Archive for the ‘Issue 2’ Category
I had the opportunity to listen to KrisAnne Hall speak recently about the implications of the recent signing of the NDAA law by President Obama which received bipartisan support—meaning most of the Federal government is guilty of a serious infringement of the U.S. Constitution.
KrisAnne was an attorney who was fired from her job for teaching Tea Party groups about the U.S. Constitution, which is apparently an unacceptable practice these days from the gate keepers of tyranny. The implication of such a firing is that the legal minds of our country are quite well aware of the scam they are perpetrating upon the American landscape, as many of their brethren run for elected office. The system is built by lawyers, exploited by politicians, and manipulated by would-be-tyrants intent to rule their own little sector of the world. But that is all known; especially to the crowd who turned out to listen to KrisAnne speak about the NDAA.
The NDAA is the most obvious power grab I have seen the Federal government attempt in my lifetime, and its implications are very far-reaching. To review, the NDAA gives the President of the United States complete power of interpretation over what constitutes a terrorist or a terrorist facilitator and allows for suspects to be detained indefinitely. And the most troubling aspect of the NDAA as if that weren’t bad enough is that the President can transfer a U.S. citizen outside of the United States to a foreign country, or military base where American courts have no jurisdiction. What this means is that if the President wants to, he or she could arrest any citizen in the United States under the NDAA Act and ship them to a Siberian prison, or even trade to North Korea to disappear forever from the face of the earth based exclusively on Presidential suspicions.
The intentions of course are short-sighted and focus on the current known terrorist network in the world. But like all laws, twenty years from now, some unknown president will use the NDAA Act to take complete control of the United States as a dictatorship, eliminating their political enemies at will without any checks and balance system of power. We’ve seen Presidential administrations do these kinds of things in the past even though it’s illegal and subversive to indulge in such activity. In fact, during the Clinton years many people associated with that administration that were known political enemies, or had become that way found themselves dead. There are many deaths of politicians that I can think of right off the top of my head, Sonny Bono is one of them, the Vince Foster “suicide” is another, that were deeply suspicious, and were in fact most likely political assassinations. It happens every day.
With the NDAA someone like President Obama now thinks he has the right to arrest his political enemies and get rid of them, which of course violates the entire concept of “checks and balances” we have in the United States, and it’s not at all paranoid to believe that such things are possible.
The trouble with the NDAA is that it’s just plain un-American. It is the kind of law we’d expect from a socialist country, or a heavy communist country, such as China, or Russia, but not in the United States. If there was any doubt that politicians in The United States are in bed with members of the United Nations to execute the implementation of Agenda 21 that doubt is gone, otherwise there would be no law in the United States that would allow the export of American citizens to a foreign country by the whim of a future President.
As predicated, only a handful of the American people are concerned about the NDAA Act, and those were the people showing up to hear KrisAnne Hall speak. The domestic enemies who wrote the NDAA Act could care less about this comparatively small group of people who are openly questioning what’s happening. They calculate that they should be easily be able to suppress such a small voice, as the rest of society has long forgotten about the law signed on New Years Eve just prior to 2012. Most of society is happy to take the word of the majority of politicians who voted in the tyrannical law completely trampling the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights, because the aim of many globalists are to eliminate The United States Constitution completely anyway.
But much to the dismay of those politicians who voted for the NDAA Act, and their deals they’ve made with global politics, there will not be a “consensus” on suppression. I know many people who will not go quietly into the night to be shipped off to Siberia, or a dirty Mexican prison south of the border just because a President doesn’t like us. So the NDAA Act and those who voted for it will be accountable when all hell breaks loose, because it will. Because they broke the law of The Constitution and they did it with malicious intent. They are wrong, and someone must pay for their insolence. And it won’t be targets of the NDAA Act. It will be those who authored the law in the first place, they are domestic enemies in the United States and must be treated as such.
This is what people are saying about my new book–Tail of the Dragon
(In the letter included below there is mention of the tears that have fallen by the cuts made to the Lakota school budget. The letter in context deals with the hypocrisy of this statement, because if reality were taken fully for the truth, it would be discovered that there is much to cry over. But the article from Saturday of which the letter writer referenced, I’ve included here for comparison. The attempt of the article was to paint a picture of a district that should vote for a tax increase to prevent these tears. It’s about time that we stop making decisions because people cry, and that we begin to actually think—just an observation. Crying costs a lot of money and doesn’t solve any problems. Now–onto the meat of this particular article.)
My daughter and I had a wonderful time reading the various Facebook comments from the ignorant specimens who were so quick to judge me following the salacious Enquirer article provoked by a swarm of angry Lakota residents who see me as their number one opposition to passing their next tax increase. The comments were funny because as she said, “you are anything but a sexist woman-hater. You raised me and I’m one of the most independent women I know.”
I told her that what those accusers were trying to paint me as would not stick once people dug into my life, which I have been very open about here on these pages at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom. I told her that I hoped to lure the radicals of our community to that bait because my character could withstand the accusations and that I hoped to show the hypocrisy and ignorance of their position so people could see that radicals jumped to the same type of elementary conclusions when promoting school levies or any other taxes. The comments were funny, and the way that people adhered onto a collective band wagon to believe something even when overwhelming proof otherwise is abundant for all to see, was quite astonishing and a wonderful experiment in political science.
What my accusers of hating women neglected to account for is that my view of women is much, much higher than what the feminist movement has given to women, and I live by that heightened state every single day. In fact, the women who know me, and there are many, knew instantly what garbage the things being said about me where which allowed me to show how the other side manipulates the facts to suit their version of reality.
My daughter has been present when I’ve had many fights with other people so she understood the context of my comments and how they were directed. But to say that I hate women is an absolute joke.
Where the breakdown begins is that feminists believe that unless you buy into their version of women and their social roles, then they say you hate them, so that they can control your behavior. Once they put you into a defensive position, they can control the argument. This is how they have as a group advanced many progressive topics, by using the collective nature of some women to appear as though they could massively shape worldwide perception.
Since I personally reject most aspects of progressive political platforms my views will drastically contrast with those who subscribe to those progressive theories and I will say that liberal feminists have it wrong and for me to endorse their views even though they are wrong would be dishonest to my personal observations, which I will not entertain. People who wish to advance progressive policy attempted to use on me the same strategy they’ve used on many to shut down an enemy to their ideas because I said things that they thought gave them the right to pass judgment on me to build a case that I hate women.
In my personal life I have so many instances that display how much I value women that I could write an entire book on just this topic, but for simplicity let me address one of my beliefs that will probably insult 99% of my readers here, but I will say it because this belief of mine is based on my observations of reality. I’ll say it because it is my belief system, and has been well-known in my family for years.
Typically there are bachelor parties for the groom before his wedding. This tradition eludes me as to its value and I’ve thought about it in great detail. When I had my own wedding 24 years ago the members of my wedding party watched a movie. And I’m not talking about a dirty movie where drinking was involved……we watched The Empire Strikes Back, because we all wanted to watch something we all enjoyed, and that was my bachelor party. To do the usual thing and go out on the town to a strip joint, or have members of my wedding party purchase a stripper for me would have been an insult to my bride. If I desired to do such things as be with another woman, or see another woman naked, then why should I get married, and why should some whore gain the ability to rob from my bride the gift of sex on our wedding night? Why should it be cheapened with a stripper who will take her cloths off for just money and for anybody?
When my brother was married he and his wedding party flew out to Vegas for one of those bachelor parties glorified in the film The Hangover. I did not go nor was I even invited, because the answer was known before the question was even asked. He knew what I thought about those types of activities so we avoided the discussion and just agreed to disagree. When my brother-in-law was married every man in my family went to a bachelor party involving the typical fair except me.
When I’ve had to marry off one of my daughters the bachelor party we had for him was at Target World and the women of the wedding party were invited also. We rented the place for the evening and shot up a storm with all the members of both families present. No strippers to insult the bride. Only guns and lots of ammunition fired off.
Last summer my nephew was married and he wanted me to be his best man, so that meant I was in charge of the bachelor party. Instead his brother handled the duties because they knew better than to ask me, because I feel so strongly about disgracing a man’s bride by indulging in a cheapened slut the night before a man’s wedding. I believe these things because the sanctity of the woman’s sexual offering on the night of the wedding should have epic meaning. The sex on a wedding night should not involve images of a painted up hussy on the mind of the male, but the gift of his bride and that’s all there is to it. The woman should be put on a pedestal and treated as though she were the most important woman in the world, and it’s the man’s job to do this, to make her feel this way.
Progressive feminism has robbed women of this experience, and has cheapened marriage to such an extent that nobody even tries anymore and this is a tragedy on our society and I don’t participate in those social activities because I see where it’s taking us.
This is just one example, but it’s a big one because it reflects my views across the entire spectrum. I will say that the feminists are wrong. Their focus is on the wrong aspects of their plight because the essence of their argument is false right out of the gate and our entire society has just adopted those failures without question. The feminist focuses on “the collective whole” and this is why they are an intellectual failure. And if their movement had legitimacy they would work together to help Arab women and the abuses they suffer, (CLICK HERE TO SEE MORE) but they don’t. Instead they are used by political machines to purchase bloc voting and nothing more.
The people who know me best are ashamed to tell me they flew out to Vegas with “The guys” for a wild night of “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.” They don’t tell me and I don’t ask, but I hear about them bragging about such experiences when they think I can’t hear.
I live by my own morality, not one created by Margret Sanger or some other feminist progressive. I think for myself and my opinions are sometimes very strong. But the people who know me best knew instantly how ridiculous the accusations made about me in that Cincinnati Enquirer article truly were. And those people were able to see how a group of progressive activists were able to shape a lie into something the masses wanted to believe so easily. This was valuable because the same tactics are used to paint anyone who doesn’t want to pay higher taxes to a school a “child hater.” The same strategy is used against a person who rejects progressive feminism which is why I worded my statements the way I did, to provoke those activist radicals so we could have names to place next to their actions.
My comments were artistically rendered and intentionally graphic on purpose. I didn’t say them on the radio, I didn’t send them in an email, I said them on my personal blog posting and given the things I have seen on the screen shots I collected about the people who most criticized me, I’d say my comments were a lot more tasteful, and respectful then what I received in return. I personally don’t have much respect for people who sell themselves cheaply even if the act is not sex and that’s my opinion that will not be shaped by some pathetic progressive thinker, whom I reject. My daughter knows this because she’s heard it from me for 22 years. And everyone who knows me understands as well.
After the Enquirer article some of my friends were so enraged that they felt they had to come to my defense. Some of them came to my defense here on these pages; some of them called me, or sent me personal emails. Some of them wrote articulate letters like the one below, which has special meaning because a year ago this person was one of those who might have believed what they heard about me and added to the pile of accusations. He certainly wasn’t a fan of Rich Hoffman a year ago–quite the opposite. He asked me to include his letter on my site which you can see below.
I have taken time to read the blogs and the enquirer article. Taking time to reflect is important because emotion just gets in the way of the objective facts. But what I have to say has nothing to do with the content of the above.
So, those of you who shared your feelings; do you really know Rich Hoffman. Have you seen him outside the blog, listened to his feelings, experienced his actions or witnessed his family values. I have so I believe I can pass judgment on the real Rich Hoffman.
I know your voices in some way are defending a person or persons. Or you are speaking for a certain group of individuals (Hint: they make decisions for us). My question is do you really know them, their agenda or what their motives are. You see I have experienced that side also, and put my trust in them. But what happened; I felt the impact of intimidation, silence or humiliation. I know which person cares about my family.
I tried to do everything the right way. I do not like being backed into a corner especially when it involves a friend. A friendship not born from a blog but from a time of need. Your actions did not just affect Rich but his family. I know that feeling all too well.
When you are ready to share, contact the man who was there and will always be there for us, Rich Hoffman.
As far as the two most important women in my life, my wife and daughter (remember them) just ask them about Rich. They will say without hesitation that he is welcome in our home anytime. Until next time: be well.
At no time in what I wrote did I say I hated women. I just made an observation and stated facts as I see them. A majority of the hate directed at me from that Enquirer article was all assumptions where the advocates offered their translation of my thoughts based on their deformed political opinions, framed for them by progressive politics. I feel comfortable saying such things because I have a personality that can withstand those types of misjudgments because in no aspect of my life is there a woman who can come forward and honestly proclaim that I’m a sexist or a woman-hater. So I was able to provoke from those school levy advocates their tendency to completely lie and manipulate the masses to serve their own selfish agenda.
So remember when a fool tells you that Rich Hoffman is a woman-hater, it’s most likely the same fool who will tell you that you are selfish for not paying more in tax, and that if they don’t obtain the right to rob you of more of your money, then the kids will suffer. The only thing that makes our kids suffer is having lying, manipulative, progressive radicals in charge of their lives. That in itself is a tragedy many people aren’t willing to deal with—yet. But they will. It was not me who said such bad things about the women of my community. My comments were directed at a select few who have attempted to smear my name with rhetoric for years now. It was those advocates, those who placed those falsehoods on their Facebook accounts and added the statements “woman hater” and many other terms using a progressive definition that is less than my personal standard. Because my opinion differs from theirs they felt entitled to attempt to ruin my name in behalf of their selfishness. That is why they are dangerous and should not be in control of any additional funds. It’s also why nothing they say can be believed because they have shown that they will go to great measure to out-right lie.
The lesson here is that no group or gender should allow themselves to be pulled into a political argument just because they believe they are assimilated all for one, and one for all. And they certainly shouldn’t be so quick to accept comments without verification, making them instruments of evil. And there are few evils in this world more severe than the thoughtless diatribes of a group who is too lazy to think for themselves and would rather destroy the life of another to preserve their existence of mediocrity.
To understand the truth it helps to view the world through Hoffman Lenses. To understand what those are CLICK THE LINK. If you can’t handle the truth, then don’t read here.
I certainly understand the tendency for parents to believe that they must send their children to public school in order to be a good parent. After all, our current culture has instructed us through those same government schools that going to a publicly run school is important to our lives. So I support my local public school grudgingly even though I believe that home schooling is far superior to public school. My kids went to public school. They attended Mason for the first half of the school lives, and then they graduated from Lakota. But for one year in between those transfers they were home schooled by my wife, and I think that was the most important year of their lives. It was hard at the time, and the choice was difficult. The decision to pull our kids out of school came from a battle over sex education in the fourth grade that we disagreed with. The school retaliated at our lack of “consensus.” My wife had been a room mom and helped the teachers three times a week and loved it. She dedicated enormous amounts of her time to not just my kids, but my kid’s classmates, which is how it is supposed to be.
But the school could not tolerate our family’s position against the sex education policies as they feared more parents might follow our rebellion, so they went after us in an aggressive way as a family, which was a really bad idea on their behalf. The school let my wife know that she was no longer welcome to be a room mom and my kids became targeted by bullies as soon as my wife was no longer in the building. That decision by the school led to unnecessary violence and a lot of hurt people climaxing in a fight between me and 22 teenage boys in front yard of our house.
The boys were encouraged by teachers in the school to pick on my kids and the police took the side of the teachers because of the union “brotherhood” which led to the massive fight. The boys made it so my kids could not ride their bikes on the sidewalk in front of our home, openly challenging us to a confrontation. And I was not going to allow my children to be bullied by a bunch of rough-looking 10th, 11th and 12th grade Mason students. It is now a family joke that when the movie Gran Torino came out a few years ago, it was that last role by Clint Eastwood that reminded them of life in our house during that time, because I was at war with the entire neighborhood. Instead of being an old man at the end of my life like Eastwood was in that film, I was a young thirty something that seemed oddly misplaced among others in my age group who preferred to just keep the window curtains pulled and do what the thugs told them to. Instead I dug down and was in constant confrontation everyone which can be most closely explained in the clips below, which is why this film is a personal family joke.
The fight was unexpected. The calculation was that like every other family we would stay inside our locked up house and hide from the scary teenage boys. They didn’t think I would go outside and confront the mob with my bullwhips and fight them squarely because many of them were under aged, only a few were over 18. But that’s what I did and it caused quite a ruckus that lasted for an entire year and involved the police force of Mason all the way up to the chief of police. But this whole mess started in our kid’s elementary school and I finally convinced my wife that the best way to teach our kids was to home school them, so we pulled them out of school, and that caused our entire family to turn on us. So not only did the community turn on us but our family did as well. In that year we learned that there wasn’t anyone we could trust but ourselves. And that was the year that my kids learned more than any other, and most notably shaped them into the adults they now are. During that trying time I heard every one of the points that Glenn Beck discussed here from his GBTV episode on home schooling. He is 100% right! My family has been there and done it and can testify completely to what he is saying.
Now in hindsight, with my kids both grown and living their lives I can say honestly that I wish we had done home schooling for more than a year. Both of my kids finished their high schools with online courses and nearly two years early, because they wanted to travel and see the world, which is what they did. When their peers in school were graduating high school and getting their diplomas my kids were touring the London Museum of History and taking pictures of Big Ben. They followed the path of their mother who also left school early after her credits were finished. By the time my wife’s graduating class was putting on their robes to graduate she was married to me and we were on a cross-country trip traveling anywhere fast at over 100 MPH. Out of my core family I’m the only one who actually walked the stage in a robe with my friend Hickory who I’ve stated here sold his Honors Society Robe to a fellow student for a hundred bucks. CLICK HERE to review. My wife and I have lived very full lives and the whole graduation experience seems petty and stupid to us compared to other things we’ve done, and we would have done our kids a better service if we had home schooled them earlier and for more years.
I always viewed public education as education propaganda. It started for me in kindergarten. My teacher was an idiot and I remember thinking that at the time. My mom was always very active in my life and she like my wife was a room mom who took care of not just me, but my class mates. I remember watching lots of movies with my mom and know for a fact that I learned more from watching movies and documentaries with her and spending time around my grandparents than anything I learned in school.
Public school always felt like a waste of time. I spent most of my time getting into trouble with the teachers, getting into fights with other students, or drawing on my papers and writing stories. The art teachers and English teachers tried to capture my talent and steer me and I shut them all out. If I had listened to those teachers it’s quite likely I would be working for a newspaper somewhere as a reporter making a fraction of what I make now, and I wouldn’t be about to release my second novel. That’s not a knock against my reporter friends who read here every day, but they know it’s the truth. Advice is only as good as the person who gives it, and I wanted no advice from a teacher who worked for public education because I saw no value in their job. I felt that way as a child and I feel more strongly than ever as an adult. To me teachers were mind numb soldiers for something I wanted nothing to do with. I did not want them to impose on me the limits of their thinking.
When my kids were 5 and it came time for enrollment my mother was especially concerned when she heard my wife and me arguing about getting my oldest daughter ready for school. My wife enjoyed school until she met me, and saw nothing wrong with it. For her it was a bench mark, a natural progression to adulthood. For me it was like sending my kids to a death camp of propaganda. There was never a question that I was always radically independent compared to others around me, so I bent on my position because my entire family thought I was the one who was wrong. Of course as it turned out, I was the only one who was right. But you live and learn.
I told my daughter before she got on the school bus for the first time not to worry, that I’d deprogram her when she got home. Of course at age 5 my wife thought my daughter wouldn’t remember me saying that but at age 22 she still does, and luckily she listened to what I said. Now after all those years of raising our kids and seeing all the problems up close I was excessively right at age 25 about the intention of public education. The goal is not to make the best and brightest. It is to make kids average. Home schooled kids do better even with parents teaching them because those parents care about making their kids exceptional, and setting the bar high makes the children respond accordingly. That’s what’s missing in public education, it’s the expectation level.
Home schooling as an option is good because it brings competitive forces to public education and forces them to adjust their costs. Teachers are not worth 50K to 60K per year when they produce such complacent results next to the home schooled child taught by a parent with maybe only a high school education or college at best. Having home schooling as an option helps break up the monopoly of public education which is the intention of the government-run schools, it always has been. I knew it when I was a kid, even if I didn’t know why. I knew it when I was raising my own kids. And I know it now. My kids have had much improved lives because most of their socializing occurred outside of public education. They have done more in their first 25 years than most of their classmates will do in their first 50 and that’s a real shame. Social limits in life are started in public education. The chains are placed upon a child’s mind in government-run schools and I am even surer of it now than I was when I was younger. When I was a young man, I only had a feeling about it. Now I have facts.
There hasn’t been one day that my wife has woke up and wished she went to her graduation ceremony. She doesn’t ever feel like she missed something, because the activities we were doing were much larger in scope of experience. But many of the family that ridiculed us for home schooling our kids used those experiences in public education as bench marks of social development, getting a class ring, a jacket, and a cap and gown. It turned out that those family members were still stuck in some perpetual 15-year-old mentality and even at age 40 and 50 years old looked fondly back to their high school days with yearning. And I think that’s pathetic.
I outgrew public education within two weeks of starting kindergarten. My wife outgrew it at age 17. My kids did by second grade. The rest of the way they learned most of their information from me and their mom at home. They whizzed through school and were routinely on the honor role every single year, because it was easy for them, because I set the bar high at home. Public education is simply a bad product. It’s a failed social experiment and needs complete reform. It certainly doesn’t need additional funding. It needs less, and it needs competition to keep it honest, and all the unions should be made illegal. Unions have no place in public education.
So use public education if you want. Have your kids play the sports and socialize with the other kids. But in my opinion if you rely on public education to teach your kids exclusively, you are a lazy parent and a fool. You are surrendering your child’s life to an institution that will mentally confine the thoughts of your child to a life of social slavery and mundane misery. If you really want your child to learn and to be a good person, then you’ll home school them and you’ll do it as soon as humanly possible. In my eyes, it’s your obligation as a parent. And those who don’t at least try it I have no respect for.
Check out Rich Hoffman’s favorite website, (besides this one):