Obviously William Schmidt is baiting me to comment on the school levy situation in Springboro where I have praised the efforts of Kelly Khols, even though her board is putting up a renewal levy. Schmidt and I have frequent banters back and forth and occasionally I use his arguments upon these pages as platforms for discussion. He represents the normal pro education viewpoint and brings things to my attention that keep me plugged in to how “those people” see the world. I am against Springboro’s renewal levy. In fact, I support a complete disassembly of the public education system as we know it to be rebuilt as a competitive undertaking. Public education is like the Harlem Globetrotters, they look good as long as they play the Washington Generals, but let them play in the NBA against the Heat, or the Lakers—who does anybody think would win? The NBA is a competitive driven business where teams are forced to get better through competition. The Harlem Globetrotters is a circus act of trick shots and nonsense. That is why public education resembles the Harlem Globetrotters and not the Miami Heat. I want to see education methods that make schools like the Heat and less like the Globetrotters so I do not support throwing money at schools through taxation. However, my friends at No Lakota Levy who have much milder thoughts about public education than I do like the trend in Springboro of leaving a decreasing taxation footprint on the community over the coming years. I used an add prepared by No Lakota Levy reflecting that sentiment on a recent posting which drove Schmidt to make the conclusions cited below. CLICK TO REVIEW THAT ADD.
Once again in a Rich Hoffman blog I see a reference praising the Springboro schools.
I salute (and envy!) Springboro, which is reducing the tax burden on its citizens. The renewal levy on Springboro’s November ballot will be set at a lower mileage rate to reduce taxes from that levy by nearly 15 percent. This is $1,353,800 per year, and $6,769,000 over 5 years. Congratulations on a job well done!
Although Rich didn’t seem to write the above himself, his praise of the actions of the Springboro Board in the past would certainly make it seem that he is in support of their actions and the reference above. Isn’t this the real news of the day– that Rich Hoffman is supporting a school levy.
It is also news that no one — not Rich Hoffman, not NoLakotaLevy, not Daryl Parks, not the so-called transparent Springboro School Board is telling the public what the tax reduction would be if they vote down this renewal levy in Springboro.
This tells me that politics is the motive. We all know that Kelly Kohls, Jim Rigano, David Petroni will look like failures if their levy fails because the school could not “live within their means” if the public says no to the renewal levy. They won’t tell the public what their tax reduction will be if they vote down the renewal levy.
What Hoffman, Parks, NoLakota, Springboro Board all ignore is that the success of their schools all hinges on the extra efforts the teachers give beyond the letters of their contracts. We are talking about hours and hours each week. No casino money, state auditor money, shopping center money provides for that. The people above want to flat out reduce the cost of labor. That is their only goal. They hope that the teachers will continue to work just as hard as their salaries are being held down — in fact they demand that.
But it is ironic that Hoffman, Parks, NoLakota, and Springboro base their hopes on the passage of a school levy. They should, instead praise the selfless efforts of their teachers who continue to work extremely hard as their communities continue to vote down levies and take the staff’s efforts for granted.
Still, let’s not bury the lead story here. It is quite newsworthy when Rich Hoffman supports a school levy.
William Schmidt
Well, I’ll make it clear since William has drawn a false conclusion, that I am not with Kelly on the renewl levy in Springboro. Many people in West Chester and Liberty Township wanted me to run for school board at Lakota and I promptly instructed them that I had no desire to see that system remain intact. I could not be elected to a school board position to do to it what Obama is attempting to do to America, and that is disassemble it from the inside. I just don’t operate that way, and that would be my only intention for getting involved, dismantlement. Relatively speaking, Kelly has done a good job in Springboro, but it’s not what I’d like to see. Kelly’s renewal levy does not introduce competition to public education allowing those measures to come about. The system Kelly is currently advocating is still a system that steals from tax payers to basically pay for the Harlem Globetrotters to perform circus acts with our children—raising them to become clowns.
When I share personal moments of my life with readers here, I do it to show how I think things should be done. I am of the thinking that children are wonderful before they get to age ten, but after that, most children learn to “mature” and lose their ability to quickly learn, adapt, and overcome obstacles. I have been enjoying recently the Fox Television show Master Chef Junior and have been amazed at the level of food preparation that those children have displayed at such a very tender age. Some of the work they are doing is truly remarkable, and a lesson to everything that is wrong with public education. Kids are taught to be stupid in public education; they are taught social restriction, pecking order politics, and how to confine their imaginations to the limits of a socialist teacher instead of their limitless intellectual capacities.
My daughter was watching me read an Incredible Hulk comic book to her son the other day and I could see the pain on her face. I raised her and her sister the same way as I am doing with my grandson, which I share with my reader here in the clip below. I know my grandson cannot understand the words I’m reading to him, so I teach him intuitively in a visual way the foundation concepts he will need to be able to apply to reading later. I use comic books to read to him because it is a visual form of learning, plus the characters are engaged in story lines that define right and wrong—which I can use to help the young fellow set his own internal parameters. That I am doing such a thing should be extremely obvious to the casual viewer.
And that is how I raised my daughters, mentored many other young people over the years, and will continue to do so. It is how students learn. My wife thought the moment was cute, so she recorded part of it. Modern public education does not do the things I was doing in the video, they do not make value assessments between right and wrong—bad behavior or good. They do not seek to open the mind, but to close it—so not to question the nature of their teachings. My grandson is only just a bit above one year old in that video and he knows intuitively what’s going on. He has no point of reference to judge against, but make no mistake, when he’s twenty to thirty years old he will find himself reflecting back onto my intonations of emphasis when referring to the topless woman on the comic pages, the heroics of Hulk, the shadiness of the villain and how it could be determined by his eyes, and the resilience of heroics. My daughter was sad because she is literally alone among her age group where her peers do not share her hopes, and illuminating outlook on life. I couldn’t be there for all her friends, and the people who have come into her life when they were the age of her son, and it makes her sad to see the context. Her sadness is in realizing that very few people do these kinds of things with young people any more—which used to be common. Our society trains commercially our entire civilization to be 18 to 25 years old, then everything is downhill from there. We ignore the magic of youth, and the wisdom of age in favor of the sexual throttling of hormone driven sentient beings. And public education has sought to perpetuate this destructive trend by putting shackles on the mind of the youth instead of wings. Instead of showing a commitment to creating young people like those shown in the Master Chef Junior television show, public education produces the half-dead sloths seen in Farris Bueller’s Day Off and it makes me absolutely sick.
So while I do like to see Springboro schools running their tax burden on their community backwards, it is not enough for me. It’s enough for No Lakota Levy who has evolved into a fiscally conscious organization instead of a politically active one—which is my interest, but until Springboro, Lakota, Fairfield, Mason, Lebanon and all other schools are off the federal payroll, and curriculum is driven by actual market forces, I am not interested in a single thing the public schools are doing. I don’t want to see children growing up to be the Washington Generals, but Labron James and Michael Jordon. I want every kid to aspire to be Chuck Yeager, Walt Disney, Stan Lee, Steven Spielberg, Bruce Lee, Gordon Ramnsey, Ayn Rand, Bill Gates, and any other great person. And people don’t become great learning to stand in line and take orders. They become great because their minds were allowed to be. In almost every case, great people have supportive parents and a family structure that allows minds to bloom. Almost never is it a school that inspires a child to greatness—it is nearly exclusive to a strong parent, grandparent, or both who intervened in the mind of a young person from being destroyed by public education.
When Schmidt says that the success of schools all hinge on the extra efforts the teachers give beyond the letters of their contracts he is lost to the ways of instruction and how young minds process data. Public schools teach kids to become stupid as they start out quite brilliantly. Public education is all about putting out the lights of a child’s mind and I think it is preposterously outrageous to fund that destruction with taxation. So to be clear, I do not agree with Kelly Kohls and the Springboro school board’s renewal levy. I think the parents should pay for their own kids to attend their educations. I should not have to help pay with state tax money, or local tax money off my property the further destruction of children just so parents can have a baby sitter to watch their children during the work day. As a parent, and now as a grandparent, I do take the extra time to mentor children and I know why it’s important, and how much energy it takes, and it’s not something that can be purchased from the government.
All public education is capable of producing is the Washington Generals. Anything of real greatness comes from some other element outside of a school. It does not come alone from a teacher, or their efforts toward students as suggested by Schmidt. Without a solid foundation even the best teachers will fail, because the mind of a child is often ruined during the first years of a child’s life. The final act of destruction begins the first day of kindergarten and only gets worse from there. Things are this way because the human race has incorrectly allowed it, by placing the focus of prime age and value on the wrong age bracket.
I nearly fell off my motorcycle traveling down RT 747 the other day laughing when I saw that West Chester trustee Cathy Stoker had the term “fiscal conservative” over her name on a campaign sign for reelection. Then her partner in crime, Lee Wong had a sign very nearby that had the picture of an elephant on it displaying that Wong was a Republican. They are the kind of Republicans that progressives dream of, Republicans like those portrayed in the HBO series shown below–Republicans that are really Democrats shaped by 100 years of European progressivism. (Hint–its only a matter of time before Tea Party types get their own representation on shows like the HBO series. Stay tuned to The Blaze on The Dish Network to see what is coming for tomorrow) Those two politicians are extremely funny, misleading, and is the perfect definition of the term “RINO” (Republican in name only) which has emerged over the last couple of years to describe machine politic Republicans who have captured the party over the years and represent a progressive position that is quite to the left of the political center from the World War II generation. Stoker is listed as a Democrat in past elections, but her campaign sign clearly attempts to avoid that association. These RINO types like Stoker and Wong, are naturally trying to appeal to the strong Republican base which resides in West Chester, Ohio but they are far from traditional conservatives.
It wasn’t long ago that Senator Bill Coley at an event with John Kasich confided in me his frustration with the term RINO. Coley attempted to attach pay to performance for teachers in Ohio, but the idea hasn’t taken leaving him to openly support school levies—which is why he was trying to convince me he wasn’t a RINO. Deals and compromise are part of American politics, according to RINOs—which is how they ended up moved off from their original conservative positions. Currently Ohio governor John Kasich is seeking a way to bypass the Ohio legislature so that he can expand Medicaid. Kasich wants to use the poor through Obamacare as a vehicle to win votes for his 2016 run as president. And West Chester congressman John Boehner is looking for anyway he can to cut a deal with President Obama and Harry Reid so he can resume his golf game without feeling guilty about the government shut-down.
The Republican establishment is vowing to strike back against the resurgence of conservatism as many of them know that if the party returns back to the right—where it belongs, they will be left out of the political loop, so they are fighting for their very lives, as reported by the Associated Press below.
From county chairmen to national party luminaries, veteran Republicans across the country are accusing tea party lawmakers of staining the GOP with their refusal to bend in the budget impasse in Washington.
The Republican establishment also is signaling a willingness to strike back at the tea party in next fall’s elections.
“It’s time for someone to act like a grown-up in this process,” former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu argues,faulting Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and tea party Republicans in the House as much as President Barack Obama for taking an uncompromising stance.
Former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour is just as pointed, saying this about the tea party-fueled refusal to support spending measures that include money for Obama’s health care law: “It never had a chance.”
The anger emanating from Republicans like Sununu and Barbour comes just three years after the GOP embraced the insurgent political group and rode its wave of new energy to return to power in the House.
Good luck, GOP elitists.
Your whiny soft core conservatism may work out East but it won’t carry the Red States
I have been to events with Republicans where 200 to 300 very high-profile “conservatives” gathered in one place, and I can report that only about 7 to 10 people in the entire room actually felt any real conviction for conservative values. The rest of the Republicans were in the party to “cut a deal,” socialize, or sleep with their friend’s wife over wine provided by business donors hoping for some sort of regulatory relief. They were in the party for what they could get out of it, not for the philosophic basis of the name “Republican.” Naturally I have been invited into these circles because of my “skills” but when it was noticed that I was to the right of right, they realized I was one of the RINO hunters, and not a RINO—and it scared them. Upon those discoveries, they attempt to play the same game that Senator Ted Cruz currently has to endure—and I suspect that the outcome will not fare well for them either.
To call yourself a conservative then behave like a liberal simply makes a person a liar. In this year of 2013 Stoker and Wong have two challengers to their seats, and both are true conservatives the way I would term it, one is Matt King and the other is Mark Welch. I personally know both men, and they are what the Republican Party should be moving to—away from the domination of RINOs who are only in politics to secure contracts for their business interests. More about Mark and Matt can be seen below in a quote from the Journal News:
Mark Welch, of West Chester Twp., said he’s running for a trustee spot in order to make the township more business friendly. The owner of Bajon Salon & Spa for 13 years, Welch said his business has had to work around the township’s strict zoning regulations.
“I got keenly more aware of community issues and it solidified my desire to do something for the community,” Welch said, of becoming a small business owner after a 20-year career in sales.
Welch said during an election two years ago he had submitted his ticket and planned to campaign, but bowed out at the last-minute because he didn’t want to take votes away from the other Republican candidate.
“I told them, ‘Two years from now, I will be back,’ ” Welch said.
Welch has since been serving on the township’s zoning revision committee and is a member of the West Chester-Liberty Chamber Alliance. Welch said it was after he placed a feather flag sign outside his business to promote the location that the township’s sign ordinance required him to remove it.
“It’s hard enough to stay in business these days … business are trying to create jobs and pay taxes and the zoning is saying, ‘Don’t promote yourself,’ ” Welch said.
Also vying for a spot as West Chester Twp. trustee is Matthew King, a Procter & Gamble IT contractor who moved to the township in 1998. King said he’s been drawn to politics since his teens.
“When I was high school I just thought Ronald Reagan was the coolest president ever and sort of got interested then,” King said.
King said he hadn’t considered running for public office until getting more involved in the community over the years.
“I’ve been around the area long enough to remember when a lot of the towns around were really thriving and I just want to make sure West Chester stays some place like that and doesn’t decline,” King said. “I’m concerned that our current board is a little too content.”
While many people outside the political machine feel honored to be invited to the kind of events where they can actually get to know powerful politicians, it doesn’t impress me, so I have no problem revealing the kind of behavior that goes on. I simply don’t like people who don’t have strong convictions about things, so I don’t like many politicians. When I attend social events where they are I know their primary interest is in how much money they can get out of me, and little else, so I am not enamored by pomp and circumstance. The whole infatuation with the drama of any political class is left over psychological garbage donated to the human race from our European descendants—and should be shed away like the skin of a snake in favor of a healthier philosophy.
Last weekend a dear friend and frequent reader here talked about their long career in fighting against these types of people—RINOs who pretend that they are all about reforming schools, standing for fiscal conservatism, and defending liberty in The United States. It is often emotionally draining to discover all too late that most everyone they ever knew were hypocrites using conservative politics to advance their financial power through career changes, or business connections. Most people who are true to their philosophy find themselves suffering some sort of emotional breakdown when they realize that their friends are not actually friends, but parasites feeding of the social system of politics. This person and I talked about the RINOs of yesterday’s politics and the RINOs of today, many of them I’m currently entangled with. When I was asked how I dealt with the betrayal, the let downs, and the lack of any conviction from the RINOs in my life, I simply stated that I read a lot of books, play video games, and consume myself with my multiple hobbies. I don’t need them in my life for anything, so I am not at any kind of disadvantage if they decide they want to disassociate with me. And if they want to move into physical, or intellectual combat, they can be crushed easily—so they are of no worry—and that’s how they must be viewed.
RINOs are defeated by standing on convictions. It is not the task of the masses to move to the political left to fit the career aims of John Kasich. It is not the job of the conservative base to let John Boehner off the hook so he can resume his golf game and “man tan” regiments by cutting a deal with a communist president. And it is not the job of conservatives to give socialists like Stoker and Wong more years to use the economy of West Chester as a platform to prop up Lakota schools, Agenda 21 sidewalk construction, and taking federal money to blow on pet projects of social malpractice. It is not the job of people who are truly conservative to change their view and names of things to suit the people who wish to profit off politics. It is their job to hunt tricksters down like the RINOs they are, and to kick them out of office putting an end to machine politics. It is more important to have representatives in government than just a Republican as governor, or as Speaker of the House who will allow themselves to be drug kicking and screaming to the left using Overton Window tactics so to preserve their thirty year aims of being “career politicians.”
Leadership contrary to 4000 years of military action is not defined by how dependent a force of any kind is upon a solitary commander, but how well that force functions without direct input. Many years ago a rival attempted to place doubt about my beliefs on leadership with the simple question—“how do you know you are a great leader?” My response was, “if an organization can function without my input, then I know I’ve been a good leader.” This of course set off the rival into a downward spiral of anger that precipitated his immediate demise—and rivalry with me. Little did he know that my thoughts on leadership were shaped by many years of studying Bruce Lee’s martial art concept Jeet Kun Do where the primary function of adaptability is to behave in martial combat like water—taking the shape of whatever the battlefield conditions present, and using that form to defeat the enemy maintaining continuous evolutions driven by circumstance.
With all that said, I am very proud of No Lakota Levy. They have a wonderful presence in 2013 and as all the tax levy supporters around Lakota have come to see, especially once they read Today’s Pulse this week and see all the wonderful graphs that are coming out—the same ones seen here—they are a stronger group now than they have ever been. Without question this will leave the pro levy factions of Lakota schools mystified, as they thought they had the strategy all figured out. But where they failed is that they identified what they thought was the battlefield generals and attempted to remove them with traditional politics—but traditional politics were not the strategy being implemented—and their tactics have solidified the voting base against them, not weakened it.
This begs the question that I’m sure Lakota is asking after seeing the signs beginning to roll out, the advertising presence in the newspapers, and the endless supply of commentators who are available to answer questions to the media—and the new website that has just been professionally updated for this new campaign. Who is No Lakota Levy?
No Lakota Levy is not one person that will show up on a donor list in the newspaper allowing political opponents to target them with extortion. Most of the No Lakota Levy people are under the radar and wish to stay that way because they have to rub shoulders publically with many of the levy supporters—so they wish to keep their involvement quiet. They support the foundation of No Lakota Levy in other ways that are not traditional, to save themselves of the grief that levy supporters aim to inflict against them for not voting for higher taxes.
The design of No Lakota Levy was built on the strategy of Jeet Kune Do. I don’t mind revealing this because I hope that both sides of political engagement will learn something from it. For the school levy fighters out there who have allowed themselves to be picked to pieces by the statist controls of the labor movement, I hope that Jeet Kune Do will allow them to learn how to defeat their enemies. Because if they do, they will save me a lot of time, and effort. The number one failure that levy fighters fall victim to is that they allow the levy fight to become all about them—as they fall in love with the attention they get when being on the front line. If they learn the ways of Jeet Kune Do, they will learn how to become like water, and defeat their enemies without actually fighting. Bruce Lee built his philosophy based on Sun Tzu’s The Art of War and this is the pinnacle concept explored in that marvelous book on strategy. For my enemies, I don’t mind letting them know something of my strategy because if they study Jeet Kune Do, they have a chance at becoming better people, and then—and only then—they may cease being my enemies.
Jeet Kune Do (also “Jeet Kun Do“, or simply “JKD“) is an eclectic/hybrid style of no style and philosophy of life founded by martial artist Bruce Lee[2] with direct, non-classical, and straightforward movements. Due to the way his style works, Jeet Kune Do practitioners believe in minimal movement with maximum effect and extreme speed. The system works on the use of different ‘tools’ for different situations. These situations are broken down into ranges (kicking, punching, trapping and grappling), with techniques flowing smoothly between them. It is referred to as a “style without style” or “the art of fighting without fighting” as said by Lee himself. Unlike more traditional martial arts, Jeet Kune Do is not fixed or patterned, and is a philosophy with guiding thoughts. It was named for the concept of interception, or attacking your opponent while he is about to attack. However, the name Jeet Kune Do was often said by Lee to be just a name. He himself often referred to it as “The art of expressing the human body” in his writings and in interviews. Through his studies Lee came to believe that styles had become too rigid, and unrealistic. He called martial art competitions of the day “Dry land swimming”. He believed that combat was spontaneous, and that a martial artist cannot predict it, only react to it, and that a good martial artist should “Be like water” and move fluidly without hesitation.
I learned about Jeet Kune Do though my studies of mythology and philosophy of the East. Although I do not agree with the collective tendencies of the East, I do admire their work ethic, and ability to deal with catastrophe. Shinto Buddhism is particularly effective as a religious and personal philosophy for overcoming personal travesties. Out of all modern martial artists, Bruce Lee was one of the most spectacular. I studied him in developing my own techniques to be used with the use of the bullwhip.
Martial art weapons such as nunchukas, knives and swords are traditional with Eastern study, but for my interest firmly placed in the West, it is the bullwhip, which is far superior to all Eastern weapons that placed me at the door of Jeet Kune Do. As all martial art masters understand, it is best to win fights before the other side even knows there is a conflict—and the mastery of such methods requires an ability to understand how to project targets before anybody else is aware of them. The key to Jeet Kune Do is winning the fight before the other side knows that there was an attack. Practicing with bullwhips has trained my mind to see targets and project their trajectories physically, and metaphorically.
Unlike the Saul Alinsky methods used by the levy radicals of big government which uses mobster tactics of mass, and fear to invoke change, Jeet Kune Do is a method of martial art that leaves Saul Alingsky’s radicalism defenseless. With No Lakota Levy it is not Rich Hoffman that carries the movement; it is not Mark Sennet, or a group of business developers who don’t want to pay higher taxes. No Lakota Levy strategically has been set up on the premise of Jeet Kune Do as opposed to Saul Alinsky, which guides the Pro Levy Movement. No Lakota Levy still exists even after pro levy supporters attempted to use traditional methods to destroy the leadership base. No Lakota Levy still exists even after a two-year cease-fire where pro levy supporters hoped that time would curb tensions and nurse the community back to sleep. No Lakota Levy is the actual spirit of the Lakota community that remembers the area when it was founded on post Revolutionary War sentiment, and was settled by rugged individualist, farmers, and hell-raisers who do not care for the recent progressive oriented New Englanders who migrated here to work at large businesses sent by transfers from the coasts. No Lakota Levy is as old and mature as the ghosts of ScreamingBridge, reminding the entire community of the principles that founded the area and it will rise up in any form to defend itself from statist scum bags and communist trained minds shaped by Cold War politics.
I am proud to see No Lakota Levy rise formless and deeply supported with a structure that resembles Jeet Kune Do’s martial style. It is like water that fills whatever glass that is there to hold it. It does not need top down leadership because it is the actual spirit of Liberty Township and West Chester which drives it—and it will be around long after Lakota, county commissioners, trustees, presidents, or congressmen have come and gone many times over. No Lakota Levy will still exist in a formless void to attack ghostlike any threat to the freedom of the community which decides to present itself. The people who support No Lakota Levy know and understand that. CLICK HERE FOR AN EXAMPLE.
Victory is won before the fight ever happens most of the time. And this victory is already won. All people need to do now is show up and fight by casting their ballot on Election Day and the rest will take care of itself. Formlessness is the key to victory, and the way to destroy the methods of Saul Alinsky and his levy whores of statism. No Lakota Levy will continue to be a force as a rotation of many different names will circulate through it to keep it fluid and effective depending on the strategic needs of the martial action. Without getting too formal on my current and future plans it should be noted that The Blaze as a news source has nearly 19 million unique visitors and is utilizing a strategy very similar to Jeet Kune Do. Glenn Beck has been the power behind that growth, yet over time many more voices have stepped in to carry The Blaze to levels of social and political influence that will pave the way for all news in the world of tomorrow. The reason that is significant is because I’m friends with one of those voices, and we have plans that involve a great deal of Jeet Kune Do. Nobody will be able to stop it because it will hit with the force of a tsunami that starts deep in the ocean and isn’t detected until it hits a land mass. Meanwhile, No Lakota Levy will still be there to protect the Lakota residents from the ominous tentacles of government employees who wish to crush property ownership and destroy the minds of all its children. To know that, it is needed to understand Jeet Kune Do and the power of being “fluid” like water. And I do not concern myself with worry revealing to my enemies my strategy………….because they have already lost…………so it’s already too late. The metaphorical tsunami is coming…………and they won’t vote in favor of school levies.
Bill O’Reilly history will remember as one of the most influential people of the 21st Century. His news show on Fox is an unmitigated success attracting millions of viewers every night Monday through Friday, but that is not the most beneficial aspect of O’Reilly. O’Reilly will go down in history as one of the most prolific authors of all time as his Killing Lincoln, Killing Kennedy, andnow Killing Jesus will sell more books than any handful of top 20 New York Times authors. His lasting memory will be in his literary legacy, not his television show. O’Reilly is a “down the middle” kind of guy, and represents well the kind of mind that assisted in voting favorably many of the modern troubles plaguing our nation, such as debt management, welfare support, and public education statism. That is why it was so remarkable that O’Reilly in the wake of the many debates on Obamacare finally asked the very important question on his show, “does the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”
The answer of course is that it doesn’t, no mob of collective rule has the right over individual citizens. The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few, and that premise destroys the basic premise of democracy—which causes considerable problems. This is why O’Reilly finally asked the unsaid question on his show.
Any needs that the many may have over the few which is articulated with such questions are driven straight out of communist text. It was philosophers like Jeremy Bentham who helped inspire Karl Marx to write The Communist Manifesto which would bring to the world the idea of communism directly attacking capitalism as an economic concept. Jeremy Bentham (/ˈbɛnθəm/; 15 February 1748 OS – 6 June 1832) was a British philosopher, jurist, and social reformer. He is regarded as the founder of modern utilitarianism.
Not even excepting our philosopher, Christian Wolff, in no time and in no country has the most homespun commonplace ever strutted about in so self-satisfied a way. The principle of utility was no discovery of Bentham. He simply reproduced in his dull way what Helvétius and other Frenchmen had said with esprit in the 18th century. To know what is useful for a dog, one must study dog-nature. This nature itself is not to be deduced from the principle of utility. Applying this to man, he who would criticise all human acts, movements, relations, etc., by the principle of utility, must first deal with human nature in general, and then with human nature as modified in each historical epoch. Bentham makes short work of it. With the driest naiveté he takes the modern shopkeeper, especially the English shopkeeper, as the normal man. Whatever is useful to this queer normal man, and to his world, is absolutely useful. This yard-measure, then, he applies to past, present, and future. The Christian religion, e.g., is “useful,” “because it forbids in the name of religion the same faults that the penal code condemns in the name of the law.” Artistic criticism is “harmful,” because it disturbs worthy people in their enjoyment of Martin Tupper, etc. With such rubbish has the brave fellow, with his motto, “nulla dies sine linea”, piled up mountains of books.
”
Marx’s accusation is twofold. In the first place, he says that the theory of utility is true by definition and thus does not really add anything meaningful. For Marx, a productive inquiry had to investigate what sorts of things are good for people—that is, what our nature, alienated under capitalism, really is. Second, he says that Bentham fails to take account of the changing character of people, and hence the changing character of what is good for them. This criticism is especially important for Marx, because he believed that all important statements were contingent upon particular historical conditions.
Marx argues that human nature is dynamic, so the concept of a single utility for all humans is one-dimensional and not useful. When he decries Bentham’s application of the ‘yard measure’ of now to ‘the past, present and future’, he decries the implication that society, and people, have always been, and will always be, as they are now; that is, he criticizes essentialism. As he sees it, this implication is conservatively used to reinforce institutions he regarded as reactionary. Just because in this moment religion has some positive consequences, says Marx, doesn’t mean that viewed historically it isn’t a regressive institution that should be abolished.
Bentham was creating the foundations of utopian socialism at a time when America was fighting for its independence from the same imperial forces that created the left leaning philosopher. Today, because of Star Trek using the character of Spock to utter the sensibilities of Bentham the entire world has come to believe that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, which is a communist foundation concept. While Marx was critical of the looseness of Bentham’s definitions, he used the direction to shape his own philosophy of Marxism.
It is to support this foundation of collectivism that public education institutions have been targeted as factories of making students ignorant instead of brilliant, because the goal is to train the masses to be unchallenging servants to the political rulers of the current age. By “dumbing down” the masses through the education process, modern statists do not have to concern themselves with being smarter than their potential rivals for power, and seek to keep the masses at their back with stupidity—which is the ultimate failure of Bentham’s philosophic premise. The needs of the many simply become a mob of ignorant souls under any political system—and nothing good comes of it in the long run. Man-kind simply regresses.
So the answer to Bill’s question is that, YES, it is morally wrong to enforce the needs of the many at the expense of the few—because often it is the few, the exceptional, and the driven that create everything that the many enjoy. When the few are penalized, tortured, and ran into the ground—sacrificed like offerings to the Mayan gods of the Yucatan Peninsula, then society will crumble completely and the needs of the many will grow as there will be nobody to provide substance to them—since they pillaged all value from society with their unchecked demands.
If anybody ever wanted proof that public schools are quite blatant in their willingness to break the law to pass school levies, just examine the latest article done by the Cincinnati Enquirer who did a good bit of reporting off a public record request. They discovered that 49 of Southwest Ohio’s public school systems, nine use payroll deductions to raise campaign money which is illegal. The guilty schools are Kings, Mason, Fairfield, Middletown, Loveland, Madeira, Mariemont, Reading and West Clermont. Read some of the selected details of that article below or check the full story at the link.
The districts collect the employees’ voluntary contributions and forward the money to private campaign organizations.
It’s an illegal use of resources and personnel of publicly funded schools, asserts Christopher Finney, attorney and founding member of the Hamilton County-based Citizens Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes (COAST).
Finney cites Ohio Revised Code 3315.07, which states in part “no board of education shall use public funds to support or oppose the passage of a school levy or bond issue or to compensate any school district employee for time spent on any activity intended to influence the outcome of a school levy or bond issue.”
Finney says the practice is surprisingly blatant.
“It’s outrageous because typically the abuse of tax dollars to advance the cause of bigger government is usually more subtle,” he said.
Other schools such as Lebanon and Lakota are not on the list, but are very careful about what they do because both those communities have activists reporting the many indiscretions committed by the public institutions. They watch closely what they get caught doing. Their crimes are harder to discover by reporters on their lunch time investigations. If activist elements were not present, Lakota and Lebanon would easily join the above list.
The importance of this information is the display of the willingness public schools exhibit to break the law to protect their extortive tax increase practices. They know that a public records request will reveal their actions, yet they do it anyway—and they don’t care if they are caught. Their disregard of the law is malicious and they do it because they are a monopoly operation, and know that their customers have nowhere else to go but to their door step.
Of course this leads to the next question—what do these same schools participate in that they wish to hide? To what extent are they willing to protect their actions, and reputations for the things that would truly get them into trouble? And how often does it occur? Readers here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom have seen parades of foul information regarding public school behavior for over three years. We have covered sex scandals, bullying cover-ups, corrosive labor practices, financial rackets, and many other destructive activities that are being taught to the next generation of children in the terribly deficient public schools run by government monopolies, and what they all have in common is the inbred deformity of mentality driven by a lack of competition.
Public schools do not worry about breaking the law because they are their own judge, jury, and executioners. They own the legal process, they are deeply embedded in the political system through the financial contributions of their labor unions, and they know that if they get into trouble locally, that their nationwide network of union thugs will come to their rescue with mass mobs of burning pitchfork radicals demanding all to turn away from the crimes committed. These parasites use society’s children to hide their crimes with open extortion and are the biggest menace to society in our modern age—and they get away with it because nobody stands up to them.
The law discussed above gets broken because nobody has the guts to hold them to it. There are of course a few “fringe” people who do, people like me and the friends who contribute openly to these pages, but most just keep their opinions to themselves afraid that the thugs will show up in the middle of the night and vandalize their cars and home. They fear the same radicals protesting their places of business and making an embarrassment out of their lives as every skeleton in their closet is exposed by the levy radicals attacking ruthlessly all who dare question their practices. Most people want nothing to do with such radicalism, so they stay silent, and allow the illegal activities that use their children as extortion tokens for peace as they sit in front of the television and watch fictional characters stand for something—while they stand for nothing.
No wonder young people are so angry, and lack so much respect for their parents.
The most ridiculous rhetoric that comes out of school levy proposals is that somehow it is considered a “patriotic duty” to vote mindlessly for tax increases. Anyone who thinks this way needs to have their head examined. I’m sure the Letter to the Editor writer from the Sunday October 6, 2013 edition of Today’s Pulse newspaper had good intentions when they suggested in the commentary below that over a 30 year span of time it is the community’s duty to continue voting yes on school levies because “it is what we do.” The meaning is that a tax increase is an “investment” into the community and the reason is simply—because it just is. The letter writer makes no attempt to understand why, she simply makes the assumption that it’s always been that way and it will always continue. Read the letter for yourself.
Support levy, support community
As a Lakota graduate and an empty-nester parent of three Lakota graduate, I look at our community and see a wonderful place to raise and educate our children. When I was in school in the 1970s, many senior citizens and empty-nesters supported the levies and my education. It is what we do when we are invested in our community.
Not all of us make use of our police, fire or park services, which are available to everyone, yet we support them financially because that is what you do in the community where you live. Please don’t lose sight of the fact that even if you don’t have children currently in our district, our local schools are one of the best investments our community has.
Please take the time to research the upcoming school levy and you will see that Lakota continues to be a good steward of our tax dollars. They have made severe cuts and have not had any new revenue since 2005. Don’t you think as a member of this community; it is time to support our schools and our children? Vote “yes” for the Lakota levy.
Donna Beluse Leslie Cincinnati
Of course I disagreed with that levy supporter, and responded with the following letter. School levy supporters are one of the most corrosive aspects of existence. They are similar to rust on a car. If left untended, they just continue to grow and eat away everything of any real structure. Their belief system is not only flawed, but is dangerously ignorant. I have learned that saying NO to school levies is not only healthy for a community, but is the best way to rid communities of the corrosive nature of levy supporters who are parasites on everything that is economically viable.
The Patriotism of Saying No
The best reason pro levy supporters can come up with as to why Lakota needs a tax increase is because it is the patriotic duty of a community to throw money away on a glorified babysitting service. Never do such people consider the cost to a community of passing tax increases. Pro tax people are like panhandlers who camp out on the way to sporting events and make you feel guilty for not throwing a few bucks at them knowing full well that you’ll need the money for beer and hot dogs once inside. The guilt comes in thinking that you don’t deserve beer and hot dogs while the beggar is struggling outside. The question never gets asked why the beggar is begging instead of doing something else—because guilt avoids the question.
The question at Lakota is why they are begging for money they don’t need. Why with declining enrollment do they wish a long-term tax increase on a thriving community? Why is it a duty to recklessly throw money at a school because someone is an alumnus under different conditions 30 years ago? And why do the employees at Lakota expect to make over 60K per year on average when the average tax payer makes much less?
Pro-levy people expect voters to not ask those questions, but simply vote in favor of tax increases based on speculative community patriotism that has no grounding in reality. They simply want money thrown into their begging dish to avoid the hard job of contract negotiations with a union that is up in 2014. And to avoid those hard decisions, Lakota wants to impose a damaging tax increase that will last for many, many years, drive away businesses and crush people barely hanging on.
So much for community patriotism.
Rich Hoffman
Liberty Twp.
When pro levy supporters makes stupid statements such as—a community should vote in favor of a tax increase because they are investing in a community they are advocating the destruction of communities. There are no communities that have survived for 40 to 50 years that increased taxes on themselves every 5 years and maintained the wealth and economic viability of their community. In the same way, a car that is left to rust untreated will slowly erode away into garbage. A community that blindly raises taxes on itself to sustain armies of government worker monopolies will also destroy itself. So the best way to save a community is to keep the public schools from destroying it with selfishly high taxes driven by corrosive labor unions.
Saying NO is management of a community’s resources. Saying Yes is simply caving into the radical, half-baked claims of voters with a shallow knowledge of history, and a distorted concept of economics. They should not be allowed to destroy communities unchecked, and saying NO is the best defense against them. There is no evidence anywhere that higher taxes lead to a prosperous community, and there is even less evidence that the same Yes votes cast in 1970 have the same value as Yes votes in 2013—the assumption is that the cost of per pupil education have gone up tremendously since then yet children are performing worse scholastically. Only a complete idiot would continue to do something just because they made the same stupid mistake in the 70s, 80s, and 90s……….”because it is what we do,” “we” being a community. To do such a thing is a receipt for social decline and a future ghetto swapping out residents of productive output with more parasites of government mooching that will replace the hard-working home owner with a government subsidized crack dealer. The path to community decline is in voting Yes for school levies, not the other way around—and is the misleading utterance of the entire parasitic school levy supporter. They all share the tendency to ignore the facts in favor of “feel good” assumptions that have no basis in reality except in their own imaginations driven by mid-life anxieties and guilt over their skills as parents. The way to protect a community is to reject those types with NO votes and get them out of our community—because leaving them alone will lead to a destruction of everything we cherish.
This is a continuing series done here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom analyzing the 45 Planks of Communism unleashed to the public in the 1958 book The Naked Communist. You can see the entire list by CLICKING HERE.You can also read the last article in the series by CLICKING HERE. The easiest way to understand how communists think is to read Ayn Rand’s We The Living, which takes place in 1924, roughly 7 years after the Russian Revolution and follows several families through their struggle to cope with the rise of the U.S.S.R as a communist political force, which would continue until Russia ran out of money in the 1990’s. But up until the last day, the communist cause was to infiltrate the entire world philosophically, not literally. Communists did not intend to win everyone over to their side by forcing the hammer and sickle down their throats in broad daylight. They had learned the error of their ways in implementing communism too quickly in Petrograd—and intended to carry those lessons with amendments to their world-wide campaign to spread social collectivism to every corner of planet earth.
Communists, particularly in the 1970’s and 1980’s were very arrogant about their beliefs. They believed in the greater good, so did not care if they came across individually as arrogant, or hurting the feelings of people since their focus was on collectivism. In the previous articles explained here it is clear that communists sought to use The United Nations as a platform to carry them through economic collapse—which was evident to them. They knew it was coming, so they sought to gather up the wealth of those functioning under capitalism until their philosophic enemy had been plucked dry. Then and only then did they believe communism would work, when it was the ONLY political philosophy left in the world.
Two years ago I would not have believed any of this were possible, but during my research into why public schools were so insanely destructive—economically, the only answer that has come back out of all my research is that they had been penetrated by communism with small doses of socialism until after a couple of generations nobody could not even see the difference—even the employees. We will get into this topic in much greater detail in a future article. Also over the years I have known many politicians, both local and national. It was last summer when a local politician was very upset with me for calling his kind RINO’s, (Republican In Name Only) that I realized there was something much more serious going on. The anger was not just in the name, but in the realization that there was truth to it, and the prospect of the accusation was simply too great for the guy. He was mad not just at me for seeing it, but for making him question it in himself. The foundation of everything this politician believed had been shaken to its very core, and he was having a crises. That crisis was the knowledge that the ideals of Abraham Lincoln, Calvin Coolidge, Thomas Jefferson and even Ronald Reagan were gone from the Republican Party as far as philosophy. Too many modern Republicans had found themselves caught in “making deals” to keep the peace against radicals from the other party and they had lost their way–they realized too late the nature of the attack against them. Communists had infiltrated the Democratic Party in every way that McCarthy feared—and once the public relation machine turned on the McCarthy Hearings and the communists looked to escape scrutiny, they became much more socially bold. This brings us to Plank 15 on the 45 Planks of Communism shown below.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
Clearly the Democratic Party had been captured by communists prior to 1958, at least informally. The Democratic platform announced each year at the DNC convention nearly parallels the goals of communism verbatim, and this began during the Red Decade in The United States where many media outlets, universities, and politicians from elite social circles were openly embracing communism as an alternative to capitalism with the same kind of regard that a woman might change shoes from one charity fund raiser to another so to be seen not being so poor to not have other pairs of high heels. In social circles, especially in the 1960’s is was considered high-brow to admire the work of Che Guevara the Cuban revolutionary and right hand man of Fidel Castro. It is within the actions of Che—who continues to be a symbol of anti capitalism among American youth–which the extent of the communist push into the American political system can be measured.
As a young medical student, Guevara traveled throughout South America and was radicalized by the poverty, hunger, and disease he witnessed.[9] His burgeoning desire to help overturn what he saw as the capitalist exploitation of Latin America by the United States prompted his involvement in Guatemala‘s social reforms under President Jacobo Árbenz, whose eventual CIA-assisted overthrow at the behest of the United Fruit Company solidified Guevara’s political ideology.[9] Later, while living in Mexico City, he met Raúl and Fidel Castro, joined their 26th of July Movement, and sailed to Cuba aboard the yacht, Granma, with the intention of overthrowing US-backed Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista.[10] Guevara soon rose to prominence among the insurgents, was promoted to second-in-command, and played a pivotal role in the victorious two-year guerrilla campaign that deposed the Batista regime.[11]
Guevara remains both a revered and reviled historical figure, polarized in the collective imagination in a multitude of biographies, memoirs, essays, documentaries, songs, and films. As a result of his perceived martyrdom, poetic invocations for class struggle, and desire to create the consciousness of a “new man” driven by moral rather than material incentives, he has evolved into a quintessential icon of various leftist-inspired movements. Time magazine named him one of the 100 most influential people of the 20th century,[18] while an Alberto Korda photograph of him entitled Guerrillero Heroico (shown), was cited by the Maryland Institute College of Art as “the most famous photograph in the world”.[19]
Marxist ideological influence
“The merit of Marx is that he suddenly produces a qualitative change in the history of social thought. He interprets history, understands it’s dynamic, predicts the future, but in addition to predicting it (which would satisfy his scientific obligation), he expresses a revolutionary concept: the world must not only be interpreted, it must be transformed. Man ceases to be the slave and tool of his environment and converts himself into the architect of his own destiny.”
— Che Guevara, Notes for the Study of the Ideology of the Cuban, October 1960 [130]
When enacting and advocating Cuban policy, Guevara cited the political philosopher Karl Marx as his ideological inspiration. In defending his political stance, Guevara confidently remarked that “There are truths so evident, so much a part of people’s knowledge, that it is now useless to discuss them. One ought to be Marxist with the same naturalness with which one is “Newtonian” in physics, or “Pasteurian” in biology.”[130]According to Guevara, the “practical revolutionaries” of the Cuban Revolution had the goal of “simply fulfill(ing) laws foreseen by Marx, the scientist.”[130] Using Marx’s predictions and system of dialectical materialism, Guevara professed that “The laws of Marxism are present in the events of the Cuban Revolution, independently of what its leaders profess or fully know of those laws from a theoretical point of view.”[130]
At this stage, Guevara acquired the additional position of Finance Minister, as well as President of the National Bank. These appointments, combined with his existing position as Minister of Industries, placed Guevara at the zenith of his power, as the “virtual czar” of the Cuban economy.[126] As a consequence of his position at the head of the central bank, it was now Guevara’s duty to sign the Cuban currency, which per custom would bear his signature. Instead of using his full name, he signed the bills solely “Che“.[132] It was through this symbolic act, which horrified many in the Cuban financial sector, that Guevara signaled his distaste for money and the class distinctions it brought about.[132] Guevara’s long time friend Ricardo Rojo later remarked that “the day he signed Che on the bills, (he) literally knocked the props from under the widespread belief that money was sacred.”[133]
In an effort to eliminate social inequalities, Guevara and Cuba’s new leadership had moved to swiftly transform the political and economic base of the country through nationalizing factories, banks, and businesses, while attempting to ensure affordable housing, healthcare, and employment for all Cubans.[135] However, in order for a genuine transformation of consciousness to take root, Guevara believed that such structural changes would have to be accompanied by a conversion in people’s social relations and values. Believing that the attitudes in Cuba towards race, women, individualism, and manual labor were the product of the island’s outdated past, Guevara urged all individuals to view each other as equals and take on the values of what he termed “el Hombre Nuevo” (the New Man).[135] Guevara hoped his “new man” would ultimately be “selfless and cooperative, obedient and hard-working, gender-blind, incorruptible, non-materialistic, and anti-imperialist.”[135] To accomplish this, Guevara emphasized the tenets of Marxism-Leninism, and wanted to use the state to emphasize qualities such as egalitarianism and self-sacrifice, at the same time as “unity, equality, and freedom” became the new maxims.[135]Guevara’s first desired economic goal of the new man, which coincided with his aversion for wealth condensation and economic inequality, was to see a nation-wide elimination of material incentives in favor of moral ones. He negatively viewed capitalism as a “contest among wolves” where “one can only win at the cost of others” and thus desired to see the creation of a “new man and woman”.[136] Guevara continually stressed that a socialist economy in itself is not “worth the effort, sacrifice, and risks of war and destruction” if it ends up encouraging “greed and individual ambition at the expense of collective spirit“.[137] A primary goal of Guevara’s thus became to reform “individual consciousness” and values to produce better workers and citizens.[137] In his view, Cuba’s “new man” would be able to overcome the “egotism” and “selfishness” that he loathed and discerned was uniquely characteristic of individuals in capitalist societies.[137] To promote this concept of a “new man”, the government also created a series of party-dominated institutions and mechanisms on all levels of society, which included organizations such as labor groups, youth leagues, women’s groups, community centers, and houses of culture to promote state-sponsored art, music, and literature. In congruence with this, all educational, mass media, and artistic community based facilities were nationalized and utilized to instill the government’s official socialist ideology.[135] In describing this new method of “development”, Guevara stated:
“There is a great difference between free-enterprise development and revolutionary development. In one of them, wealth is concentrated in the hands of a fortunate few, the friends of the government, the best wheeler-dealers. In the other, wealth is the people’s patrimony.”[138]
A further integral part of fostering a sense of “unity between the individual and the mass”, Guevara believed, was volunteer work and will. To display this, Guevara “led by example”, working “endlessly at his ministry job, in construction, and even cutting sugar cane” on his day off.[139] He was known for working 36 hours at a stretch, calling meetings after midnight, and eating on the run.[137] Such behavior was emblematic of Guevara’s new program of moral incentives, where each worker was now required to meet a quota and produce a certain quantity of goods. As a replacement for the pay increases abolished by Guevara, workers who exceeded their quota now only received a certificate of commendation, while workers who failed to meet their quotas were given a pay cut.[137] Guevara unapologetically defended his personal philosophy towards motivation and work, stating:
“This is not a matter of how many pounds of meat one might be able to eat, or how many times a year someone can go to the beach, or how many ornaments from abroad one might be able to buy with his current salary. What really matters is that the individual feels more complete, with much more internal richness and much more responsibility.”[140]
Che went on to become an international sensation—a celebrity that was the greatest advocate of communism in the world during the 1960’s. As a military mind and revolutionary who hated the capitalism of America, he intended to subvert America strategically in the manner that an aggressor might cease a city, by surrounding it until the pent-up occupants were so hungry that they’d do anything to eat. Che Guevara surrounded the philosophy of global capitalism with communism until even the staunchest Republican was questioning their own moral ground—and were willing to accept some aspects of communism so not to be out-maneuvered politically by rivals who followed the example of Che Guevara.
Democrats were those rivals to the Republicans and they were firmly behind Che and the communist takeover of Cuba. Even though it was Kennedy a Democrat who had to deal with Castro during the Cuban Missile Crisis, it was members of his own party that allowed the stalemate to occur in the first place. To allow the Soviet Union to use a communist territory right off the coast of America to terrorize the mainland with nuclear threat was a strategy that was well in place for many years and was hardly a surprise to anyone on the inside who knew the real intentions of communists.
Communism found its way into both American political parties after the failure of the McCarthy hearings to stop the communist advancement as the public had accepted through their universities the continuous communist push by supportive faculty. It was common back then to see campus protests in the 1950’s declaring “Better Red then Dead” which was a KGB designed public relations campaign designed to turn the youth of America against capitalism. It was better to be alive under communism then dead under capitalism which was the message. Communist revolutionaries that reached rock star status like Che Guevara backed up that implanted fear with action.
Many of the politicians today, including the guy who was so mad at being called a RINO by me had their personal political philosophies shaped during the volatile period just described. Their opinions about the world were shaped under the threat of KGB marketing machines and the literal antagonism of Che Guevara. To the exact extent, let us see the situation through the eyes of John F. Kennedy himself during the terrible Cuban Missile crises which was organized strategically by Guevara himself through the firsthand memory of the President’s very young mistress at the time.
In June 1962, Mimi Alford was a 19-year old freshman from Wheaton College who had an internship at the White House. Within four days of meeting her, JFK took her on a tour of the White House, maneuvered her into a bedroom, undressed her, and made love to her “as if it was the most natural thing in the world.”
Alford’s story matters because she spent time with JFK on perhaps the single most important day in his presidency. It came in late October 1962 after the affair had carried on for several months. The U.S. had discovered that the Soviet Union secretly installed nuclear missiles in Cuba to defend the revolutionary government of Fidel Castro. Most of JFK’s national security advisors — and all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — recommended JFK order the invasion of the island to destroy the missiles and overthrow the impudent Castro. JFK, a war hero, resisted. He accepted the lesser measure of a Naval blockade of the island while searching for a diplomatic solution.
Alford, back at school in Massachusetts, evoked the dread of those days when the world stood on the brink of nuclear war, an “atmosphere of deep concern in some quarters and outright hysteria in others. We were warned about a national shortage of bomb shelters. We were besieged with apocalyptic estimates of how many people would die in a nuclear exchange.” No doubt seeking diversion from the burdens of office, JFK invited her to Washington. (He’d sent Jackie Kennedy and his children out-of-town.)
When Alford arrived at the White House on Oct. 28, 1962, Dave Powers, JFK’s personal aide, told her that the president had just sent a message to Moscow asking, for the last time, that the missiles be removed. Many thought war would start within 48 hours.
“Normally, he would have put his presidential duties behind him, had a drink and done his best to lighten up the room,” Alford recalled. Instead, JFK paced, contemplating whether he would soon have to make a decision to send thousands, if not millions, of people to a violent death. At one point, after leaving the room to take another urgent phone call, he came back shaking his head and said to Alford, “I’d rather my children be red than dead.” It wasn’t a political statement or an attempt at levity. These were the words of a father who adored his children and couldn’t bear them being hurt. Thus, this is how both political parties in America accepted communism.
The truth is hard to admit. Most people I know in politics support open socialism and they mistakenly call it capitalism. Their minds are distorted with deal making and political slander—lost to any resemblance of morality because they have been taught incorrect ideals about virtually everything in their life. Those ideals were shaped by the communists of the late 1950’s and 60’s under great duress and fear—under literal terrorism where global communists attacked the philosophy of capitalism with great hate, the way radical Muslims attack Christianity with ruthlessly determined swagger and a sense that their individual lives do not matter so long as the collective whole lives on.
About 30 minutes before Che Guevara was executed in 1967 at the tender young age of 39, Félix Rodríguez privately told a captured Guevara that he was going to be executed. Guevara then responded by asking Rodríguez if he was an American of Mexican or Puerto Rican origin, having noted that Rodríguez did not speak Bolivian Spanish. Rodríguez replied that he was originally from Cuba but that he had emigrated to the US and was currently a member of the CIA. Guevara’s only reply was a loud “ha!” and he refused to speak any more to Rodríguez, who left the hut.
A little later, a few minutes before Guevera was executed, he was asked by one of the Bolivian soldiers guarding him if he was thinking about his own immortality. “No,” he replied, “I’m thinking about the immortality of the revolution.”[206] A few minutes later, Sergeant Terán entered the hut and immediately ordered the other soldiers out. Alone with Terán, Che Guevara then stood up and spoke to his executioner which were his last words: “I know you’ve come to kill me. Shoot. Do it. Shoot me, you coward! You are only going to kill a man!”[207] As Guevara was speaking, Terán hesitated, then opened fire with his M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle, hitting him in the arms and legs. For a few seconds, Guevara writhed on the ground, apparently biting one of his wrists to avoid crying out. Terán then fired several times again, wounding him fatally in the chest. Che Guevara was pronounced dead at 1:10 pm local time according to Rodríguez.[207] In all, Guevara was shot nine times by Terán. That is how selfless, and fanatical communists have always been. They will hide their beliefs until it serves their strategic objective, then they will stop at nothing to execute their goal—even if it means their death.
American politics was captured during this period of revolution and it continues to be shaped to this day by communism, falsely believed to have been defeated during the Cold War. The current government shut-down is a long culmination of these events where years and years of abuse have finally collapsed on itself economically. The nature of these politicians is now clear. They are only functionaries under a system that is riddled with socialism by a communist push that has lasted for nearly 100 years in America, but climaxed right after the release of The Naked Communist. The situation is so bad that the so-called bastion of the Republican Party, the current Speaker of the House and my direct congressman, John Boehner was caught trying to cut a deal with the Democrats Harry Reid and Barack Obama to exclude at least the political class from the socialism of Obamacare. READ MORE AT THE LINK BELOW FOR DETAILS.
I sent that article to some of the people who fund Boehner’s campaign in my area leaving them in a difficult position. What they will do with that information is the result of years of communism—if they deny Boehner campaign funds they risk having a communist oriented Democrat representing them in congress. If they try to crack down on Boehner without the collective support of other fundraisers, they may find themselves and their business scrutinized by the federal government unfavorably—so it is risky to do anything. Of course Boehner knows all this. His dilemma in trying to strike a deal with Reid was similar to the one that JFK was faced with while having sex with his 19-year-old mistress, it’s better red than dead. Rather than fight Obamacare outright at first, until the Tea Party members of the Republican Party voiced their protests, Boehner wanted to at least work out an exemption for himself, his family and his members—as Speaker of the House. He hoped to work out a concession. John Boehner’s focus was not on the deceitful ways that Obamacare was passed, on the disguise of it as a tax to shove it through the Democratically controlled House and Senate, the Supreme Court Ruling allowing it to stand as a “tax” on the American public when it was really sold as another entitlement—on the origin of the deal to make all Americans customers to the insurance industry whether they wanted to or not compelling them under force to buy something—Boehner could only think about himself just like the terrible day in 1962 just before his assassination in Texas where Kennedy confided to his lover—its better red than dead.
Obamacare is a communist dream and its start can be traced back to the intention of communists in 1958 to infiltrate both political parties in America. There can be no question that they were successful based on the actions of the current House Speaker John Boehner who is a functioning communist believing with all his heart and soul that he’s a fiscal conservative. When faced with the realization that it is better red then dead, even the hardest core conservative will choose to go red, so to protect their own lives from the threat of communism which they fear so intensely, they no longer even call it by its proper name.
The government shut down has revealed an aspect of American culture that is beyond dispute. The number of government parks and monuments that have been cut off from tourism is astonishing, and underlines why all federal land should be privatized under the free market system. No government should have the ability to extort national landmarks or historic places as a way to increase their budgetary needs through monopolistic extortion. No property should be federal land, and operated under the monopoly of government control and authority. All land in America should be under private ownership.
Under private ownership there would be no ability for the government to shut down. Parks would operate on a profit basis and would be open “for profit.” By shutting down parks and tourist attractions operated by the federal government a giant underline has been proposed as to why this arrangement has been allowed to take place at all. Government should not have the ability to stop access to land that is so-called collectively owned by all Americans. Since government has stopped access, the best alternative is that all that land should be privately owned. The cost of service would increase, but at least the pretense of politeness would be eradicated, and efficiency would be implemented where it is currently nonexistent.
Of course the reason the government owns so much property in America is the pinnacle problem of growing statism, where the state believes it has more authority than individual lives—which is an anti-American concept to begin with. I considered this problem the other night while visiting Kings Island during one of my favorite times of year, the weekend Haunts that are dedicated to Halloween type activities in one of the largest amusement parks in the world. I love going to Kings Island in the cool fall evenings where the park is open till 1 AM.
I was thinking about the government shut down as I stood under the Eiffel Tower listening to a very intense rock band group called Blood Drums. The time was 11:30 PM, there were fog machines everywhere pumping large volumes of cloudy mist all over the entire park. People all around me were enjoying the music and eating snacks from the various venders and the park was operating all its major rides till well after midnight as the moon peeked over the ominous nighttime clouds. Government was totally incapable of providing anything close to the kind of experience found at Kings Island that I was enjoying. If government operated Kings Island, the park would have closed at 6 PM, because government does not care about profit since it exists off the looted efforts of the wealth they confiscate. They do not strive to be profitable, efficient, or even relevant. They simply take what they want with the mass mobs of the very stupid at their back. Government could not operate Kings Island, only private ownership.
The greatest park in the world is Disney World in Florida. No federally operated facility is more efficient, or does more for science, technology, or the preservation of environmental resources than does Epcot Center or Animal Kingdom. The Disney Parks are almost always open and occasionally they even stay open all night. They can do this because they operate under the free enterprise system. With that said, I have mentioned a time or two the McDonald’s that I love in Orlando located just to the south of Universal Studios. I am most proud to be an American when leaving one of the Disney Parks late at night—around 11 PM after being there since 9 AM where I can stop by this particular McDonald’s which is open 24 hours a day and eat a Big Mac in their dining room till 2 or 3 AM. I can do this because the free enterprise system has shown McDonald’s and the Disney Parks that there is a need for such things, so they operate their business options in such a way to facilitate the needs of “individuals.”
What is going on with the government shutdown is extortion. The statists of government are declaring that either tax payers further fund the ridiculous demands of a monopolistic enterprise called the federal government and all their land grabbing tendencies, or Americans will be cut off from their national treasures. The inefficiencies of government workers is never questioned, or their operating hours. The only thing discussed is the fact that the federal government has the power to deny access to things that are……………….American and they are dead wrong.
On a visit to the Smithsonian, and the Achieves on the Mall in Washington D.C., I had an altercation with the security at both places because of the video I was taking. The pin headed, cock-suckers who had the worthless task of standing around looking stupid all day drove me absolutely insane with their level of regulation, which was senseless. Government museums and parks have way, way too many rules. Whenever I have camped in a State or National Park I have always made a point to break their rules intentionally just to cleanse myself of their brain-dead mediocrity. At the Smithsonian and the Archives the employees were over-staffed and had little to do. They were just there to be there—hired by a faceless, statist government so that the employees could be counted as a “job created.” Their usefulness was marginal at best, and I let them know it.
I have personally no tolerance for extortion, and closing down national landmarks because of fiscal issues in the federal government. Government should not maintain property, or have the authority to shut down anything. Private enterprise should have that option, and their hours and content should be regulated by their customer base—and nothing else. The best that America has to offer is not in anything that has the word “federal” in front of it, so it should not be the template for future activity. Private enterprise is the way to go 100% of the time. Disney World is clean and well maintained not because of a federal law mandating it, but because they want to take care of their customer base. And Kings Island at 12:00 AM was clean and tidy even with a ruckus crowd of teen age kids running around in the dark away from their parents. The Kings Island staff could have waited till the park closed to clean everything up, but they still had people going around the park keeping everything tidy even when they really could have skimmed the task. It’s the little things that make average things exceptional, and that is seldom if ever seen in a federally controlled property.
So why does the government control so much land if they are so inept? The answer is in the merits of the government shut down. And it is simply pathetic!
For many readers here, they vaguely remember how things were during the Cold War. Young people born at the start of the 1990’s have no memory of the Cold War and have since had the event washed away from the collective conscience of America through the public education system, which will be covered extensively during a later article. But the U.S.S.R was fully intent to take over the world replacing all political ideologies with communism. It was, and still is their undisputed goal. Global communists in Planks 8 – 14 sought to infiltrate the American created United Nations as a way to put the world at their feet with counter intelligence activity that would enable them to accomplish their global goals. Read those intentions for yourself below.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
Obviously today, the intentions are more of a reality. The United Nations is on the door step to the entire world and in America through Agenda 21 is infiltrating the culture of The United States with a communist philosophy that has virtually taken over every zoning board in every American city so quietly that many of the participants don’t even know why or how they came to think the way they do about things. If you need a review of what Agenda 21 is, CLICK HERE. Communists were aware that they were a threat to individual freedom throughout the world and they needed a way to stay relevant. They had to find a way to keep from becoming outlawed in free countries, while still growing as a world-wide influence—so they penetrated the United Nations so to infect the world with their social, and economic philosophies. The result has been the world we currently are living in; economies stagnant—living off the past that are slowly dying. In Russia individual motivation had already died, which is why they needed access to the U.S. Patent office. The people of Russia had given up on any kind of personal ambition and weren’t inventing anything. The gross incompetence of any communist system is terribly evident comparing the time of 1917 where communism saturated Russia with a crippling political mentality while radio, film, manufacturing, television broadcasting, and sky scraper industries popped up in America within just a few years under capitalism. Communism had to stop the power of capitalism and to do so they had to loot off the ideas created in America so their country could keep up economically in some fashion while they chipped away from within the United Nations the sovereignty of America.
The 45 Planks of Communism was a military maneuver not made so much by nations against each other as is typically the case during modern warfare, but philosophies. In this case communism started by Karl Marx 60 years prior to the 1917 Russian Revolution slowly penetrated Russian culture over many years until enough people were ready to overthrow the bourgeoisie class. The same period of time evolved from the Russian Revolution to the fall of the Berlin Wall where the economic system of communism failed, and that wall dividing West and East Berlin was finally torn down. As the world celebrated the fall of communism, and the break-up of the Soviet Empire communism had penetrated The United Nations and spread violently under the changed name of “progressivism.”
The attack in America was underway. Fiscal collapse has always been the goal of communists using The United Nations to force America to spread itself too thin all over the world while halting American business with excessive regulations. The so-called Lean Manufacturing methods that were made so popular in the Asian theater were popularized by The United Nations as a way to incorporate the entire world into a shared system that broke down the resistance to communism. Micro management disguised as Lean Manufacturing was the way that communism has halted the growth of American business using so-called efficiency studies to introduce bureaucratic red tape that would halt innovation in corporations focusing all work places into embracing communist views of shared input. Even America’s largest companies have found and accepted that government regulation, and business compliance into lean manufacturing methods promoted by the United Nations has crippled their internal innovations and efficiency of their work forces. Mostly today, America lives off its past innovations as new concepts are not introduced as individual motivation has been removed in service to the concept of a collective whole—the overall health of the organization. This concept of shared sacrifice in American business is a spill-over from communist propaganda manipulated through The United Nations to stop capitalism. CLICK HERE FOR A SAMPLE.
Lean Manufacturing for American companies was the only way they could counter the terrorist tendencies of communist labor unions with a legitimate proposal of focusing on efficiency instead of the individuals that made up the unions. However, the tactic was employed on both ends by communists who infiltrated The United Nations and advanced both proposals—which forced collectivism onto entrepreneurial activities. Without the United Nations, it is highly likely that unions would have fizzled out in America well before the 1980’s and that business innovation would still be the standard instead of the exception.
The strategies employed by communists aimed to bring mass societies into the understanding of collectivism by destroying individual effort and focusing on collective causes. Everywhere this is done, the strategy began in these 45 planks of communism, and was embarked on a scale much larger than anyone realized at the time, and cannot simply be comprehended otherwise. But when it is understood that communism is behind the push for a stronger United Nations, and behind even Lean Manufacturing introduced to America through United Nations “globalism” outreach then the strategies of communism are easy to see. The devious depths of their efforts where nothing but the complete destruction of individual effort in favor of collective causes, and since that mentality could not compete directly with capitalism, communists needed the American funded United Nations to attack capitalism in an indirect way, instead of a full-fledged frontal assault.
When I was young I used to wear a KISS (the rock band) shirt that said on the back, “If it’s too loud, you’re too old.” Back then, even though I didn’t do drugs, curse, or promote decadence as a “leader of the pack,” the same kind of parents who support school levies today were doing the same back then, and they hated me. And I mean……………HATED me. They’d declare on many occasions……………..”some day Rich Hoffman………….you’ll grow up. Someday the music will be too loud for you and you’ll be like the rest of us.” Well, let me update their sentiments. I’m now a grandfather and have raised two daughters and been married for over a quarter century. And “they” are still waiting, their fat jello packed asses destroying several sets of furniture over the last couple of decades are still praying upon the gods of statism for “maturity” to shatter forward progress. I still play music loudly, and that isn’t going to stop. Most of the music I listen to are orchestral scores, but occasionally there is a rock song that comes on the radio that I crank up all the way and roll the windows down, even in the hard of winter. One such song is “Lift Me Up” (featuring Rob Halford of Judas Priest) by Five Finger Death Punch which for me is a throwback to the kind of music that was so popular during the pro-capitalist American period of the 1980s. I LOVE this song, not only for the tempo, but for the lyrics.
Five Finger Death Punch (also initialized as FFDP or 5FDP) is an American heavy metal band from Los Angeles, California. Formed in 2005, the group’s name is derived from classic martial arts cinema. The band originally consisted of vocalist Ivan Moody, guitarist Zoltan Bathory, guitarist Caleb Andrew Bingham, bassist Matt Snell, and drummer Jeremy Spencer.[6] Bingham was replaced by guitarist Darrell Roberts in 2006, who was then replaced by Jason Hook in 2009. Bassist Matt Snell departed from the band in 2010 and was replaced by Chris Kael in 2011.
Their debut album The Way of the Fist was released in 2007. Following its release, the band began achieving success rapidly. The 2009 follow-up album War Is the Answer further increased their popularity, leading to both of the albums being certified gold by the RIAA, selling over 500,000 copies each in the United States. The band’s third album, entitled American Capitalist was released on October 11, 2011 and achieved Gold status within the year. The band has played international music festivals including Mayhem Festival in 2008, 2010 and 2013, and Download Festival in 2009, 2010 and 2013.
Five Finger Death Punch are the recipients of the Radio Contraband Rock Radio Awards for “Indie Artist of the Year” in both 2011 and 2012. They were also honored with the Radio Contraband Rock Radio Award for Album (American Capitalist) and Song of the Year (“Coming Down”) in 2012.
What I like about Five Finger Death Punch is that they represent a growing independent movement that is emerging in Los Angeles culture—which is typically dominated by left leaning statists. The same anger and energy that is driving the creation of songs like the above “Lift Me Up” are the same as those driving sales for Grand Theft Auto 5. The emergence of this heavy metal rock band represents the growing freedom movement that certainly isn’t “Republican” but leans “libertarian.” There is a growing sector of the world population that feels the pressure reflected in the lyrics to “Lift Me Up,” and they are looking for anything or anyone to follow to lead them to that destination. On such destinations, statism is not the answer, or even a viable option. For people who find the song “Lift Me Up” inspiring, blind compliance to authority is not an option.
In my own life I have a tendency to completely disregard rules I don’t agree with, and I don’t feel any kind of social obligation to obey majority rule. To me, if the majority of society is a group of fools, I’m not going along with their collective sentiments as an individual. To provide context to that statement, my children were nearly arrested for climbing on The White House fence during the Clinton years by the secret service, but weren’t because they were encouraged by me. The other day there were jokes about my age and the knowledge people had that I have still been to court more times than the years of my life. I have stood in front of court judges more times than anybody I know except for lawyers, and every one of those instances was attempts by majority rule through law creation to bend my will to the collective due to my open disregard for society’s rules. So I have a lot of experience in that kind of thing and after many, many years, I am no closer to compliance now than I was at any point in my life.
So to those who told me nearly 30 years ago that someday I’d grow up and that the music would become too loud what they were really saying was that someday the statist system would beat me into compliance and I would learn to live with the results………..and that they couldn’t wait to see it happen. When I pulled into their drive ways to haul off their children for some gallant adventure they declared to themselves as my car disappeared into the surrounding streets with the music levels declining as distance mandated they’d say to each other…………someday the music will become too loud for Rich Hoffman.
Well, it’s not, and I doubt the music ever will, because I love lyrics to songs like “Lift Me Up.” The words in such songs reflect accurately how I have always felt, and continue to strive for every day of my life.
It ain’t no mystery
I’m all I have left
I’m pushing back running you over
I’ve been thrown down,
Run around
Beaten ’til I hit the ground
I’m telling you right now that it’s over
There’s no room for mistakes
All the parts are in place
Say what you will but say it to my face
Better back the fuck up
Better shut the fuck up
I’ll do what I want
And I’ll never give up
I won’t be broken
I won’t be tortured
I won’t be beaten down
I have the answer
I can take the pressure
I will turn it all around
Lift me up above this
The flames and the ashes
Lift me up and help me to fly away
Lift me up above this
The broken, the empty
Lift me up and help me to fly away
I’m gonna change history
Enlighten the world
Teach ’em how to see through my eyes
I’m gonna lash back check that fate as a heart attack
Stomp out all the ugliest lies
You can’t convince me to change
We ain’t on the same page
I’ve had my fill
There’s nothing but rage
Best get out of my way ’cause there’s nothing to say
Is that all you got because I ain’t got all day
I won’t be broken
I won’t be tortured
I won’t be beaten down
I have the answer
I can take the pressure
I will turn it all around
Lift me up above this
The flames and the ashes
Lift me up and help me to fly away
Lift me up above this
The broken, the empty
Lift me up and help me to fly away
I won’t be broken
I won’t be tortured
I won’t be beaten down
I have the answer
I can take the pressure
I will turn it all around
Lift me up above this
The flames and the ashes
Lift me up and help me to fly away
Lift me up above this
The broken, the empty
Lift me up and help me to fly away
Lift me up to fly away
Lift me up to fly away
Lift me up
That song is a rebellion against statism, and it makes no attempt to hide it. That song gives me hope that the entertainment culture has a movement rising within it that reflects the attitude of Five Finger Death Punch as a rock band. Such people will not blindly accept the statism of public education, of Obamacare, of a one world order through the United Nations. There is a growing subculture of open rebellion that is very similar to the one that came on the heels of the Jimmy Carter presidency, and with it the sentiments of Five Finger Death Punch who hit hard lyrically, controversially, and fearlessly proclaiming what everyone else is already feeling. The reason we love that music loud is to hear it over the noise of the statist world, the social rhetoric of the current progressives, the school levy sluts, the eco-terrorists and every anti-capitalist in existence. I do love such music loud………….as much so now as I always did.
Compliance is not an option………blind devotion to being ruled by some political, or academic elite is simply not going to happen………..not by me, or many people who I know. They will not willingly give up their guns, they will not simply go to jail without a major fight, and they will not keep saying yes to higher taxes, more imposing legislation, more cops, TSA agents, NSA spies, FBI peeping Toms, and endless parades of IRS agents working for a huge government union that wants to control individual lives and behavior. Peaceful transition from a free society into a statist one, now that the game is well-known, will not happen. Young people do not have the money to subsidize baby boomers with Obamacare and still pay off their student loans for jobs that don’t pay for one of those things, let alone both. An entire generation of young people let down, broke, and pissed off are coming to age and large statist governments think incorrectly that they will just roll over and………comply. They will not! Instead, they are looking for anything……….ANYTHING that will do as the song above states………….They want someone—-anyone to lift them up, and let them fly away from the nightmare created by years, and years, and years of massive statist governments that want control on every free mind that exits, and the byproduct of that action is rage driven by realized betrayal. So turn up the music and let it out………..because many people feel it. You are not alone. When you hear that song on the open streets of West Chester, don’t be surprised to look at the car where the song emerges and see me driving. It reflects my sentiments about the politics of our day…………….perfectly.
