Tag: Lakota Schools

A $1000 Check to Saugus High School: The social decay that leads to school shootings nobody is talking about

After a recent shooting at Saugus High School in California where the 16-year-old birthday boy Nathaniel Berhow shot at five students early in the morning killing two before shooting himself in the head, a local woman donated $1000 toward the school which I found perplexing. The donation was an obvious act of rebellion from the woman toward the trend toward violence among young people who are using guns to inflict harm in the pressure cooker that is public education. The woman obviously wanted it to be known that she stands by her support of the school and would go to extreme acts to show her solidarity with the students. But as we know who have been fighting the trends of public education for a long time that $1000 check was next to useless, as the teacher’s union would quickly consume it. For the overall problem, it was a simple gesture no different than a rain drop in the ocean, but it obviously made the woman feel good to write the check, and it gave the news a nice feel good story about community unity and public education support in the face of grave danger.

I’ll say it again, teacher’s need to carry guns so they can put down attackers like this depressed kid quickly when they make a move to attack. This school shooting didn’t last long, and the targets were obviously selected for a reason. The news outlets won’t say it, but I will, high school is all about peer pressure and what kind of person is formed from that pressure. The social circles that are formed can be quite intense, relationships are complicated among human beings and foundations of betrayal can be quite ominous. And to any 16-year old, a girl who likes this guy and not you, or a girl who is with this friend and not you can be tragic, and even very melodramatic, especially if the adults in their lives aren’t providing the proper level of wisdom to navigate the crises. And ultimately, that’s what we find in this shooting case at Saugus High School.

We need guns because our society is making these types of people who are dangerous. I’m sure people thought of Nathaniel Berhow as a nice kid who would never do such a thing, but in moments of anguish, people do a lot of dumb things without really meaning to. I would say we are a culture of guns which has derived from our cultural need for them. As America evolved to allow individuals to reach the limits of their abilities, there are always parasites who are seeking to claim jump success, and guns are needed to protect the property of the ambitious, so that they will keep trying to try at success. Its our system of civilization and these public education institutions are running against that tide. The woman who gave the $1000 check is likely a nice person, but her belief system is faulty as to what that check represents. I know a few people like her, wealthy people who want to throw money at something like these tragedies because it makes them feel good to do it, like they are helping. But what is always ignored is why the kid thought his 16-year-old birthday was so dire that his only option was to lash out at fellow students before killing himself in the process. There was so much life to live, why cut it short so soon?

That’s where our social system fails. The public education institution has eroded away at the parental role in the lives of these kids then everyone wonders why parents can’t help when things get so bad. The premise, the cause and corrective action that needs to be acknowledged is that the public education system can’t do the job. The teacher’s unions who work in these schools are radical, and lazy. The politicians who set the agenda for what is taught are corrupt and stupid. And while the parents are trusting that system to teach their kids saving them the burden, they are living reckless lives having affairs, getting divorced and indulging in too much lackluster leadership under the roof of their own homes. That is why kids like this Nathaniel Berhow shoot themselves on their birthdays, and desire to go out in a blaze of glory to hurt the people who have hurt them. Hurt of course is a perceptual exchange. What one person considers hurtful, others may not. That’s why adult mentorship is so important to help with biological perception changes that mind steer the teenage mind in the wrong direction.

Removing guns from our society simply ignores the root cause of these greater social problems. It buys time for the society that has helped create this mess to continue believing in the failed system just a bit longer so long as the public focuses on those $1000 checks and not the real problem in public education. Public schools don’t work. They are weak attempts at social engineering that fail often and with these kinds of catastrophic results. And from the media, and the political class, there is no leadership to change what we are seeing openly and with frequent occurrence. Its only a matter of time before another school shooting happens near all of us. Its not the guns that are the problem, it’s the desire to use them to solve these kinds of problems that are. ABC News owned by the Disney Company especially are bad on this topic. Their belief, which is the same as most progressives in this modern age is to take away the temptation, that having so many guns makes these events easier. But Nathaniel Berhow had an unregistered gun. What would ABC like to see, the uninventing of guns? Even if all the gun manufactures in the world were put out of business, any machine shop around could build the parts. The black market will always have guns, so any law created won’t change that fact. Chicago still has more shootings than anyplace in the United States. Guns are illegal there and populations are regulated with liberalism. Yet gun violence is as common as rain in a storm.

Any method of resolution will fail if it does not deal with the true problem of psychological trouble that spawns out of collective education services and the pressures that go with them. The failure in public education is deep and is in need of a complete overhaul and really if you get to the example of the woman who wrote that check and the media that gravitated to it as if it were made of gold and spoke of the good hearts that rose up to meet this tragedy with acts of kindness, the real evil was in writing the check and supporting that school in the first place. In supporting a failed institution that is leaving people so desperate and lost that they cannot solve simple problems as teenagers, and in allowing the parents to reside guilt free of responsibility for raising their children, further danger is assured. When the news tells us that they do not know why a shooter like Nathaniel Bernhow did what he did, what they really mean is that they can’t admit their role in it, and therefor can’t talk about it. Its not so simple as leaving behind a note, or in having some other form of confession. The real villain is in the construction of the minds who can’t deal with the trouble and how public education makes those conditions worse, not better. And that is what we should all be talking about.

Rich Hoffman

Impeachment isn’t an Option: Defending the President with violance if it comes to it

In all parts of my life I would have to say that I am a highly respected person, very highly educated and in all manners of it, an example for everyone to follow. The word influence leader is tossed around a lot in the content of my interactions, and at a high level. Most of my best friends these days are very wealthy and also extremely respected. Yet I would say that my personality that writes these articles on this blog site is every bit me on a plate, and even when the talk turns toward aggressive corrective action, that is certainly not out of character for me. I say all that for context because when it comes to President Trump, I love the guy because he has been willing to take the fight to the enemy in a way that I have for years, and I know it’s a pain for him. He and his family could be enjoying so many other things in their life rather than dealing with the losers of the swamp. And so could I. Prior to these political days I routinely spoke to people in Hollywood working in the business and one of my targeted career tracks was to have my written works published by big time publishers on the shelves of Barnes & Noble. Obviously by my work on this blog, I had planned to write more books than Stephen King, George R.R. Martin, or J. K. Rolling and to be more successful. But I saw where the country was in the years of 2005 to 2010 and I joined the Tea Party movement to fix it, and that is very much my stance today.

The premise of my decision is to fight back against several levels of thought that are essentially trying to destroy America, and that is the notion that other people make you who you are rather than you make yourself. Our education system teaches us that other people make or break you, yet our Constitution is designed to unleash individual talent so that you can be anybody you want to be, and sometimes that means you have to go off the rails in spite of what the social norms allow. Such an example for me was talking to publishers in New York about my second book called Tail of the Dragon. I had been nurturing several large talent agencies toward my work the way many writers did and when they looked up my website at the time and saw that I was a Tea Party supporter—openly, that was the deal breaker. Of course, my response was to point out the many leftists writers such as Stephen King and J.K. Rolling who were openly liberal and why the same rules of social edit didn’t apply to them and the answer I received was obvious. All the big publishing houses and corporate media markets were dedicated to all out global socialism and if I wanted to be in the game, I’d have to adapt. Well, that’s not how or why I do anything. So I turned away from that business I loved so much and went into another direction. I of course still write, but I do it for myself as opposed to the mandates of other people.

So anybody reading can imagine what I might say or do in relation to this impeachment inquiry on President Trump and why some of my writing has turned scary at times. Based on the standards that Democrats are creating for impeachment, essentially because they can’t beat President Trump in an election and all their internal polling says so, this is the only way they can have a shot for the White House for the next 12 years at least. (4 more years of Donald J. Trump, then (8 years of Don Jr. I’d place a bet on that one right now) So Democrats due to their ideas being goofy already are turning to law breaking and true piracy to attempt to get their people in power and I’m not OK with it. I can be successful at anything I put my hands on. What I get and do in life is not up to other people. I could go work at a root beer stand tomorrow and within a few months I could make it all very successful and the people associated with it very wealthy. I have no reservation about protecting the president I elected from an obvious coup by government employees who have rigged our system to their personal advantage and using the Constitution to justify the behavior. What they have been doing, the government employees whether we are talking about our local union ran schoolteachers, or our CIA and FBI agents who have been hostile to our 2016 election and are asking for an ass kicking. I put more value on the ass kicking than in any ass kissing that most of the business community believes they must do just to stay in business due to massive government corruption. I believe in that notion so strongly that I have made life decisions already to follow that line of thought. Nothing anybody says at this point is going to change anything. Trump is my guy, I voted for him to fix this mess, which he has been doing a good job, and I’m not going to sit by and just allow a bunch of losers who did cause a lot of expensive problems for us to deal with get away with it.

Its not unusual for me to lend my thoughts to local issues and people I think will help a situation. And I’m not worried about letting villains know what I think of them. I don’t like being lied to and I certainly don’t take threats to my life in any way lightly. I have come to know that threats of either violence or even social ostracizing is all these enemies of America have to fight with and for that they have come to think they are running the world. I didn’t put up with it when I was a kid, or as I was coming up in life and learning what worked and what didn’t. I certainly saw it in the entertainment industry where they would clamor over every email you send them, and lunch meetings, to complete alienation once they learn that you are a conservative. And it doesn’t work presently in any capacity because the truth is, they don’t make people, they need people who are successful to loot off of, and that is the dirty little secret they are terrified people will discover about them, and I’m not shy to let them know I know it. However, the big national and international issues are what I’m most interested in talking about and this impeachment talk is truly the biggest story that needs to be covered. It is amazingly arrogant to watch Democrats attempt to overthrow an election during an election year and sell it back to us as some kind of legal purity. It’s the biggest farce I’ve ever seen and I am prepared to turn to violence to protect the president I elected, and many others. Getting along with other people isn’t nearly as important to me as in doing right, and right in our “republic,” not some socialist democracy, is determined by elections and without that basic premise, we have nothing anyway. So why not fight for it with spilled blood and a lot of carnage? That’s how we got it in the first place and I’m thinking that in the end, that’s all those insurgents will understand. It wouldn’t be my first choice, but based on my own history, what other outcome would there be if that other side refuses to listen and honor our laws? I’d say they already made their choice.

Rich Hoffman

 

Jorge Masvidal is much more American than Julie Shaffer and Ray Murray: Fighters and good punches in the the face are more honest than politics

It was a little remarkable that President Trump showed up to a UFC fight over the weekend and there was some good things to say by the participants. But then again, maybe not. There is an honesty in fighting that I think is missing a great deal from our modern culture, and the pacifists who have had bad intentions for our country have been critical of. Locally in my school district of Lakota there is a contentious race for school board for instance where the opposition in favor of the teacher’s union is not happy that two of the candidates, Lynda O’Connor and James Hahn are endorsed by the Republican Party. The union activists of course want the board to appear non-partisan—which would of course be a complete lie. The teacher’s union is a very partisan organization. But their intention is to win these fights without having to get bloody. To pretend that there isn’t a fight, when in reality, they are the ones fighting the hardest. It was good to see that President Trump gets it, and he understands it so well that he actually attended a big fight at Madison Square Gardens to support some of his friends from the years before he became president.

As Republicans we have been encouraged to fight with our pinkies out while sipping on tea cups, and to not get bloody, but to participate in “honest” debate, all the while, our opposition has been plotting openly our complete destruction. Fighters like Jorge Masvidal understand much more about politics than what he thinks is a station above his reasoning. As he said, his fists speak better than his mouth, I would say that those fists are more honest than the mouths of thousands and thousands of politicians. That is because there is honesty in the power of being the best and to overtake an opponent. The passive aggressive backstabbing of politics is a much more dishonest business, and its not a surprise that Masvidal is mystified by it. But that he knows enough to be honored by a President who respects his profession enough to attend the event.

As I have been covering all week, for a simple little debate like a school board election there is an amazing amount of deceit that goes on to protect the union candidates for future contract negotiations. Deceitful terminology fills the vocabulary of politics where if we were all honest, warfare would be a better description. That is certainly where I am at on the matter. I have no desire to play the game of politics, even if I may be really good at it. I would rather have the honest fight to find out who has the better idea. May the best person win, not the most dishonest and back stabbing one. In the theater of politics, Trump understood the real nature of winning there than all the passive aggressive losers who have built the entire system around false definitions for things at the expense of truth. And President Trump respects good, honest fights enough to attend a fight to watch young people like Masvidal give it everything in a bloody fight that was literal brutality, but much more truthful than the best of politicians.

I pointed out the value of Trump’s presidency well before he won office by pointing out his experience with WWE wrestling, even getting into the Hall of Fame. Masvidal was right about Trump, he is a “bad mother f**ker” because he did make a lot of money beating many rivals to the prize. He won in entertainment with is top television show, The Apprentice which earned him a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. And he won with his casinos in promoting fights both with Tyson, but with WWE events. Trump has won with championship golf courses. He has won with best selling books. He has done nothing but win most of his life and has beaten everybody who has challenged him. He even won one of the toughest fights that there is, the Presidency of the United States and against all odds. Trump has much more in common with fighters like Jorge Masvidal than he does with some pencil necked lawyer from Washington D.C. And that’s why they hate him in the Beltway, but real fighters love him.

I have watched politics for a long time, and even how business evolution has moved away from capitalist ideas into more of corporate socialism where everybody is equal and fighting is frowned upon, and I have been preaching that conflict is often better than just playing passive aggressive games of getting along for the benefit of appearances, but while true respect is elusive and not part of the conditional decision making process. Its better to fight than to get along when it is good ideas that we need to move forward for a better society. Having a good fight is an honest way of getting everything on the table so we can deal with things rather than playing nice to each other’s faces then turning around and backstabbing each other when really we should be working toward ideas that we all agree on.

Most businesspeople would rather just give a check to a politician to go fight their battles for them so they can focus on conducting business. Trump played that game well when he needed to, but as he learned, it’s not enough, especially if the politicians don’t like to fight, but would rather placate everyone so they can just get elected the next time around. In my district both businesspeople and some of the politicians are learning the value of a good fight. They may not want to do it themselves, but they are starting to understand why I carry a bullwhip around with me everywhere and am never too far from a gun. I personally love to fight and I find that the most honest people there are out there are those who also like to fight. They may not agree with me on everything, but eventually after a good fight, I find more in common with them than anybody else. Trump understands that there is more honesty at that UFC fight than in some Beltway dinner party. And Trump’s supporters are starting to see that comparison for themselves.

Locally, which is no different than any regional political conflict, we have all been tricked into thinking that our fights with extremists like Julie Shaffer, Ray Murray and their mentor Sandy Wheatley were to be debated like respectable contributors to some tea and latte game that was stacked in their favor by misdirection hidden behind politeness. They hide their aggressive political desires behind children and outright lies then wonder why we are so mad at them. But the trend is certainly changing, we now have presidents attending UFC events rather than hob knobbing with members of congress just to suck ass their way into some bill passage that only benefits the lobbyists of K Street instead of the people in rural Idaho. Jorge Masvidal understands America much more than Julie Shaffer and Ray Murray in the Lakota school district. The key is not in getting along while the teacher’s union robs our budget surplus with their easy votes, but in fighting back and telling those with ill intentions what we really think of them. Because they need to know, and so does the rest of the world. We are judged by others based on what we do and think, and I’d rather other countries looking at Jorge Masvidal as an example than the union passivist Julie Shaffer and her pot smoking buddy, Ray Murray.

Rich Hoffman

All Teacher’s Unions are Communist Organizations: Even at Lakota where political endorsments are poised to lift the veil

As it has been covered extensively the teacher strike in Chicago by their labor union has been very disruptive making even the very liberal mayor there appear to have a brain by comparison. What everyone has to come to terms with, is that these teacher unions are outright communist groups advocating the same communism America has been fighting for over a century. Of course they don’t name it with a “C.” Instead when they hold up their signs proclaiming that “This is what Democracy Looks Like” that is essentially their message. They don’t love children, they want to destroy our capitalist society and for anybody who has watched the Chicago teacher’s during their strike, the evidence is more than abundant. And the teachers in these unions are able to hide their true intentions largely due to a community of parents who are too busy to pay attention to their real definitions, which is on full display below for the upcoming election at Lakota, where we are advocating to elect two new “Republican” endorsed school board candidates, Lynda O’Connor and James Hahn. The Facebook page is from a long time tax increase supporter, Sandy Wheatley who used to be the president of the Lakota School Board many years ago and was part of creating the culture of deficit spending that caused a lot of trouble that persists to this day. She is discussing with another person the difference between a union endorsement and an official political party.

The ignorance presented is staggering. Sandy isn’t as stupid as she sounds here, but she has to play dumb to sell the sausage to Lakota parents, something she has a lot of experience doing. And I promise, Sandy is not the reason that her good friend Julie Shaffer is in support of transgender bathrooms. Sandy is actually a girl. I promise contrary to what you might think by some of her pictures. There is a reason her Facebook picture is Julie Shaffer’s campaign sign. However, Sandy is attempting to sell to all who will listen that the Lakota school board is a “non-partisan” position and that all members should not be political. The reason she wants that is so that the labor union, which is just as communist as the Chicago teacher’s union needs to change the name of their intentions so that they can pull off a scam against the voters so they can remain in power.

All the evidence you need can be found in the labor walkouts all across the country, whether we are talking about Arizona, Los Angeles, Chicago or even the one just to the west of Lakota schools at Ross Township, the mantra from the teachers is “red for ed,” or otherwise, the red of communism to control public education. Sandy and the gang within the Lakota school system has had to dress up their public perception largely because in our community there has been considerable pushback against them for which they have had to put on a happy face and attempt to present denials. But make no mistake about it, the Lakota Education Association is just as communist as the Chicago teacher’s union and they are extremely political. What’s dangerous is that they don’t say what their politics is. As Chairman Wheatley says on her Facebook post, she considers the labor union endorsement to be similar to the “Girl Scouts.” But providing an elusive definition for what they stand for, the labor unions have been able to gain great control over our public education system and in Lakota we are looking to stop that with official party endorsements to the contrary. People know what Republicans are, so it provides a clear distinction between the endorsed candidates of Lynda O’Connor and James Hahn, as opposed to the union stooges Julie Shaffer and Ray Murray.

Sandy knows how the game works, she has been at the center of destruction for several decades now. Back when she was on the Lakota school board the big news was that the district had grown to the point where it needed to have two new high schools. They made a huge mistake under her watch, the district financially should have split into two districts, one in each township for which Lakota resides. One school district should have been in Liberty Township and the other in West Chester Township, because one community overloaded itself with terrible zoning that placed too many residential voters to the polls to vote in favor of Lakota schools, while West Chester was able to diversify the heavy needs of the burdensome school district with more businesses. When it comes time to vote, West Chester tends to vote down tax increases while the new residents of Liberty Township vote in favor. Sandy was part of tying the two together forcing West Chester to support Lakota East while Liberty Township does very little to support Lakota West.

One of the goals of communism was always to attack private property and that is precisely what all public schools do, they force property owners in their districts to pay for their property to a school that is hell bent on teaching children not about capitalism, but about all manners of socialist and communist ideas—things that Republicans don’t support. But all that effort is hidden behind “children” and the real names of the activity are avoided and actually deferred by willing little soldiers like Lakota’s Sandy Wheatley so that voters don’t really understand what’s going on, only that they need to drop their kid off somewhere for somebody to watch while they go to work. So they start off by wanting to believe in the system, which people like Chairman Wheatley are all too happy to provide them with some definition they can believe in, “labor unions aren’t political, they are just like the Girl Scouts.” When in reality, they are more political than actual political parties.

I would doubt that Sandy Wheatley has a copy of the Communist Manifesto in her home. What is disgusting about her is that she used to be a school board member yet she is clearly in support of the labor union over the needs of the voters, and Julie Shaffer is a carbon copy of Sandy. They support the union over the voters and when it comes time to negotiate a contract on behalf of the voters, the voters don’t have any representatives. But the union does, on both sides of the table. That is how costs ran out of control at Lakota and Sandy Wheatley was at the heart of the whole mistake, and she is campaigning for Julie Shaffer to do the same presently. And the labor union doesn’t just want a piece of that $100 million surplus that Lakota has right now, they want political activism, such as transgender bathrooms which Julie Shaffer supports. That is how the union keeps its members placated and focused on their communist agenda. Where else would those stupid people make the kind of money that they do in public education? Listening to the Chicago teacher’s talk, who could disagree with me as to their intellect? Contrary to what they say, teacher’s are well paid for their silly little work schedule and their all summer’s off. It’s a good gig that these stupid people wouldn’t get anywhere else, so they will support the communism of public education to get that pay check. Just as parents are willing to overlook the same so they can have the free babysitting. But what is actually happening is very sinister, and expensive. At least with good Republican people on the Lakota school board we can deal with the cost. While time and knowledge will bring people to the other problems by calling them by name, instead of elusive terminology meant to maintain the illusion that all this has been a good thing all along. Taxpayers need representatives on the school board. The Lakota teacher’s union already has their representatives. They don’t need more with Julie Shaffer and Ray Murray.

Rich Hoffman

Its all about Guns in Lakota Schools: Remember to vote for Lynda O’Connor and Jim Hahn for School Board on November 5th

From the beginning it was always about guns for me regarding the school board candidates at the Lakota school district which we are voting for on November 5th, 2019. Not so much as we use guns to shoot people, but that they sustain ourselves from people who would like to shoot us. The political philosophy being embraced or not really, points to the essential differences of the management system that is up for debate. Julie Shaffer and Ray Murray represent anti-guns on teacher’s points of view, exactly the same position as the teacher’s union and Democrats nationally. The roots of their belief system is that we should all depend on each other, flaws and all for the betterment of a utopian society lacking individual identity and trusting in the system we have invented to sustain us. As opposed to Lynda O’Connor and James Hahn who believe guns should be worn by teachers as first responders in the moment of a hostile crises and that individuals, not systems, are the keys to solving many of the social ills starting with the ownership of firearms in general.

To further break down this parody Julie and Ray want voters to trust their very flawed personalities with the lives of our children, and that also is the position of the progressive teacher’s union politically. Once anybody admits to themselves that guns are in American society, and should be in all American schools, to protect the acquisition of individual possession then the formula for all public education to teach contrary realizations is exposed and ruined forever. So of course, Julie and Ray don’t want guns on teachers, they want everyone to trust the system they represent, and to their specific roles, are terribly underqualified. However, qualification is an individual assessment, so for them, so long as they can blend into the background, their personal faults ethically, financially, and morally can be ignored.

This interpretation of guns is a heady matter that is not conducive to the lazy thinkers and mass collectivists that have transcended from the deserts of the Middle East and migrated along the coasts of the Indian Ocean during the evolution of the many oriental religions of sacrifice and collective salvation. The gun has no place in those cultures because the aim of life is not to acquire individual traits, but to get rid of them. If you study the modern liberal, that is the roots that you will find dear reader, and that is the foundation of all teacher unions and government schools. Every single one of them. And when it comes to managing those school boards with like minded people, Julie and Ray are just the kind of people they want running things, easy to beat, flawed personalities, and not very smart.

In fact, at the core of education as we all assume is the individual attainment of intelligence, after all that is the purpose of education, to acquire knowledge. But that is not the goal of government schools led by these sinister, oriental style forces. They want a breakdown of individualism and an advocacy of social collectivism where the institution is worshipped itself, not the participants. You can see that at any Friday Night Football game at Lakota. The parents in the audience watching their kids play games under the lights of an October sky will say, “we won,” or “we lost.” By attending the game, they feel they are part of the game and therefor, the institution represented on the scoreboard. Individual touchdowns by heroics are lost to the next day news so long as the school gets the credit for individual behavior. And that is the way it is with these people, and it always has been.

So to come to such thoughts is a very individualized process, and for that people arriving at such a state need guns to protect themselves from the advocates of institutionalism, whether the attackers are crazed pot smoking lunatics or Manchurian candidates seeking actual assassination to preserve the status quo. You would be surprised to what extent lazy, dull; people will fight to avoid more work and real thinking. They would truly rather kill you than to step up to the level of thought you might introduce them to with a little effort. To that proof I would offer Socrates as an example, who was poisoned for corrupting the youth of Greek society. Today instead of killing Socrates as a middle-aged man they just kill them before they ever hatch out of kindergarten. The public schools don’t want the next great philosophers, and great thinkers and innovators. They want boring people that they can control easily, and they certainly don’t want them to have guns to defend themselves with.

Ultimately that is why teachers in school must have guns and why we need school board members who support education curriculums that advocate individualized learning and will push back against the tide of state and federal mandates to the contrary. We want kids to learn in school and we want guns to protect what they have learned from villains of old oriental philosophies from eradicating that possession from their minds with the threat of death. Guns protect all individualized possessions, even knowledge. Anyone who knows history well could think quickly of five or six situations where governments, kings, or anarchists have shown up on the doorsteps of a great thinker and killed them so that society would not advance beyond the intellectual reach of the worst and most wicked. For that is the true intention of evil and the reason it is bad.

Guns are about preserving what we teach to individual students so that they can live and carry out the products of their understanding. Not in just saving their lives for the sake of one more statistic sitting in the stands of a football game cheering for the institution when they could be at home reading a book and getting smarter. The goal of a school should not be to accept the perverted sexual understanding of the most obsessed mind with the basic functions of reproduction, but to teach them to think beyond such primitive cravings, to the point where we don’t even think about being transgender, but what is the state of life outside of the universe, or multiverse. It is up to the education system to teach to think beyond limits, not to hold everyone under them.

And that is the subtle message of this election, Lynda O’Conner and James Hahn stand for guns and the protection of individual possession of knowledge, Julie Shaffer and Ray Murray aren’t even smart enough to ask such a question, so they don’t want to be left behind by smarter people than they are, rather they want to keep guns out of the schools, and instead keep the topics of conversation on transgender bathrooms and how to blow $100 million by paying teachers countless amounts of money then asking taxpayers to subsidize their failure at some future time. By voting against guns in schools and in society, anti-gun personalities like Ray and Julie stand with the original masses in disregarding individual behavior in favor of collectivism. And when you see how Ray and Julie have led their lives, you can understand why they are so eager for such a position.

Rich Hoffman

Shakedowns at Lakota: The trolls robbing openly the business community

It’s not often easy to understand the many veiled ways that a school system, any school system, extorts the business community for extra cash in the pay to play scheme that is what has become of government schools. When anybody talks about the teacher unions as a negative radical force, it goes far beyond the wages that destroy budgets that school boards are constantly having to deal with. It actually seeps into the management of the school system itself flowing over into zoning and finance. When we see these radicals in action they usually present themselves as nice cordial people, perhaps with too much jewelry and perfume–even the guys. Their pant suits would make Hillary Clinton proud as they profess to be “all about the children,” which nobody would argue with because they don’t understand the details. But when the lights are dimmed a bit, or these union radicals are sipping their lattés at Starbucks, their true intentions become much clearer and a hatred for the rich and industrious comes sharply into focus, even as they make plans to strike against a school system over more money such as what seems always to be happening in Chicago. And from the letter presented below, this practice of harassing businesses isn’t just happening in my home district of Lakota, it’s pretty much everywhere that labor unions operate with taxpayer funds.

What makes stories like this hard for people to understand is that its not the direct action that progressive teacher unions create themselves, it’s the results that they instigate as a radicalized political entity. Anybody who has the endorsement of a labor union and is running for school board is playing the game and do the bidding of that radical element. This example is within Lakota, but the same story could be told in Mason, Monroe, or any government school. The foundation for this particular practice at Lakota goes back to the severe mismanagement of the school board that went on when Joan Powell was running things. To a large degree Julie Shaffer has carried on the tradition along with Ray Murray and Brad Lovell. Ray lost his seat a few years ago to Todd Parnell. Lynda O’Connor and Todd have been two votes toward solutions and are both business friendly. For this upcoming election, Jim Hahn is poised to join the school board and like Todd and Lynda, is a pro-business candidate and would be part of the solution. But before we can talk about that we must define the problem that is expressed in the letter presented.

The names were blacked out to protect the innocent on the letter shown here. Even though I have permission to use the letter in its raw form it’s not really necessary for the story. The story is that a real-estate investment by an enterprising opportunity has been trying to gather up the funds to initiate the endeavor and they are being told in this letter that the common practice in public schools operating in this region are demanding even more money to leverage control over the project before a shovel ever hits the ground. And that threat will continue until the owner or prospector of the property makes a payment to the school for the increased value assessed by the legal entity who is also part of the game. Essentially that means that any investment coming into an area doesn’t just have to look at the costs of the project itself, but the amount of extortion money that the local school system applies to them. Of course, if they don’t play then as the letter says, they will be “blacklisted” and will have trouble elsewhere.

Such as in the case of Lakota, this is why incoming projects, shopping centers, home developments either move to some friendlier district without the kind of leverage that Lakota has or they just buck up and shut up so they can do business in our community. The teacher’s union create the false narrative that their employment makes a great school which attracts investment by developers. They have the media platform to get a sympathetic ear from both print and television news because the kids are used as a shield to advance the topic. But the chaos is driven by the insatiable need for ever more money that is always increased by the labor demand for unreasonably high wages, which must be paid for by the “rich,” property owners. Those property owners are of course the general taxpayers who own real estate—they are all looked at as soft targets by the teacher’s union out for progressive changes to society in general. But it is the business owners who take the biggest hit, just as this letter explains. If they want to do business in Lakota, or any school district through Ohio and Pennsylvania, they will have to pay the troll living under the bridge between finance and the local school system.

The worst part of all this is that it is the crazy labor costs that are driving the activism. Business owners typically don’t want to get involved in contentious disputes because the teacher’s union will threaten quite openly to boycott their work, which to any business could mean complete destruction. Its hard enough to come into a community with a business plan to get funding for the project, but then to survive a shakedown by the local school that might put 7% to 10% extra cost into the project. Then to have it all threatened with bad press and a bunch of angry latté sippers from the teacher’s union is often a “not worth it” decision. People may look around Lakota’s district and declare that everything is great, there are lots of businesses and lots of residents. But what isn’t talked about is that there could be more if the school system wasn’t such a negative impact on potential investors. When it is wondered why Lakota has had declining enrollment, this is one of the contributing factors. Or why young people move out of the area once they graduate. Or why Liberty Center still hasn’t leased out all its available space in spite of all the wonderful things it has to offer to the community, the cost of doing business is too high for most, so it limits our opportunities as a community.

Meanwhile the demand for such high cost appropriations does come from the teacher’s unions who are always threatening the school district with increased costs which pushes not so bright school board members like Ray Murray, Brad Lovell and Julie Shaffer into participating in these shakedowns to keep from having to go to the voters every couple of years to get more levy money to pay the unending appetites of the radical Lakota teacher’s union. The businesspeople are easy targets because they often can’t afford to defend themselves once they have sunk a lot of money into a project, then are stuck holding to it once the bleeding starts. Sure, the labor radicals are nice to them and are not shy to ask for more shakedown money any way they can get it with cordial conversation at public events, but make no mistake about it, the practice is vile and is just as criminal as any thief looking to rob a bank. It’s the same thing, only the school districts wait for some investor to come along with bright ideas to do all the work, then once they are too far along to turn back, find they have to secure more revenue to appease the trolls in the school district. And that is just disgusting. It is certainly happening at Lakota in abundance, but to be honest, it is happening everywhere. The reality is that nobody has the guts to cover it which is why it continues to happen on and on and on.

Rich Hoffman

Ray Murray Thinks it will take 38 Years to Spend Lakota’s $100 Million Surplus: Why people like he and Julie Shaffer should never be in charge of a budget

$100 million is a lot of money to liberals who only see future pay increases for subpar work leading to easy labor union contract negotiations. And clearly one school board member, Julie Shaffer displayed at a recent meet the candidate’s night at the VOA Miami University Campus Lecture Hall how little she knows about money. Her partner in such a perspective was Ray Murray, the former school board member coming back for more and local pastor pontificated that we wouldn’t—couldn’t spend that much money of a surplus for 38 years, so to his utterances why not give it all away. Now you can see dear reader why it’s dangerous to elect these kinds of people into a management of our tax money. Instead of respecting that money and understanding that the surplus wasn’t really one at all, but a debt leverage problem that needed attention, they tried to paint the fiscal conservative on the board, Lynda O’Connor as a Chicken Little for pointing out that deficit spending is not a healthy condition. No wonder the teacher’s union is licking its chops to get Ray and Julie back on the board and managing their contracts a few years out. They already have that money spent whereas Lynda and the newcomer James Hahn understand that $100 million is not that much money, especially when you look at the overall budget needs.

I did get to talk to Matt Miller the Lakota superintendent and the very good treasurer Jenni Logan, recognized throughout the state of Ohio as the very best in her field, and they assured me that they were going to tackle the deficit spending problem. Sure, it’s fun to spend money like there’s no tomorrow, but smart people like Jenni, and Lynda understand that $100 million as a surplus isn’t much when the operating budget is around $160 million per year, where the only product is educating students, (or babysitting them) and they aren’t doing a very good job at that either, getting a recent poor report card from the state that shows money does not improve results. The teachers need to work harder and worry less about transgender bathroom policies.

I was encouraged to see many friends from the business community not sitting this election out, they are not impressed with the $100 million surplus either. They are wondering why Lakota can’t lower their tax burden if they are operating at such a surplus and not considering spending pauses so that they could continue to build up elements of our community that really matter, jobs and recreation that make a community what it really is, and not just a cesspool of employment for a liberalized labor union trying to program our children into future Democrats. Had they not been there this election might have a different tone, but even the spending addict Julie Shaffer had to watch her mouth so not to sound “too” Democrat in such a conservative district even with pro spending liberals showing out in full force to support future contract negotiations. The smart people want to see James Hahn elected instead of Ray or Julie because that would put a third conservative on the board and would help manage that surplus responsibly. But if left to Ray and Julie, to Lynda’s point, the money will all be gone in around 5 years. Jenni gets it. But Matt didn’t look so happy to see me, and not so excited about focusing on the deficit spending aspect. Elections have consequences and a lot of people are waiting to see how this one turns out.

The best thing to do with the money would be to lessen the burden on future taxpayers to inspire more investment and continued growth. What is lost on Ray and Julie as to the role of the school board in the community is that they not only have to manage the quality of the school, but the cost and to understand the balance between the two. The way it has been, which has sickened me to my core, is that school districts leverage their power to tax against future investment. If you want to play in their school district then they expect you to pay, which is something I will be covering much more in subsequent articles. I can understand the tension in the room at that candidate’s forum. I understand idealistic people with a bloodthirsty zeal to support their school system without understanding how the cheese is made behind the scenes. It’s much easier to just focus on kids and transgender bathrooms, whether or not busing is available and the quality of the sports program. But the question remains, what makes a school district good, is the businesses that attract jobs and good quality applicants who need housing, places to eat, and shop. Or is it the schools that we pour millions and millions of dollars into that just go to overpriced teachers teaching our children radical leftist political activism only to have those kids grow up and to move away. I would say it’s the businesses that come first then the schools that reflect the quality of a well-managed community. And that is something no school system wants to admit to, because it would destroy their extortion racket that they have politically on a community, and financially.

There is a reason so many real estate people are involved with pro levy endeavors, or government labor union types. It’s because behind the scenes schools leverage themselves into the business community with subtle threats directly attached to their ability to tax. Pay or be destroyed, or don’t do business altogether. Being in pro education anything groups like I was last night the people are not the risk takers who go out and obtain financing for some next new great thing, they are just average people who want to feel what they are doing by investing in Lakota will make their kids like them when they grow up. They want to think that the education system will fix all their deficiencies as people. That is certainly the case of Julie Shaffer and her past protégé Joan Powell who were part of those upside-down deficit spending habits that almost destroyed Lakota and the community it sits in. The reason there is a $100 million surplus now is because so many kids grew up and away and new kids did not replace them, so Lakota has declining enrollment that will continue into the future, and that took the pressure off our budget tremendously, but the deficit spending has continued and will so long as there is a three vote majority against proper budget management.

As Julie said trying to defer blame from herself, school boards don’t pass levies, they don’t demand further tax increases. They leave it up to the voters. But what school boards do however is mismanage the money we give them. They cave into labor union demands for ever increasing rates of pay that is not connected to any performance standards. And when Julie won’t take her part of the blame for the deficit spending and when Ray, who was there all along thinks it is party time at Lakota, that they have 38 years to spend that $100 million surplus, well there is the problem. We have a chance to fix it with this election, but people are going to have to show up to vote. If they don’t then the same deficit spenders will be in place, the labor unions will love it because Julie and Ray would gladly approve a contract negotiation because they don’t have the guts to deal with a strike or bad press for standing up for the taxpayers. And they will lead the charge against the business community to twist their arms into silent approval or else boycotts from the radical union members will come after their brand with a fury. And none of those questions were asked at the candidate forum because as we all know, it’s something that people just don’t talk about. But it is every bit the core of the problem.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The King Makers of Ur: Why the CIA and Democrats in general want to impeach President Trump

Most of the readers here understand what’s going on, however for the next several months and even years, people will Google this topic looking for context and they’ll find this article, as they often do, and they’ll want to know. The only thing that the impeachment inquiry is for the Democrat Party against President Trump is that they don’t have an answer for him. Their presidential candidates on their side are terrible and they are looking for an equal playing field, so they are opening every box of Pandora to get a chance. Its not that Donald Trump did anything wrong to deserve impeachment, its that the long history of the city state and their creation of gods and kings has, and that journey is coming to an end in the United States and people who have been enriched by that system are upset about it. Particularly in the American intelligence community, which is overwhelmingly trying to point the direction of the United States back to the crusty start-up civilization of Ur in the Mesopotamian Valley dating 3500 BC.

It was along that small band of land that we know of thus so discovered that city states first rose to power starting around Ur and extending east and west into India and north Africa, then up around the northern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. Suddenly mankind went from a hunting species to an organized state led by a king then managed by various degrees of bureaucracy. Over time institutions, such as education facilities and various governments plotted for ways to best fit the formula of people management devices in these first attempts which persist to this day. Even in modern Washington D.C. the symbols of reverence for this period of human development is unmistakable. And it is to that history that modern Democrats and the various intelligence agencies are loyal, even if terribly outdated.

In America was born something new in relation to the city state and with its birth came the destruction of that old way of thinking. Of course, we can still see the hangers on from that long past, but as we speak it is dying. Even if they did manage to remove Trump from office, which they won’t, but if they did, people have had a taste of the kind of life that can come from divorcing the city state but maintaining the benefit, and they won’t be going back. People in America have no desire to move toward a Hong Kong type of society to win back freedoms we already have. And for them, Trump is the ticket to that level of peace and prosperity.

The “deep state” knows this, those members of the FBI and CIA who desire to overthrow the 2016 American election in the same way that they pick and choose winners and losers around the world for America to deal with. They want to remain the king makers of Ur, because in making or breaking people, that is where the real power is. They want to keep that power but in looking at Trump’s re-election chances for 2020, they must do something to protect themselves from the inevitable reality of their own existence. The city state of Ur was always a failure even if it did bring forth advances in human thought. The idea of a king or a centralized government ruling over the masses is for the feeble minded the ultimate fantasy, and they want it more than life itself.

That is why the CIA has become involved in yet another plot to dislodge President Trump from the office we elected him into. And they think they have history on their side, that people will pick a king over their own self-rule, and that they’ll be happy with it. Unfortunately for them, their understanding of the psychology of history is entirely too shallow, and they are in for some sad realizations. Mankind has been running from Ur since its inception, and America was founded as an ultimate escape from the city states of London, Paris and ultimately Ur. People want freedom, not more managers of their lives, and the gamble that the CIA and FBI have made in revealing their true natures is that they anticipate people will fall back within the city walls for which they are most comfortable. And they’ll behead their President out of self-preservation and fear.

This is the reason I have never really trusted the CIA or the FBI or any of the American intelligence agencies. I trust them even less now, because their understanding of the world is anchored back to those ancient biblical cities of primordial origins which rose up mysteriously from the tents of migrant hunters and thus accepted no further evolutions of thought and philosophy. The most creative of the human species have pondered these mysteries for millennia, but it was only when the United States was founded within the last several hundred years that a new reality of self-government under the miracles of capitalism became known. Then Donald Trump, the ultimate capitalist and free spirit was elected and those dreaming of a return to the city-state of Ur have since boiled in fear and frustration. This was not the world their education institutions instructed them would be coming. They had been lied to and now the very foundations of their entire belief system were now in jeopardy.

That is what is going on with the Trump impeachment, it has nothing to do with him. But everything to do with the previous power structure that has been trying to undo the American experiment since Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson worked out the details in the attic of a small home in New England under the bright sun of a summer day with no air conditioning. It was philosophy which guided their thoughts and a new form of economic theory devised by Adam Smith. Even John Adams was there to refine the thoughts in the context of intelligentsia. But for everyone else it was a slow go and over the many years since, out of a perceived safety of protecting our country, the FBI and CIA have thought of themselves as the king makers which gave them power over everyone. And they liked that power and in so doing had no inspiration to learn what was really on people’s minds, which is why they find themselves in 2020 looking at a second term of Donald Trump. They feel they must do something.

It is that something that we should all be concerned about, because its obvious that the deep state power that we are all witnessing will do anything to keep us all within the city walls of Ur and under their control. A wild and wooly world that is not under the control of the city state is more terrifying to them than death itself, so they will do anything to hold that power, including try to impeach President Trump, and to hell with how it looks. A world without those city walls is far more terrifying to them than the reality of what’s truly in the hearts of the electorate. Ultimately its not Trump they fear, it’s the people who voted for him. And they don’t know how to control that without just taking him away as an option only to limit our voting options to another modern update to Nebuchadnezzar. Yet, what they are learning as we speak and beyond, is that we don’t want a Nebuchadnezzar, we want self-rule and the benefits of a capitalist economy not just within the United States, but around the world. And the trajectory of history shows us that, that is the way the world is heading, in spite of the best efforts of the CIA to take those options away.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Monroe Schools Plays it Safe: One of the many reasons that Julie Shaffer has to go

I was very happy to learn that James Hahn, who is running for the Lakota school board is aligned with the Trump plan to allow concealed carry in the Lakota school district to stop potential threats to children at the point of danger. Lynda O’Connor is as well. If people who normally don’t vote in Lakota oriented elections within Butler County actually showed up to vote this November, there is the potential that this important program could be enacted at Lakota. However, as long as Julie Shaffer sits on the board, inaction and liberal policy making will continue, dangerously well into the future. Lakota like most districts without such a concealed carry policy will remain victims, and as the Monroe school system reminded us this past week, the danger is ever present.

Of course, the alternative to under preparation for moment to moment dangers is over reaction, and to their credit, Monroe schools in southwest Ohio has been very aggressive in monitoring social media accounts and cracking down on every little threat, which the Wednesday alarm turned out to be this past week. The alarm was real, but the threat wasn’t credible. Better to be safe than sorry. Yet a few years ago Monroe schools was accused of going to far digging into the text messages between students which led to the police isolating a young man and making an example out of him for a very minor commentary on his cell phone. For that the kid was suspended and had his cell phone confiscated by the police and was isolated within the student population for “security.” Better to ruin the reputation of one kid than to have a bunch of dead kids due to a rash of violence would be the reasoning. But that is what state controlled security looks like, they are watching everything we do even outside of the classroom, because that is where the roots of threats start and must be detected.

As all trained shooters know however is that the best way to deal with violence isn’t in suspending the liberty of all your students or voters, but in dealing with the problem when it occurs. Just doing the little things right, such as diligence on security check ins, following up on rumors with logic, and carrying guns for when and if a threat emerges so that it can be dealt with right then and there, not five to ten minutes later once the police arrive. That is after all the reason that our Constitution promotes private people carrying guns, so that the other aspects of the Constitution can be protected, such as unlawful searches and seizures.

Given the Monroe approach, which is keeping threats off the radar, but it’s always running all over privacy rights all in the name of safety, and that is the problem. Is that really what we want to teach our children, that their rights can be always superseded by the state need to protect them, when in fact they have a right and obligation to protect themselves? Of course, I would say not but this is a question for the general population. For most people safety is the limit of their concern, all they care about is whether or not their kids come home from school, and shallow thinking politicians will be happy to give them the minimum of their concern requirements. But at a cost, philosophically, and legally. Should the state take responsibility for safety or is it the task of each and every individual. Leave the math, the reading, and the history to the schools, but for the parents and school administrators, its their job to make sure things remain safe.

I’ve debated Julie Shaffer on WLW radio before, and in other forums and let me just say as politely as possible, that type of deep dive conversation is not within her intellect. She’s a pretty shallow stream, not very deep. For her, so long as Lakota, or any school system prevents mass shootings by intruding on the rights of the students and their parents, she’s fine with that, even if it does push kids into accepting that everything they do in life can fall under the purview of the state all in the name of safety and security. So long as something can be deemed “safe,” people like Shaffer can justify personal intrusion of the students. That is why she led the school board at Lakota to a stall out on the Trump initiative to arm teachers in the schools with concealed carry hoping to run out the clock on the inevitable act of violence that any district with 16,000 kids might embark on. Its safer to turn the responsibility over to the state and throw the rights of the students out the window. And when they grow up, they will then vote for the same policies because its all they know.

Lucky at Monroe this past week the threat wasn’t credible. But one of these days it will be, whether its there, or at Lakota, or some other big-name school in the famous southern Ohio districts outside of the I-275 loop. Its easier for shallow school board members to kick the can down the road and let someone else solve that problem for them even if it does step all over individual rights—because on the political left, that is the agenda anyway. At Lakota presently three of the five school board members are what we’d consider liberal, while the other two trends toward conservative. If James Hahn could find the votes from a sleepy public, that ratio could be turned around and this whole concept of safety and philosophy would have a chance to be heard. But not until a major change occurs.

Monroe, which is right next to Lakota as far as districts go has shown the trend of the future, monitor everything and at the slightest provocation, over-react. Play the better safe than sorry angle and hope you get to the bad guys before the bad guys get to you. But in the process, lots of innocent people are being scrutinized in ways that would have sent shudders up our spines just a few decades ago where nobody would ever think that such a day of personal intrusion would ever be acceptable. Just think of two more decades into the future where these kids will be running things, and what they will be willing to justify all in the name of safety.

Of course, the cause of the tendency toward violence is very much a current debate. I would say that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. Fatherless homes, failures of state care, a lack of personal responsibility where everyone gets a trophy, the legalization of marijuana, the over medication of depression medicine, the failure of religion, all just to name a few are contributing to the concept of violence against classmates that certainly wasn’t a consideration when I was in school. I would place the blame squarely at the feet of liberalism, which most of these school boards are functioning from, so we are mathematically inclined to get more of the bad behavior not less. That means we need to get our approach to this crisis faster than we are now. Kicking the can down the road doesn’t work when you run out of road, and I would say that’s where we find ourselves presently. And the demanded action will require more than a letter sent home to parents.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

For a Stupid “B”: The solution to Lakota’s budget problems

I’d like to take the high road and not do a series of stories about school board members who go to hotel conferences and drink so much that they pass out face down in the bathroom with their underwear nowhere to be found. That might be embarrassing to the whole district and damaging during a political campaign. Rather, I’d like to discuss the facts and that it is clear to me that in the very large Lakota school district with over 16,000 students that the spending by the liberal school board is out of control and needs some common sense applied. Due to their reckless handling of the radical teacher’s union throwing most of the money from the 2013 tax increase toward teacher salaries, they are poised to do it again. Lucky for the Lakota school district, we have an election coming up, and we have a potential third vote solution to the spending problem, James Hahn.

Listening to the many problems uttered at the Lakota school board, if we were doing a business analysis of their problem it’s that they are overspending on their budget. We are paying extraordinary six figure salaries to too many employees and they simply aren’t worth the money. From the measure of the state, Lakota received a report card of a “B” which simply isn’t acceptable. For all the cheerleading that Julie Shaffer and Brad Lovell, who has a wife working as an administrator, have illustrated, that if only we gave teachers a raise, that we could maintain our A+ excellent ratings–people buying homes in the area and investing in businesses would have nothing to worry about. But they have failed and failed miserably. As elected officials they have enjoyed too much the drinks at those seminars more than doing the business of the district and now the failing grades are starting to show, even as declining enrollment if managed properly could have kept more tax increases off the ballot.

When they ask as a school board for a tax levy they are essentially saying that they have no desire to manage their employees. They would of course say that their collective bargaining agreements are what drive up the costs. They would then say that the reason they want to overpay teachers and yield to their threats for strikes if they don’t get even more ridiculous raises is that Lakota wants to retain their employees so they can get the good grades from the state. But guess what, that isn’t happening. A grade of a “B” isn’t good enough for our district especially for what we are paying.

To have average salaries of $70K to $80K per employee one might argue that its worth it to give kids the best opportunity for success. The trouble is, in comparison, other schools that are competing with Lakota who also have high rates of teacher salary, supposedly the best in the business are getting As on their report card. Lakota is paying for mediocrity. What obviously needs to happen is that Lakota needs to cut away their overpriced teachers who care more about gender neutrality and other leftist causes and bring in new talent that can flip the pay scale. What is there to lose if Lakota is already getting a “B” in its grade rating? Why wouldn’t we dump half of the teaching staff and start over with fresh young talent to balance the books?

Well, that is called management and currently three of the two school board members just aren’t willing to do that hard work. Currently Lynda O’Connor and Todd Parnell are functioning as conservatives trying to implement some management controls, and they are feeling the heat from it. What they need is a third vote on the Board, in this case James Hahn. I had the opportunity to meet James recently and he is a sharp, business guy. He understands how things should work and functioning in a three-vote majority, he could do some good, especially partnered with Lynda. I have known Lynda for a long time and at first, I was skeptical of her. But over time she has proven herself to be a solid conservative who wants to do the right thing. What she has needed and continues to need is that critical third vote.

Before we burn down the district with another levy vote and do all the television, radio and newspaper coverage that could be very hard on our district regarding its reputation, we have a chance to vote for James Hahn to actually manage the district at the Board of Education for the first real time in my lifetime, and I’ve been around Lakota for decades. This is a rare opportunity and the Republican Party is backing Jim and Lynda for this very important race during the upcoming election. But it won’t be easy. The levy activists and unionized radicals who hide behind children and declare that great harm will come to their minds if we don’t just throw endless amounts of money at them forever will do whatever they can to prop up Julie. She will get a lot of votes just because she is perceived as a lay down candidate for the teacher’s union who want their money at the expense of the rest of us.

This particular election is one of the most important in Butler County because it’s a chance not only to put fiscal responsibility in charge of one of the largest public budgets in the state, but that the failure to do so could easily cost most of us many more thousands and thousands of dollars a year for nothing. And by nothing, I mean a report card of a “B.” An average at best rating for a top level pay level that is detrimental to our future development. The big scam was to pay the teachers so we could keep our school system at a high grade so that people would continue to move in and buy homes and invest in businesses. But what we are seeing is the opposite, businesses are concerned about the high taxation and who wants to invest in a home in Lakota for a “B” when they can go to Mason with the same dollars and get an “A?”

Of course, Julie and her liberals on the school board want to keep things as they are, they are for big union contracts and the same old teacher problems, like wasting time and money on entertaining transgender bathrooms. And when their treasurer says that they are operating at a budget surplus they don’t think that’s a sign for them to tighten up their budget and spend better. For them it only means they must seek a tax increase and that their energy goes into how to make voters pass it rather than doing their jobs of managing the budget they do have, drive away the expensive teachers and bring in the new. For the grade of a “B,” why not? I personally am happy that finally we have a candidate in James Hahn who thinks correctly about these matters. And if only we could get him elected, we may finally solve many of the problems at Lakota. Hopefully we can, before the politics of the matter get truly nasty. I’d rather talk about budgets and not about the stories of bad conduct that easily could be justified.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

An old picture, its much worse now.