I can understand why the un-ambitious, physically frail, intellectually insufficient, culturally lacking and otherwise fearful human beings would be attracted to socialism. Competition is a frightening ideal to those who lack the confidence to advance themselves to a level of performance that is needed to overcome rivals. Such attitudes are what drive capitalism and bring freedom to the lives of everyone in subtle ways, yet the idea that there are winners and losers in life must be accepted. For the characters who wish to be handed victory trophies in life for simply existing—because they fear competition, socialism gives them the ability to feel they are equal to those who are clearly better at some skills and set the bar high for all others to meet. Socialism is more attractive to the weak and feeble masses because it keeps them from having to compete for merit. Socialism will always be appealing to those types of people.
But ironically socialism is not good for the collective society because it removes the merits gained through competition. When competition is missing from any endeavor, performance drops dramatically in every activity attempted under any effort. While socialism protects the individual from collective pressure exerted upon those who fall short in life it destroys the individual merits that a society enjoys because of competition driven by the best and brightest succeeding.
Americans for many generations, particularly since the 1930s have been inundated with socialism imported from the deficient European political theater, and it has harmed the American way of life dramatically. But since socialism was introduced so long ago, many modern Americans do not know life without it. They have socialism in their retirement packages, their collective bargaining agreements, in every aspect of their governments, in their taxation, in their medicine, in virtually every aspect of their lives because a democracy is ruled by the masses and the masses find socialism more appealing than capitalism—that is until they find their freedoms evaporating as a result.
When a football team starts losing because the best quarterback is on the bench because the head coach does not like the individual, or believes that other team quarterbacks deserve a chance but are clearly lacking in ability relative to the better player, the whole team loses and they will begin to embrace methods of capitalism to put the best players on the field so they can win. But such pressure is only introduced if the other teams are actually trying to win the game by putting their best players against other team’s best players. If all teams fail to recognize who the best players are from bad players then the game loses appeal to any audience as chaos and boredom are due to follow. Fans in the stands that pay money to be entertained and watch the game will quickly realize that they could perform at the same hapless level, and will stop attending football games. They’ll just organize their own games. So a level of competence and an attempt at becoming the best is required in such endeavors. Socialism harms this process.
Yet the same rules that make football a great game apply to science, business, education, even gardening—competition drives the level of society higher with quality being better wherever competition is present. The most dramatic example of such competition can be seen in Orlando, Florida. My absolute favorite McDonald’s to eat at in the entire country is the fabulous giant of a restaurant which resides just outside of Universal Studios. It is one of the largest McDonald’s restaurants in the world and is made that way out of a need created by competition. Universal Studios in Florida has two amusement parks just down the road and both are absolutely fantastic. But they became fantastic because they are in competition with the four Disney parks just down the highway at the next exit and all the wonderful entertainment options that connect the two multi-park complexes with International Blvd. And in between these two massive amusement destinations is the Sea World complex which has done so much good for marine wildlife research due to their excessive revenue generating capacity. It is competition and capitalism that make all the fabulous activity in Central Florida work so well. Without competition, Universal Studios could afford to cut corners and present the bare minimum investment needed to bring visitors through their admission gates. But they can’t, because Disney drove the market higher always pushing the other parks to become better, or go out of business. The result to all this dynamic is that an average fast food restaurant like McDonald’s which everyone takes for granted in their home town communities is driven to become better and more spectacular. Whenever I’m in Central Florida, I make a point to visit this McDonald’s so I can relish capitalism displayed in such a fantastic fury. There is no place on earth like Central Florida because capitalism has defined it and made it what it is.
Elsewhere, where socialism injects itself, such as in public education, any unionized effort, or any government position competition is missing. This is why such efforts struggle perpetually to maintain any level of quality—because they are essentially combating nature itself attempting to fight off the effects that destroyed the U.S.S.R and every communist country in the entire world that functions with a socialist foundation. Every village in Africa where starving residents struggle to live from day-to-day is due to the regulatory limits set upon them by their village authority. Those limits may only be religious, political, emotional, or any other variation, but they do not involved competition. Village chiefs do now as they always have, attempted to drive their collective society’s desire for competition into their military so that proof of valor and manhood merit is designated to bravery on the battlefield instead of creativity in manners of business. This is the result of socialism and has been going on since before such a term had a definition.
Socialism is the easy way for the masses to avoid not feeling the pressure of competition. Socialism as we see it today in medicine, in education, and in all government would be equivalent to Universal Studios being allowed to exist without having to compete with Disney World. Another tendency of socialism is to use the power of pull to eliminate competition such as the theoretical circumstance of Universal Studios using politics to apply too many regulations selectively enforced on Disney World to attack the fact that they have a broader revenue base and force Universal Studios to perform at a higher level than they might otherwise do if they didn’t have to compete with Disney. Using politics to sap all the wealth of Disney away into nothing, Universal through socialism could eliminate their competition through regulation. This would mean McDonald’s would only have to build a normal free-standing store since Universal Studios would be the only park around, meaning McDonald’s wouldn’t have to compete with the restaurants that are in business down by Disney World in the absence of such competition, Universal could afford to do the bare minimum of everything driving up costs but dramatically lowering quality.
This is the situation with Social Security, Obama Care, the Post Office, public schools and virtually everything that socialism touches through government. Socialism allows the average to sell their services as “superior” because they have eliminated competition. This is the spirit behind every collective bargaining contract—they are socialist attempts at fairness—but the fairness comes at a cost to quality, and dynamics.
So when it is said that people want to see better things out of government, they have to reject the socialism that they are currently addicted to as a safety net to their own incompetence. It is easy to declare that the entire world should be fair, but the cost of that fairness is terrible, as it pushes society into a black hole where nothing of any good can ever escape. The grand myth by socialism lovers is that if they collectively believe in something through the power of democracy that they can deny the laws of nature, but they can’t. Their beliefs are never realized, and their commitments to socialism destroy the world for everyone instead of just the targeted well-to-dos which they rally against. It is those who are best whether it be richer, stronger, faster, or even more attractive which set the standard for all others to reach up to. Without such goal posts, society just flaps in the wind and recedes backwards. The masses may never achieve the level of greatness that comes from the best. Universal Studios may never be as great as Disney World and McDonald’s may never be a good as The T-Rex Café but it is the attempt through competition which raises the performance of all to achieve heights they otherwise would never accomplish. Before society can every become better at anything it must reject socialism and embrace capitalism—because until they do, there is no reason for the average and mediocre to attempt to be more than they currently are—to strive for greatness, and goodness in a spirit only competition can provide.
One of the big problems the current White House is going through with all their scandals is due to a commitment to maintaining a positive public image instead of dealing with difficult problems. The White House is in trouble because they showed more concern about their public image than in doing what was right. Since The White House trouble is all the rage in the news at the same time the Lakota school system released their lip-dub video in dedication to Spina Bifida awareness comparisons were inevitable. While watching the video I realized that Lakota was guilty of the same sins as their progressive older siblings in the federal government. I had been prepared to say good things about the video where the efforts of the entire school had been pulled together with thousands of kids involved, but as I watched the obvious attempt to cater to Ellen DeGeneres at the 8:30 mark in the video the line was crossed.
What I see when watching this video is a very committed attempt to shut down the entire school system, teaching the kids nothing during the filming of the video except to act in a music video. The amount of work was extensive and would have required hundreds of labor hours to decorate all those halls, coordinate the student efforts, and ultimately put on a production that is so large that Lakota could implement their stated objective of getting their effort noticed by Ellen DeGeneres. They even rented a helicopter for the crane shots! Based on what I know about the personalities behind the effort it appears to me that Lakota is using the tragic conditions of Spina Bifida as a shield gaining national exposure and the money that comes with such public relations. The money Lakota needs is to pay for heavy ended labor contracts that are about to launch the administration into a budget deficit. I wish that it wasn’t the case, but after carefully looking at the posters on the wall and the behavior of the coordination, the effort is more about public relations and appeasing Ellen DeGeneres than actually helping Spina Bifida victims.
These kinds of public relations tricks have been executed against communities for decades. The White House uses these tactics overtly because nobody would dare call them what they actually are, because the villainy is hidden behind goodness. In the case of Spina Bifida the little girl featured in the video needs help, and she needs money for research into her ailment. But if people really wanted to help, the left-leaning video organizers would contribute considerable portions of their pay-checks—especially the nearly 1000 employees at Lakota who make more than $60K per year to help Spina Bifida. Some of the people involved in that video have quarter million dollar contracts. A personal check for $1000 to $5000 goes a long way, and those school employees can afford it. But the intention of the video however was to convince “other” people to contribute “their” money while the school gets a pat on the head by a national celebrity. The school can then use that endorsement during their next levy increase campaign. I would say the same statements to those organizers that I have said to the local socialites who stick their noses in local charity efforts—just write a six figure personal check instead of buying another Florida condo, then you will have done something good for Spina Bifida and the little girl in the video. But putting up decorations all over the Lakota schools using staff members and shutting down the entire education process to film a video for a public relations effort with the intention of attracting a day-time talk show host’s airtime is public relations, not Spina Bifida awareness.
When President Obama brought in the families of the Sandy Hook shootings to Washington and gave a speech with them in the background, the President was guilty of using the tragedy of that catastrophic school shooting to advance his anti-gun policies. The situation was exacerbated when those families were encouraged to sit in the Senate balcony to apply pressure on the Senators as they voted on a proposed gun bill pushed by the Obama administration. The same type of subtle manipulation is being done by the government school of Lakota. The attempt at consensus by Lakota to use victims of Spina Bifida as an excuse to appeal to a national audience is using the mechanism of charity as a malicious and manipulative endeavor. Since altruism is generally a hand-off type of social judgment, assessment of charity value is never analyzed. It is never judged whether or not a charity event is successful or not, because only the intention is considered. This allows giant government schools like Lakota to use victims of Spina Bifida to actually gain public relations favor ahead of tax increase requests without being accused of using thousands of Lakota students and employees to illegally support school levy endeavors by hiding the intention behind a detrimental illness.
This is the danger of a government school being stuck into the center of a community and forcing property owners to contribute their money to such institutions under force. The progressive philosophy shown in the video, especially at the 8:30 mark is one that I do not support, yet I must support it because I own property near the school. And I also don’t agree with supporting an institution that exploits those who are less fortunate with the disguised need to further raise taxes. Public schools need to behave under competitive influence so that tax payers are given a choice of what kind of ideas they support, or don’t support, instead of being forced to provide thousands of private dollars in taxes to a progressive organization that thinks singing, dancing, and getting on Ellen’s television show is more important than the fundamentals of education, and living within a community established budget.
It may be considered by many to be “mean spirited” to point out such obvious schemes. But if someone really wants to help Spina Bifida, they need to put their money where their mouth is and help those who need it without seeking celebrity on television. In the case of this video, it is just a grim reminder that public education institutions see themselves as molds for a community, and they are driven by government parameters, so it is troubling to see such large conglomerations of collective effort believing that they are doing good, when the act is only an illusion. These are not the kind of messages that children should grow up believing. Even though the participants at the 8:30 mark in the video behave in such a flimsy way as part of their social act, the act itself is but one more reminder that the product produced in public schools are one of the many factors that are eroding away the ethical foundation of our present society with beliefs that are caused not for concern over Spina Bifida, but to become celebrities on Ellen with a production so big, and expensive, that nobody would dare question it.
For those who have not been keeping up with the news, here is the chance to catch up. Glenn Beck puts his thoughts together on how the IRS scandal, the Benghazi terrorist attacks, and the AP News story are all connected. Glenn’s thoughts are very much aligned with my own. Watch, listen, and share with a friend. For those who read here and hold “important” positions and know “important” people, make sure to share this with your networks so they understand what kind of game is going on.
With three major scandals enveloping the White House, Glenn spent time on radio this morning breaking down how they are all rooted in the idea of fundamental transformation.
“We have Benghazis, IRS, and the AP. I tried to figure out what these things were really all about. In the end what do these three scandals have in common? And what they have in common is the arrogance of transforming the world,” Glenn said.
In Benghazi, Glenn believes that Obama was trying to transform the Middle East by supporting revolution. Glenn theorizes that the CIA was involved with running guns to the Syrian rebels, a theory that has been supported by other members of the media in recent days.
“In Benghazi he was transforming the Middle East. He wanted to run guns, support the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia was the one who asked us to support the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria. So support the Muslim Brotherhood in the entire Middle East, run guns to the Muslim Brotherhood through Turkey into Syria and cede revolution, not just in Syria but all throughout the Middle East. This is the transformation of the Middle East. That’s his policy,” Glenn said.
How about the IRS scandal? Glenn said that’s about transforming political dissent and how the government deals with political dissent. He said the scandal specifically shows the evolution of intimidation and control from “nudge”, encouraging people to only trust sources with an acceptable bias like Al Jazeera and Huffington Post, to “shoot” where the IRS is used as a weapon to attack people’s reputation and finances.
“This scandal is about shoot. We’ve gone from nudge, to shove – which is destroy your reputation and I’m going to send the union thugs out after you ‑ to shoot. I’m actually going to use the union thugs to beat you, and I’m also going to destroy your life and finance through the IRS. I will destroy you. I will bankrupt you. When it comes to the only kind of gun the IRS has, they’ve just fired it at the American people,” Glenn said.
Finally, the AP scandal is about transforming the media.
“The progressives have been trying to transform the media for quite some time, and they’ve done a great job. We’ve all seen it,” Glenn said.
“Now, this, I want you to hear this fact clearly. This president has gone after and is prosecuting more whistleblowers than all of the other presidents combined in American history. By the way, he’s had five years. In five years he has gone after more whistleblowers than all other presidents combined. Understand that’s during the Communist hunts. That’s during Vietnam. That includes all of World War II, all of World War I and Woodrow Wilson. That includes Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War. All other presidents combined,” Glenn said.
Glenn said that in order to transform the media, you first have to threaten the watchdogs who are trying to show what the government is doing. And when a few of the watchdogs are able to break through, you go after the press and intimidate them until they are unwilling to investigate.
“This is the last part of the fundamental transformation. What do all of these have in common? Transformation: Transform the Middle East, transform the First Amendment, and transform the media and the watchdogs. Transform, fundamental transformation of the United States of America,” Glenn said.
This isn’t the first time I’ve said such things about Obama. I suggested impeaching the President after the controversial appointment of cabinet members during 2012. CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW. So this isn’t anything new for me. But if my congressman John Boehner had acted when I suggested it then the lost lives in Benghazi might have been saved, the economy would be recovering, and the IRS scandal which was happening to members of his district due to their involvement in Tea Party groups would not have occurred. Also members of the media would not have been subjected to harassment by the Obama Justice Department under Eric Holder and countless other tyrannies that could have been averted.
Instead, Boehner calculated that my urging to impeach Obama was radical, and represented a far right-wing view-point that he dismissed. After all, his concerns were to play golf with Obama and work toward “peaceful solutions” through diplomacy. Boehner also enjoys appeasing the local socialites who know little about politics, or business finance, yet inject themselves into every discussion where money flows attempting to bring altruistic judgment through joined wine glasses and catered meals. Such socialites support Obama’s brand of socialism, especially in public education institutions even though they claim to be conservative Republicans joined at the hip to Governor Kasich. Boehner and Kasich listen to the socialist whims of such people so that the purse strings stay open for future campaigns. After all, those socialites are “rich” and their opinions carry much weight even though the quality of their minds are detriments to society, and for politicians seeking re-election the former is more important than the later. It is because of such social pressures, and lack of determination that people like Ariel Castro can operate in the open, and why con artists like Barack Obama can get away with audacious lies behind a socialist agenda to fulfill goals that exist outside of fathomable reality. The blood is on the hands of those who didn’t act in the beginning hoping that elections would solve the problem peacefully, and far less grotesquely.
But elections didn’t solve the problem, and the “socialites” planned desire to maintain community integrity with wine glasses and fund-raising dinners allowed evil to grow, not abate, and now all those involved with the great indecision are guilty of not just assisting in treachery against The United States, but in assisting evil through inaction. The crimes committed by the Obama administration all during 2012 and thus far in 2013 are on the hands of those who failed to recognize evil hidden behind a smiling face and great charisma that only a demon from the temples of hell could generate.
It is a fair characterization to level such claims at Barack Obama because it was his administration that allowed for a terrible evil to be committed with full knowledge that it was a lie. Obama and his White House staff blamed the Benghazi deaths on Mark Basseley Youssef, AKA Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, AKA Sam Bacile the director of the terrible film “Innocence of Muslims” which about 10 people saw in a southern California movie theater. Other than that one public showing only a 15 minute video clip existed on YouTube at the time of the Benghazi attack. Bacile wrote the film in prison and shot it within two months of being release with no money, no real actors, and obviously an angry rant that was shaped during his stint in prison. Nobody saw it, and nobody cared—but the film was a symbol of free speech, which President Obama is supposed to protect. Instead, Obama allowed Bacile to take the fall for an alleged gun running operation in Libya and the apparently intentional death of those involved to cover the tracks. The Obama administration immediately hoped to hide their guilt behind the free speech efforts of a nothing film shown to a vacant audience counting on the American people to believe that the violence had been ignited by a 15-minute YouTube clip. See the rest of the story at the below link.
Obama knowingly lied to the American people and with the same type of public sincerity shown by the embodiment of evil in Ariel Castro who pretended sincere emotions during a presidential election that covered the gross abuse of his employees intentionally disgracing The White House. They did what they have done on purpose, and they trusted that the press and American people would not advance the issue beyond their deceitful manipulations. The worst of all these recent revelations are that the Obama administration designated a sacrificial victim in Sam Bacile who was only guilty of being a bad filmmaker, and tossed him into jail to cover the crimes of murder that was either intentionally committed by the Obama administration, or was caused by sheer incompetence. Either way, Americans died in Benghazi due to poor leadership by the Obama administration. Then the Obama White House tried to blame the violence on a silly YouTube video hoping that the scandal would not be pressed by the public any further. They insulted the deceased with their hope to get away with the crime.
The reasons for the impeachment of Barack Obama extend well into a long list of Constitutional violations and are voluminous beyond comprehension. But the worst is the intention of the administration to pick a sacrificial victim in Bacile and throw him upon an alter stepping all over his rights as an individual to preserve the collective aims of the Obama White House. If The White House will do such a thing with one man, they will do it with any collection of people, any business, or any philosophic idea, and that makes Obama and his employees dangerous to the American experience, and detriments to all free people who want a fair chance at life success and social opportunity. That is why Obama should be removed from office so to set the parameters for all future presidents of what is acceptable and what is not. A failure to act on Obama and his crimes will establish for the entire future an understanding that it is alright for Presidents to behave in such a destructive fashion against the American people. More destruction will follow of the American way of life if Obama is not impeached, and this is a reality that cannot be hidden from. It will take courage, courage from the press, courage from the politicians that must embark on the tragic journey, and courage from the American people to look evil in the eye and act against it, instead of being seduced. It must happen because America does not want to look at itself decades from now and wonder what happened in the same way that we are asking how Ariel Castro was able to chain three stolen girls in his basement in plain site of many people who failed to act in a way to save the victims. To me, Ariel Castro and Barack Obama are one in the same. Their only real difference is that Castro tortured and molested three innocent girls over a long period of time. Obama is doing the same figuratively with the entire world, and he needs to be stopped boldly and with great conviction. One is literal, one is metaphorical, but they are both the sheer face of evil in all its destructive qualities, and bottomless malevolence.
It has taken me a few days to assemble my thoughts about Ariel Castro, the man who took at least three young girls hostage in his home and forced them to perform as sex slaves over a ten-year period, never letting the girls see the light of day. I wish I could say that such information was shocking, but it’s not. The case represents a complete failure in our society—a failure to recognize evil and to act on it. Castro was very arrogant about his behavior, even maintaining emotional connections to the families of the girls he had locked in his basement—so to throw off the trail of his guilt. The case has unsettled Americans because they fear that it could happen to anybody, anywhere, if such people could do such a horrible act right out in the open of a busy neighborhood. The question of how Ariel Castro could have held the girls prisoner for such a long time as other people walked by down the side-walk, visited his home, and observed him from across the street and not detect the evil happening in his basement leaves Americans feeling insecure—and looking to government to assist them. Everybody wants to know that somebody can detect such evil and prevent it from happening.
When I wrote my novel TheSymposium of Justice I wrote the opening chapter based on a personal experience I had which involved the FBI and local police who were unable to find a serial rapist that was roaming my neighborhood, frightening my wife and little girls. The villain of that chapter was a character who is ironically very much like the profile of Ariel Castro in real life. The scene takes place in the chapter titled “Scarface the Rapist.” It was based on many late nights spent by myself looking for the rapist on my neighborhood streets because the FBI was failing to discover the predator. The similarities to Castro and Scarface the Rapist in my novel was not a prophetic act on my part, but a profile tendency that such villain’s exhibit. I realized in my interviews with the police at the time, and the FBI that our society had lost the ability to detect evil and act on preventing it, because most human beings had fallen victim to inaction by allowing their personal educations to introduce to their minds anti-concepts which stripped away their ability to ascertain value to people or situations.
I wrote The Symposium of Justice as a reaction to this realization. I wanted to re-teach those willing to learn how to recognize evil and to act on their realizations. I wanted to present to reader’s minds various scenarios that examine evil from various vantage points so that they could relate the experience to their lives and hopefully keep people like Ariel Castro in the cracks of society away from innocent children.
There is no amount of surveillance available to the CIA, FBI, the DEA, the police, or any other protective organization if the people listening have lost their ability to determine the nature of evil and to act against it. The short answer to the Ariel Castro types in the world, who wish to assert their dominance over others with force, coercion, and fear, is that the authorities cannot save anybody. They can only scoop up the bodies later after the crimes have happen. It took Amanda Berry to finally escape after 10 years of captivity having to endure unimaginable acts to heroically save herself by playing her hand till just the right moment. If she hadn’t kept her mind sane, the rest of the girls would still be chained in the basement for perhaps another 10 years and the police, along with every federal agency would be powerless to do anything about it. They are powerless not because they don’t have the tools to detect human bodies present with heat detection technology, listening devices, and other advanced wall penetrating information gathering equipment—but because they cannot detect the behavior patterns of evil.
The human race has lost its ability to look people like Ariel Castro in the eye and determine that they are up to no good. The human race has lost its ability to assert judgment of right and wrong. It has lost the ability to act on behalf of goodness.
I realized this during my many interviews with federal agents and the police years ago. So I took matters into my own hands. I wrote The Symposium of Justice to help others re-learn how evil conducts its sinister symphonies. I write this blog every day in the same spirit, I want to teach other human beings how to determine right from wrong and to educate them on the skills they have had bred out of them through public education and other statist institutions. The best way to prevent the Ariel Casto types from ruining the lives of other people is to detect them as they walk down your sidewalk, or to catch them in the middle of the night outside a neighbor’s window, and to deal with them in ways that they police are powerless to engage in—due to a court system which has allowed evil to thrive by removing value assessment from society.
The other aspect to this problem of evil and its social growth is the tragic result of modern society to consciously produce “beta men.” Public schools, statist governments, religions, and the media have actively sought to destroy the traditional sense of strong, Alpha males in a misguided attempt to bring perceived equality to women. They have sought to accomplish this by bringing down the mental standards of women toward men, and making men strive to be physically less astute and more akin to females. This has caused all types of problems primarily where men no longer feel they should protect females in society. Men should no longer open the door for women, pay their way during mating customs, or stand on behalf of a woman’s honor, is the modern message advocated most profoundly. Progressive social engineers have removed “value” from the social vocabulary so to make possible equality between the sexes and this has left both males and females prone to being preyed upon by evil.
We currently live in a society where a man would not consider taking a bullet from a gun for a woman he does not know. He will not fight for the honor of a female that is being pillaged by a gang of thugs. The man has been taught to be a “beta” since he views males and females the same in value so the first impulse is indecision instead of valor during an emergency confrontation or possible maneuver by evil to harm an innocent women. This has wrecked sexual customs in human beings forcing their inner feelings underground through pornography to manifest. For women, they deeply yearn for a dominate man in their sexual relationships and are more prone than ever to promiscuous relationships outside the family unit to satisfy their yearnings. For men, unable to satisfy their wives turn to pornography and innocent young girls who are too immature to judge their adult inadequacies. This is the fuel behind the sex trade industry where many men save up their pennies to purchase “escorts” during business trips at their hotel rooms, or place dollar bills in the panties of 19-year-old girls at Vegas gentlemen clubs. Some even go so far to fly oversees to participate in the type of youthful sex that they cannot get in the United States openly.
This comes back around to the Ariel Castro case. Castro, too poor to fly to Malaysia, Cambodia, or China for illegal sex with 12 to 16 year-old-girls simply took them from his neighborhood. He scouted them out as a school bus driver for a public school, and simply took the girls for his use. His situation is no different from the other evils that drive sex trade throughout the world. The only difference between Castro and “Millions” of other confused men is that Castro was too poor to hide his crimes from the eyes of society. He could only afford to take the crimes to his basement, but the desire is the same as the middle-aged businessman who pretends to go to Cambodia for a “charity” event only to use such an endeavor to commit vicious evil against an innocent child sold into the sex trade by parents crushed under government statism. The evil of Castro was not seen by friends, family and neighbors because in their minds they are guilty of the same crimes. They may not act on their thoughts, but they think about them, which prevents them from casting opinions at the strange behavior of Castro as he entered his home with more food than he needed, placed trash in front of his home that was “excessive,” and had strangely boarded up windows. Nobody thought to push Castro when they were associating with him about his strange habits because they had the same irregular behavior patterns allowing evil to hide itself in plain view.
I know when I wrote Symposium and started the opening chapter with a rape attempt driven by a child molesting sex addict that I was insulting most of the world population. I didn’t expect the novel to jump to the top of the New York Times Bestseller list because it stands against most of the current values of modern society. But for that, I am proud. I enjoy profoundly fighting evil. I have done it all my life and I will do it as long as I walk the earth. I have picked fights with evil for many years and had many adventures because of it. If I had it my way I would string evil up into the trees with my whips and beat them all like a piñata. I don’t care if its one evil doer or 1 million, it does not matter. But in the modern world, I would be prosecuted because I have value where evil does not. Evil and statist government are essentially one in the same so the government will defend evil and prosecute me because evil has nothing to give—they can only take—just like government. So I take my frustrations out on evil in my novels—particularly my Symposium, which my kids love most. They know me, and some of the antics I have been involved in, so they understand the motives of Fletcher Finnegan from that very defined story of good against evil.
I feel bad for Amanda Berry who escaped the wrath finally after 10 years from Ariel Castro. But I feel worse for the “millions” and millions of other girls throughout the world who are currently under the same tragic circumstances. Evil has their lives in its hands and for such young minds they realize that there is nowhere on earth that they are safe, so they surrender their integrity to the impositions of tyranny in the form of forced sex. The line of problems that lead to such circumstances is long, and has its roots in statist governments and lack of individual will. This problem will not go away with the prosecution of Ariel Castro. It will simply allow society to divert their attention away from the real problem of evil that is present in their own lives, inconveniently. For those who realize such things, I offer them The Symposium. The way to beat evil is to combat it directly and to spit in its eye and prevent it from hiding in the shadows of guilt, apathy, and lazy neglect. Evil must be defeated if the human race hopes to continue, and no government on earth can achieve such a feat no matter how much money they spend on the attempt. The combat of evil comes from the ability to first determine right from wrong and assess value. Then there must be a will to confront it. Without such things, evil will continue to hide right in front of our faces, and more Amanda Berrys’ will remain chained in basements, tied to bed posts, and taken from loving families and sold into modern slavery until such a will is present in the human race. It all starts with recognizing evil for evil, and having the courage to confront it without fear.
This is how desensitized we have all become. It’s an accepted practice…………….and it is evil.
As Justin communicated with me his thoughts on the IRS revelation on May 10, 2013 he had just wrapped up a very busy day with the media finishing up with ABC World News Tonight, among many other television news programs. He was far from “satisfied” and I couldn’t blame him. Here is the prior article about the issue with the IRS and Justin.
* Reaching out to liberty groups and tea party groups is political in nature – an affront to liberty. I accept the organization (IRS) has a policy against it, but would like to know what actions are taken to assure this does not recur.
* Asking a group about a tax status, unless politically motivated, is ok. What leadership does in their free time is of no relevance to what the organization does. Asking about an individual, particularly an unrelated individual, is troubling. What purpose could it serve? Why was that individual, me in this case, not contacted or informed of outreach?
* As of writing I have not received anything in writing from the IRS besides the initial denial. It would be nice to receive an apology and to receive assurance it will not happen again and that responses, if any, will not be held against me the individual.
The IRS had attacked the Liberty Township Tea Party out of blind speculation that they were involved with Justin Binik-Thomas as he was a founding member of the Cincinnati Tea Party and the assumption was that the Liberty Township group had a way of getting to Thomas. So Liberty Township was maliciously selected for “enforcement.” This essentially meant that the leadership at Liberty Township had to jump through any hoops the IRS decided like mere animals doing tricks for their livelihoods. One of the targets of this IRS inquiry were videos I made featuring Sheriff Jones discussing immigration reform and another I put together featuring the current congressional violations against the 10th Amendment.
I felt bad that my videos were under scrutiny and that some of my antics had gotten other people in trouble with the IRS. At one point in the early winter of 2013 I told some of that leadership just to blame the videos on me, that I was the sole owner of their content, and that I’d deal with the agents on my own. The Liberty Township group did a stand-up job of dealing with the IRS and took care of the situation, which was much more gracious than I was willing to provide, which probably saved a lot more headache. I provided the information the IRS was looking for, and once all those leads went nowhere, the IRS backtracked.
The entire witch hunt started as a direct assault on Justin, and the IRS was simply using mass peer pressure to force Thomas to comply, or back off his Tea Party actions. The IRS was essentially harassing the Liberty Township Tea Party as a way to get at the nerves of Justin Binik-Thomas, and that is not just wrong, it was criminal. So the apology from the IRS is nice, but way too late. It also hints at something else that is amiss.
I am very suspicious of government. I think of even the best of their representatives as habitual liars and con artists. I wouldn’t trust them to walk a dog on an empty leash. So their timing on this apology is actually alarming. The first thought that came to my mind is why are they doing it? And, why now?
Using pure deduction, based on the behavior of government in the past, the same government that lied under oath many times in the past declaring that the IRS did not do the things they just admitted to doing, I would say that the IRS as a member of the federal government is employing the old “bend but don’t break” defensive football strategy. The government knows that they are guilty over the Benghazi situation and are caught in a serious lie. They know that the Tea Party is still full of members that are very active and highly charged even after the re-election of Barack Obama. The government knows that there is an active campaign to remove Republican Governor Kasich from office in the next primaries for turning against the Tea Party, so they fear what might happen to them if the Tea Party gets even more detail out of the Benghazi hearings, which have been carried on Fox News, and extensively by The Blaze Network. The Blaze is a huge supporter of the Tea Party movement and it is getting bigger by the day. The IRS of course knows all this since they have the ability to pry into all our lives at will in the name of “revenue” for the always hungry government. During the Benghazi hearings The Blaze website had over 15 million unique visitors, which is a lot of Americans looking for the truth. So I contend that the IRS is taking a calculated move in relation to the rest of the government and yielding a little to the Tea Party in hopes of taking the edge off the really bad stuff coming out of the modern-day Watergate—which is Benghazi.
This is the trouble with a “collective” organization who thinks more like an ant colony protecting the “queen” than a society of free individuals. The IRS understands what their brothers and sisters are going through in Washington D.C. regarding Benghazi, and they are hoping to take the edge off the story with a nice little monumental revelation that seems so scandalous that it sucks the life out of the Benghazi story. But so what—what is anybody going to do to the IRS? So what if the IRS breaks the law and pisses off the Tea Party, what do they care if they make anybody angry? They revealed they lied in testimony, and that they actually target individuals whom they politically disagree with. So their admission means nothing, it gets played on the news and it makes many Tea Party members believe—falsely—that “the government” is coming around, that they are trying to be good, and honest for a change wishing to redeem themselves for sins of the past—which is far from the truth.
Experience tells me that the behavior of the IRS indicates a bigger fish to fry just outside of perception, and the attempt to throw the world off the scent is the real strategy of this sudden revelation by the IRS. So it would be my advice to those who read here frequently to not take your foot off the throats of those who seek to rule over you. Instead, push down and do not become distracted with this petty admission. I know Justin doesn’t feel happy about spending the last two years targeted personally by the IRS just because he existed. I know the Liberty Township Tea Party would like to have back the dozen or so 2 hour meetings they had to deal with just IRS compliance measures. And as for my time, where do I get back my Saturday that I wasted making DVD copies of my published videos so some pin head at the IRS can have hard copies of evidence gathered from the Liberty Township Tea Party? The answer is that I don’t, the IRS stole my time for no reason, and they don’t care one bit about it. Their apology is not one of sincerity, but of further cover-up of the many sins coming out of Washington D.C. One of my Saturday’s is more valuable and productive than the entire IRS building full of people over any given year. Every minute of my life creates jobs, hopes, and fulfills dreams for others, so wasted time on the IRS takes those things away from others which are why they are such a bad organization whose only primary role is wealth-redistribution.
The shocking revelation by the IRS is not out of goodness, but to cover up further deceit. For them to show humility toward Justin Binik-Thomas who was the real target behind the Cincinnati IRS probes is in the hope that the Tea Party becomes too compassionate to press on with the much more destructive injustices that are hidden just beyond sight. The General Petraeus affair was made of the same type of distractions. The tactical General was planning to retire anyway, so why not throw a juicy story to the hungry wolves hunting a guilty government in order to throw them off the trail? But the Tea Party didn’t take the bait and run back to their caves to eat the meat as hoped. Instead they sniffed and determined that the target was insignificant—and pressed on toward the real villain. Just the other day Obama declared to students at Ohio State that they “should not listen to these anti-government” groups. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain—was essentially what he meant. Government is feeling the pressure from the Tea Party and the strain is showing. Government knows they are guilty—all of them—of serious crimes, much more so than the situation of targeting Tea Party groups of tax exempt status then lying about it. And it is on those crimes that everyone must remain focused—which is what’s happening.
One of the Liberty Township Tea Party members in that leadership group most affected by the IRS inquiry released a statement which I will now provide on the matter. It’s from Mark Etterling, and articulates the problem very well, and provides insight to the next steps that are to come. Mark’s thoughts reflect my own.
An IRS spokesperson recently issued a verbal apology to the various Tea Party and Patriot groups whom they had specifically targeted for extreme scrutiny over their applications for 501C3 tax exempt status. Even though I can’t speak for our group, which happened to be one of those that was targeted, or any of the other groups for that matter, I can at least issue my own personal response. Your apology is NOT accepted. In fact, I’m willing to go so far in my response as to say that I would personally like to see those responsible not only fired, but also brought up on both criminal as well as civil charges for violating our civil rights via a direct abuse of power.
Exactly one month ago I wrote a commentary stating that I was fed up with all the bogus mea culpa’s. An apology based on an accident is one thing. However, an apology that is derived solely from being caught committing overt actions related to a political agenda is something else entirely. An apology isn’t enough after a school suspends a kid over eating a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun just so that the administrators can push a gun control agenda. Using the IRS to exercise extreme scrutiny against specific political groups is nothing more than an overt attempt to curtail the opposing voices of those groups. Therefore, an apology doesn’t cut it there either.
Those that are currently in power like to scoff at those of us who protest against what we view as tyrannical actions by claiming we are simply being paranoid. However, if you look up the Merriam-Webster definition of Tyranny it’s easy to see that bringing the full power and weight of the IRS to bear on a specific political group for the sole purpose of stifling their oppositional viewpoint fits the very definition of tyranny.
3: a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force
4: an oppressive, harsh, or unjust act : a tyrannical act
I’m not acting out of hypocrisy just because this happens to be an incident that struck home for me. In fact, in the book I wrote two years ago I specifically stated that even though I disagree with almost everything liberals like Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow ever say, I would still fight for their right to speak no matter how much I disagree with them. The reason is that freedom and censorship cannot coexist. The presence of one will automatically destroy the other. A person cannot profess a love of freedom and yet practice a tolerance of those things that destroy freedom at the same time. Therefore, your choice is to either tolerate the abuse of tyrannical censorship, or be as outraged about this as I am. I would suggest that no matter what your political leanings you should think about this carefully and choose wisely. Otherwise, the next time you might find yourself being on the wrong end of such tactics yourself where the tyrants will have already chosen for you.
My wife and I transplanted a Black Walnut tree in our yard during August of 2012 knowing that the little tree would struggle. August is a bad time of year in Ohio to move any kind of living thing that grows in the soil, but to compound matters there was a drought in August that year which meant we had to constantly water it. Then just six weeks later, the tree had already been looking withered when it suffered through the first frost of the year. Looking at the bits of ice accumulated on the tiny stump of a tree, I thought that was the end of its life. The little budding leaves shriveled up and fell off within days. All through October, November and December I looked at the little stump for a sign of life but there wasn’t any. So the plan was that we’d dig it back up in the spring and find a replacement. But as March came, then April I held out hope that the little tree would show some sign of life. Then, in the fourth week of April, little buds sprang out at the base of the tree. It was trying to grow again.
About the time that I was watching this tree I was reading Ayn Rand’s Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal on my front porch. I immediately drew a metaphoric parallel between capitalism represented by the little tree and the cruel nasty world that was trying to kill it represented by socialism. I thought of socialism because we had to remove the tree from where it was growing naturally as I was worried about mowing over it with the lawn mower. Landscaped yards always remind me of socialism as they are planned associations of plants in relationships concocted by the owner of a property that may not naturally be compatible. We had moved the tree to save the tree which brought to my mind George W. Bush’s famous socialist quote “I had to abandon free market principles in order to save the free market.” If I had not removed the tree, it would have died. But why did I have to move the tree—because I desired that my landscaping look a certain way. It wasn’t the poor little tree’s fault; it was just trying to live where a seed had fallen. As the dictator of my property, I can decide what lives and dies. My plants do not have freedom from me. They are completely reliant upon my compassion to keep them alive or to kill them at my discretion. That is why landscaping to me always reminds me of a planned society resembling socialism.
I tend to let things grow where they want to as much as possible, as they do in nature. I don’t like to tamper and trim too much unnecessarily, because I like the plants on my property to know that they have a certain amount of freedom to do as they please, and that I will let them. That also tends to be my leadership tendency when I have to lead others; I let them do their thing as much as possible as long as it doesn’t violate my overall vision. But the vision is always mine, and if something or someone gets in the way of that vision, they get cut down ruthlessly. That is the way of nature.
But that is not how it is supposed to be in a free country with free people. The government is not the people’s gardeners. The government is not supposed to transplant trees, cut the grass, and plant flowers just because they think such arrangements look pretty, or are pleasant esthetically. The government is not supposed to move businesses around, tamper with people’s cultures for bloc voting advantage, or pick winners and losers in enterprise. They are not supposed to be involved in health care, otherwise known as the watering of the population, but should allow growth to occur as robust and dynamic as the economy and the minds of the people can allow. The populations of earth should be allowed to grow to the highest trees of the California Redwoods as opposed to the well manicured trees of a football stadium, where the building is more emphasized visually than the plant growth of the landscaping.
These are the problems that are tackled and solved in Ayn Rand’s classic book about the philosophy of an economy which make excellent arguments in favor of capitalism. Reading the book felt like discovering an old archeological relic which held the keys to solving most of society’s problems, and finding such material after it had been buried away from man’s eyes for generations. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal is a remarkable book written from essays first published in The Objectivist magazine during the 1960s. Capitalism is The Unknown Ideal because it never really had a chance to get off the ground in America, where the Ideal was invented. The result to America and to the world has been explosive economic growth that gave every individual operating under capitalism the opportunity to live and thrive based on their own ambitions.
Yet every statist oriented government in the world, which has dominated the human mind for millennia fear capitalism the way a panicky home owner worries that the grass of their well manicured lawns are growing too robust. For the property owner, it is generally accepted that the trees and every blade of grass on a property are the possessions of the owner. Governments, princes, princesses, monarchs of every kind, dictators, even United States presidents believe in their heart of hearts that people belong to the “leaders” of a culture in the same way that plant life on a property belongs to the owners and this is the cause of statist governments which find capitalism repulsive.
They fear an unmanaged economy because the evidence is that the growth can quickly overwhelm their property and remind them that it is the plant life that will always outlast their attention and place demands on the property owner–the leaders of statist governments. The growth of such plant life always threaten to overtake government which is what they fear most, so they diligently cut back any sign of extensive growth like maniacs fearful of their own shadows. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal digs into the history of these fears and provides psychological reasoning for them in a way that is unique to this particular book.
Years ago when I studied economics at The University of Cincinnati there was not one mention of this book which had been out to the public for over 25 years at that point. The economics professor would have had much more success as an instructor if he had not attempted to explain variations of Keynesian economics and the cause and effect of business cycles but had simply taught his class upon the contents of Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Those business cycles, depressions, recessions, and all economic growth are caused by statist governments tampering with the robust desire for economic activity to flourish naturally, and without restriction. To maintain their control, governments are always cutting back on growth to satisfy their aesthetic tendencies which is the cause of most misery in economic development.
The book is incredibly well written, and easy to understand. But its concepts are contrary to what entire generations of civilization have been taught in their public education establishments and colleges. So most readers will go through a phase of troubled thought when reading, as they have to unlearn all the garbage that they have been taught over many years, but for the sake of review—in pulling together such remote thoughts into a single metaphor, the little Black Walnut tree and its tenacity at living reminded me of the lessons articulated in the wonderful book Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. If every human being in the world read just this book, they would find their lives much better off. This book is the Dead Sea Scrolls of modern economics. Capitalism has been attacked and transplanted many times by over aggressive statist governments for many years. It has suffered harsh winters, frosts, lack of nourishment, and abuse of many who want to kill it. Yet, like any gardener learns when they take an extended vacation, or neglect their yard work, the grass always grows, and the trees spread out their branches. Capitalism finds a way to grow even under the harshest governments, under the most vicious advocates of socialism. It keeps crawling its way toward the light in spite of destructive restriction and gardeners who trim their yards to simply exert control over the plant life. Statist governments control economic activity in the same way, they cut, trim and manipulate to satisfy their vision, not the individual desires of the people who put them into power to begin with. This is the cause of their failure, and the reason for economic recessions.
Stop the presses! I thought the Community Foundation of West Chester and Liberty Township refused to accept funds or support political statements with their local charity group. Yet as the Lakota school system is gearing up for support of another levy attempt using their public relations machinery to close a nearly $2 million dollar budget deficit projected for 2014 due to employee wage increases, the Community Foundation did a really nice job of putting their name behind two teachers from Lakota, Amy Smith and Dean Hume featuring them with the Lakota Educator of Excellence Award. The Community Foundation promoted their picks with the following two videos featuring the teachers. Have a look.
The Community Foundation had this to say about teacher Amy Smith:
Those who nominated Amy Smith indicate that there is no teacher more deserving than she to receive the “Educator of Excellence Award.” Amy is described as a compassionate and caring teacher who goes above and beyond for her students. She is often spotted at her students’ sporting events and dance recitals, and has been known to call parents at home after school hours just to update them on something their child accomplished that day at school. Amy works to ensure that each of her students’ needs are met, whether that means enhancing curriculum for students who excel in a particular area or setting aside individual time for a student who might be struggling. Beyond academics, Amy prepares her students for success in life by teaching them empathy and compassion for others, and by building their self-confidence. As one parent writes, “Amy is the kind of teacher that every parent hopes and prays their child will get. The heartfelt nomination letters are a testament to the lasting impact that Amy Smith has made on her students, their parents and the whole Endeavor Elementary community.”
The Community Foundation then said this about Dean Hume:
The majority of nominations for Dean Hume to receive the Educator of Excellence Award came from former students who, under his tutelage, were on the staff of Spark, the award-winning student-run news magazine at Lakota East High School. Dean founded Spark 21 years ago and has since been the faculty adviser, although he takes no credit for the publication’s success. Instead, credits accolades like the publication’s 10 National Pacemaker awards and 18 All-Ohio rankings to his talented students. Dean is known at Lakota East for his unorthodox approach to education. One student describes her first day in Dean Hume’s class, saying, “He shut off the lights and climbed onto a table…he explained that as our time in the Journalism program went on, the lights of the world would turn on so we could see it for what it truly is.” Former students comment on how he saw in them what, oftentimes, they didn’t see themselves and pushed them to fulfill that potential. Dean would stay after school when his students needed to work on a story and would be there with them on deadline weekends when the pressure was on to put out another excellent issue of Spark each month. Dean Hume is truly committed to his students. As one nominator put it, “It is fitting that the newsmagazine he created is called Spark because that is exactly what Dean Hume finds in each of his students…a spark that he then fans into flame with unparalleled dedication.”
While all that sounds very nice, and sweet, and even though Dean Hume has reportedly said many bad things about me to his class, I do like his choice of paintings on his classroom wall. I’m sure those teachers are very good teachers, but I would argue that what they are doing is expected by the community, and should not be the exception, but the rule. I expect every teacher to perform at the level of those teachers, so I do not understand why all the hoopla. But from a public relations standpoint, just ahead of a levy attempt, I can see why these teachers would be highlighted. I’m sure they enjoyed the award. But here is the problem. During the winter of 2012 my group, No Lakota Levy tried to work with the Community Foundation to help pay for the students who were being raked over the coals with sports fees of $550 per sport because the Lakota administration mismanaged their money. We didn’t want the kids to suffer for the problems of the adults, so we approached the Community Foundation to join forces and help the Lakota school district have a positive experience. I thought it was nice for my partners to reach across the aisle, even though I disagreed.
Alderson told the board audience of more than 200, that No Lakota officials had approached the foundation but that “we refused to accept their funds.”
“We refuse to accept funds where political statements are attached,” said Patti who took exception to my comments here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom where I said about the levy addicts “even with the overwhelming proof I’ve provided the crazy PTA moms and their minions of latte drinking despots with diamond rings the size of car tires and asses to match, (they) plot against me with an anger only estrogen can produce. They have shown no restraint in casting aspersions in my direction by calling me every name the human mind can create in human language. Did they think it wouldn’t get back to me? And being a head for an eye kind of guy I’m happy to return the favor. And yes, I meant it the way I said it. I do not think an eye for an eye taken is harsh enough. I generally leave people alone and let them make their own decisions without my interference until they attempt to impose themselves upon me. School levies are imposing themselves onto my life.” I knew when I said all this that it would anger the levy addicts, so I put a period at the end of my statement directed to those strongest advocates of higher taxes. The levy addicts had already slandered my name every way possible and painted me as a community menace, so I felt my opinion of their lifestyles was justified since they had already thrown in my direction names like, “wife beater,” “hillbilly,” “child hater,” “greedy businessman,” and many other derogatory terms. So I made my opinions of the levy addicts known by saying they are, “just prostitutes to their husbands who do everything they can to be away from them aside from the occasional sex. Their husband’s roll them over at night and insert their manhood into these women of the bedroom and hundred-dollar bills find their way into their purses. The women don’t know what the man does to earn the money, nor do they care. They are busy saving the world one child at a time with howls of safety and more regulations as they rush to the polling places at election time.”
As The Enquirer stated I was unapologetic for my writings. In fact, I should have really spoken my mind. I actually held back in concern that little children might read what I thought of the levy addicts. Knowing the real motive behind the games that were at play within Lakota made me very angry. The Community Foundation did not spontaneously line up to speak against my comments but had been planning them for a long time.
I said in The Enquirer about the issue, “Emotions get pretty intense in political campaigns and let’s face it; we have had to continue with our levy resistance for a couple of years now. It gets very frustrating when you present good arguments then the pro levy side paints you as being against children, and wanting to dismantle the community because they can’t come up with compelling arguments against you.”The rest of the article can be seen by CLICKING HERE.
It is often very difficult to tell good intentions from bad ones when children are being used as extortion mechanisms. In my community there are a lot of groups who advocate that what they do is for the good of “children” but what their real intentions are constitute power, whether that power is political, emotional, economic, or just psychological. It is even more difficult to announce the kind of tyranny that I am about to name, because there isn’t any mechanism in our courts that define the behavior as bad, or even illegal. There are no moral codes that do so either. In fact, Christianity espouses the value of charity with great fanfare, so organizations like the Community Foundation feel that so long as they show altruist measures in society that they will be given a free pass to behave in any manner necessary to achieve any aims they deem “good.”
Some of my partners in No Lakota Levy were also very active in the Community Foundation, which is a good organization with intentions that are beneficial. They expressed an interest to donate money to the Community Foundation but they were not doing it because they wanted to solve the problem. They were doing it because powerful community members in the culture of the Foundation were applying pressure on them to cave on their resistance to the school levy at Lakota. As a local charity group the Foundation appears to have believed that they needed to support the school levy otherwise they were letting down “the children.” As perceived leaders in the community many of these people were pushing my partners to separate from me as I was too radical and detrimental to the “growth” of West Chester and Liberty Township. I watched all this activity with great humor. I eventually agreed to help with the donation project because on the surface it was a good one. But I had something else in mind for all those “society” types who were slandering my name to my partners, and to other people around the community who were firm “NO” votes on tax increases. I needed to identify the slanderers by name for future battles, and I needed to expose their true intentions. This meant flushing them out from behind their hiding places of smiling faces attending Lakota. The best way to do this was to expose the game they were playing by beating them at it.
In spite of the comments I said above, I have said far worse publicly, in writing and in fisticuffs around town. But the levy addicts never cared much until The Enquirer article from March 7th. After my partners and I started our own foundation once the Community Foundation closed their doors to our $10K donation the following dialogue appeared in The Cincinnati Enquirer. “Unlike similar anti-school tax groups in some other area suburban districts, No Lakota is now in a privately funded $10,000 partnership to help students pay for higher school sports fees, says the group’s founder Rich Hoffman.
Hoffman and other tax opponents have long contended that Lakota’s teachers and their union should be taking the brunt of recent budget cuts through pay cuts rather than eliminating student services and upping sports fees.
“It’s obvious that the greatest casualty in these three levy fights has been the kids, and that’s really unfortunate,” says Hoffman of the “Yes to Lakota Kids” program to be publicly unveiled later Tuesday.
Hoffman said the unusual effort is designed to remove students from being used by school labor unions as “emotional hostages” in the often contentious tax levy campaigns of recent years.
Just a few days later, Patti Alderson made her comments to the school board and one week after that Enquirer article levy addicts were scouring through my public writing here on Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom looking for anything they could use to smear my name not just privately—as they had been doing—but to take me out of the “public” debate. However, their behavior was something that had to be triggered because behind the scenes—through charity events, fund-raising dinners, and inner circle emails, the attack on my group was taking place from the Lakota levy addict public relations machine—and I didn’t appreciate it. School officials were working illegally behind the scenes to pull the strings of power to make their moves of offense. (illegally because officials were working on levy related material during school hours, which is traceable by email and witness testimony.) It was expected that since I was a public figure that I would behave like Mitt Romney did during his presidential campaign when Barack Obama called him names and slandered him any way possible, but Romney was inclined to show that he was “above such reproach.” Well, I don’t follow any such rules. After The Enquirer article there was the Forbes article and my comments about students being used by school labor unions as “emotional hostages” was too close to the mark for the levy addicts. They were forced to make their move against my organization to reveal what they were secretly attempting to do behind closed doors. For me this was equivalent to a “controlled blast” that a bomb squad might attempt to do to safely detonate a booby trap or other dangerous device. The trick was in the timing.
I published the comments seen above in the middle of February after I learned about the Kroger survey organized against me to smear my name publicly. I was curious when and if anyone from the other side would take issue, but they didn’t as I had said such things before. The important thing to note is that the levy addicts did make their move once they realized that my organization was stripping away their “emotional leverage,” with the financial donations. This was the weakness of the levy addicts. Deep in their hearts they were conscious of their social hypocrisy. They were aware of what they were doing, but they could not reveal the truth, even to themselves. The levy addicts attempted to make my comments into one of sexism, vulgar pretense, and social unreliability. But their anger was toward none of those things. Their anger was toward the worst thing that I said which was that the school, and everyone attached to promoting school levies were guilty of using the children of Lakota as “emotional hostages.” For that comment Patti Alderson took to the microphone on behalf of her Community Foundation and feigned anger at my derogatory remarks when the real issue was the role that the Community Foundation had to take in denying the $10K check from No Lakota Levy as a contribution to the children of Lakota attempting to actually unite the community.
This brings us full circle back to the Community Foundation giving two teachers from Lakota, Amy Smith and Dean Hume Lakota Educator of Excellence Awards. Patti Alderson proclaimed in her public comments about me that the Community Foundation refuses to accept funds where political statements are attached. Yet the support of the Community Foundation getting behind the Educator of Excellence Award with a flashy video and a touchy—feely symposium of Lakota employees, obviously filmed during school hours was a political statement considering that Lakota is gearing up for another tax increase attempt.
They are of course entitled to their opinion at the Community Foundation and on a perceptual level, anyone with a brain can tell that there was something wrong with the scenario, but the crime is difficult to define conventionally, which is why it continues to happen in virtually every school district across the country. After all, the school and the Community Foundation are helping children. This is supposed to give them a moral license to do and say anything they want so long as they are flying a flag of honor with pictures of smiling children upon it. But when I pulled the flag down giving both parties nothing to hide behind, they reacted in fear and extreme revulsion lashing out predictably. The question of why this happens is the real mystery that many of the levy addict players cannot define themselves. They have no idea of why they are motivated to behave in such a way.
In the 1960s even up to the current gay marriage debate the essence of the free love and non sexual denomination relationship discussion is to achieve one primary aspect of life that is particularly disconcerting to voters who tend to lean-to the political left. These people tend to want to be loved, and they are often insecure about losing love once they obtain it from others. Love is one of the most primary functions and desires of a human being. It could be said that the level of love in one’s life dictates their happiness. The trouble is some people understand that love is obtained when two or more individuals share common values, and some ignorantly believe that it is obtained through altruism—a sense of sacrifice. When a man tells a woman, “I’d die for you,” he is proclaiming the later. He is an idiot. It sets the relationship with the woman on the wrong footing. She will always unconsciously be on the lookout for another mate in case the man fulfills his proclamation. If the same man says to the woman, “I love you because of who you are.” This has more weight and the woman will understand that the love is generated from shared values. The former will be successful because the relationship is built on values that are shared. This is the ultimate failure of our modern age. The wrong types of people seek love for all the wrong reasons. The left leaning voter seeks sacrificial love through the measures of non value because it is less risky for them. Love without value means that any given person of any given value can love any person anywhere no matter what their sex, age, or success factor. This belief is driven from the fear that if love is obtained, that it might be lost if the values of people change. So to safeguard themselves from this fear, they seek to remove value from love so that they never have to be without love. This is of course sweet when looked upon in this fashion as it is easy to feel compassion for such people. But this leads to social failure because it strips society of values, which is what we are seeing in America today.
Many of the levy addicts involved in the Lakota Levy debate are suffering from this problem of insecure lust for love. Their intentions are not to pass a levy, save children, or ever solve the public education funding problems provided to them by greedy labor unions. Instead they hope for a return to the problem every couple of years because they are addicted to levy attempts as this is the way that they have learned to make other people “love” them. For an example of this need for love, look at the faces of the levy supporters in the picture at THIS LINK, CLICK TO VIEW. It’s not about children for them, but about community, love, sharing, and all kinds of mushy emotions. This is the real intention of levy supporters and why I call them “Levy Addicts.” They are addicted to the euphoric feeling of crusading for a cause (children) for an invisible desire for goodness—as it has been defined by government. Anyone who stands in the way of that “love” is a threat to their existence, and they attack the way a jealous spouse attacks someone who they fear might steal away their love. But the love is not pure. It is instead neurotic and doomed from the start. It can never be filled, or achieved because it requires the theft of other people’s money to acquire. Many of the levy addicts could write personal checks for the $2 million dollars and never miss the money if they really wanted to help the community. I can think of a few of the levy addicts who would consider the $10K that No Lakota Levy raised for the children of Lakota to help pay for their sports fees as equal to the same cost that they spend on lunch. It doesn’t mean anything to them, the value of money is negligible because they have so much of it, and have forgotten how they came to it. But what does mean something to them is whether they can manage to unite an entire community through charities, politics, or business into loving them to the extent that they are willing to surrender their personal values and logic. These are the deep dark secrets of the levy addicts.
My threat to their existence is that I proposed to solve the problem and remove the financial chaos which they need for their scam. The levy addicts need the chaos to fill their lives with love which they are always yearning for—the desire to be loved by others to fill a value they can never seem to find any other way. In this way the levy addicts become just as tyrannical as the Crusaders attempting to move the world toward a particular religion out of a professed love of God through altruistic sacrifice—but if not the Crusades pick a mass movement of any other radical group seeking to crush individuals in pursuit of a collective good. The definitions of “goodness” are set by those with the loudest mouths and deepest yearning for public love. At Lakota the fantasy of the levy addicts is if only they could remove the opposition to their plans, then the community would shower them with love and affection—kissing their ass in every public appearance because they are powerful financially, politically, and socially. They would thus be loved by all for every reason imaginable—except the one of personal value—which they are lacking. These levy addicts become terribly insecure when they realize that people only “love” them for what they can give them. They are always looking for ways to give other people things they’ve stolen from someone else because of this deep fear of lacking personal value.
This is what the hate due to my words was really about, and what was exposed when No Lakota Levy wanted to actually help children with a $10,000 donation. Nobody in either the media or the politics of the community knew what to do because they had been exposed for what they really were. Everyone involved pretended that they were innocent of any emotional crimes, but when I spelled it out in The Enquirer the real sin of which those supporting school levies were guilty of using children as emotional hostages I had hit the nerve everyone wished to keep hidden from the public. The hypocrisy and sin against all children by the adult population seeking community love was out in the open and nobody knew what to do with the emotions.
The Community Foundation which had declared itself non-political announced its political support of the local government school with their video support of the two teachers which they recently awarded. If such charitable foundations really wanted to help the entire community, they would simply cover the cost of the tax increases with their own personal checks instead of attempting to compel the entire community to support a school they may not like or support. There is no call by the charity group to solve the actual funding problems at the school because that would defy their real intention, which is to maintain their power base at the center of the community which is in perpetual pursuit of “love” from their peers.
If the motivations were not one of public love, the money would quietly find its way into the Lakota treasuries in the still of the night without a name attached to the donation. If those involved in community health were actually willing to serve altruism, they would not place themselves on pedestals so that everyone could see how much they did for the community–they would simply do the work without fanfare. But the intention is not about “goodness,” but is instead about “love,” and the pursuit of it for all the insecure reasons it was ever pursued. The reasons behind the Community Foundation award to the two teachers sadly looks to not be about merit, but politics, and even more tragic are the attempts to hide such charades behind children. Without my incident to measure against described above, the presentation of the award to the Lakota teachers might otherwise go unnoticed. But in relation to the upcoming school levy, the objective is clear.
The funds that No Lakota Levy attempted to give the Community Foundation occurred before I wrote what I did in mid February. In fact, there wasn’t even a levy announcement yet for that year as No Lakota Levy had just won the recent election. The Community Foundation well before any of these events occurred declined to work with my partners and me for reasons that are obvious now, because they support the school levy at Lakota perpetually. They care not what causes the levy, they just blindly seem to support them for the reasons offered. The response in the early winter months of 2012 was instead to smear my name and attempt to remove me from the argument instead of bringing the community together as we proposed. I simply wanted to see the school offer the teachers union a 5% pay reduction to prevent another levy. The school district as a whole chose not to listen to the 18,000 voters during the previous election. Instead they chose to proceed with a smear campaign against me personally instead of solving their problem. Then they expected me to take it when word came back to me from No Lakota Levy members and Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom readers who told me what was going on behind the scenes—what was being said about my name and why. That is when the decision to advance the campaign to a new level proceeded.
All the parties involved believe they are right and moral in their position. Yet only one group is right. I would contend that these charity groups and levy addicts are detriments to the community because they feel they have a right to compel property owners to contribute to their silly pursuits of community love. The Community Foundation is perfectly free to support the Lakota school levy if they wish to, just as the levy advocates are free to support their public educations to their heart’s content. They are all free to pursue their desire to be loved by the public by giving teachers special awards and publicly showing how much they love children through charitable contributions. But they are not free to compel me to do any of those things, and they are not free to bend an entire community around their small-minded needs for social “love.” They are not free to impose their beliefs on others by forcing tax increases on everyone to fulfill their worldly visions corrupted by an unquestionable hunger for love—devalued love where judgment of right and wrong are not applicable. That is the trouble with the situation of government politics which public schools are tightly bound with large charity organizations camouflaging their inner desires for attention through altruistic goodness. The fact and hypocrisy remain that if those who speak loudest of the value of teachers, Lakota schools, and community value of government education institutions, then they should cover those costs on their own and not try to compel people like myself into contributing where I chose not to, and then seek to defame me personally because the neurotic, love starved levy addicts didn’t get their way. It is not OK for institutions to crush individuals all in the pursuit of collective love. And that is the current arrangement between local charities like those who attach themselves to public schools with the primary, yet disguised intention of promoting the image of that school in order to garner votes in an upcoming election. The levy addicts do their so-called good by writing checks on the backs of children using their innocence to justify community tax increases. The reason is for love, not justice—and in that revelation much coercion is performed against free minds for a tyranny that destroys generations.
When the question was asked of Tom, “do you think you can be a team player” regarding the upcoming election, and getting behind Governor Kasich in his next run for governor, the question provider said a mouth full without realizing their violation. Tom attempted to explain that the Tea Party movement is like herding cats, as everyone is a free-thinker who cannot be unified under a flag of compromise, as traditional politics requires. This is true, and to date, there are not enough cats in the game to make much of a difference in elections, so the Tea Party has been quietly shunned by established political rule in an attempt to maintain the status quo. The crux of the problem is in requiring free thinking individuals to compromise their beliefs to be a part of the “team” which is the primary problem in American politics at every level, and I for one am tired of it. In this regard, a candidate either stands for capitalism and is willing to defend it, or they aren’t. It is that simple.
Governor Kasich ran his 2010 campaign as a defender of capitalism. He was for business; he was for reeling in the costs of big government. He was against Obamacare. He was against taking federal money for silly intrusions that erode away the 10th Amendment through the Commerce Clause. He was for School Choice in Ohio, so he had a lot going for him that represented much of what the Tea Party stands for. They all share in common, a support of capitalism—because even if everyone disagrees on various policies—the cats all stand for capitalism as a political ideal and can unify behind such a banner. However, Kasich and House Speaker Boehner went on a golf outing with President Obama and Vice President Biden and have never been the same since. It could be noted that Kasich and Boehner were seduced by the snake-like charm of Obama and his collectivist minions because as political parties go, Kasich and Boehner have more in common with Obama and Biden than they do with any citizen in America who stands for individual liberty.
Kasich’s fatal flaw in his thus far first term is that he has attempted to expand Medicaid, which is essentially the same sin that was committed by Barack Obama—it is using other people’s money stolen in the form of taxes to purchase elections. Ideologically, Kasich didn’t fight very hard for his Tea Party beliefs. He abandoned them at the first sign of trouble, allowing the rule by force of a mixed economy to determine his core beliefs. After his golf game with Obama, and the defeat of Senate Bill 5 by the public sector unions in repealing Kasich’s reforms at collective bargaining, Kaisch turned into a progressive. Within two years of attempting to take on public unions with needed legislation, he surrendered and joined with the enemies of freedom by attempting to expand Medicaid in Ohio to purchase votes for the next election.
The Republican Party currently being led by Kaisch in Ohio expects other Republicans like Tom Zawistowski to fall in line with the party platform and “compromise” their beliefs for the good of the collective party, and that is the difference between politics of the past, and the politics that the Tea Party is pushing for. It is not Tom’s job to conform his beliefs to the party strategy of John Kasich or John Boehner as both men have elected to sell out their ideas as a compromise to the forces of persuasion—the pressure groups who routinely lobby such men with trinkets of advantage in trade for political pull. That is not governing, or leadership. It is simply appeasement in the same way that payoffs to the mob might be encouraged. If the yielding of beliefs is not achieved, then the pressure groups will pounce with collective authority to change those beliefs. This is the direct result of the type of economy that has moved away from capitalism and toward socialism. It is the direct result of a mixed economy. A mixed economy Governor is the type of man who Kasich is. When the wind blows from the Tea Party, he spoke of Tea Party values. When the wind blew from the direction of the opposing labor unions, Kasich then became an advocate of Medicaid expansion to redeem his “sins” of the past. When John Boehner was throwing his support behind Mitt Romeny for President, he spoke of ending Obamacare with a repeal the first day of Romeny’s administration. But when Barack Obama won the election through questionable means, Boehner declared that Obamacare was the law of the land, and seemed to forget that as House Speaker he has the power to fund or not fund the train wreck of socialism that Obamacare is. He simply changed his mind in response to the “pressure groups” in charge.
This is not how government was supposed to work according to the foundation of America. The Tea Party represented in politics by people like Tom Zawistowski and Matt Mayer are not running for office to respond to the consensus whims of pressure groups—lobbyists. They are running for office to maintain purity of the Ohio and federal Constitutions. This is an idea that is not understood by virtually anybody, particularly in the media. That is the reason the question, “do you think you can be a team player” is such an absurd question. It openly suggests that Tom should be willing to compromise a right idea for a wrong one depending on the nature of the pressure groups who are really in charge which is against everything anybody who believes in a representative republic stands for.
The way to beat this monstrosity of political corruption is to just make things simple and focus on the idea of capitalism. In politics, an idea is either good for capitalism or it’s not and from that vantage point, political unification can be achieved by removing the emotional elements from the debate, of which nobody will ever completely agree. A political commitment to capitalism also declaws the pressure groups that have the mouth of politicians like Boehner and Kasich on their marionette strings rendering them ineffective. It doesn’t take a heard of cats marching to orders like a bunch of mindless automatons to run a government. It simply takes the commitment to a political philosophy that carries over to the benefit of the population at large. Capitalism naturally sorts out the good from the bad, the corrupt from the saint through competitive efforts. The cheating that goes on so often of which capitalism gets the blame comes from the pressure group relationships such as what Speaker Boehner and Governor Kasich represent—a mixed economy relationship ruled by thugs who have more “pull” than others without such arrangements. Under pure capitalism, such relationships would not be possible as the best and most effective ideas would percolate to the surface in spite of the desires of various pressure groups.
If I had to make a prediction as to the direction of Tom Zawistowski I would say that people like him will migrate to a party like the one I’m talking about, the “Capitalism Party” to begin the intellectual argument that has to take place in the coming months. After all, it does free thinking people no good to vote for Governor Kasich once again. He has shown to be just as fiscally destructive as Governor Strickland, the socialist democrat was. The biggest difference is that he had a “D” next to his name so he was easy to identify. In many ways the “R” next to Kasich’s name is more dangerous because voters thought they were getting a Tea Party conservative—instead they got a sell-out, and a LBJ fascist—well intended, but desperately, and catastrophically wrong in his political philosophy. That is why people like Tom Zawistowski are leaving the Republican Party. If they are smart, they’ll join me in the Capitalism Party then things can really get moving as the debates will evolved from ones of emotion to ones of actual goodness that is not relative to opinion.
“If they attack first………..blast em’!”
