term access.
Young people asking about the 1980s are asking, without quite knowing it, why the men of those films are no longer the model. The answer is not that those men failed. The answer is that a sustained effort has been made to make their qualities unfashionable. The effort works because it routes through women and because men will adjust to keep the women. That is not a conspiracy theory. It is an observable pattern, recorded early and repeated often.
The question Waller raised still stands. Who decides these things? Look at who benefits when strong men are redefined as the problem and compliant men are redefined as the solution. The pattern is old. The stage is new. The result is the same.
Footnotes
1. Genesis 3:1–6 records the serpent’s approach to the woman, her decision, and the man’s subsequent participation. The sequence is presented without apology or modern reframing.
2. Job 1–2 shows the adversary operating with limited permission to disrupt a household and test loyalty. The text treats the activity as ongoing rather than resolved.
3. Robert James Waller, The Bridges of Madison County (1992). The novel’s commercial success among women did not prevent it from containing sharper observations about safety, conformity, and the costs of certain choices. Waller explored related themes in other works, including Slow Waltz in Cedar Bend.
4. The public rejection of “toxic masculinity” alongside private preferences for competent, physically capable men is a recurring observation in both evolutionary psychology literature and ordinary experience. See, for example, the documented sex differences in mate preferences for resources and protection on one side and youth and fertility on the other.
5. Cultural producers and technology platforms have documented preferences in content and personnel. These preferences are not secret; they are visible in public statements, hiring patterns, and amplification choices.
6. The seasonal portrayal of Jason Voorhees is offered only as a cultural reference point for threat and response, not as a literal religious claim.
Bibliography for Further Reading
• Waller, Robert James. The Bridges of Madison County. Warner Books, 1992.
• Waller, Robert James. Slow Waltz in Cedar Bend. Warner Books, 1993.
• The Book of Genesis, especially chapters 2–3.
• The Book of Job.
• Buss, David M. The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating. Basic Books, revised edition.
• Sommers, Christina Hoff. Who Stole Feminism? How Women Have Betrayed Women. Simon & Schuster, 1994.
• Goldberg, Steven. The Inevitability of Patriarchy. William Morrow, 1973 (for an earlier, data-heavy treatment of sex differences in social organization).
• Farrell, Warren. The Myth of Male Power. Simon & Schuster, 1993.
• Critical treatments of second- and third-wave feminism that examine outcomes for family structure and male socialization.
• Works on spiritual conflict and non-human agency that treat the biblical record as a chronicle of recurring patterns rather than isolated ancient events. (Readers interested in the longer argument developed across my own writing will find related material in The Politics of Heaven.)
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.
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 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.
Yesterday morning, while most of America was still arguing about whether you are allowed to notice patterns, Flydubai Flight FZ1073 left Dubai for Tel Aviv with roughly 174 people on board, almost all of them Israeli. Somewhere over the route, the Omani co-pilot stabbed the Indian captain, Smit Machchhar, and the Boeing 737 MAX dropped about 17,000 feet in under two minutes. Passengers broke into the cockpit. One of them put the attacker in a chokehold. Off-duty pilots landed the airplane in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia. Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel Katz called it an attempted jihadist attack. A fellow pilot told Israeli television the co-pilot prayed excessively and refused to shake hands with women. Saudi authorities are still questioning him. Trump said he might have been a terrorist or he might have been mentally ill. That is the news cycle. What follows is the argument underneath it.
I have my copy of the Quran. I have carried a flexible edition for years so I can argue with it instead of about it. I also have my Jonathan Edwards study Bible open on the desk. Edwards died in 1758, before there was a United States. He already knew the problem. He called the two great works of the devil against the kingdom of Christ the papal kingdom in the West and the Mahometan kingdom in the East. He said Muhammad was a subtle, crafty man who pretended the Alcoran came from Gabriel, sold a sensual paradise, and propagated the religion by the sword. That is a Northampton pastor in the 1750s, not a 2026 invention.
What the Word Actually Means
Islam means submission. Not peace in the Hallmark sense. The whole system is built around total submission to Allah and to the law derived from Muhammad. Anybody who does not have submission in the vocabulary is already in trouble with the text.
That is why the political class is comfortable with it. A religion that trains people to bend the knee to an authority they are not allowed to question is useful to people who want the same habit pointed at the state. If you will not submit to the God of the Quran, the substitute arrives quickly: submit to the bureau, the school board, the speech code. Historically the faith has almost never traveled as private piety. It has traveled with a political order attached — dhimmi status, tribute, second-class standing for those who will not convert, and expansion when the numbers allow it.
I can sit at a drinking fountain with a Muslim coworker and talk about anything. I joke with them. Why are you praying toward Mecca on a cloth at a set hour? They can tell me to read the Quran. I can tell them to read the Bible. We can still shake hands and walk away. That is ordinary human contact. It is not the same thing as pretending the systems are compatible. The insecurity shows up the moment you decline to submit. Then you are the enemy. Gentle people exist inside every population. The doctrine is still the doctrine.
Edwards, Before We Had a Country
If I could put Edwards in the chair, the question would be simple. What do you think of planting the Quran in the life of a nation that still claims the gospel?
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob revealed his Son. The Quran speaks of God and denies the eternal sonship of Christ and his death upon the cross. That is a false gospel. It leads away from the only name under heaven by which men must be saved. To implement that book as a peer authority in the public life of a nation is to invite spiritual darkness onto ground already cracking under its own weight. A house divided against itself cannot stand. A people who try to honor both light and darkness will perish.
From a 1750s seat, the attempt looks like division by design. It flatters the pride of man — one God, no mediator, no scandal of the cross — while denying the Savior. A nation cannot serve two masters. It cannot honor the cross and the crescent and stay one thing. Edwards thought God would not share his glory with another. I think he was right.
Same Names, Opposite Message
Adam is in the Quran. Moses is in there. Abraham is in there. Jesus is in there as a prophet who was not crucified and is not the Son. That is spiritual plagiarism. You take the names to borrow trust, then you twist the load-bearing walls to have a strategic meaning meant to destroy Western Civilization at the ground level.
The fork in the road is the sacrifice. In Genesis the son on the mountain is Isaac, the child of the covenant marriage. In the Islamic telling the favored line runs through Ishmael, the son of Hagar, outside that marriage. That rebuilds the family tree so the covenant son is no longer the covenant son. From the first chapter of the argument, Islam is set against Israel. A religion that elevates the son who was not the child of the covenant, and then asks the world to treat that reversal as revelation, is telling you something about the spirit behind the text.
Muhammad was a merchant in a region that wanted its older habits back under a new umbrella, aimed at the Christian order in the eastern Roman world. Something came and talked to him. That does not make a man great. The traditional account is roughly twenty-three years of recitation. The thing calling itself Gabriel contradicted what the Gospels say Gabriel announced to Mary six centuries earlier. Angels do not spend two decades canceling a message they already delivered. One of them was not Gabriel. The Bible tells you to test the spirits. He submitted instead.
Who Lets the Adversary Run?
People ask why Jesus lets the adversary operate. I have heard the real-estate version: a transaction in the garden, a deed, Satan as a squatter with papers. I do not think God lost the earth. Sovereignty over creation was not handed away. What was permitted was influence over human beings who chose the lie. The patience is not incompetence. Evil is allowed so that justice and mercy can both be seen when the thing is finally crushed.
That patience is expensive. Innocent people die. The biblical claim is that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and waits because he is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. The end of the patience will be worse than the middle of it. You can hate the cost and still see why a God who intends to save refuses to end the offer early. What you cannot do is confuse that patience with approval of a rival gospel.
The Black Stone and the Unasked Question
A billion and a half people circle a stone, touch it, kiss it, and cannot tell you where it came from. Pre-Islamic practice, rebranded. Kissing a stone the stranger ahead of you just kissed is not profound. It is submission performed so that nobody has to ask. Where did the rock come from? Why these characters were borrowed from the Bible? Why is the Christology reversed? Why is criticism of Muhammad blasphemy while criticism of the church is a Tuesday?
Truth does not need a threat to survive examination. A lie does. Revelation 22:18–19 warns against adding to or taking away from the words of that prophecy. It is a seal on a book, not a police regime. The habit of the New Testament is to test everything. The habit of the other book is submit and be quiet, from the first surah to the last.
Joseph Campbell bothered me on this point. When he spoke of Gabriel appearing to Muhammad, he softened it. He wanted to stay employed at Sarah Lawrence and keep the editing work which I always thought was dishonest, intellectually. He knew better. Polite academia already had a tribute system. That pressure is worse now. It is not scholarship. It is submission with a faculty ID.
Speech Is the Battlefield They Prefer
Everyone looks for Turks at the gates. The cheaper conquest is speech. You submit in what you are allowed to say to your wife, your kids, your readers. You do not ask where the stone came from.
The radical left has spent years introducing Islamic institutional power into a culture built on the Bible, English law, and the conscience of the individual. The ideas are not compatible. A system whose end state is Islamic rule, with non-Muslims as tolerated subordinates, cannot live as a permanent equal inside a republic that treats religions as voluntary associations under a civil law nobody gets to replace. The useful idiots think they can aim this at the church and then manage the aftermath. Every civilization that tried that partnership was wrong. What a lot of people don’t say about Iran is that their government is the goal of those attacking America. That’s what is expected of us and Islam is the entry point to that kind of blind totalitarian rule. That’s why destroying Iran was important for the Trump administration. It had to happen to break the spell.
Yesterday’s cockpit is the unpolite version of the same pressure. The Crusades were a late reaction to centuries of conquest, not the opening move. The argument was never settled. It changed vehicles.
Two Things Worth Keeping
Islam means submission, by whatever method gets the knee bent: fear, law, shame, the sword, the human-resources office. And the religion took shape in the seventh century as a rival system in the borderlands of the Roman East, borrowing names, reversing the covenant son, denying the cross, and requiring a submission Christianity does not require. That ambition did not retire. If you cannot find the authority inside the religious layer, look at the next layer up. Government is always happy to become the thing you submit to.
The pilot who opened the cockpit door while he was bleeding did not submit. Neither should we.
Footnotes and the bibliography — Edwards’s History of the Work of Redemption, the Miscellanies, McDermott, Ibn Ishaq, Bat Ye’or, Genesis 16–22, Revelation 22:18–19, and the 30 September wire copy from BBC, Reuters, Times of Israel, and PBS
Notes
1. Keir Starmer, 26 September 2025, announcing the digital-ID scheme: “You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It’s as simple as that.” BBC, “New digital ID will be mandatory to work in the UK,” 26 September 2025; BBC explainer, updated 23 October 2025. Darren Jones called a working system “the bedrock of the modern state.” A petition to scrap the scheme approached three million signatures.
2. The scheme was described as an app on the phone, carrying name, date of birth, nationality or residency status, and a photograph, mandatory for proving the right to work by the end of the Parliament (no later than August 2029), not required to be carried, and not retrospective for people already in a job. BBC, 23 October 2025.
3. On 14 January 2026 the Telegraph reported that Labour had dropped compulsory digital ID for right-to-work checks, describing it as the eleventh U-turn, while sources still spoke of mandatory digital checks as distinct from a compulsory card. The September sentence remains the clearest statement of intent.
4. U.S. “right to work” statutes bar compulsory union membership or dues as a condition of employment. Indiana is a right-to-work state; Ohio is not. The British phrase in Starmer’s announcement means the opposite: state permission as a condition of employment.
5. Amy Acton was director of the Ohio Department of Health during the 2020 orders. Subsequent litigation tested those orders against the Ohio Constitution. The employer-side account here is mine, from operating through the orders while those cases were being built.
6. Applicant-tracking systems and automated résumé screens are standard in large U.S. firms. The disparate-impact and DEI sorting layered on those systems expanded after 2020 and has been contested in federal policy since 2025. My 2026 job search is the field report; it is not a national census.
7. Real ID and passport-level identity checks for employment eligibility (Form I-9, E-Verify) tightened the document set employers will accept. I was required to produce a passport repeatedly in 2026 hiring processes.
8. BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard are the dominant U.S. index complexes. Their proxy and ESG policies in the early 2020s were a transmission belt from asset-manager politics into corporate HR. Political and legal pushback since 2023 has narrowed, not ended, that belt.
9. Vinyl’s return is a measured market, not a metaphor only. RIAA data through the mid-2020s show vinyl as the majority of physical music revenue, driven by ownership rather than by audio quality. The Cracker Barrel gift-shop scene is mine, with my grandsons.
10. Jonathan Edwards, A History of the Work of Redemption, on the papal and Mahometan kingdoms as the two great rival orders that swallowed the Roman world.
11. Socialist International membership and the historic sympathies of Western socialist parties for the Cuban revolution and for Central American insurgencies are a matter of public record. Canada’s and Mexico’s governing models are social-democratic and corporatist respectively; neither is a classical liberal republic.
Bibliography
BBC News. “New digital ID will be mandatory to work in the UK.” 26 September 2025.
BBC News. “What are digital ID cards, how will they work and will they be mandatory?” Updated 23 October 2025.
BBC News. “No digital ID checks until you change jobs, says No 10.” 23 October 2025.
Burnham, James. The Managerial Revolution. New York: John Day, 1941.
Edwards, Jonathan. A History of the Work of Redemption. In The Works of Jonathan Edwards, vol. 9, edited by John F. Wilson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Hayek, F. A. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944.
Hoffman, Rich. The Politics of Heaven. Manuscript, completed 2026; publication targeted 2027.
Mises, Ludwig von. Bureaucracy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944.
Mises, Ludwig von. Socialism. 1922. English edition, Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Murray, Charles. Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class. New York: Twelve, 2020.
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.
I have loved the work I did for around about twenty-five years and I passed up a lot of opportunities do do that work. The financial opportunity cost was enormous. That is not a slogan. That is a long marriage to a craft, a lot of people counted on me to keep them in a job and it was not good for me, for a long time, several years. It was a really tough period and I didn’t talk about it much, but I did a lot of work that nobody will ever know about to make a lot of people’s lives just a little better. Then 2026 arrived, and one of the best things I have done in this decade, maybe in my adult life, was not a deal and not a title. It was a birthday. My wife and I went to the Museum of the Bible in Washington to see Dead Sea Scrolls: The Exhibition. I wear the hoodie from that day the way some men wear a championship jacket. The shirt is cloth. The day is not.
My new guys
In the gift shop outside the exhibit, I bought a replica clay jar, the kind of vessel the Qumran caves used to keep parchment alive through empires. [1] It was about twenty dollars. I spent far more than that in the gift shop. I like the twenty-dollar thing most. I put it on my desk at work so that every conference call had a reminder of a century before Christ sitting next to the phone. When I finally got free of that place, I left so fast I abandoned the jar. A friend kept it safe. It took about two months to get it back. I missed the jar more than I missed the job. That sentence tells you what I value. The people who took over the company paid me a lot of money to leave, and I couldn’t get out fast enough. And as I predicted, they are quickly running the place I spent a large part of my life running into the ground, which is a shame.
THE BIRTHDAY I ACTUALLY WANTED
If you can do anything you want on your birthday and you choose an exhibit of old skin and ink, you are telling the truth about your interior life. I am a member of the Museum of the Bible. I like the building. I like the traveling shows even more. This one was the only thing I wanted.
I don’t agree with DeWine on much, but I can work with him. A lot of people say they know people, but most of the time it’s nobodies just as dumb as they are. They might be good for a lunch meeting, but they can’t do anything for you.
The museum sits at 400 Fourth Street SW, a short walk from Federal Center, in that southwest quadrant where the Capitol complex, the Mall museums, and the old Department of Education neighborhood all lean on each other. [2] We parked in a garage, came up, and ate sausage-and-egg McMuffins at the McDonald’s down the road. I took a picture of my wife. We have been married thirty-eight years. You think you know a face. I have never seen her happier than that morning. The joy was all over her. It has become my favorite picture of her.
People who only know me from videos think they know what fills a man. A lot of the country is spiritually vacant, and they tune in to get a little ballast. Here is the ballast. If I could design a heaven, it would look like that day on a loop: time, the Bible, the cases, the reading, the thinking. I would be happy forever. Nothing I have bought with a title has come close.
THE EXHIBIT THAT WAS THE REAL THING
Dead Sea Scrolls: The Exhibition opened at the museum on November 22, 2025, in partnership with the Israel Antiquities Authority and Running Subway. Curators: Navit Popovich-Geller, Risa Levitt, and Joe Uziel. Floor 5. Official run through September 7, 2026. East Coast stop. [3]
They rotated the fragments in three phases so the skin could rest and so visitors would not see the same eight pieces all year.
First rotation, November 2025 into February 2026: 4Q7 Genesis, 11Q10 Targum Job, 4Q83 Psalms, Astronomical Enoch, Barkhi Nafshi, War Scroll material, an eschatological commentary, Temple Scroll. [3]
Second rotation, February through May 2026: fragments of the Great Psalms Scroll, Numbers, Lamentations, Community Rule, apocryphal psalms, Tohorot, non-canonical psalms, Book of the Giants. [3]
Third rotation, May through September 2026: Isaiah, Tobit, phylacteries, Birth of Noah, Jubilees, communal ceremony, Community Rule, Damascus Document. [3]
We hit Phase Two. I am glad we did. I stood in front of text copied when Rome was still a rumor in Judah and the Hebrew Bible was still held in a living community’s hands. You can read about Qumran in a chair. It is another thing to see the letter-forms under museum glass and realize the narrative did not begin in a nineteenth-century print shop.
That matters. The scrolls are the great twentieth-century confirmation that the biblical text is not a late pious invention. They are a Second Temple Jewish library, biblical and sectarian, hidden in jars in the caves above the Dead Sea and found again beginning in 1947. [4] They do not make a man holy by themselves. They make a liar work harder.
I know the museum’s early years included purchased “Dead Sea Scroll” fragments that testing later showed were fakes. The museum said so and pulled them. [5] This show is not that drawer. This is Israel Antiquities Authority material from the national collection, the real library on tour. Christianity Today called it the real deal. [6] They were right.
THE JAR THAT WAS NEVER THE POINT AND BECAME THE POINT
The original scroll jars are tall, lid-tight, local clay. They are why the texts survived weather, war, and time. [1] The replica I bought is a scale souvenir. It came with a copy of a scroll like the ones on display. I put the whole little shrine on the desk.
I kept fortune-cookie slips in it.
That needs explaining.
THE LUNCHES WHILE THE BUILDING CHANGED HANDS
CTL-Aerospace is a Butler County composites and aerospace shop with a long OEM life, the kind of midwestern plant that actually makes the parts. In September 2025, it filed Chapter 11 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, Case No. 1:25-bk-12226, Judge Beth A. Buchanan. [7] The company’s own first-day declaration described raw-material quality shocks, a 2024 loss on still-strong sales, and a lender fight with Wells Fargo that turned into a cash choke. [8]. The company never recovered from challenges caused initially by the COVID lockdowns. I worked real hard to save the company from an acquisition and I’m very bitter about the time I wasted on it, but I felt obligated to a lot of people which was not to my benefit. It was very insulting, as hard as I worked, to watch these new people coming into the management system and assume they could just erase me, which of course they haven’t been. A lot of people have been contaccting me wanting a job wherever I end up landing and wanting to know what’s going on with me, which doesn’t have a quick and easy answer. I Poured a lot of myself into something that was not in my control and I owe myself some time to dust off the negativitive experience. I traditionally list my work experience as a writer and consultants. Both take a lot of experience to do. And when you get a chance to learn new things, out of the box, you do all you can. It takes a lot of experience to be a good writer. That is always my first priority.
What followed is the new modern American ritual. Advisors. Debtor-in-possession money. An auction under section 363. A sale of substantially all assets free and clear. The docket names the buyer’s side as an affiliate of Davidson Kempner: DK OF VI Trading Subsidiary LP, designee DK CTL Aerospace Opco LLC. The sale hearing record sits in January 2026. The DK deal closed in March 2026. And followed a typical story these days among a lot of companies that don’t get talked about enough in CNBC financial discussions. [9][10]. Yes, I hate Amy Acton for what she did to the state of Ohio under the COVID lockdowns. And I haven’t talked about it much, but because I spent so much time there, I have to tell that story 50 times a week, because everyone wants to know what happened, especially since I was on the executive leadership end of it. And it comes up a lot because we launched Vivek Ramaswamy’s run for governor there, and people want to know what happened.
I kept things running as long as I could, but I witnessed a massive failure in the infrastructure smaller businesses use to stay running. And there are lots of parasites who look to target wounded companies for their profit, just like pirates in the days of old, only in a very modern context. Government made it possible for these pirates to make a lot of money off wounded companies. There’s a lot more to the story, but that’s a good starting point. Much of this is in the public record, and I wasn’t happy about any of it. You loan your name to these things, and lots of other people make your life difficult, and you stick around to take care of people you consider friends, when the smart money would have said goodbye a long time ago. Instead of getting upset, I spent my time going to places like The Museum of the Bible. I have some great and horrific stories to tell. Things nobody will believe.
I lived the floor version. Executive management had a habit of going out for Chinese. We were in a tough stretch. A takeover is a weather system. Consultants and funding people move through a plant like they already own everything when you spend years building everything they are taking. You can feel the Monopoly problem in your bones: you are still on the board, but you do not hold the properties, and every roll of the dice is a mortgage you cannot pay. I call that parasite logic because that is how it feels when people who did not build the thing arrive to manage the thing and treat the builders as furniture. I’m talking about this now because I would put all those fortunes in my Dead Sea Scrolls jar for safekeeping during this really hard period, and now that I have it back, it reminds me of these last several years. And I did a presentation at my new place this past week, which went well. And I have a chance to build everything from scratch again, which is about a ten-year plan. But it’s good to get going on something positive again instead of trying to defend employees from a takeover of the business they counted on to put food on their table. When we talk about the economy and Trump expanding jobs, nobody ever talks about these kinds of things which destroy many thousands of jobs every month in America, and it’s what I would consider the biggest job killer in the world, an open attack against America through finance. For many decades, we were able to protect the business from these kinds of elements, but it takes smart people to protect the finance side of things, and COVID conditions broke a lot of cracks that many companies already saw at a critical time.
The court file is the court file; we wanted employees to keep their jobs. My desk was my desk. During those lunches I kept the fortunes and dropped them in the jar. It was a private joke with history among those who went to lunch with me then. The oldest surviving copies of Scripture in a twenty-dollar pot, stuffed with cheap paper predictions, sitting in an office while a seventy-year industrial story got run through a Cincinnati docket. I could have done something else several years ago, but I couldn’t let everyone down who counted on me for their jobs. For my own personal interest, until I took the step shown in the video displayed here for a new opportunity built from the ground up, I was very bitter about it all.
What was good for me was to leave. And I found myself doing everything for everyone else. That made going to the Museum of the Bible a very personal, positive thing for me, as I was seeing massive failures all around me from so many people. Eventually, I will write a book about all this, name names, and tell the whole story. Right now, I’m too angry for it. For a lot of legal reasons, I just put my effort into better things for the future, things I could have direct control over. And I say all that knowing that there are a lot of people who want a new job with me. I have been building something that didn’t already have jobs made for it, which takes a lot more work and more time. That’s why I don’t have a new home for you, yet. But I won’t forget. I plan to build something that is at least 10 times more valuable. That’s how I prefer to work against those who did a lot of bad things.
WHY I LEFT LIKE THE ROAD RUNNER
I cleaned the office out. Books gone. Ready. I still could not stand to be apart from the jar, so it stayed on the desk until the last day. Then the last day came, and I did not make a farewell tour. I did not go room to room to say goodbye. I left like a cartoon puff of dust in a Looney Tunes episode of Road Runner.
A man across the hall belched and farted all day, which disgusted me. I would never hire a person like that for anything, yet there he was, inserted disrespectfully against me. That sentence is not decoration. Some characters are the atmosphere of a declining shop. He was disgusting to be near. The minute I could put distance between my lungs and that hallway, I did. I moved so fast I betrayed the one object I had meant to carry out in my hands.
Halfway down the road, I felt it. Incomplete. The phone and the computer were replaceable. The jar was not, because it held the day with my wife, the Phase Two case, the confirmation that the old book is old in the right way, and the little paper fortunes from the last honest lunches where in it. I had left my treasure in a building I found repulsive, so much so I don’t even drive down I-75 anymore in that part of town so I don’t have to look at the building. I probably won’t again for decades.
A friend picked it up and kept it exactly as I had left it. I have it back now, much to my relief. I feel finished and ready to do something else.
WHAT I LOOKED AT ALL DAY
Every call, every meeting, I looked at that jar and thought of her face at McDonald’s and the dim room where a fragment of a book still spoke. People think a man like me is fueled by argument. Argument is downstream. The fuel is contact with the source.
The feed has a spiritual vacancy. People come to a voice because they want to be filled. I cannot fill them with a hoodie. I can tell them what filled me. I chose, on a day I could have chosen anything, to stand in front of Qumran. I bought the cheapest true thing in the shop and put it where my work-eye would hit it. When the work turned into a court-supervised transfer to a fund, I still wanted the jar more than the chair.
That is not just nostalgia; it’s the kind of values and priorities that build the kind of value in a company that others want to steal because they can’t make it on their own.
THE SCROLLS AND THE POLITICS OF HEAVEN
I have been writing toward a book I call The Politics of Heaven. The phrase sounds misty until you have seen the evidence that the text survived empires in clay. Power is always trying to own the story. Jars on a cliff are what the story does when power is coming, just as the Romans did when they were plotting the destruction of the Jews. The intellectual rebels of Qumran stayed in the desert to get a jump on their planned retreat, to preserve themselves. I stayed around until the very last minute, even though I had lots of opportunities to do other, much more profitable things. It feels good now to be able to go down that road, instead of trying to hold everything together just long enough to save people’s jobs.
The Community Rule and the Damascus Document in those rotations are not tourist wallpaper. They are a sect’s attempt to live under a holy order while history went feral. [3][4] Psalms in the second rotation is the prayerbook of a people who had already learned that governments are weather. I looked at that material and felt the same thing I feel when I write: the old book is not a hobby. It is the deepest available account of how heaven and earth argue.
I do not thump people with it. I live next to it. My Dead Sea Scrolls hoodie is a souvenir of living next to it for a day that worked.
WHAT THE JAR ACCUSES ME OF, KINDLY
I felt as if I had betrayed it by leaving it. That is a strange sentence about fired clay. It is accurate. We betray what we love when we let urgency become panic. I was right to leave the hallway. I wanted to be away from those people so badly that I left behind the one object that proved I had a life outside the hallway.
Getting it back did not restore a career. It restored a ranking. The job was a long love. The jar is a truer one, because it points past the job to the day, the wife, the text, and the stubborn fact that some things are dear. Of course the experience has been very jarring to think about. I have a lot of information that is very valuable because of it. It will make an excellent book, the first third of one that I’ll write talking about all this. But, it needs a good last half to be the kind of book I like to write, which is a story that is unfolding right now. These are the dangers of modern business and its something that a lot of people can’t wait ten years for, because now its a problem. And pretty much nobody bothers to untangle the mess. But, I feel like I can talk about it more now that I have my Jar back. Its one of those incomplete things that has been bothering me a lot for a few months. The stories I will tell of these months will make great writing content, that a lot of people will never believe. And of course, I won’t hold anything back.
If you see me in the Museum of the Bible shirt, that is why. I do not get tired of it. I do not get tired of the little Dead Sea Scroll Jar. I got it back from people who were careful with it, and I will not park it again on a desk I might have to flee when the Romans come to destroy Jerusalem again, or corporate raiders come to steal all the treasure that hard work builds.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Qumran scroll jars: cylindrical, lidded storage pottery associated with the cave finds of 1947–1956. Israel Antiquities Authority / Library of Congress exhibit notes on Qumran pottery; World History Encyclopedia image and description of Dead Sea Scrolls jars. Gift-shop replicas commonly include a small clay pot and a printed scroll insert; museum retail varies by exhibit.
[2] Museum of the Bible, 400 Fourth Street SW, Washington, DC 20024. Near Federal Center SW Metro. The building sits south of the National Mall museum cluster; the Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building is at 400 Maryland Avenue SW, in the same southwest federal pocket.
[3] Museum of the Bible, “Dead Sea Scrolls: The Exhibition,” November 22, 2025–September 7, 2026, partnership with the Israel Antiquities Authority and Running Subway. Official rotation lists as published by the museum newsroom, October 1, 2025, and the exhibit page.
[4] Discovery and corpus: eleven caves near Qumran, 1947–1956; biblical manuscripts plus sectarian works (Community Rule, War Scroll, Damascus Document, Enoch traditions, and others). Standard introductions: Vermes; VanderKam; Collins.
[5] In 2018, the Museum of the Bible announced that five of its then-owned “Dead Sea Scroll” fragments showed characteristics inconsistent with ancient origin and removed them from display. That episode concerns purchased fragments in the museum’s own early collection, not the 2025–2026 IAA loan show.
[6] Gordon Govier, “New Dead Sea Scrolls Exhibit Is the Real Deal,” Christianity Today, April 8, 2026.
[7] In re CTL-Aerospace, Inc., Case No. 1:25-bk-12226, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division (Cincinnati), Judge Beth A. Buchanan, petition filed September 8, 2025. Debtor address in the petition header: 5616 Spellmire Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45246, Butler County.
[8] Declaration of President and COO, in support of the Chapter 11 petition and first-day motions, September 8, 2025 (Doc. 9 and related first-day papers). Public summaries: Stretto / chapter11cases write-up of the filing, September 2025.
[9] Docket items in 1:25-bk-12226 include the bidding-procedures motion (Doc. 90, October 9, 2025), sale papers, declaration of Geoffrey Frankel in support of sale to DK CTL Aerospace Opco LLC as designee of DK OF VI Trading Subsidiary LP (January 19, 2026), and the January 20, 2026 sale hearing activity. Later docket entries include a March 23, 2026 stipulation involving DK CTL Aerospace Opco LLC.
[10] Capstone Partners, “Capstone Partners Advised CTL Aerospace, Inc. on its Sale to Davidson Kempner in Chapter 11 Bankruptcy,” posted June 10, 2026, stating the section 363 sale to a DK affiliate closed in March 2026. Capstone describes its Special Situations and Financial Advisory Services work after the September 2025 filing. Pre-petition turnaround work with Focus Management Group is described in contemporary filing summaries. Davidson Kempner is a global investment firm; the buyer vehicle on the docket is the DK-named Opco / trading-subsidiary chain above. I am describing the public control change. My language about parasites is how a fund-and-consultant weather system feels to a builder on the floor.
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING
Museum of the Bible. “The Dead Sea Scrolls Exhibition with the Oldest Biblical Texts Arrives at Museum of the Bible in November 2025.” Newsroom, October 1, 2025.
Butler County development notes listing CTL among regional aerospace suppliers.
Riveron. Public descriptions of bankruptcy, fiduciary, and turnaround practice. I include the firm here because that consultant class is the air a Chapter 11 plant breathes; readers should use the CTL docket itself for who was retained in this specific case.
Wells Fargo as prepetition secured lender, per the first-day declaration summaries.
11 U.S.C. § 363. Sale of assets in Chapter 11.
On Museum of the Bible provenance controversies (for contrast with the IAA loan): 2018 reporting on forged fragments; Hobby Lobby / Green family civil penalty and repatriation coverage from 2017–2021. Frommer’s and major-wire summaries.
Library of Congress / IAA. “Scrolls from the Dead Sea” historical exhibit notes on jars and Cave 4.
World History Encyclopedia. Dead Sea Scrolls jars.
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.
I keep hearing the same two stories about artificial intelligence, and both of them are wrong. The first story says AI will take your job, run your company, replace your CEO, and close the gap left by people who were never qualified to sit in the chair. The second story says AI is a monster and you should protest data centers, paper, cash, and every tool that looks like the future. I have used the tools. I have run departments. I have been the job maker and the job getter. I have dealt with more human resources departments this year than in the rest of my life combined. My assessment is simple. AI is an employee that does not sleep. It is useful. It is not thinking. It won’t save a company that hired the wrong people. And it is not going to take over the market economy.
I said versions of this years ago. I wrote it into The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business when I argued that trained intuition, the kind people smear as “shooting from the hip,” still beats a mechanical process most of the time. [1] I was curious whether I was being Paul Bunyan with an axe while the chainsaw era rolled in. I have checked that thought against reality. I was not being Paul Bunyan. I was early.
WHAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY MEAN WHEN THEY SAY THEY ARE AFRAID OF AI
A lot of the fear is not about software. It is about people. I have heard it all year. You are an old white guy with privilege, so nobody has to take you seriously. That is not an economic analysis. That is a social permission slip. A generation that came of age working from living rooms, insulated from deadlines, conflict, and performance pressure, was taught that experienced men over fifty were the threat. Angry. Scary. Too much résumé. Too many relationships. Too much industrial memory.
I did not even keep a LinkedIn account for a long time. I have one now because people look me up. The feedback is almost comic. Oh my gosh, you have a giant, scary résumé. You know a lot of people. You are scary. The consensus I keep running into among people twenty-five to fifty is that they want insulation from old white guys, and they want AI and HR processes to provide it.
That is arrogance dressed up as progress. It assumes the world started when they arrived. It assumes the CEOs who fly to Davos and recycle the same mantras on LinkedIn have discovered a substitute for judgment. They have not.
AN EMPLOYEE THAT DOES NOT SLEEP IS STILL AN EMPLOYEE
I like AI. I use it. I get up at three in the morning, and I can talk to it. A human expert may not be available at four. As a research assistant, an editor, a bundler of notes into a first-pass PowerPoint, it is excellent. That is the honest use.
Ask me if I use it to write the source material. No. I write. Then I use it to filter, clean, and catch sentences that sound like a machine trying to imitate a person. It still does not understand human communication the way a person does; it cannot write like me. It rearranges. It polishes. It does not originate the thing that has to be true in the real world.
I have given it more than a fair shake. I have tried versions of it on air and off. It is a resource. It is not a mind. The companies that bought the line that AI would author strategy, close the leadership gap, and replace people who have actually built things are now bumper-carring into the wall. The toy came out of the box broken and not broken as a tool and broken as a religion.
HUMAN RESOURCES DID NOT GET DUMBER BY ACCIDENT
I have run HR departments. I know what those departments are supposed to do on the job-maker side and how they feel on the job-getter side. What I have watched this year is a shift. A lot of people in those offices are just doing a job. They are not asking who wrote the rules. They inherited a form memo from a CEO who inherited a political fashion straight out of China and Davos. The fashion said identity boxes plus software would outperform experience.
That is why so many program-management groups now want to teach Microsoft Copilot as if a bundle of prompts can run a business. Copilot is brilliant as an aid. It is not a substitute for a person who has missed a shipment, faced a union problem, held a customer’s rage, signed a payroll when the cash was tight, and still hit the date. Conflict-averse HR, deadline-optional culture, and “AI will cover it” is a combination that looks modern and performs like a hobby.
Age discrimination is not a vibe I invented. Federal law has prohibited it against workers 40 and older since 1967, and the EEOC still takes thousands of charges a year, but it’s still a problem that slips through legal loopholes. [2][3] The cultural version is cruder than the legal version. It says experience itself is suspect if it comes in the wrong demographic wrapper. Then it pretends a model trained on yesterday’s text can replace the person who lived the work.
THE DEI-PLUS-AI BET WAS A COVER STORY
Here is the game I see. Corporations adopted policies that pushed skilled, experienced leadership aside. They checked the boxes. They told Wall Street a story. Wall Street, which is very good at polishing a story and selling it to investors who brag about the penthouse, treated it as value. The quiet assumption was that artificial intelligence would run the company anyway, so the nameplate on the office did not have to belong to the best operator. You could hang a CEO tag on almost anyone. The software would drive the results.
That is a communist-adjacent fantasy wearing a tech hoodie. Anybody can do it; the model will think, output will hold, and the country will not notice the drop. I have watched the opposite happen. Companies hired people who fit a political costume and lacked the scar tissue. The work did not get done. The dates slipped. The quality sagged. AI did not close the gap because AI cannot supply intuition, accountability, or the courage to tell a room the truth.
There is a live argument in the research about whether DEI programs help or hurt firm performance. Consulting shops have sold the “diversity outperforms” slide for years. [4] Other work, including recent official economic analysis, has argued that identity-based promotion into management after 2016 tracks with lower productivity and high aggregate costs. [5] Other papers say markets did not punish firms that kept DEI programs after the 2025 policy shift. [6] I am not asking you to treat any one paper as scripture. I am telling you what I have seen in the rooms where the product has to ship. When you select against experience and then pray a chatbot will think for the inexperienced, you do not get a renaissance. You get a mess you can hide only as long as cheap money and a pumped Wall Street aligned with the Federal Reserve keep the lights pretty.
THE 2026 ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT put a number on one version of the cost: industries that leaned hard into those practices were associated with lower productivity, with an estimated hit on the order of tens of billions of dollars a year by 2023. [5] You can fight about methods. You cannot fight the operating reality I keep walking into. The people who still know how to run plants, programs, and payrolls are being called back because the substitute failed.
CASHLESS, PAPERLESS, AND THE DREAM OF A HANDLE ON MONEY
The same fashion that sold AI-as-CEO sold cashless and paperless as moral improvement. Save the trees and they were all wrong. Go online. Let the system monitor everything. If money isn’t tied to anything hard, it becomes easier to change the unit of account, funnel value through banks and markets, and pay huge salaries that don’t have to answer to real output. I write things on my hand for a reason. Systems fail. Internet fails. Even a satellite link is not reliable beyond fault. When the process is slow because nobody will put a number on paper and look a vendor in the eye, you do not have innovation. You have latency with a sustainability sticker on it.
Central bank digital currency talk is the polished end of that dream. Supporters sell inclusion and efficiency. Critics, including people who are not talking from a barstool, warn about privacy, programmable control, bank-run risk, and a tool that lets the issuer see or freeze the transaction. [7][8][9] The United Kingdom’s House of Lords called retail CBDC a solution in search of a problem. [7] I do not need a white paper to know why cash still matters. Cash is rude to central planners. Paper is rude to people who want every thought inside a dashboard. It was a communist push sent straight from China to destroy the West and its economy.
Do I think every CEO who said “paperless” was running a global conspiracy? No. Most of them were repeating a slogan. The slogan still has a direction. If you can get firms off cash, off paper, off experienced dissenters, and onto a monitored stack “managed by AI,” you do not need to win the argument about value. You change the scoreboard to make it look good.
WALL STREET, THE TAIL OF THE DOG, AND THE STINK ON THE FIELD
I am tired of financial television chasing the tail of the dog. I am telling you where the nose is pointed. As long as the Federal Reserve can put money into the system and Wall Street can mark the story to a market that is not a gold standard, companies can hide bad operating bets. They can hire the wrong people, buy the wrong software narrative, and still show a chart. That does not last once real demand, real competition, and real delivery show up.
I have seen the smaller version of this inside companies. A finance person who thinks everyone is doing it, treats the accounts like a personal weather system, buys the boat and the early retirement, and assumes that by the time anyone counts, the story will have moved on. I have seen the harm that leaves behind. I am not going to dress that up as a composite Hollywood villain. I am telling you the pattern. Corporatism hides a lot of ordinary theft and ordinary incompetence behind process. AI will not save those people from arithmetic. Justice, eventually, is just arithmetic with a badge.
Trump’s first term already showed how official narratives about prices, energy, and markets can run one way while operators on the ground run another. I am not asking you to treat every spike as a morality play. I am asking you to notice when CEOs change how they value human beings because a political weather system told them experience was optional. When the weather changes, they want the experienced person back. They want the so-called angry white guy over fifty. They will pay. They should. The next stretch of this economy won’t be won by people who have only managed a Slack channel and a vendor scorecard.
WHY THE ANTI-AI, ANTI-DATA-CENTER PANIC IS USEFUL TO AMERICA’S RIVALS
Here is the part a lot of people miss because they only know how to protest. There is a strategy, whether fully coordinated or merely convenient, that wants American firms less competitive. Chase nonproductive internal politics. Constrain labor. Then tell the public that the remaining productive machinery, the data centers, the industrial base, the people who still know how to build, is the enemy.
AI can supplement a labor market that politics has made stupid. That is exactly why a rival would love the United States to hate the tool and keep the policy. If China can cap American output while American companies argue about pronouns, paper, and whether a fifty-five-year-old program manager is too frightening to hire, Beijing does not need to beat us in a fair race. It needs us to trip.
In 2026, OpenAI, Republican committee chairs, and threat-intelligence shops reported China-origin influence activity testing anti-data-center and anti-AI-infrastructure narratives in American feeds. [10][11][12] Serious reporters also pointed out that Americans have homegrown reasons to dislike a warehouse that eats power and water on the edge of town, and that foreign amplifiers often ride a wave they did not create. [13] Both things can be true. Local land-use fights are real. So is the fact that a strategic competitor has no incentive to cheer an American buildout.
I am not telling you to love every server farm or every utility bill. I am telling you not to take your marching orders from a laser pointer. If you have ever used a laser with a cat, you know the trick. The light is not the mouse. A lot of the anti-AI content is the light.
BLADE RUNNER IS A MOVIE
People talk as if we are one product launch from a replicant you cannot tell from a neighbor. That is science fiction. Current systems predict the next token from past data. They are strong on familiar patterns and weak on novel, counter-to-data judgment. Researchers keep finding the same limit: impressive on the benchmark you trained toward, brittle when the problem is actually new. [14][15][16][17] Clinical and decision studies show overconfidence and shallow reasoning where a human still has to live with the miss. [18]
Could robotics pick up a can, sort a bin, run a basic route? Yes, and that will get better. Could a model sit in a budget fight, read a liar across a table, redesign a line at 2 a.m. when the fixture is wrong and the customer is flying in at dawn? Not in this decade in any way that replaces the person. Maybe the mid-2030s produce something scarier on television. I do not see human-level intuition on a corporate org chart by 2027. The people who bet the firm would already be here were suckers. COVID revealed a lot of sucker games. This is another one.
THE MARKET IS ALREADY VOTING FOR EXPERIENCE
I am watching the reversal in real time. After the first wave of large firms and Davos talkers, the rest of the economy still has to find people who will work harder than the median, who still value cash, who will write the note, who will own the date. The companies that got off the hook early and went back to old school- paper when it helps, cash when it matters, experienced people when the problem is ugly- are going to eat the ones that cannot.
I run exercises that force me to think like a younger person. I get in the dirt and check the idea against the part. What I have learned is that I was more correct than I expected, and that a lot of CEOs who bought the AI-will-save-our-staffing-politics story are going to choke on it. Trump-era pressure and a tighter real economy make it harder to hide a nonperforming org chart behind a diversity slide and a Copilot license.
SpaceX and serious industrial operators didn’t get there by pretending a chatbot could substitute for a propulsion engineer who’s already failed twice and knows what failure smells like. In the second half of this decade, no matter the logo on the building, it’s a race for qualified people. Not vibes. Not boxes. People.
HOW I ACTUALLY USE THE TOOL, AND HOW YOU SHOULD
I use AI like a good editor and a tireless librarian. I do not outsource the claim. I do not let it invent a number I have not seen. I do not let it talk to a customer in my voice until I have put my name on the sentence. If your company is using it to hide the fact that nobody in the room has done the job, you are not modern. You are late and lying to yourself.
If you are a CEO who spent three years telling the board that software would replace judgment, you already know the next slide. You need operators. You will pay for them. Say it out loud before the market says it for you.
WHAT I WANT YOU TO REMEMBER
Do not fear AI. Fear the story that says you can fire experience, flatten money into a controllable token, put every process inside a monitor, and trust a model to think. That story is how a country makes itself smaller while it talks about innovation.
AI will help people work better. It will not replace human intuition. It will not run the next serious company. It will not protect a generation from having to confront other human beings. It will not get a DEI hire through a merit-based storm. It will not rescue the consultant class from the promises they sold.
Watch the dog’s nose, not the tail. The stink on the field is failed output. That is where the animal is going. I told you first. You will not hear it clean on the usual financial shows, because they are paid to narrate the tail.
Have a good day. Remember who told you. I will see you in the argument that actually matters: whether this country still believes a human being can outthink a woke agenda
FOOTNOTES
[1] Rich Hoffman, The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business: A Skeleton Key to Western Civilization (Liberty Hill Publishing, 2021). The book treats “shooting from the hip” as trained speed after fundamentals, not sloppiness, and sets that American gunfighter ethic against Eastern strategy texts.
[2] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Age Discrimination,” and “Fact Sheet: Age Discrimination.” The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 protects applicants and employees forty and older in hiring, firing, pay, promotion, and other terms of employment.
[3] U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, The State of Age Discrimination and Older Workers in the U.S. 50 Years After the ADEA; AARP reporting on EEOC charge volume, including 16,223 age-discrimination charges in 2024.
[4] McKinsey & Company, “Diversity Matters Even More” (2023) and earlier Diversity Matters series. These reports are the standard corporate citation for a diversity-outperformance claim and should be read as correlational advocacy research, not a controlled experiment.
[5] Council of Economic Advisers, Economic Report of the President, 2026, chapter on the economic consequences of DEI, discussing post-2016 associations between DEI-related management practices and productivity, including an estimated GDP cost on the order of $94 billion in 2023 in one specification.
[6] Jacob Grumbach and coauthors, “Markets Do Not Punish Firms for Maintaining DEI” (2026 working paper / Democracy Policy Lab), finding no abnormal-return penalty for S&P 500 firms that kept DEI programs after Executive Order 14173 (January 2025). CBS News summary, August 18, 2026.
[7] House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, report on retail central bank digital currency (2023), described in later reviews as calling a retail CBDC a “solution in search of a problem.”
[8] Norbert Michel, “Central Bank Digital Currency: The Risks and the Myths,” Cato Institute Briefing Paper No. 145 (January 10, 2023).
[9] Kevin Dowd, work collected in later Cambridge writing on CBDCs, arguing negligible public demand where retail CBDCs have been tried and warning about programmable control. See also SUERF review of retail CBDC costs and bank-run arguments (2026).
[10] OpenAI threat report, June 2026, describing China-origin clusters using ChatGPT to generate social content testing narratives against U.S. AI infrastructure and data centers—coverage: Politico, June 10, 2026.
[11] House Energy and Commerce Committee Republican letter (June 2026) asking the administration to investigate foreign influence around data-center opposition. E&E News / Politico, June 4, 2026.
[12] New York Times, “China, Russia and Others Seek to Inflame Debate Over A.I. Data Centers,” July 9, 2026, citing Alethea analysis of state-media amplification.
[13] Wired, “China Didn’t Make Americans Hate Data Centers,” June 12, 2026, and follow-up September 6, 2026, arguing domestic land-use, power, and political grievances are the base layer and that influence operations often exploit existing anger.
[14] “Does AI Prediction Scale to Decision Making?” Communications of the ACM, 2025, on the limit of past-data prediction for counter-to-data human decisions.
[15] MIT CSAIL / MIT News, “Reasoning skills of large language models are often overestimated” (July 11, 2024), on failure under counterfactual and unfamiliar variants.
[16] “Take caution in using LLMs as human surrogates,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2025.
[17] Strategy Science, “Mean Articulation Machines” (2025), on remaining human advantages in abduction and strategy under true uncertainty.
[18] “Limitations of large language models in clinical problem-solving arising from inflexible reasoning,” Scientific Reports, 2025.
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING
Hoffman, Rich. The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business: A Skeleton Key to Western Civilization. Liberty Hill Publishing, 2021.
Hoffman, Rich. The Symposium of Justice. Self-published, 2004.
Hoffman, Rich. Tail of the Dragon. Cliffhanger Research and Development, 2012.
Hoffman, Rich. The Politics of Heaven. Manuscript in revision; forthcoming.
Goldratt, Eliyahu M. The Goal. North River Press, various editions.
Womack, James P., Daniel T. Jones, and Daniel Roos. The Machine That Changed the World. Free Press, 1990.
Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Multiple translations.
Musashi, Miyamoto. The Book of Five Rings.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Age Discrimination resources and The State of Age Discrimination and Older Workers in the U.S. 50 Years After the ADEA.
AARP. Age-discrimination complaint tracking and related labor-force reports.
Council of Economic Advisers. Economic Report of the President. 2026. Chapter on DEI and productivity.
McKinsey & Company. Diversity Matters series, including “Diversity Matters Even More” (2023).
Hsieh, Chang-Tai, Erik Hurst, Charles I. Jones, and Peter J. Klenow. Work on the allocation of talent and growth, often cited in the opposing DEI-economic-cost debate. See Science Forum, “On the economic costs of ending DEI,” May 15, 2025.
Grumbach, Jacob, et al. “Markets Do Not Punish Firms for Maintaining DEI.” 2026.
Larcker, David F., Charles McClure, Shawn Shi, and Edward M. Watts. “The Limited Corporate Response to DEI Controversies.” SSRN, 2026.
Michel, Norbert. “Central Bank Digital Currency: The Risks and the Myths.” Cato Institute, 2023.
Dowd, Kevin. Critiques of retail CBDC adoption and demand. Cambridge / related essays, mid-2020s.
Bank for International Settlements. Surveys and risk papers on CBDC design, security, and financial-stability implications.
House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee. Retail CBDC inquiry, 2023.
Allison and coauthors. “Central Bank Digital Currencies, Financial Inclusion, and Privacy: A Normative Perspective.” Southern Economic Journal, 2026.
OpenAI. Influence-operations reporting on AI-infrastructure narratives, June 2026.
Alethea. Threat-intelligence analysis of foreign state-media coverage of U.S. data centers, 2026.
Bitcoin Policy Institute. Reports on foreign influence ecosystems around AI infrastructure (treat as advocacy research; read against Wired and NYT).
Politico; E&E News; New York Times; Wired. 2026 coverage of the data-center politics and influence debate.
Acemoglu, Daron, and Simon Johnson. Power and Progress. PublicAffairs, 2023. For a broad political-economy critique of who captures tech rents.
Kissinger, Henry, Eric Schmidt, and Craig Mundie. Genesis: Artificial Intelligence, Hope, and the Human Spirit. 2024.
Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas. I, Human: AI, Automation, and the Quest to Reclaim What Makes Us Unique. Harvard Business Review Press.
Hougaard, Rasmus, and Jacqueline Carter. More Human: How the Power of AI Can Transform the Way You Lead. Harvard Business Review Press, 2025.
Hoffman, Reid, and Greg Beato. Superagency: What Could Possibly Go Right with Our AI Future. 2025. Useful as the optimistic techno-humanist counter-case.
Mallaby, Sebastian. The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence. 2026.
Communications of the ACM; PNAS; Scientific Reports; Strategy Science; MIT CSAIL papers cited in the footnotes, 2024–2025, on reasoning limits of large language models.
World Economic Forum. Annual meeting materials from Davos. Read as primary source for the managerial dialect, not as gospel.
Microsoft. Copilot for Microsoft 365 product documentation. Useful for separating the actual tool from the sales mysticism.
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.
