Sheriff Clark in Milwaukee is someone I thought a lot of before the riots broke out in that poor infested city over the weekend of August 13th 2016. His answer after the riots made me like him a lot more. Thank goodness he said what he did—which was essentially what I and many other conservative voices have been saying for a long time.
It was good to hear him speak properly on the matter and is worth remembering. So here are the words of Sheriff Clark. Listen to them and pass this along to a friend who needs to hear a little wisdom as we all endure the massive storm of progressive failure nationwide.
Of course I have been telling you people about this for a long time now. Every country and city touched by the vile group Socialist International is responsible for this economic disease which is currently engulfing the world. Here is the latest off the news wire:
RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — The acting governor of Rio de Janeiro state has declared a state of financial disaster so he has more leeway to manage the state’s scarce resources less than two months Brazil hosts the Olympic Games.
Francisco Dornelles announced the decision on Friday. It will allow Rio’s state government to change its budgetary priorities without disrespecting Brazil’s fiscal laws
This has been a long time and coming. Brazil is resource rich and has had every opportunity to become a prosperous first world county but their overall public philosophy has imprisoned their people for decades to poverty. Hollywood has attempted to lure America to follow the example of Brazil with films like Blame it on Rio and Wild Orchard as ways to expose North America to the sexually promiscuous lifestyles of their southern neighbors, but it hasn’t worked.
Puerto Rico is pretty much in the same situation, as is all of Mexico, Cuba all of Central America, all of South America—everywhere. Canada would be suffering but their entire country doesn’t have as many people in it as a typical America state, so they can afford to live off tourism to their country for a while longer. But Brazil can’t. The socialist polices enacted to pay public workers large pensions just doesn’t make economic sense—large governments where they are the primary employer just don’t work. Marx was an idiot and sadly, too many people are learning that too late.
Believe me, I’ll be around to remind everyone that I told you so. You should have listened to me and many others ten years ago.
This is exactly why we have guns in America folks. Corrupt politicians, socialists money grabbers, and poor leftist philosophies gone bad.
A suburban township has settled a lawsuit by Indiana-based adult club owners who had planned to open a swingers club in southwest Ohio.
The Hamilton-Middletown Journal-News reports Melissa Warren and Eric Adams of Sanford Group LLC planned to open the sexually oriented business in West Chester but found their business license and zoning certificate had been revoked in November.
Township officials and Sanford Group reached a settlement that calls for Warren and Adams not to open another such sexually oriented business or similar use in town.
The township agreed to pay Sanford Group $61,000 and the site’s landlord $29,000 toward unpaid rent.
To illustrate my point, now that the Sanford Group knows the future of their West Chester location, they are absolutely free to attempt to get some very cheap rent at the old Forest Fair Mall location, which is very near where they proposed to set up shop over this contentious issue. After all, if they really just wanted to set up an adult swingers club, the reputation of the Forest Fair Mall location would have been much more lucrative. That mall is now a dead mall, which was once a vibrant place because management around Fairfield and Forest Park botched the deal over a twenty year period. High taxes and bad policy destroyed the mall—specifically allowing the location to be a hangout for young unsupervised people and night club goers. For a time, Forest Fair Mall opened an entire wing in front of what became Burlington Coat Factory to bars and nightclubs which essentially destroyed the appeal to lucrative businesses thinking of locating there. Then there was the meat market nightclub called Metropolis which further solidified the death of Forest Fair Mall. A lot of people got laid, cheated on spouses, and behaved in a generally despicable manner, but the cost was enormous to the region. Families stayed away from the mall and scum bags took over, and Forest Fair Mall—one of the largest in the country—died.
What happened in West Chester is called, “management.” They protected the community for future capitalist growth while discouraging vile businesses rooted in sexual proclivity from destroying that culture. That is what the purpose of zoning is supposed to be. Sadly it still cost money to make bad people go away, largely because a judge ruled in favor of the swingers club—probably because he wanted to attend the place. But the West Chester trustees worked the situation well and kept those sexual provocateurs away so that the families of West Chester and the business owners trying to expand their efforts could do so without the disgrace of an embarrassment conducting business just down the street. A tip of the hat to the good guys within West Chester for a job well done.
I don’t like Sean Payton, the head coach of the New Orleans Saints football team, mostly because I’m a Tampa Bay Buccaneer fan. I think he runs a dirty organization as was the evidence of his one year suspension a few seasons ago, and I think he leads a team of thugs. That could be said of many NFL teams, but when a coach like Payton exploits that thug culture to squeeze out a few more wins for his own personal advancement I think he opens himself up to an extra level of scrutiny when something goes wrong. And when an ex-star player of his, Will Smith was gunned down in the street on April 9th 2016 Payton didn’t blame the football players involved for their very bad behavior leading up to the tragedy—he blamed guns and took a progressive position socially to camouflage the failure of a culture which he has helped create—and that makes him a scum bag.
Former Saints DE Will Smith and his wife were out for a night dining with friends. One of those friends just happened to be a cop who was involved in a shooting of the father of Smith’s future murderer—later that evening—ironically. Smith had friends in law enforcement and he was a star football player and Super Bowl champion—so he had a sense of entitlement based on his behavior. He was doing good things with his life and looked to be a good family man. He had celebrity friends and was the star of whatever event he attended. All was well until he started driving home and accidentally bumped into the very expensive Hummer driven by Cardell Hayes.
After Cardell Hayes lost his father to a police shooting the city of New Orleans paid the minor league football player a hefty sum of money for which he purchased a bright red Hummer. It didn’t sit well with the football player to be rear ended on a late night Saturday while stopped in the road. Hayes moved toward the sidewalk to get out of the way of traffic and settle the matter with the driver who hit him. But instead of pulling up behind to exchange insurance information, like what was supposed to happen by law, and call the police to file a report, the car driven by Smith ran off invoking a hit and run incident. Well, being a young football player who has had to scrap for everything on every play to get what he needs in life, watching that car run from the scene of the accident was apparently too much for Hayes who gunned off in pursuit of the fleeing vehicle. It was unlikely known at the time that it was the famous Will Smith who had hit him and whom Hayes was chasing. All Hayes knew was that someone had committed a crime against him and he was going to get the guy. What Hayes should have done was write down the license plate number. He would have had his justice and everyone would still be alive. But instead Hayes torpedoed his car into Smith at a traffic light several blocks up the road and the two drivers met on the street for an angry brawl. One thing led to another and before anybody realized how serious the situation was, Hayes shot Smith in the chest six times killing the New Orleans football star.
Hayes stayed on the scene and admitted what he had done to police and everything was cleaned up and looked to be a pretty straight forward case of road rage. But it was in the aftermath that Sean Payton obviously missing his friend and speaking with a heart rooted in tragedy said that he hated guns, and that New Orleans was like the wild, wild, west. Payton used the death of his friend to advance a progressive anti-gun stance without addressing the behavior that actually caused the violence in the first place, and that was disgraceful. It made Payton an even worse person than I already thought he was and he appeared to think as Smith did that his level of celebrity could free him of the burden of judgment. For instance, if Smith was as smart as news reports obviously wanted to portray him in this tragedy, why did he participate in a hit and run? Was he counting on making a call to his friends on the police force to resolve the issue and to ensure that he was above justice because of his celebrity? It certainly looked that way. Payton seems to think that he can make reckless progressive statements because the people of Louisiana want another Super Bowl win so he calculated that they would just put up with his banter without question.
Most of the people I know in my neighborhood have guns and they often carry them. Yet we never shoot each other—even when we get into traffic accidents. It was only a few months ago that a lady hit me on my motorcycle nearly injuring me badly. I was literally a half-inch away from losing my right leg. We were both armed with guys, yet even in such a crises it never occurred to either one of us to shoot each other. I simply yelled at her, and then once I saw how sorry she was, we quickly went to the business of settling the accident. It was a very civil way to settle a tragedy. It certainly didn’t devolve into the kind of violence that killed Will Smith. That is because the problem isn’t guns, its behavioral science. The football culture that Will Smith and Cardell Hayes lived within is built on primal valor and coaches like Sean Payton exploit that pent-up energy to win football games. For young people like Smith and Hayes—who often grow up fatherless, but find social redemption in popular gladiator sports the ethics on a football field often depend on an eye for an eye mentality. There is a lot that goes on during a football game psychologically that never shows up on a television screen for which Smith and Hayes have made their livings and it’s not easy to turn all that off for civilian life. Many football players have a hard time with that adjustment. Will Smith was apparently attempting to do that and he was mostly successful. But when you play a game where the alpha male rules the field and that an entire team depends on your ability to assert that dominance over other alpha males—the nature of the game doesn’t just leave the mind on the football field. It sometimes carries over into the streets of whatever communities they live in.
Will Smith abused his rights as a private citizen when he attempted to roll away from the accident. When he was challenged by another alpha male for attempting to flee likely they said things to each other that required in their minds an ultimate statement on who was the alpha male. Hayes not having any other intellectual resources to guide his actions went for his gun and the rest his history. But it wasn’t the gun that was the problem or that people carry them. It is that we have a society that doesn’t understand how important alpha males are and how hungry young people are to either become them, or yield to them. And for coaches like Payton who build alpha males for the benefit of football victories so that the people of New Orleans can feel good about themselves on a Sunday afternoon—he should have known better than to say the stupid things he did about guns. In a lot of ways Payton was just as guilty of what happened in that murder as the gun was. He breed and exploited the circumstances for which the violence was provoked in a road rage incident and like a coward—he deflected the blame to an inanimate object—instead of the behavior of the participants. For a coach that paid players on his defensive teams, which Smith was a part from 2009 to 2011—to physically harm other players to take them out of a game, the morality of gun violence doesn’t hold much water when Payton helped create a culture that inspired violence against others.
How guilty was Payton, well, for the NFL they came down on him hard—a $500,000 fine and a year suspension. Considering the problems the NFL has had and how much they’ve let go over the years—Payton must have been pretty guilty. If Payton had been a better coach and mentor, it is highly unlikely that Will Smith would have run away from a hit and run accident, or ran his mouth when cornered down the road by the victim. We are all products of our environment and in the world of professional football; the head coach is the judge, jury and executioner of environmental influence. Will Smith was a product of Sean Payton’s professional football teams and that product showed itself most when he crashed into Cardell Hayes then left the accident scene expecting to be relieved of the guilt. Why shouldn’t Smith have expected to not be punished when he watched so many of his friends and fans forgive his head coach and push behind justice just so they could witness one more win in New Orleans on any given Sunday? The answer is, Smith didn’t know better and that was the fault of a culture who made him that way—and the guilt for most of what shaped that culture for Will Smith led right into the office of Sean Payton.
I say that knowing such viewpoints are considered outdated these days. Believe me, my regard for the household chores that are burdened by a man gives them far more personal weight to carry than women should have to endure—it’s not like men should sit around being couch potatoes being served by the women like maids. I expect men to be gentlemen, to help hold the door open for women wherever they are, to treat them with the utmost respect like the vessels of life that they are—and to put their lives and importance before any man’s personal comfort. Progressives would call that view “old fashioned.” I would say that they are idiots to criticize that formula which evolved out of biological and psychological necessity.
In that context, and I’m not going to embarrass him with calling him out, because he’s certainly not alone in this thinking, but one of the most national critics that I know of Donald Trump who is on the radio broadcasting support for Ted Cruz is a guy who has a wife with a far more prestigious job than he has, makes a lot more money, and she relies on him to share many of the household chores so they are done when she gets home from work. I know this because he’s a friend of mine. Just like Ted Cruz—that friend is failing in his conservatism because he has adopted in his life a progressive metrosexual lifestyle that is not becoming of tradition. He has no right to point to Donald Trump—who does have similar views about conservatism and family life as I do—and says that he as a candidate is not a conservative. In his family life, Donald Trump is far more conservative than Ted Cruz—if we are basing conservatism on traditional values—not progressive manipulation of family lifestyles.
I do not fault people who make these types of arrangements within their marriages—it’s their choice. But I do judge them as lacking conservatism. There was a lot about the old stereotypes about breadwinners and domestic tasks for women that helped tag team successful family growth that has been thrown out due to progressive marketing within our country, which should be revisited regarding conservative philosophy. I’ve been married for over a quarter century and honestly I don’t think marriages can last without a proper division of labor specified toward the roles of the sexes. Women are built through estrogen to project a certain level of sign stimuli to be appealing to the opposite sex, and domestic tasks achieved are part of that femininity. Men are built through testosterone to endure physical challenges that don’t always require great intellect, but will make them sweat and project masculinity—which females are biologically inclined to find appealing. It is quite natural for a woman to watch a man chopping wood in the yard from the kitchen window then desire to take him a cool refreshment to get a whiff of his sweaty masculinity. Men find such odors disgusting, but women enjoy them for reasons of mating customs. When we change those rhythms with the family unit we change the nature of philosophy for which human society is built. That is not a good thing when what did work produced many of the positive gains our culture has enjoyed for the last several thousand years.
Of course there is a reason that progressives advocate homosexual rights, just as they have attached themselves to the feminist movement. They have always been after the destruction of the family unit—by feminizing men and encouraging masculine women so that the barriers to primal mating customs could be destroyed and conservative traditions eradicated. The strategic necessity in this endeavor has of course been to turn family control over to the state and pave the way for National Socialism. Given the popularity of the presidential candidate Bernie Sanders—we can see how effective that marketing has been.
When men try to tell me that my ideas about families and the relationship between men and women is outdated—I feel sorry for them, because they are in denial. They will point at their successful dual income lives and declare themselves victors of economic achievement. But they often lack the types of deep love and understanding that our grandparents knew when men were men, women were women, and everyone knew what their family and social roles were—before progressive tampering with biological natures. A lot of the mess we see today can be directly attributed to this condition. Women have been told that they have to be everything to everyone—but most of all, that they must make personal sacrifices for the good of all women and their social obligations as a village. That is why so many women are willing to vote for Hillary Clinton in spite of her terrible record and obvious dishonesty. This is also why Donald Trump’s numbers are so low among women—because instinctively they come to each other’s collective aid when they sense another is in trouble—like the banter between Trump and Cruz over who was more attractive, Heidi Cruz or Melania Trump. When that didn’t work out so well for Cruz, he proclaimed that Trump didn’t like “strong” women—which he insinuated means a career driven maniac who has put her career before her family for the benefit of what she believes is important. The insinuation also was that Melania Trump was a bimbo of some sort because she’s pretty and has decided to be a happy housewife—and to withdraw from collective feminism. Melania in her own right had a successful modeling career and she had done well with a jewelry line as an entrepreneur. But when given an option to have a life for “herself” or to stay home with her son Barron and raise him properly, she picked service to her family over service to collective society—and that is looked down upon by most women who have been trained to think that these feminist arguments about “self reliance” from a “man” was actually good for them. And to the men who have married such women and taken a “progressive” role in their own families—they often find themelves miserable or divorced before it’s all said and done.
I often love talking to old people, because to the 70-year-old couple who have survived a 50 year marriage and has 20 grandchildren and 5 or 6 great-grandchildren, they have lost their estrogen and their testosterone and are as equal within the sexes that human beings can truly be. But they still play out their roles within the family for the psychological maintenance of their children and grandchildren. The man might work out in a tool shed carving wood while the woman works at being experts in the kitchen. Of course the man could learn to cook and could rival any woman, and the woman could learn to carve wood and mow the grass. But successful marriages learn what works and how they can use their sexual roles to bond their families to an idea of conservatism for which the family can last through the ages.
So I find it preposterous that Ted Cruz feels inclined to lecture Donald Trump on the family roles of his wife—because Trump does not have“enlightened” outlook feminism. Cruz obviously does, and so do many men that I know who have confused themselves by thinking that mixing up the sexual roles of family business is somehow considered “conservative.” I can think of about ten men right now who are either national figures speaking out against Trump in favor of Cruz or they are just local business associates who share with their wives the tasks of cooking, cleaning and bread winning—and they are all either divorced at some point in their lives, or they are miserable and secretly hate their wives. The wives secretly know this so to keep the marriage together for their children they occasionally let their men go to Vegas to blow off some steam and make fools of themselves. The women giggle at Pure Romance parties and watch chick flicks together and these idiots think that behavior is rooted in conservatism and will produce a successful family existence. They are mistaken.
Trump is the first presidential candidate in my lifetime that has not backed down from this issue. If he thinks someone looks like a radicalized feminist—he chews into them the same way as he would a man—and that is equal treatment. If women want to play with the boys, that’s the way it goes. But in his family life, he is very traditional—at least by today’s standards. I would argue that Trump is much, much more conservative than Glenn Beck, Ted Cruz and all the writers at the Weekly Standard, The Wall Street Journal, and at Fox News. The men who have given in to this progressive feminist push for equality without the consequences of being dominated by an A Type male—have to justify their failure somehow. These metrosexual conservatives play the same games feminists do, they say that Trump is not a conservative in the way that women have been told that they need to have an “independent” life by service to collectivism. And that just isn’t how the situation is in actuality. Ted Cruz and his supporters have become feminized and tricked into thinking they are still conservatives. But they are not. Sometimes being “enlightened” isn’t a great. Tell that to the bug that reached for the light only to be incinerated by a bug zapper. The human race is doing the same thing to itself—and it’s not very becoming. Putting up with people who have consciously made all the wrong decisions in their life is one thing—but being lectured by them is something else. And I really don’t want to hear Ted Cruz with his little Kermit the Frog voice lecture me about “strong women” when he obviously has issues in his marriage. Save it for counseling—but don’t pretend that the insane behavior is a pinnacle of conservatism. All it really is, is embarrassing.
This is a pretty important story. Republicans have a severe “branding” problem. People like me who are very conservative find people like George Will, Karl Rove, Mitt Romney, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, John Boehner and even locally, Patti Alderson, Don Dixon, Cindy Carpenter and many others terribly flat and unable to win contested issues against Democrats. They are what make up the Republican “establishment,” these days and it is their fault that the Republican “brand” has declined, and even failed in most cases. As I’ve discussed before conservatives won’t get everything we need in just one election. There has to be a multiyear plan enacted to repair the massive damage done to the party by Republicans moving left of center to attract new voters. And just for the record, Ronald Reagan was not conservative enough for me. He is not the benchmark of conservativism as far as I’m concerned. When Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz say they want to be the new party of Reagan, I cringe. Reagan actually toyed with joining the Communist Party and was a union leader for a time. Only late in life did he learn to speak like a conservative and very late—become one. I liked him-but when it comes to conservatives I am often very let down—because few people are as conservative as I am.
About 1,000 Democrats in Mahoning County so far have switched their party affiliation to Republican with election officials saying several did it to vote for Donald Trump, the GOP presidential front-runner.
“We are seeing something this election cycle I’ve never seen before to this degree,” said board Chairman Mark Munroe, who’s also the county Republican chairman. “Every day I take phone calls or get voice messages from people saying they’ve been Democrats all their life and they’ve had it. They want to vote for Donald Trump. I’m surprised at the volume of inquiries we’re getting. It’s remarkable.”
A number of Democrats taking a Republican ballot when voting early at the board “say they want to vote for Trump,” said Joyce Kale-Pesta, Mahoning County Board of Elections director.
About 7,000 Mahoning County voters have cast early votes. Early voting started Feb. 17 and ends March 14, the day before the primary.
Of those 7,000, about 14 percent were Democrats who voted Republican, Kale-Pesta said. That’s about 1,000 so far.
The percentage of Democrats switching parties will grow even more, said board Vice Chairman David Betras, who also is the county Democratic chairman.
And it doesn’t concern Betras.
“I knew Donald Trump’s message would resonate with blue-collar Democrats,” he said. “But once they learn about his record – besides him being anti-trade – they will change their minds in the general election. I assure you that come the general election, voters will vote our way once we tell the story of Donald Trump. The more chaos created in the Republican primary, the better Democrats will do in the general election.”
Betras, who backs Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, said it “would make me happy for Donald Trump to beat John Kasich,” the Ohio governor running for president as a Republican.
About 5 percent of Republicans – 350 voters – cast Democrat ballots of those who’ve voted so far, said Chris Rakocy, the board’s information technology manager.
Munroe, who supports Kasich, said that if the governor isn’t the Republican presidential nominee, “I’ll be glad to support whoever is our nominee.”
When asked about Trump’s various controversial statements, Munroe said, “Should Trump be the nominee, he’ll have plenty of time to rehabilitate himself.”
Trump is the reason turnout will be higher than normal for this primary, Munroe said.
“We’re seeing this all over the country; the Republican vote is way up and it’s because of Trump,” he said. “Now, it’s happening in the Valley. Whatever you think of Trump, you can’t take away his ability to energize the electorate.”
There are 161,009 registered voters in the county, including 40,958 Democrats and 14,663 Republicans. The rest are independents, who don’t vote in primaries, with a tiny number affiliated with third parties such as Green and Libertarian.
In Ohio, party affiliation is basely solely on voting in a primary, Munroe said.
“All you have to do is tell a poll worker that you want to vote for a certain party in the primary and that becomes your affiliation,” he said.
Election officials in Trumbull and Columbiana counties say they aren’t keeping track of how many voters are changing party affiliations.
“But we’ve had some people say, ‘I want to switch to the Trump party,” said Stephanie Penrose, Trumbull County’s elections board director.
“There are a lot of Democrats switching over,” said Kim Meeks, Columbiana County’s elections board deputy director. “We see a trend, but we won’t know details until after the primary.”
Let that simmer for a bit and think of what that could do for the GOP. Think about California come November 2016, or New York. Tell me there is another Republican in the party today who could win in these places. The answer of course is that there isn’t. Ted Cruz won’t. And nobody else will either.
I’m not surprised. Chuck and the gang at WLW picked Lisa Wells once Darryl Parks was out-of-the-way. Looks like they made a pretty bad decision.
She was a drug user according to her arrest records and a Lakota levy supporter–which is kind of the same thing. She was WLW’s way of becoming more “inclusive” to a new demographic that hasn’t typically listened to talk radio. Why do these things keep happening to WLW?
Southern Ohio, specifically Butler County isn’t known for its wildlife—but there are enough RINOs migrating around that it rivals only the Serengeti of Africa. This is largely due to the State Central Committee seat that the socialite Patti Alderson holds which keeps those RINOs in seats they otherwise wouldn’t be able to hold. Ann Becker is running against Patti Alderson to attempt to set things right in Butler County and if you listen to the broadcast Ann did with Brian Thomas on 55 KRC below, you will begin to understand how Patti has loaded Butler County full of so many RINOs and learn what you can do about it. What’s even stranger, given the sometimes intense anger that the Liberty Movement is uttering these days toward the establishment commitment toward RINOs (Republican In Name Only—people like Don DIXON) is that Patti listed them on her promotional website as a badge of honor like her own zoo listing. That’s how out of touch she is. Now a few names on her list, also shown below, are decent people—like Margy and T.C. Rogers. Roger Reynolds most of the time is like a tennis ball being knocked over a net from Liberty to establishment—so he’s sort of on the fence—but most of the rest are clearly RINOs. Not that they are bad people, but they are definitely establishment anchors who lean far too left for the current Liberty tide that is emerging. To prove it, just click on the hotlinks below, and you will see the evidence. Here is the information that Patti listed on her website promoting her ability to maintain the status quo by continuing to feed the RINOs of Butler County.https://t.co/3jNX1vRG7N
“Patti Alderson is a blessing to our Community. I do not know where Butler County would be without her commitment and leadership.”
— Margy Conditt, State Representative
“During her time on the State Central Committee, Patti Alderson worked with conservatives across Ohio to build a strong Republican Party. Winning elections is the first step in the battle to preserve and protect our values – we need Patti Alderson to keep up the fight.” — Tim Derickson, State Representative
intelligent persistence to bring the resources necessary to help solve the most pressing needs of our community.” — TC Rogers, Vice President Butler County Commissioner
“It is my honor and privilege to endorse Patti Alderson for Butler County’s State Central Committeewoman. Patti is one of the most upstanding, hard-working leaders I’ve ever known. She is a tireless community volunteer, philanthropist, and a top-notch civic leader. Patti is one of those rare individuals who never stops “giving back.” I wholeheartedly ask for your support for Patti Alderson!”
— Nancy Nix, CPA, Butler County Treasurer
“Patti is a staunch Conservative dedicated to the values this County was founded upon and deserving of our vote.” — Greg Wilkens, Butler County Engineer
“I endorse Patti Alderson whole heartedly for State Central Committee. Patti is a person of strong character and moral judgment. Please join me in supporting Patti Alderson on March 15.” — Roger Reynolds, Butler County Auditor
The Black Rhino of the Serengeti are herbivores who mostly eat greenery—brush, grass and other plant life. The RINOs of Butler County eat lots of greens as well, but this often comes in the form of paper money. All the RINOs listed on Patti’s endorsement page are zoo feed RINOs who come to her home and charity events to be fed and have largely been domesticated by her. She controls them, she keeps them fat, dumb, and happy, and she maintains her grip on their existence with her seat on the State Central Committee.
The Black Rhinos of Serengeti are almost always on endangered lists because they have been overly hunted. To this day, they are a protected species. The RINOs of Butler County are also a protected species—they are protected by the State Central Committee but in reality they need to be hunted and thinned for the sake of Liberty. Because, they are over grazing and stripping away all the wonderful resources our fine county provides with a bottomless pit of hunger that always needs to be fed. If Patti weren’t so rich with what they want to eat, they’d erode away with the desire to have full stomachs that could never be filled. So while we want to preserve the Serengeti Rhinos we want to hunt the Butler County RINOs to near extinction for the good of all of us.
Patti lists them above the way an African hunter might mount the head of her trophies on a wall for the admiration of her peers. As she poses next to each picture of all her trophies she looks like a Cabela’s ad for new hunting gear. Except Patti doesn’t just mount those RINOs on her wall, she breeds them first and is heavily responsible for the over population of RINOs in Butler County that we currently have—the insidious money hungry establishment types who are stripping away everything our county offers in favor of their full bellies.
If you want to hunt them and thin out the herd of RINOs that are migrating all over Ohio, then vote for Ann Becker to return the county of Butler to its natural beauty by preventing the overgrazing of the RINOs that Patti Alderson feeds so passionately. Put a stop to Patti Alderson’s zoo full of overgrazing RINOs—and vote to preserve Butler County.
Little things matter to me quite a lot. I notice everything and of my many careers over a lifetime, one of them will be a cultural expert where psychology, art, religion, economics and all other forms of unnamed human ambition find their way into every created thing on earth. I grew up for as long as I can remember wanting to be a film director—but not being a very collaborative person—relegated that desire for more inward pursuits. Because of all that I can say with great provocation that the world is in a severe cultural decline. America obviously leads the world in culture—even though many academics might dispute it. The evidence is in our movie houses and our music with great audacious display. So rather than slide my predilections into the direction of the current pendulum swinging culture of global unification I am focusing much more these days on American westerns as a foundation philosophy that stands in contrast to the world currently presented to us.
I was born in 1968 and a few months after my birth one of the greatest films ever made was released—it was a Sergio Leone western called Once Upon a Time in the West. Leone was an Italian director interpreting American westerns for a country trying to fight its way back from cultural decay after World War II. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. Leone at the time was best known for his “Dollars” trilogy which made Clint Eastwood into a star. Those films are and have always been fantastic. But for the director Leone they gained him the opportunity to make the western of his dreams off the success of the previous Eastwood films. Paramount Pictures tossed the world to him along with a host of first class stars and Sergio Leone along with his musical collaborator Ennio Morricone spun a masterpiece called Once Upon a Time in the West.
Some of my very first television memories were these spaghetti westerns by Sergio Leone replaying on Channel 19 in Cincinnati. My grandfather loved westerns and whenever I was at his farm-house he had them on, so my mother also watched them all the time as well because it reminded her of her dad. Of them the Sergio Leone westerns reflected my own observations about people even when I was very young—and I soaked them up. Before I was ever in the kindergarten I was a fan of Once Upon a Time in the West. I often confused all Leone’s westerns together until I was just shy of ten and it was then when I began to appreciate Once Upon a Time in the West as something of its own. The Leone films had hard-wired themselves into my consciousness. My very first time in front of a television camera was when I was sixteen during “tough guy” week on Channel 19. “Tough guy week” was a ratings grab at Channel 19 so they ran Steve McQueen movies along with a lot of Clint Eastwood to bump up their winter numbers. At a young age I had evolved into having a “reputation” and I was sitting at the dinner table of a prominent Sharonville judge, his wife and the biggest criminal of Northern Cincinnati at the time. The event was a Chinese New Year advertisement for a restaurant that I worked at. One of the owner’s sons was a guy who liked to dip his feet into that type of world where justice sits at dinner tables with known criminals and he used me even at that young age as one of his “heavies.” I enjoyed the experience because I was essentially living the life of the protagonists in Sergio Leone’s westerns and I discovered by living those characters in real life that one of my favorite film directors was in fact a genius. As I sat at that table during that day long commercial recording talking to the judge and the crime lord obviously working together with me in the middle and being told by that same judge that when I got into trouble—he’d take care of it–I knew for me there was no going back. At too young of an age I knew way too much about the way the world worked. I was then and still am about 60 years ahead of myself and it does really go back to Leone’s westerns and my young introduction to them. When the commercial aired on television my family was one of the first people back then to have a VCR so I was able to tape it. My television appearance aired with the judge and the criminal seated on either side of me during a showing of For a Few Dollars More. During that same Channel 19 “tough guy” week Once Upon a Time in the West was shown again and I was able to see it as a 16-year-old actually doing in real life much of what the Charles Bronson character was doing in that film and I watched it with new understanding for the first time. It was as real and honest of any motion picture I had ever seen—it was to my eyes much better than The Godfather which was still making cultural waves in that year of 1985. A month later I was involved in a fight with a bunch of people which led to a tragic situation and if I had not been sitting at that table with that judge on that particular day for that commercial, I’d probably have a much different life than I do now and my freedoms would likely be greatly restricted.
I felt it was important for my wife to be to watch Once Upon a Time in the West to understand more about me, so I tried to show it to her early in our relationship. At the time she was a country club girl so she wasn’t ready for movies like that—where the opening was so strange and dramatic. She made fun of it heavily after the first seven minutes and I never tried again to show it to her until January of 2016. I had meant to show the movie to my children at some point so given all my history with it I felt that they should see the movie. I bought the cut of the film that had been restored to 165 minutes as opposed to the version I had seen as a kid, the 145 minute version which was a bit more confusing, and relished being able to finally show it to my wife and at least some of my kids. It was a great experience. The music from Ennio Morricone was so good in that movie that I have used it often to raise my mind above times of incredible stress. Even though my wife didn’t like Once Upon a Time in the West at first I still loved it and thought of it often to carry me through tough times. I was 25-years old and in deep trouble. I had more legal problems and had law suits directed at me from several directions and I had to tap into that raw, primal civility that I had refined when I was 16, where I could walk into any situation and just take care of things no matter how bad the guys on the other side of the table were—or who hid in the shadows where you parked your car. I had for the first time a CD collection of Ennio Morricone’s music which featured a scene on the front from Once Upon a Time in the West. By the 1990s the film was considered an obscure classic and nobody remembered it much except for filmmakers and people who were particularly fascinated with cultural phenomenon. In the hardest days of my life I listened to the music from Once Upon a Time in the West to serve as my moral compass—and it has always worked for me. I sat in my office back then with the world coming down around me and would listen to those Morricone soundtracks and think of “The Man with the Harmonica”—that haunting melody which spoke of revenge, perseverance, and the growth of a human into an Übermensch (German for “Overman, Overhuman, Above-Human, Superman, Superhuman, Ultraman, Ultrahuman, Beyond-Man”; German pronunciation: [ˈˀyːbɐmɛnʃ]) As readers here know I think a lot of the concept which is from the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. In his 1883 book Thus Spoke Zarathustra (German: Also Sprach Zarathustra), Nietzsche has his character Zarathustra posit the Übermensch as a goal for humanity to set for itself. It is a work of philosophical allegory, with a structural similarity to the Gathas of Zoroaster/Zarathustra. I learned later that my love of Sergio Leone had more to do with the concept of the Übermensch than of the westerns themselves—but I can say that there is an honesty in Once Upon a Time in the West that is not present in any other form of art and it should be experienced—especially these days.
After directing The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Leone decided to retire from Westerns and desired to produce his film based on The Hoods, which eventually becameOnce Upon a Time in America. However, Leone accepted an offer from Paramount Pictures to provide access to Henry Fonda and to use a budget to produce another Western film. He recruited Bertolucci and Argento to devise the plot of the film in 1966, researching other Western films in the process. After Clint Eastwood turned down an offer to play the movie’s protagonist, Bronson was offered the role. During production, Leone recruited Donati to rewrite the script due to concerns over time limitations.
The original version by the director was 166 minutes (2 hours and 46 minutes) when it was first released on December 21, 1968. This was the version that was to be shown in European cinemas and was a box office success. For the US release on May 28, 1969, Once Upon a Time in the West was edited down to 145 minutes (2 hours and 25 minutes) by Paramount and was a financial flop. The film is considered by some to be the first installment in Leone’s Once Upon a Time Trilogy, followed by Duck, You Sucker!, called Once Upon a Time… the Revolution in parts of Europe, and Once Upon a Time in America, though the films do not share any characters in common.
The film portrays two conflicts that take place around Flagstone, a fictional town in the American Old West: a land battle related to construction of a railroad, and a mission of vengeance against a cold-blooded killer. A struggle exists for Sweetwater, a piece of land near Flagstone containing the region’s only water source. The land was bought by Brett McBain (Frank Wolff), who foresaw that the railroad would have to pass through that area to provide water for the steam locomotives. When crippled railroad tycoon Morton (Gabriele Ferzetti) learns of this, he sends his hired gun Frank (Henry Fonda) to intimidate McBain to move off the land, but Frank instead kills McBain and his three children, planting evidence to frame the bandit Cheyenne (Jason Robards). It appears the land has no owner; however, a former prostitute (Claudia Cardinale) arrives from New Orleans, revealing she is Jill McBain, Brett’s new wife and the owner of the land.
Meanwhile, a mysterious harmonica-playing gunman (Charles Bronson), whom Cheyenne later dubs “Harmonica”, pursues Frank. In the film’s opening scene, Harmonica kills three men sent by Frank to kill him. In a roadhouse on the way to Sweetwater, he informs Cheyenne that the three gunfighters appeared to be posing as Cheyenne’s men.
Back at Sweetwater, construction materials are delivered to build a railroad station and a small town. Harmonica explains that Jill will lose Sweetwater unless the station is built by the time the track’s construction crews reach that point, so Cheyenne puts his men to work building it.
Frank turns against Morton, who wanted to make a deal with Jill; Morton’s disability makes him unable to fight back. After having sex with Jill, Frank forces her to sell the property in an auction. He tries to buy the farm cheaply by intimidating the other bidders, but Harmonica arrives, holding Cheyenne at gunpoint, and makes a much higher bid based on his reward money for delivering Cheyenne to the authorities. Harmonica rebuffs an offer by Frank to buy the farm from him for one dollar more than he paid at the auction. As Cheyenne is placed on a train bound for the Yuma prison, two members of his gang purchase one-way tickets for the train, intending to help him escape.
Frank’s men betray and ambush him, having been paid by Morton to turn against him, but—much to Jill’s outrage—Harmonica helps Frank kill them, intending to kill Frank himself. Frank returns to Morton, only to find that he and the rest of Frank’s men have been killed in a battle with Cheyenne’s gang. Frank then goes to Sweetwater to confront Harmonica. On two occasions, Frank has asked Harmonica who he is, but both times Harmonica refused to answer him. Instead, he mysteriously quoted names of men Frank has murdered. This time, Harmonica says he will reveal who he is “only at the point of dying”. The two men position themselves for a duel, at which point Harmonica’s motive for revenge is revealed in a flashback:
A younger Frank, already a cruel bandit, is forcing a boy to support on his shoulders his older brother, whose neck is in a noose strung from an arch. As the boy struggles to hold his brother’s weight, Frank stuffs a harmonica into the boy’s mouth and tells him to play. The brother curses Frank and kicks his brother away, and dies.
Harmonica draws first and shoots Frank. As he lies dying, Frank again asks who he is, whereupon the harmonica is placed in Frank’s mouth. Frank nods weakly in recognition and dies. Harmonica and Cheyenne say goodbye to Jill, who is supervising construction of the railway station as the track-laying crews reach Sweetwater. Cheyenne collapses, revealing that he had been fatally shot by Morton during the fight with Frank’s gang. The work train arrives, Jill carrying water to the rail workers, while Harmonica rides away with Cheyenne’s body.
Leone’s intent was to take the stock conventions of the American Westerns of John Ford, Howard Hawks and others, and rework them in an ironic fashion, essentially reversing their intended meaning in their original sources to create a darker connotation.[22] The most obvious example of this is the casting of veteran film good guy Henry Fonda as the villainous Frank, but there are also many other, more subtle reversals throughout the film. According to film critic and historian Christopher Frayling, the film quotes from as many as 30 classic American Westerns.
The major films referenced include:
High Noon(1952): The opening sequence is similar to the opening of High Noon, in which three bad guys (Lee Van Cleef, Sheb Wooley and Robert J. Wilke) are shown waiting for the arrival of their leader (named Frank, played by Ian MacDonald) on the noon train. In the opening of Once Upon a Time in the West, three bad guys (Jack Elam, who appeared in a small part in High Noon, Woody Strode, and Al Mulock) take over and wait at a train station. However, the period of waiting is depicted in a lengthy ten-minute sequence, the train arrives several hours after noon, and its passenger is one of the film’s heroes (Charles Bronson) rather than its villain. The scene is famous for its use of natural sounds: a squeaky windmill, knuckles cracking, and Jack Elam’s character trying to shoo off a fly. According to rumor, Leone offered the parts of the three gunmen to The Good, the Bad and the Ugly stars Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef and Eli Wallach.[23]
3:10 to Yuma(1957): This cult Western by Delmer Daves may have had considerable influence on the film. The most obvious reference is a brief exchange between Keenan Wynn‘s Sheriff and Cheyenne, in which they discuss sending the latter to Yuma In addition, as in West the main villain is played by an actor (Glenn Ford) who normally played good guys. The film also features diegetic music (Ford at one point whistles the film’s theme song just as Harmonica provides music in West). And the scene in which Van Heflin‘s character escorts Ford to the railroad station while avoiding an ambush by his gang may have inspired the ambush of Frank by his own men in Leone’s film.
The Comancheros(1961): The names “McBain” and “Sweetwater” may come from this film. (Contrary to popular belief, the name of the town “Sweetwater” was not taken from Victor Sjöström‘s silent epic dramaThe Wind. Bernardo Bertolucci has stated that he looked at a map of the southwestern United States, found the name of the town in Arizona, and decided to incorporate it into the film. However, both “Sweetwater” and a character named “McBain” appeared in The Comancheros, which Leone admired.[24])
Johnny Guitar(1954): Jill and Vienna have similar backstories (both are former prostitutes who become saloonkeepers), and Harmonica, like Sterling Hayden‘s title character, is a mysterious, gunslinging outsider known by his musical nickname. Some of West’s central plot (Western settlers vs. the railroad company) may be recycled from Nicholas Ray’s film.[24]
The Iron Horse(1924): West may contain several subtle references to this film, including a low angle shot of a shrieking train rushing towards the screen in the opening scene, and the shot of the train pulling into the Sweetwater station at the end.[24]
Shane(1953): The massacre scene in West features young Timmy McBain out hunting with his father, just as Joey does in this movie. The funeral of the McBains is borrowed almost shot-for-shot from Shane.[24]
Vera Cruz(1954): In both films, Charles Bronson’s character plays a harmonica and is known only by a nickname.
The Searchers(1956): Leone admitted that the rustling bushes, the silencing of cicada chirps, and the fluttering pheasants that suggest a menace approaching the farmhouse when the McBain family is massacred were all taken from The Searchers. The ending of the film—where Western nomads Harmonica and Cheyenne move on rather than join modern society—also echoes the famous ending of Ford’s film.[24]
Warlock(1959): At the end of this film, Henry Fonda’s character wears clothing very similar to his costume throughout West. In addition, Warlock features a discussion about mothers between Fonda and Dorothy Malone that is similar to those between Cheyenne and Jill in West. Finally, Warlock contains a sequence in which Fonda’s character kicks a crippled man off his crutches, as he does to Mr. Morton in West.
The Magnificent Seven(1960): In this film, Charles Bronson’s character whittles a piece of wood. In West, he does the same, although in a different context. The Magnificent Seven was based on Seven Samuraiby Akira Kurosawa, whose film Yojimbo (“The Bodyguard”) was the inspiration (and later, litigation) behind Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars.
Winchester ’73(1950): It has been claimed that the scenes in West at the trading post are based on those in Winchester ’73, but the resemblance is slight.[24]
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance(1962): The dusters (long coats) worn by Cheyenne and his gang (and by Frank and his men while impersonating them) resemble those worn by Liberty Valance (Lee Marvin) and his henchmen when they are introduced in this film. In addition, the auction scene in West was intended to recall the election scene in Liberty Valance.[24]
Duel in the Sun(1946): The character of Morton, the crippled railroad baron in West, was based on the character played by Lionel Barrymore in this film.[24]
Sergeant Rutledge(1960): This John Ford Western, featuring Woody Strode as the title character, has a scene in which Constance Towers falls asleep in a chair with a rifle in her lap, just as Jill McBain does in Leone’s film.
My Darling Clementine(1946): In the trading post scene, Cheyenne slides Harmonica’s gun down the bar to him, challenging him to shoot – much like Morgan Earp (Ward Bond) sliding his weapon to brother Wyatt (Henry Fonda) in the Ford film when the Earps meet Doc Holliday (Victor Mature) for the first time. Also, a deleted scene in West featured Frank getting a shave with perfume in a barber’s shop, much like Fonda’s Wyatt.
Once Upon a Time in the West was itself explicitly referenced in The Quick and the Dead, when John Herod (Gene Hackman), faces Ellen (Sharon Stone), better known as “The Lady,” in a climactic gunfight. Ellen’s identity is a mystery until the end, when the audience sees Ellen’s flashback to Herod lynching her father, a sheriff. The sadistic Herod gives Ellen (then only a little girl) a chance to save her father by shooting through and breaking the rope wrapped around his neck, but Ellen accidentally kills her father by shooting him in the forehead. As with Frank, Herod yells “Who are you?”, and the only response he receives is an artifact from the earlier lynching—in this case, the sheriff’s badge that Ellen has kept all these years. The Quick and the Dead has another connection to Once Upon a Time in the West: It was the final film for Woody Strode, who died before it could be released.
Many other films have paid tribute to Once Upon a Time in the West over the years: Quentin Tarantino‘s Inglourious Basterds opens with a lengthy sequence entitled Once Upon a Time in Nazi-Occupied France (a phrase also used as a tagline for the 2009 film) which introduces the film’s primary villain and features the mass shooting of a family at a farmhouse; Tarantino’s Kill Bill films utilize snatches of Morricone’s harmonica and guitar soundtrack; Back to the Future Part III recreates the station rooftop scene from Once Upon a Time in the West; Baz Luhrmann‘s Australia features several nods to Leone’s film, including a homestead with a squeaky windmill, an almost-identical funeral scene, and an antagonistic relationship between the film’s villains; and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End features a parody of the “Man With a Harmonica” theme on the soundtrack, as the film’s protagonists parley on a sandbar before the final battle.
A lot of people I think have the same reaction my wife had to Once Upon a Time in the West the first time they see it. Let me tell you that 25 years after she laughed at it the first time, she wasn’t laughing any more. Nobody is laughing any more, I can say that. She had grown to appreciate what the film had been saying for decades. She had learned by middle life what I had known as a 16-year-old, and once you know those types of things there is only one place for your mind to go. You either become an Übermensch of some kind or you go insane. There are a lot of characters in the world like Henry Fonda’s “Frank.” And there is only one way to deal with them and Sergio Leone knew how to capture that conflict on-screen like no other person I’ve ever seen in film. A lot of film makers have tried to capture the magic of Once Upon a Time in the West, but they never get it all. Now, nearly five decades later the extremely bright international culture that produced that great film is nearly vanished. It’s not a great film just because it’s a western—but because of the metaphors presented in the seemingly simplistic tapestry of the western—as it was invented in America.
It doesn’t matter that Sergio Leone took an American hero like Henry Fonda and made him into the villain—it’s that Leone knew how to take the strength of his characters whether it be Charles Bronson or Clint Eastwood and turn them into Übermenschs to deal with overwhelming evil captured quite accurately. I always think of that dinner table during that filming of the Chinese New Year commercial and how it reminded me so much of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. But even more than that it reminded me of Frank from Once Upon a Time in the West. When Jill gets mad at Harmonica for helping keep Frank alive—it is for the reasons provided that many of the mysteries of our lives go unfulfilled. And yes I’m talking in a bit of a riddle here, but to get the answer watch the movie and remember the line, “time flies.” Knowing what to do with an enemy after you’ve identified them as such is what I have always found valuable about westerns. To understand that you have an enemy is to have a set of values that an enemy fights against and in Once Upon a Time in the West that conflict is poetically displayed in ways that no film has ever mastered as well. Many have tried but nobody has been able to hit it as well as Sergio Leone. Time does fly, whether it’s a 16 year old discovering the truth of how a childhood movie favorite applies to the real world of politics and intrigue and how rivers are often polluted with the remains of politics washed off the parking lot after a strong rain—with the personal stamp of approval from a kindly old judge—or a wife who had grown over the years to see something totally different from her young 20-year-old eyes were ready to appreciate. Some movies reflect culture—others like Sergio Leone’s films make it. And that is why I think so much of him and his films—particularly, Once Upon a Time in the West. If you haven’t seen it, you should. Because “time flies” and so do good ideas—you have to hit them when you get the chance for the motivations only you know about—even if the morality for it only exists outside of time and space in a mythical realm where justice truly does rule—not with blinders—but a six-gun and a lot of tenacity.
I heard you! You do not support Governor Kasich for President – even if the Ohio GOP State Central Committee does.
You reenergized my faith in the Constitutional people of Ohio! Yesterday I sent out an email about the Ohio Republican State Central Committee’s endorsement of Governor Kasich. An endorsement by a party means the members of that party are expected to support the candidate.
I received over 200 emails in two hours yesterday telling me ‘Hell No.’ The stories about Governor Kasich and the disdain for the Ohio Republican Party State Central Committee’s endorsement of Kasich was incredible. I could feel the anger coming out of my computer.
Governor Kasich says he balanced Ohio’s budget – all Governors have to balance Ohio’s budget, it’s in the Ohio Constitution. He says he created jobs in Ohio – his term started after the crash in 2008. Yes, there were more jobs created in Ohio after 2008 but was it Kasich that created the jobs or the free market starting to improve? He takes credit for the jobs that our small business owners work hard and create – you didn’t build that Governor Kasich.
Governor Kasich’s support of Common Core, his expanding Medicaid using Obamacare, his increase of spending in Ohio by 30%, his standing in the way of Right to Work, his raising taxes – all of these things and more are reasons that he is not the best choice for President.
I think we all agree that we want a President that will stand by the Constitution and give America a plan to move this country forward, not backward, toward freedom. Whoever that candidate is for you, vote for him or her. No one has the right to expect you to vote a certain way, party or not.
We want political parties that stand on principle, not on who they can get elected. Shame on the State Central Committee. They are up for reelection this March; we must watch those races.
Your mission over the next eight weeks is to make sure everyone you know is ready to vote on March 15, or early vote at your county Board of Elections, starting February 17th. This is the most important primary in the history of the United States of America. Everyone who cares about the future of this country needs to get out and vote!
One of the biggest issues I heard about regarding Governor Kasich was his support of Common Core. I really thought he would flip-flop on this by now, but he is standing strong with Common Core.
A horrible choice for our kids and Ohio Governor Kasich!
I had the privilege of hearing Heidi Huber give an update on Common Core last night. The video is below. We must stand together to make the change we want to see.
Kantian ethics refers to a deontologicalethical theory ascribed to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. The theory, developed as a result of Enlightenment rationalism, is based on the view that the only intrinsically good thing is a good will; an action can only be good if its maxim – the principle behind it – is duty to the moral law. Central to Kant’s construction of the moral law is the categorical imperative, which acts on all people, regardless of their interests or desires. Kant formulated the categorical imperative in various ways. His principle of universalisability requires that, for an action to be permissible, it must be possible to apply it to all people without a contradiction occurring. His formulation of humanity as an end in itself requires that humans are never treated merely as a means to an end, but always also as ends in themselves. The formulation of autonomy concludes that rational agents are bound to the moral law by their own will, while Kant’s concept of the Kingdom of Ends requires that people act as if the principles of their actions establish a law for a hypothetical kingdom. Kant also distinguished between perfect and imperfect duties. A perfect duty, such as the duty not to lie, always holds true; an imperfect duty, such as the duty to give to charity, can be made flexible and applied in particular time and place. (Sound like Kasich?)
In political philosophy, Kant has had wide and increasing influence with the major political philosopher of the late twentieth century, John Rawls, drawing heavily on his inspiration in setting out the basis for a liberal view of political institutions. The nature of Rawls’ use of Kant has engendered serious controversy but has demonstrated the vitality of Kantian considerations across a wider range of questions than was once thought plausible.
The poet Heine, who was a friend of Marx and upon whom the latter at one time had a great influence, depicted very vividly Kant’s motives for treading the two paths. Kant had an old and faithful servant, Lampe, who had lived with, and attended to, his master for forty years. For Kant this Lampe was the personification of the average man who could not live without religion. After a brilliant exposition of the revolutionary import of the Critique of Pure Reason in the struggle with theology and with the belief in a Divine Principle, Heine explained why Kant found it necessary to write the Critique of Practical Reason in which the philosopher re-established everything he had torn down before. Here is what Heine wrote:
“After the tragedy comes the farce. Immanuel Kant has hitherto appeared as the grim, inexorable philosopher; he has stormed heaven, put all the garrison to the sword; the ruler of the world swims senseless in his blood; there is no more any mercy, or fatherly goodness, or future reward for present privations; the immortality of the soul is in its last agonies — death rattles and groans. And old Lampe stands by with his umbrella under his arm as a sorrowing spectator, and the sweat of anguish and tears run down his cheeks. Then Immanuel Kant is moved to pity, and shows himself not only a great philosopher, but a good man. He reconsiders, and half good-naturedly and half ironically says, ‘Old Lampe must have a God, or else the poor man cannot be happy, and people really ought to be happy in this world. Practical common sense declares that. Well, meinet wegen, for all I care, let practical reason guarantee the existence of a God.'” [Heinrich Heine, Collected Works. W. Heineman, London, 1906. Vol. 5, pp. 150-151.]
That’s how the political left has been able to implement and enact a communist strategy while at the same time convincing people who think they are hard-core conservative Central Committee members that they are doing the work established by Immanuel Kant. What they don’t know is that Kant put down the foundations of Marxism which would evolve into open communism to essentially destroy the economy of Russia allowing Europe to rise to power after World War I. It’s all German philosophy people. But eventually Kant would influence John Rawls who nearly singlehandedly brought detrimental liberalism to most political institutions academic and social. His magnum opus, A Theory of Justice (1971), was said at the time of its publication to be “the most important work in moral philosophy since the end of World War II“[4]and is now regarded as “one of the primary texts in political philosophy”.[5] His work in political philosophy, dubbed Rawlsianism,[6] takes as its starting point the argument that “the most reasonable principles of justice are those everyone would accept and agree to from a fair position”.[5] Rawls attempts to determine the principles of social justice by employing a number of thought experiments such as the famous original position in which everyone is impartially situated as equals behind a veil of ignorance.[5] He is one of the major thinkers in the tradition of liberal political philosophy. According to English philosopher Jonathan Wolff, while there could be a “dispute about the second most important political philosopher of the 20th century, there could be no dispute about the most important: John Rawls”.[4]
The Overmanwarrior 