Tag: Free Will

George Lang the Artist: Understanding the new way of viewing business as an art

Many people have the wrong idea of what art is, their thoughts on the matter has largely been shaped by their art classes in public schools that have failed to meet up with the needs of modern concerns. If you’ve ever toured the great art museums of Paris, or even of your own hometown, you’ll get a sense of it. Many modern artist types attempt like religious radicals to mold their thoughts to some 16th century definition of it and insist that high art holds the same standards, which it doesn’t. Rather, the modern concepts of capitalism are now the canvases which the great minds of business paint, and it is they who are the modern Picassos and Rembrandts. This was on my mind the other day while we were enjoying my wife’s birthday at Liberty Center in Butler County, Ohio at the Cheesecake Factory and I stood outside and marveled at all the great creations that builders had made in that vicinity that were works of modern thought and a next evolution of art. It was there that I thought about the importance of George Lang’s pro-business ideas for Ohio as a senator for the 4th District.

I don’t know many politicians who have embraced business the way that George has over his long career. Many people don’t know it, but George gives out free copies of Ayn Rand’s classic novel Atlas Shrugged to people at Christmas so that they might learn something of the value of a unique American artform that evolved specifically in the United States, the art of making money and using it to create works of art of a different kind. If Paris and Europe in general are thought to have created art from the Renaissance period and those pieces are on display in museums to this day, American art is of a different fashion. Its artists work to overcome discriminations and inherited European regulations to create works of three-dimensional art that serve also as money making generators to pour blood of value into a culture for which the art resides. Ayn Rand figured out in her uniquely American novel what Victor Hugo and Leo Tolstoy in other cultures were learning about themselves in their own time, that American business was a new form of art in the world and it is always wonderful to see it working well such as it clearly does at Liberty Center in Butler County, Ohio.

I see builders and capitalists as the modern equivalent of artists who put their ideas into buildings, not canvases, and the results of their creations are much more interactive than just a painting expressing one moment in the mind of an artist, but a shared experience that permeates all time and space with hopes, ambitions, and sorrows. With every new hospital that is created come the hopes and dreams of childbirth, and the extreme sorrows of dying loved ones sick beyond repair living their last moments on earth. The art of the building created captures those contexts within the scope of a culture. And within those extremes are restaurants of ambition like the Cheesecake Factory and Cabela’s to entertain us along the way. I remember when George Lang was a trustee for West Chester and when it came time to build the Voice of America Park near the West Chester Hospital, it was George and others who turned over the design and function to private groups to allow full creative flow, which was a gutsy move. The park that is there now is a wonderful asset to the community, much better than if government had tried to force itself into the design of it, without all the little flairs of creativity of design that the park has now—all each in themselves works of art that enhance the experience of all residence in ways that aren’t typically measured.

The old view of art which is typically a liberal crutch insists that this new idea of art is a threat to them, so they label any supporters of capitalism as such to their way of life. That is why most politicians stay off the subject and instead pander to the arguments of the day, that the old-world view of liberalism has shaped, such as public education value, insurance for all, and elements of the socialism involved in Social Security. The new creations that spawn off all efforts of wealth could answer those old questions a thousand times over easily, but most politicians dare not go there because the challenges to the old system of thinking of art prevent them from articulating the value of business to a community because they seldom understand it themselves. That is not a problem of George Lang. He understands that businesses are the foundation of the future and all the solutions that can be found within it. And those solutions are works of art, not just profit making ventures.

As my wife and I were getting a cheesecake to take home from the Cheesecake Factory they informed me there that there are two manufacturing facilities in the United States that daily supply cheesecake to all their restaurants. The explanation was that the home office wants everything to taste uniformly good so they manage their quality control from those two facilities, which is tough competition because Wal-Mart, Kroger and many other local outlets make good cheesecakes. For the Cheesecake Factory to impose on themselves such a high-quality standard that is extremely expensive to maintain is a work of art, not any evil of capitalism as defined by a liberal in viewing artistic endeavors. Yet for that market to even take root where a canvas to paint such an artistic endeavor upon to even exist it takes politicians who know their role to remove barriers of such expression so that future concepts can be born for the benefit of all. Where such enterprise zones exist the best of modern culture can be seen. I’ve been to the Louvre in Paris. I loved it for what it was, but honestly, I saw much greater works of art at Disney Springs at Walt Disney World in every little business that was there and the bustling activity that can be seen any night of the week into the small hours of the morning.

What I’ve always loved about George Lang, whom I’ve known for more than a decade now, is that even with high ambitions at office holding, he wants those positions because he appreciates the artistic efforts that are born from them. His natural love of the novel Atlas Shrugged, which many politicians run from because of the capitalist stigma that hangs around it like a shackle to the past, is something George has always embraced, and it shows wherever he has been in a position of political power that his influence is conducive to great works of art that come from the many minds of business enterprise. And those enterprises are far outpacing the old ways of canvas art from any other period of world history, and the means to measure them are just now being understood in novels like Atlas Shrugged. Its not that the new ways of thinking of art are wrong because the old way is so slow to understand their miracles that the definitions are corroded with misunderstandings. Its just a matter of time before the rest of the world comes to the same realization, and when they do, they’ll find that George Lang was always there all along.

Rich Hoffman

The Debate for the 4th District Senate Seat in Ohio: George Lang was the clear winner

Prior to the primary election for the 4th District Ohio Senate Seat where George Lang, Kathy Wyenandt, and Lee Wong debated for that seat, the video included was done by TvHamilton at the Benison Event Center. For those seeking to understand the candidates prior to casting a vote, here they are. One notable mention is the disgraced GOP candidate Candice Keller who did not come to participate. It appears that this was the last of the candidate forums before the primary and she had not been participating anyway, so she was represented here by an empty seat off to the side of Lee Wong. Feel free to share these contents with a friend, neighbor, or curious onlooker intending to vote on March 17th along with the brief summation that is included.

Without question to my eyes George Lang won this debate easily, and he should be the next senator for the 4th District. But ultimately its in the hands of the voters. George’s answers were very polished, as we’d expect, and was the obvious choice deserving a vote. As is clear in the debate George can hit all the notes and appeal to the voter base that has various degrees of passion about the topics that are important to us all. Few people but George could have talked about Agenda 21—something that few established politicians could ever get away with, and he appealed to moderates by stating that he was friends with Kathy Wyenandt and was willing to work with anybody over anything. He is very Donald Trumpish in that he has quite a range of abilities in communication that just about anybody can relate to, yet with his core beliefs, he believes in helping businesses which obviously help voters with good jobs and secure futures. He is also a big Second Amendment guy who is every bit as committed as the most staunch supporter without the drama of a crazed radical.

And as the current Ohio 52nd District representative in the Ohio House, a seat that Kathy lost to him in her attempt to enter a political seat as something other than a school levy supporter for the Lakota schools, George specified what he has been doing and wishes to continue to do to bring more business opportunities to Ohio. As he pointed out there are several problems that are facing our state, for one, we are bleeding young people. Our youth are leaving for destinations they perceive have more opportunities leaving us in a bad state for attracting workers for more industry wanting to move into the area. As he said, that is leaving a recruiting problem for less imaginative industry that is looking for fertile recruiting grounds for their businesses and with so many youth leaving the state after they attend college, the numbers just haven’t been there. Personally, I think this is a problem of human resource departments and not the actual demographics, but George wants to overcome that problem with incentives to have a booming population that can attract the best that the world has to offer by way of jobs. For instance, he used Butler County as the example of how the rest of the state should look, which currently has a population of around 400,000 people of good income and plenty of opportunity.

One issue that was talked about in somewhat agreement by all the candidates was Ed Choice which is currently bringing great stress to public schools all across the state with report cards that they think are unfair as vouchers are now traveling from students to the private school of their choice leaving the broken funding model that schools use exacerbated beyond repair with worry in how to maintain their exploding budgets. As George pointed out correctly, the government schools are strapped with regulatory burdens that make it hard for them to compete with private schools and he is looking for options to make it more fair for them to attract customers as the trend is to send money to the students and not the school real estate that the schools reside within. Kathy had articulate answers but unfortunately she has a long way to go to fully understand the true problem. The state of Ohio cannot come up with a proper funding model for their schools so long as the budgets that they are asking for is filled with entirely too much Parkinson’s Law, where school levies get passed and the labor unions lobby for more increases to consume the total amount of surplus that is gained in property taxes. George’s ideas are moving more to deregulating the impositions that public schools have to live up to with report card needs mandated by the state, whereas Kathy’s thoughts were to protect the system that we have in place that has all the inflated funding in it. Lee Wong didn’t know what to say, he hardly seemed to understand what the question was.

Speaking of Lee, the West Chester Trustee who is running as a Republican, he stated during this debate that he thought of healthcare as a right. I’ve been saying about him that he is a Democrat that is only running as a Republican because Butler County is full of members of the GOP, which is why things tend to be so good. He has no other path to office other than to try to sell himself as a Republican whereas he is clearly a Democrat, even a socialist in many cases with positions like his on healthcare. Of course, George’s answer is to have more competition and to bring down the costs with more options. Kathy as the only stated Democrat on the stage was looking for more of a centralized committee approach that is aligned with other Democrats on the matter. But clearly she wasn’t very interested in the topic as her primary concern resides on education issues which constitutes her only real political achievement, the passage of the Lakota levy of 2013 which instantly gave raises to teachers, some of which were making six figures, and placing those inflated wages on the backs of Lakota residents who weren’t very happy once they learned what Lakota really wanted to do with the money they extracted from the public.

Essentially the summary of the debate was that Kathy Wyenandt agreed with George on most every issue except for school funding, because that’s her only real experience going into this election. She’s essentially an education lobbyist who thinks she has enough juice to deal with multirange needs as a senator, and compared to George, she has a lot to learn. Lee Wong is an old rival of George’s from West Chester and he really didn’t seem to care if he won or not. His hope seems to be to help Candice Keller with a split West Chester vote that might hurt George and give a radical rival a chance to knock George down in the primary. He was unprepared for this debate and obviously aloof. Only George Lang showed any real promise as a state senator in the kind of capacity that is expected out of the job. And that really isn’t a surprise, but it is good for everyone to see for themselves, for those who couldn’t attend that night. The proof is here, you don’t have to take anybody’s word for it, watch it for yourself and be sure to vote on March 17th, 2020.

Rich Hoffman

To Judge Amy Berman Jackson, Roger Stone is the Most Dangerous Man in the World: It all comes down to sex

I am surprised that with all the talk about the Roger Stone sentencing case and the mysterious reason people seem so alarmed that President Trump has weighed in on the issue, that the true cause of the ruckus has not been discussed. It’s not that Stone lied to congress, a congress that tried to impeach President Trump on nothing charges only to overthrow the 2016 election, its not that Harvard Law graduate and Obama appointee Amy Berman Jackson judge in the case is a political activist using her bench to dispense political ideology against voters sentiments. It’s not even in how the FBI has evolved into a political police force arresting Stone on charges in the early morning with CNN cameras tipped off and rolling as the former Director of the FBI and many under his command sip wine into the many sunsets of the Beltway and laugh at the rest of us who are clearly at a disadvantage to their government paid rule. It’s not about any of that, although those are all by-products of the situation. What its really about, and usually traces back to this central, primal point, its about sex.

For most of our human evolution contriteness has been the means to interact in social conditions. As everyone instinctively knows the first need of all males is to find their way within some pecking order where the top males are known and understood while most everyone finds some happy place of contriteness somewhere under the top male. Most males learn their place by the time that they get into their 20s and it is purely the aim of academia to make the most out of those who fall in that realm of being in the middle of the male dominated pecking order that is at the core of our species. And as all males learn who are not the top males, that the way to move up in that pecking order is with contriteness, so not to threaten the top males with a challenge, but to appeal to their egos in hopes for some table scraps that might come their way. That is the point of most institutional systems. Of course, the purpose of understanding who the top males are is to have the right to mate with the top females, the best looking, the best specimens of supernormal sign stimuli that is on the market. In nature this is how the best-looking kids find the right DNA to procreate the species.

Women of course flower and bloom into specimens for pollination and it is up to these men along the pecking order of society to find a good female and to mate with them and have babies. The great crises for most women is during that period in their lives where as beautiful flowers of puberty they wilt into carriers for the next generation only to be discarded as wrinkled up flowers later in their lives once the children had been raised and there was no longer a social need for them. This is why progressivism was such an attractive aspect for women, because they grew tired of becoming wilted in life and being left behind by husbands looking to clime the pecking order ladder just a bit higher and to trade them in for another young flower that might be at a less declining stage of wilt. Careers then became the new family and specifically government became a new refuge where some level of protection from the more dominate aspects of the species could not make everyone under them feel so inferior.

Less exciting people in life found a home in government where they were somewhat protected by the alphas and so long as everyone followed the rules of English society contriteness, everyone could get along to some degree or another. And those rules were to seek a certification to show that you knew something because someone said you did, and that the way up the ladders of society were to be contrite, to follow the rules, and to be happy with what you ended up with to the degree that you were allowed to have it. For people not at the top of their species, which was most people, this was a good arrangement, until we entered the period of western expansion and the gunfighter on the open plains ignited in American society the idea that anybody could be the top male, or female of their species if they could shoot a gun, or show fearlessness on the open horizons where the sun disappeared away each night. This whole American experiment redefined what being a top male, or top female was, it was no longer the best looking person, the tallest person, or the strongest, but it was the one who was most fearless, or who learned to be fastest, or more cunning which opened the door to a whole lot of new entrepreneurs who suddenly filled American society with a new breed of “top” people.

Of course President Trump with his flashy suits and gold buildings, and long list of beautiful women embodied this divorce from contriteness that the government bound career seekers were looking to hide from so the established pecking order subsidiaries would be angry at for changing the rules on them. And then there are people like Roger Stone, and Alex Jones who are obvious alpha males who are comfortable with the Trump America who wear gaudy suits and show no willingness to bow down to the established order of things, and it enrages people like judge Amy Berman Jackson who spent her whole life preparing for her wilted flower phase in order to still find a life of happiness in the contriteness of academia, as they had promised her would always be the case. When a Roger Stone stands before her, her ruling powers want to throw him in jail for life because they want to slap down this trend, which is now well beyond their control. Yet they still wish to act out against them. If they can’t get to Trump, they can get to Stone, to Manafort, and to Flynn, and those people are not permitted to be “top” anything if people like Jackson has anything to say about it, and that is why this case is so unfair. The legal system was never meant to be fair, it was meant to protect people from the judgement of their pecking order placement in life, where most people aren’t the best looking, or even the smartest. And with the newfound power of the personal gun, they were too lazy to become proficient with such an empowering device. So they have retreated to the rules of European contriteness in hopes that they might find some happiness as the inevitability of old age burdens them more each day with the realities of wilting flowers.

So the case isn’t about justice, the Stone case is a rebellion against the new found freedoms of our modern age where the concerns of pecking order madness can no longer be stuffed into a civilized box of rules and parameters meant to keep the contrite protected from the realities of mediocrity. Under the Trump administration America has been free to sore if only the people of the country dare to go there, and if they are not the best looking, or most skilled, they can still step out of their pecking order station and seek a life of unlimited potential. And that is why Amy Berman Jackson and her Obama era supporters want to throw Roger Stone in jail for as long as possible even as real criminals walk the streets raping, pillaging, and robbing everyone blind minute by minute. To the world of Amy Berman Jackson, Roger Stone is much more of a threat because he refuses the rules of contriteness and instead insists that he is free of such pecking order demands on his life, which is why he is one of the greatest threats to civilization that has yet arrived to human eyes.

Rich Hoffman

Voters have a lot to be angry about with Kathy Wyenandt: Remembering Todd Portune and his “people over politics” theatrics

Of course George Lang still needs to win the Republican primary in March before looking ahead to the Democrat challenger for the 4th District Seat for Senate in Ohio Kathy Wyenandt, but there are a few things about her campaign already that is disturbing, and they’ve come up before. One of the reasons Lang had to raise so much money for that 4th District Seat is because he needs to beat two Republican primary challengers then a very likeable Democrat in Kathy in a county that liberals would love to turn more purple than the hard red that it has been. Liberals hope to do that with women candidates who can cross over invisible political boundaries for voters earned and unearned and Kathy will be there with some money left from her previous attempt at the 52nd District House seat which she lost to Lang and a check from the now deceased Todd Portune that was sizable for the task of purple rain in Southern Ohio. Since he just died and its not fashionable to disparage the dead, I’ll save many harsh comments I have for Commissioner Portune for some other day but I do find it interesting that he thought enough of Kathy to give her a $2,500 check. Portune and I go back a long way and it was not pleasant. He was better late in life, but vicious political theater in the days of Dwight Tillery as the Mayor and Foxy Roxy as the Vice Mayor are stories I could tell that could dwarf the Bible many times over, but to put it mildly, I do not share with Rob Portman and many other conservatives any kind words. Yet it was the passing of Portune and of learning of his contribution connection to Kathy Wyenandt that reminded me of her campaign and the message she has for politics in general that I am very much opposed to.

Wyenandt and I have talked about this several times, her belief that politics has become so toxic that her campaign slogan is “people over politics,” as if to say, she is not a partisan and will listen to people over any other influence. Well, ironically Todd Portune told me something almost exactly to the same effect almost 30 years ago while I was in his office and we were discussing a solution to a nighclub incident where a bunch of drunk kids had died in a car crash coming home from the Cooters night club after the place had closed. I was proposing to him to solicit help from the city to get approval through the CBC a non-alcoholic nightclub that would operate in Coryville right next to the freshman dorms on the University of Cincinnati’s campus and give kids somewhere else to go once all the bars closed for the night and poured a bunch of drunk kids into the world as dangerous toxins. I was weary of the Democrat Portune who had pictures of prominent politicians in his office and I wasn’t sure if I could trust him with the intentions of the group I was representing. But he said to me much of what Kathy has said recently about the common good and people over politics, so I trusted Todd Portune with my idea.

Well, and there is much political theater that fills the book ends as mentioned but the gist of it was that I found myself in a lot of political trouble every which way you can imagine and as it turned out Todd Portune, as a member of Cincinnati City Council at the time was also the attorney for the nightclub Cooters and he had ratted out all my plans to all the wrong people which killed the financial aspects of the deal and left me hanging in a very bad way. I was young, so it was a good learning experience and it only took me 10 years to dig out from that mess, but to say the least, I learned what it means when politicians tell you that they put people over politics. What they really mean is quite the opposite. When it comes to Todd Portune, I figure fate sort of played out for him. While Rob Portman, whom I knew pretty well in those days of my dealings with Portune has lots of nice things to say about Todd, I’ll just state that I’ll leave the dead to rest and let whatever version of God the readers hear have sort out the details. The lessons of those experiences are more valuable than any other element and it reminds me a lot of Kathy Wyenandt’s campaign.

Each time I’ve spoke to Kathy she is always quick to tell me that she doesn’t read this blog site, yet she knows an awful lot about it, and she always pulls the conversation around to how divisive politics is and how she thinks we can all agree to taking some of the toxic relationship out of it. She is a nice approachable person so it would take a while to dig into the details so usually those types of conversations never get into the weeds too far, but as I’ve thought about it over time, and have learned that she has even enough of a relationship with an old political rival of mine, Todd Portune, I have much more severe opinions about Kathy’s “people over politics” platform. As a school levy supporter for Lakota on the last attempt, a political point she has choosen to capitalize on, it is clear what she represents and that makes the premise revolting of what she is asking people to accept. The toxic relationship people now have in politics is because they have learned too much about the bad dealings of people like Todd Portune and the double dealing that often goes on especially among Democrats when they say to your face, “people over politics.” What that usually means is “see you in court while you spend a fortune defending yourself from some political incursion.” Democrats for years have tried to put us to sleep while they’ve literally tried to screw our eyeballs out and the toxicity of modern politics is that enough people have woken up to the fact and people like Kathy want to ease people back to sleep to that reality.

It is OK to be angry that Lakota has wasted all the money Kathy helped spend through that last levy passage and is now looking to tax homeowners even more. Of course she doesn’t want people to fight or be angry, she wants to put them back to sleep—to the good ol’ days where Democrats could talk out of both sides of their mouth and get away with it. Of course the Democrats which Wyenandt is a member want everyone to suddenly get along now that the many evils that we have discovered from politics gone wrong in the past are clear to us now. If people are thinking of those things, no Democrat will get elected for anything ever. So Kathy’s only real strategy is to try to kill everyone with kindness and put everyone back to sleep so she can have a chance at a higher office. But to answer the question that she asked me, which I know she’ll read about here on my blog, and we’ll talk about the next time we see each other out and about, is that its good to be pissed off and angry at politics and that it is people who elect representatives that can recover their interests who are waking up and that they should be angry at how they have been treated. And because of the Lakota levy of 2013 voters have a lot of reason to be angry with Kathy—and then some.

Rich Hoffman

Why Rush Limbaugh is so Beloved: Republicans are postitive people

The world’s reaction to Rush Limbaugh’s stage 4 lung cancer diagnosis was bewildering to me. I suppose I understood why many on the left were almost cheering that his death might arrive by the end of last week yet they still seethed when he was presented with honors at the State of the Union address and was seated well next to the First Lady. You got the feeling that if his pending death wasn’t as good as sealed that many of the people in that room wouldn’t have stood for such an incursion and that they put up with it only because they felt just a little sorry for the popular conservative talk radio host. Then I wondered why we have even put up with such hatred. But I was reminded of the major difference between Trump and Limbaugh by Friday when Rush was back on the air between treatments that he fully expects to survive and listening to the story of how President Trump thought of the illness, and it all made perfect sense. Its why I have always been a Republican and why my particular brand of conservatism has been very conducive to the mentality of the current White House. Everything is very above the line with Trump, and also with Rush Limbaugh. Tragedies are expected to be overcome, not yielded to, and even a death sentence is something to solve, not to be a victim of.

As Rush told the story of his big day in Washington D.C. and the after party of a sorts in the White House Residential area upstairs with the First Family, I was hearing a story that was all too familiar to me. That is how I solve problems in my life. I don’t get emotional about anything and everything has a solution. There is no impossible, everything is on the table and its only a matter of time before a problem is resolved. I’m like that with everything and it was nice to hear that President Trump truly is at that level of optimism when he wondered why Rush couldn’t just get all the cancer cut out before the State of the Union Address then enjoy the evening unfettered. It was a reminder to me why I enjoy the people of this particular brand of politics so much, they are positive problem solvers who don’t yield to the emotions of the moment but are always looking for solutions. Democrats are the party of victims, people on their heels and surrendering to the whims of chaos, Republicans under Trump are problem solvers who look at everything as an opportunity for improvement. And in essence, that is the state of our modern political life, half the nation is looking at the glass half empty, the other half, that its half full. The glass is the glass, but the interpretation is radically different.

Rush may not survive the cancer, but then again, he might. He certainly didn’t take the time to wallow in the sorrow of the moment, he was invited to a big event with the President and he enjoyed it for all it was worth. The hatred expressed toward him was personal because there was a subconscious understanding that not only did they want the radio broadcaster dead and off the air for what they think will give them a chance at future elections, but they hate how positive Rush is and ironically that is also one of the things they hate so much about President Trump. They want to have an excuse to fail, to not achieve, or even not to try at all. They want to blame society, they want to blame their parents, they want to blame their schools, their government, their economic conditions on why they have settled in some rut in their life which they lack the courage to get out of. And Rush and Trump remind them of it.

I’ve seen that hatred up close and personal; I never yield to problems at all. Everything has a solution just waiting to be discovered. Its just a matter of time to grind things out so that we can uncover it. That’s how I run my own life, so it was very refreshing to hear to what degree President Trump exhibited the same traits. It didn’t surprise me, but it was refreshing, just as it was good to hear Rush back on the radio on Friday and the early parts of this recent week sounding like he always does for his three-hour time slot. I can’t say how many times I have turned on the Rush Limbaugh Show while overseas on trips, just to listen to him talk on the radio. While in Japan I would turn him on at 1 AM there and listen while I lay in bed because it was noon in the states, and it was very nice due to his positive outlook on everything. Even while surrounded by the necessities of whatever culture I was visiting, listening to Rush Limbaugh was unique because he’s unquestionably American, in that problems aren’t meant to be yielded to, they are meant to be overcome. While visiting those cultures overseas, it is always nice to hear a bit from home, and from the best that our American culture has to offer. I had the same experience in London and in Paris, rather than go to dinner at 6 PM somewhere and listen to the pub talk, I would put in my ear buds and listen to Rush on my iPhone while the rest of the world wallowed in sorrow of their victimized status. It wasn’t that I so much wanted the news of the moment, it was just nice to hear that Rush always had a solution to whatever problem was being discussed, and that was and is what makes Rush Limbaugh something unique and so beloved.

What the left doesn’t understand is that at whatever future time that Rush Limbaugh doesn’t do his radio show every day, that people like me will not turn to them looking for leadership. Simply, someone else will fill the role that Rush Limbaugh currently does. The interesting thing that has happened is that even with all the attempts at communism and socialism that various factions both foreign and domestic have attempted against the American people, positive people always find each other. I supported Trump because he’s always been such a positive person. I listen to Rush because he’s a positive person. In my own life, and I’m thinking of positive politicians whom I like a lot, like George Lang, Mark Welch, Ann Becker, Nancy Nix, T.C. Rogers, Roger Reynolds and even Sheriff Jones. I like them all because they are all very positive people to the core of their personalities. Even though they all have lots of reasons to look at the glass half empty, they haven’t, they always think of it as half full and are scanning the horizon for solutions. That is the biggest difference in the political gulf that exists in our modern day, and its not the task of the positive to yield to the negative. Rather, the other way around. The desire to see Rush off the air is deeper than just hoping that conservatives will lose a voice and that Democrats might win some future elections, its in hoping that the excuses for failure will remain for them to hide behind. Because in truth, that is what is really behind the political tension of the American two-party system in its current form. But that was never America, we are free to solve problems, and that is what makes us different from the rest of the world and is why Rush Limbaugh is so beloved and always will be.

Rich Hoffman

George Lang has raised more than 11 Times the Amount of his Rivals: Why fundraising is important in our republic

In the end, it’s the voters who show up to vote on election day and decide who wins an election or loses. Perception can reflect reality so anything can and does happen, but in the three-way race between candidates for the 4th Ohio Senate seat in the upcoming March primary there is only one clear frontrunner and that is George Lang. Campaign donations are an important indicator as to whether or not a politician has the ability to generate money from the donor groups which is important leverage in Columbus politics when weight behind a bill or proposal is needed. The way politicians measure each other is in just such a manner because they all know how hard it is to do. Its one thing to appeal to those all important voters on election day, but even more than that, how to appeal to the type of people who write thousand dollar checks when elections are still 6 months or even a year away, and not lose their souls in the process. Of the three people running for that senate seat in the 4th District, only George Lang was able to do anything substantial raising over $200,000, 11 times more than the other two, which says a lot about the value and true potential he has to offer to that seat.

The way the news outlets like to report things, they like the idea of “democracy” where everything is a horserace of popularity and everyone has a chance to win, even the unprepared nurse who decides on a whim to run for some office. It feeds the Cinderella complex that if anybody would like to, they can just decide to run and win an office and do some good work in the name of a democratic process, and they like that belief until it doesn’t work out the way they’d like, such as in the case of President Trump. In truth, we have a republic and the representatives we put into office need to be skilled, knowledgeable, and tenacious. Candidates shouldn’t be able to buy their way into an office, but they do need to show that they can generate political interest in their platforms even when most people in the world are thinking about everything else but an election. It is one of the hardest things in the world to do is to get on the phone and ask business leaders in your community for a few thousand dollars, then go out into the community and do good work that is honest, and George Lang has shown time and time again that he can do that. People not so skilled will look at that process and say its corrupt, because essentially, they can’t do it. That’s what Ding Dong Lee Wong will say as his old West Chester trustee rival George Lang outraises him at every turn. Ding Dong Wong was only able to raise $6,300 for instance, with the largest donation being a measly $500. For the person who wrote that check that might have seemed like a lot of money, but in the way that other politicians measure the viability of a peer in Columbus, its weak and shows that the office holder does not have support of people in their community all through the year, when there aren’t elections.

Campaign donations are a kind of vote all their own, not so much for the general election, but for the reach a candidate has across their entire base, particularly business leaders who are often overlooked by the general media as part of an undemocratic process. For instance, they might poise the question of why Ginni Ragan gave George Lang a check for $13,300 in January, what does she want with the money—as if the presentation of the check was a favor of some kind that George would owe her, which supersedes the general voter. What nobody talks about is that people who are in such a financial position contribute those types of funds without a lot of expectations attached, it is their way of betting on the right representation who they think will protect their values in politics and they see it as just another form of a vote. It’s a lot of money to small minded reporters who want to keep the dialog of democracy defined in their limited vision, but it ignores the aspects of politics that are way beyond their comprehension. A politician who can raise a lot of money gives them more weight on the floor of a republic form of government because it represents a kind of mastery that many of them have not yet overcome, the hard task of asking for a campaign donation for an election nobody is thinking about when the person on the other end of the phone could think of a million other things to do with that few thousand dollars.

Yet the news outlets depend on that money, they need candidates to take out adds on their airwaves, in their newspapers—consultants, lawyers, and every kind of parasite known to mankind that lives off the crumbs that falls from politicians in the unsaid bid to show how much money they were able to raise and therefore, how strong they would be as a representative on the congressional floor. While its true that Trump nearly funded most of his campaign during the presidential run, it was the amount of money he was able to raise over the last three years for the GOP that brought the party in behind him. And in order to get that money, he had to generate a lot of excitement that filled the coffers and gave him the political leverage to use that money to continue to sell his message which people who contributed wanted to be a part of. Big donors or smaller ones see campaign donations as an investment more often than the media would report.

For instance, the media would like to poise Candice Keller as a real threat to George Lang, because she’s a woman, and that if elected her many scandals would follow her and the press could then have a field day. But in reality, she only managed to raise $12,135. Most of the other money she has been working with were donations that she gave to her own campaign. That might buy adds and billboards, along with yard signs, but the people in Columbus know the truth, that Candice doesn’t have support from her own community when she can’t get on the phone and ask for the big checks. Therefore, what pull could she hope to garner for a big new bill she wants to get passed, or use her vote for leverage to change something she doesn’t like. The power on the legislative floor comes more from just a voice and a vote, it comes from the stout presence of the ability to raise money, because that is a measure that defines worth in a republic.

Campaign donations are our way of protecting our republic from the mob rule of a democracy, which for many decades now has been the mantra of the media. They even have Republicans saying that we must protect our “democracy” which means that a majority rules by simple vote and that rules can be changed if only enough emotion is spent to sway public opinion. That is what is happening currently in Virginia over the gun rights issue there now that Democrats control all branches of government. The true measure of worth in a strong republic is how well a candidate can generate value for their platform between election cycles and that is the strength of George Lang and why its important that it’s the third highest amount of all people running for senate in Ohio. To other politicians that is real power and mastery, and the much important leverage that a real player can bring to that seat. That might run against the sentiments of some Journal News reporter or television broadcaster cheering for some socialist slide into a democracy, but it’s the true value of a political position where all aspects can be united and the politician can properly represent their platform authentically. A cheater or a low life is not going to be able to raise that kind of money with all the transparency of our modern age. George Lang is top class in every category, and that’s why he was able to outraise his rivals more than 11 times over. And why he’s the only viable candidate for the 4th Senate Seat in Ohio in 2020.

Rich Hoffman

Why Democrats Hate Trump and Republicans in General: The choice between being a winner or a loser

It took a few days for it all to settle in, the debacle for the Democrats in Iowa, the terrible reaction to the State of the Union address President Trump gave this week, and the acquittal in the senate of the failed impeachment attempt of that same president, but the essence of the failures of the Democrat Party are deep and reflect an America most people despise, that of the loser. Its one thing to have compassion for people who are born losers, its quite another to allow ourselves to be controlled by them. We don’t want losers telling us what to do, and we certainly don’t want our lives limited by them. And what we saw this week by Democrats under great pressure, because the Republican Party under President Trump’s leadership is working very well, are members of the other party that just can’t compete, and they are fully aware of it. All their attempts to “equalize” the situation failed leaving them essentially to be a heaving mess of below the line thinking that nobody finds attractive. It reminded me why I simply don’t like Democrats, its not due to their race, their sex, or even their essential philosophy they say is steeped in compassion for other people, the planet, or even the less talented, its because their view of the world is rooted in negative victimization and nothing else, and that was never what becoming an American or staying an American was ever supposed to be about.

Plenty has been said by lots of smart people regarding the events of this past week, but nothing says incompetency like the Iowa caucuses. When people asked me about it, and these other events my reply was to compare it to a football game. Any quarterback from even a high school team can hit a running receiver in stride 30 yards down the field if they know where they will be at precisely the correct time that the ball is released from their hand, so long as they have 5 seconds or more to make the decision to throw. However, when a quarterback must play against a good defense and the line of the opposition is pressing down on that quarterback in 2.5 seconds or less, then even good quarterbacks will look like bumbling fools on the field of play. The Democrats are used to having all the time in the world to throw the ball, Republicans in the past have not pressed them out of some gentlemanly agreement to be equally deficient in performance. That is until President Trump came along from the private sector and started applying expectations to government—which is the source of their hatred of him. Suddenly there were expectations on Democrats that they just were not ready to deal with, and instead of trying to get better over the last three years, they have bet everything on getting rid of the expectation, symbolized in President Trump.

The media has gone along with the game allowing the Democrats to feel empowered as a political class to some level of competency so long as there was never any real measure. But Trump brought measures with him to Washington D.C., the same kind of measures that all private industry is judged by and the essence of it is that Democrats just weren’t ready. And when it was showtime in Iowa, it was an embarrassing mess. And when the State of the Union speech was given by President Trump, the Democrats could only sit there and listen as they spent all their time and energy being the opposition to Trump’s measures that they couldn’t share any joy in the long list of accomplishments that the President spoke about for over an hour straight. All they could do is sit there like the victims they have chosen to be, or to protest all together by not showing up, wearing white outfits to reflect the women’s suffrage movement from the turn of the last century, or do as Nancy Pelosi did at the end of the speech, rip it up because they had found themselves behind on all of it.

Then of course the next day, Republicans in the senate, except for the chameleon Mitt Romney, voted to acquit the President of the attempted coup by Democrats by quelling impeachment dashing any hopes of removing Trump from office before the election in November. That is what having a winning attitude will do for a person or a party, people tend to unite behind it and bask in its joy. But when your entire platform is about being a victim, that’s not at all an attractive prospect. People may see themselves as losers, but few people are happy staying that way and that’s all the Democrats are offering, which is why as a party, they are failing so epically. I hate to say it again, but I predicted all this many years ago and sure enough, its happing right on schedule. It’s not that Trump himself did it all, he was but the vehicle. It really comes down to personal beliefs, if they are above or below the line. You can’t build a great anything if the participants have a loser attitude. Trump was elected by an excited base because they recognize in Trump someone who wants to win. They do too, and so the Trump base was born. Its not hard to figure out, its something that evolved out of a natural trajectory of thought.

What you will find dear reader when talking to the “other side” whether its in an elevator at an apartment complex in Hyde Park which is full of anti-Trump socialites who know more about wine than they do politics, or the angry mother at Kroger shopping for weekend snacks for her family while running all three of her kids from one sporting event to another and doesn’t have time to know what’s going on in the outside world aside from what she sees on Yahoo’s front page of news, is that people who dislike Trump or Republicans in general are angry at their own lack of understanding about the world and their laziness to do the work in learning more so they could be more informed. They want to remain below the line people, people obsessed with what they can’t do, or what they can’t be. They want to relish in their victimhood because they just don’t have the ambition to take a positive position in their own lives on anything, and the Republicans of Trump make them feel the pressure to be more, and they hate it.

When people say they hate Trump what they are really saying is that they are too lazy to keep up and that they want to go back to the days where they didn’t feel so much pressure. Where they could give a little statement to the press about something and the media would run with it, but nobody really expected anybody to do anything about it. Democrats had likely the worst week they have had in years not because anything changed for them, but now there are measures to compare to, and that pressure is something they are not used to dealing with. It should be expected that people wanting to remain victims in life would be unhappy with the sudden growth of the country under the Trump presidency which expects good results about everything. Ripping up the SOTU speech the way Nancy Pelosi did was no different than all the attempts to impeach Trump, or to convict him just because he had expectations, they were too lazy to live with. Instead they kept their eyes on victimization when the Trump administration was bringing empowerment and before they could blink, the Democrats had lost their base almost completely. And now its too late for them to do anything about it.

Rich Hoffman

George Lang Attracts Larger Crowd in West Chester than Democrat Presidential Candidates: The activism of media coverage and what they don’t tell you

Over the weekend I was able to catch up on some of the Democrat coverage of the presidential candidates while campaigning in Iowa head of their primary and it became very obvious that the Trump rally we had in West Chester last week where George Lang, Warren Davidson, Sheriff Jones and Steve Buckingham from the Trump campaign drew larger crowds. You can see those crowds in the following Twitter coverage from that event. I didn’t think about it much at the time because I was just enjoying the festivities. Everyone had a great time and it seemed to bring out the best in people Between the Butler County GOP and the Trump team they brought in Chick fil-a to feed everyone and the event was a top notch rally in so many respects. But the people coming didn’t know that and they showed up just to hear people just talking about Trump and in large numbers. Before the rally many of us talked to the press, Channel 5 came out and covered it, and so did WLW radio, but not many others. The response we received was that “you guys love Trump in Butler County, where’s the story?” After the rally once the pictures started going up from people who where there, it became obvious what the story was, the media didn’t want to cover more people coming to hear these guys talk than who are going to see the leading presidential candidate for the Democrats. For the proof of that I would like to point you dear reader to the following article by the Cincinnati Enquirer talking about an upcoming senate race between Kathy Wyenandt and Candice Keller for the 4th District of Ohio. Its very, very interesting.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/08/09/kathy-wyenandt-meet-democrat-who-wants-challenge-candice-keller-senate-race/1954587001/

I don’t like to point at media bias as some below the line reason for something, but to the average person who doesn’t know much about politics, the Cincinnati Enquirer attempted to paint the scandal ridden Republican whom the party is asking to step down from her office over several very misplaced comments to Kathy Wyenandt, the Democrat that they are trying to flip a seat to blue in the very conservative Butler County—a long held objective among the liberal news room directors and newspaper heads. Its not the news they care about, it’s the political objective which they quite openly these days advocate. The truth of that article was that there are two other candidates running for that Republican seat, George Lang and Ding Dong Wong. But the Enquirer left them out of the article and tried to paint the whole race for senate between the two women—one of which is as good as toast even within her own party.

That article was written back in August of 2019 while the news of Candace Keller’s latest scandal was hot on the press—so the intent was clear to the Enquirer’s readership, promote the Republican that is in trouble so people remember her name while promoting the Democrat woman who normally wouldn’t have a snow balls chance in Hell of making it to the freezer for preservation. Both must be artificially propped up to look like front runners in that upcoming election and the Cincinnati Enquirer was happy to play that role. So fast forward a few months to this rally for Trump in West Chester held on a night when he couldn’t even come, because he was in Iowa doing another rally ahead of the Democrats and their primary there drawing huge crowds as usual, and people showed up to see George Lang and Warren Davidson speak and the enthusiasm for those two was incredible. That was the news story that none of the outlets wanted to cover because it goes against their desires for the upcoming election for which they are desperate to shape the story.

The rally was held in very large space that none of us thought we’d come close to filling, yet the pit in front of the stage was at least double any event that Joe Biden was able to attract over the week leading up to the primary. If the news wanted to truly report the news, they’d be interested in that little fact. Instead however of reporting how many people in Butler County and specifically West Chester were interested in attending a rally where these local politicians were speaking, one of them being the frontrunner in that 4th Senate Seat race, they would have at least covered it from that perspective. “West Chester rally for local GOP candidates outdraw Democrats for presidential candidates in Iowa.” Because that was the truth of the matter. I mentioned that observation to a few people while at that rally but it wasn’t until later and listing to the speech by Sheriff Jones where he had the crowd chanting “USA, USA, USA” that it became apparent just how many people were there.

I think based on what I saw that George Lang could draw a bigger crowd within his district than any of the presidential candidates who are leading in the polls could anywhere in the country. There is more enthusiasm for George from the base of Republicans who support him than there are for any Democrat. I might have thought that before that West Chester rally, but after, there is no question. Knowing that Trump wasn’t going to be at that rally, people showed up to hear what they considered the next best thing, George Lang and Warren Davidson speak to an excited audience. And the Cincinnati Enquirer skipped out on the opportunity to cover it because they didn’t like the story. It went against their activism of trying to paint the disgraced Candace Keller as the leader who would go against the Democrat in Butler County. What they were really up to was attempting to convince the un-informed masses to clear the deck chairs for a conversion of a deep red district into a blue one by removing the biggest red piece in the puzzle from the board all together. And if they had covered the West Chester rally, it would undo the way they have poised the story to continue into the primary in March.

The Journal in Hamilton isn’t any different. The activism on their part is rampant as well, it’s the reason that all these newspapers have made themselves irrelevant. The news happens faster than they can report it, they have a bias that does not reflect the views of their readership, and they are uninteresting. I used to contribute many articles to the Western Star when I lived in Warren County for a number of years. Back then, it was the news of record locally. But now its out of business because when people want to read a news story about these things, they just open up their phone and are free to get whatever information they want. The Enquirer and The Journal never have properly adapted. If it wasn’t for the people over 60 years of age, they’d be out of business right now. All newspapers are headed over the cliff and this is the reason. But blogs like this one report these events and its much easier for a consumer of information to click here and retrieve the information months from now than it is to get a little 400 word article that is all about political activism on their part, into the mind of a busy consumer. So there you have it, since they didn’t report what a great event the West Chester rally was, now you can see it for yourself and also know that Candace Keller is not the face of the primary election, she’s the one that Republicans are trying to get out of the way due to her radicalized comments. And that is the truth of the matter that the Enquirer tried to promote in favor of their handpicked stooge, Kathy Wyenandt.

Rich Hoffman

Why EdChoice is so Beneficial: Removing Parkinson’s Law from the public education debate in Ohio

I’ve been watching and listening to the whole debate about EdChoice in Ohio with great interest. Of course, the Ohio Senate had to vote to delay the implementation of Ed Choice which was scheduled to take effect the day of this writing, until April 1st 2020. The public schools in particular have responded terribly to it, including the school in my own district which I’ve written a lot about, Lakota. It has been nothing short of embarrassing to listen to Lakota’s superintendent complain about the funding model that is coming whether they like it or not and move the entire district into a victimized status so quickly on the issue. The report back from some financial news from Lakota has not been good and they are floating the idea for another levy which would be a terrible, anti-growth tax increase just to supplement their mismanaged spending habits, so the news was bad enough. This EdChoice debate has only made things worse. Dealing with professional educators to me is the worst experience that there is in professional politics because they are so entitled and unrealistic about what they think their financial requirements should be, so we’ll deal with some of that here, and in the coming months. Listening to politicians attempt to put their minds around what to do about EdChoice, which is simply a grading system that inspires the financial contributions of the state to follow the student of that failing school to the school of their choice. This of course leaves variability in public school budgets for money they have been used to getting now going to an unpredictable number of students who may decide to go somewhere else with that precious state money.

I listened to Bill Cunningham and Representative Bill Seitz talk about this EdChoice problem on WLW and every word made me cringe. Here were two people who call themselves rock ribbed Republicans missing the whole point of the public education debate. Now, my history with these two is that they are on the wrong side of many issues. They mean well like a lot of people do, but their perspective has been tainted by years of acceptance of a system initiated by people like John Dewey during an experimentation of many things during the progressive era at the turn of the last century and like many have accepted that that’s just the way things are and the way they will always be. Money goes to the school from the state to teach children living in that district not just skills for a future job, but to turn them into democratic citizens with an emphasis on social change. In hindsight this has been a complete disaster, look at the products of the schools, which many of us are. People aren’t very smart, and they don’t set their sights very high in life. Dewey’s mistake was in attempting to steer society away from republic representation and more toward democratic majority rule, which we all know now is a disaster at the epistemological level.

For the two Bills talking on WLW about EdChoice, they are both people in their 60s and 70s now, to them public school is about sports programs, learning to follow orders so that kids learn to live in a civil society, and in establishing much needed social connections with peers. Way back, many decades ago when my wife and I pulled our kids out of public schools for a year to teach them at home because the results were just so disappointing we had family members literally melt under the news because they were afraid my kids would turn into complete social outcasts, because they believed after so many years of this Dewey philosophy that the goal of public schools was to establish these mental applications. Of course, those sentiments were completely fear based, just as about everything in public education is. We have learned to just accept the failure that is evident because that’s always the way we have done things. People like the “Bills” on WLW enjoy the idea that their public school is the holder of real-estate value, and that Friday Night Lights football in the fall months of every year make for great conversation. But it was flawed from the beginning and never was poised to do what Dewey wanted because his fundamental problem was in thinking that the state as a central authority should be in charge. It was a progressive experiment, but not a very “Republican” thing to do.

Schools like Lakota and many others who are complaining about the insecurity in their funding model should be looking at the situation like any business would instead of some free-loader sitting in a bird nest of a rich district and opening their mouths for tax money to flow in. They should be working to be the best school with the best options in a free market society. No matter what the report card states in giving families the choice of a school they’d like to go to, Lakota should feel confident that kids would want to go to their school for all the reasons that anybody would, to get a good education, be near a good sports program, or just to be around other students who aren’t problems coming from broken families. Students should have a choice and if Lakota wants those students, they should have to work to attract them.

The most tragic thing I have noticed, looking at the situation professionally, is that all public schools have become addicted to the natural state of Parkinson’s Law that has contaminated their budgeting structures. Everyone who has been involved professionally in process improvements understands that Parkinson’s Law is an adage that states “work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion,” meaning that a work schedule blankly stated will allow a worker to fill that time allotment from beginning to end by the nature of human interaction. If you give someone an hour to do a 5-minute job, they’ll take the whole hour. Process improvement demands to understand how long it actually takes to do a job, and to work out the tendencies of Parkinson’s Law to misstate labor needs. Well, that same tendency is at the center of the public education debate all across the country, and is why the EdChoice trend is so badly needed. Budgets have been filled to their maximum to accommodate whatever the state provides and to what extent local school district tax payers will put up with in increased levies driven by labor unions looking to use Parkinson’s Law to attach need to student performance by using the chaos of money going to the schools, not the student, to keep the process centrally controlled and with a false understanding of what education per student should cost, leaving the real state funding model perpetually broken, which is just how the labor unions and lazy superintendents like it.

Clearly what we have had hasn’t worked. Education needs reformed and the centralized aspects of it need to be removed. Free market solutions are the only way to improve schools and the students that come from them. People should have the option to vote with their feet putting schools into the same competitive situation that every restaurant, shopping complex and entertainment destination must do, compete for the dollars available. Education is not so sacred to not be attached to competitive market conditions, end of story. A quick look at our students declares that trying something new wouldn’t hurt, because we couldn’t do worse. And ultimately that is the direction of education anyway, just as the trends of the world are declaring. People want more choices in life, not less, and it’s a matter of time anyway where money for education shouldn’t even come from the state. But while it does, it should go to the students so they can vote with their feet. Not to hold them to a school that doesn’t feel it has to earn their business. If Lakota is such a great school, or any government school for that matter, don’t tell us how good you are. Make yourself one of those schools that people want to go to. Make it so that you are so crowded that you must turn people away, which only increases the value of the product. Sure, it makes the current way that schools do business chaotic, it forces them to understand how much Parkinson’s Law is in their processes. It forces the teacher unions to think differently for sure. But that is their problem, not ours. And the state will never know how much it should spend on students so long as Parkinson’s Law is contaminating their assumptions. That is the key to this whole discussion and we’re going to have it now or in a few years, but the way things have been are not the way things are going to be. The old Dewey model was poised from the outset to fail. But these days, life happens too fast and there is just too much to learn to attempt to squeeze everything into the traditional classroom setting that we have been attempting to do. The times and this new economy are forcing us to change, so let’s get at it and solve this problem once and for all by looking at the entire concept differently.

Rich Hoffman

The Outsider Don Lemon: This is what winning looks like

It has probably been noticed that much of what I have been writing has took a turn in tone from an outsider view of the world, to more to the insider. That is because Trump, whom I have supported from the very beginning, and the Tea Party movement which I was also a part of from the very first moments, are now in charge. When you win and capture the other players chess pieces you must accept that victory and not continue to act as a victim in throwing rocks at the castle walls. Once you enter and take over the occupants of that castle, and you sit on the throne, you must acknowledge that your role has changed, and you are now responsible for what happens next. So, my direction has been to prepare those victors for a proper philosophy to help them grasp that victory and not to lose it back to the heathens who have been cast out. And that is precisely what happened on CNN when Don Lemon had on a panel of people who openly mocked the intelligence of Trump supporters, they were speaking very ungraciously about their newly found view of the world outside of the castle walls—out of power and still yet unwilling to acknowledge their loss of privilege and respect in the world.

I have been writing material for those of us getting used to our winning positions so that when the other side tries to recapture their positions, these newfound winners will know how to maintain their positions and increase their winnings, and to not allow the pendulum to swing back in the other direction as it has for a few centuries now in American politics. When you gain power, you keep it, and you use it to improve the lives of people looking to you for support and leadership. And in that way of thinking I have been making the arguments that conservative views of the world are a superior philosophic vantage point concluded through experience and wisdom, quite the opposite kind of sentiment that Don Lemon was applying to Trump voters. I would argue the opposite, that Trump voters have the higher moral high ground and superior intelligence state of mind, and that is why victories are coming easily to them these days.

The political left had captured intelligentsia over a century ago and they maintained a stingy grip on it for all of our lives, to the point where they have attempted to lay claim to intelligence itself. The Progressive era as it made a political crawl for power in 1912, and ended up putting the extreme racist Woodrow Wilson into the White House with Franklin D. Roosevelt in place just over a decade later for four terms of White House occupation, claimed our education perspective with a very Marx like view of the world that people like Don Lemon still think exists. But they have not yet accepted that they lost that position not just in the 2016 election, but essentially during the entire decade that came before. The political left pushed George W. Bush further and further to the left, then gave us Obama after an embarrassing decade of Bill Clinton. People were tired of watching their republic continue to turn so far to the left on the political spectrum, so I clarified what that measurement has been in an article dedicated to the effort.

In 2008 and 2009 I was doing work with many contacts in Hollywood and was enjoying being a growing insider in entertainment media. My bullwhip act was catching on and I was getting a lot of invites to a career trajectory that was shaping up to lead to millions and millions of dollars. The networking connections that I was establishing with my talents was shaping up to be very lucrative. And it was on a film set in Glendale, California that I made a decision to lend my talents to this new conservative trend toward the Tea Party which many at that time thought was crazy—because of all the money that was on the table. I was engaged in a philosophic talk about politics with many popular stars at a lunch break while we were in line at the catering truck and I decided that I was going to have to use my abilities to help change the direction of the country. So, I became involved in the Tea Party movement helping where I could on issues local and national. I became heavily involved in talk radio and put my name next to many controversial issues because from the very beginning, I understood the political spectrum that I have now been conveying recently. What good is millions of dollars if liberalism was allowed to steal it all eventually anyway and we lose our society? In that way, I put off my insider status for a choice on the outside so that the right political philosophy could retake powers of position in our nation, so that we could all have a better society along that political spectrum.

Believe me, I felt the pain of going from an insider to an outsider. It was not a happy place, so I get the need to ridicule their betters that Don Lemon and his friends at CNN feel is necessary. And they should know that they are only digging their own hole deeper. Because unlike what I experienced in the early days of the Tea Party leading up to the Trump election of 2016, and everything that has happened since, I understood where the political spectrum was and why people started America to begin with. That the entire progressive era was a well-meaning swing way to the left of it, but that the heart of every American rested well to the right of that center and would under the needs of freedom, to continue moving to the right every chance it had. So, for Don Lemon and his supporters, and all those on the left politically, they do not have philosophy on their side. They will not be able to retake powers of position easily, unless we hand it back to them with unlocked doors and sheer neglect. That knowledge is terrifying to them, and they should be scared for how they behaved when they did have power. It is our task to give them many nightmares in the aftermath of their fall from power just as a warning to their further encroachments.

However, winning should always be the goal and we have won. Now the challenge is to stay hungry for more wins and to maintain a winning culture. To not relax and become ourselves corrupt, but to be vigilant and hungry for that winning culture at every opportunity. It is a new day and we don’t need to worry so much about being victims to the Don Lemons of the world. We have beaten them. Its ok to piss over the castle walls upon their spiteful faces, but we must never again give them political leverage over us. And that is the lesson of the day. When you get power, keep it and understand that our position is historic, and that the philosophy of mankind is on our side, and so long as we preserve the natural tendency of all human beings to function under freedom, that their movement to the political right will always guard that castle, and keep us all in the winning column for many centuries to come. We’ve all made sacrifices to get here, all battles are about such decisions. Now however that we have power, we need to keep it for the hopes of all who dream well into the history books that have not yet been written. And additionally, now that we have power, its time that we use it to do good, and bring justice to those hungry for it.

Rich Hoffman