Overmanwarrior's Wisdom

Official Site of Rich Hoffman. Connecting the dots in a complicated world.

Posts Tagged ‘Atlas Shrugged

The 2014 Annie Oakley Western Showcase: Bringing Lash LaRue off the silver screen into reality

leave a comment »

As usual it was a marvelous weekend at our annual Annie Oakley event.  What started as a large group that originally met at Las Vegas each year is now just a handful of whip crackers, knife throwers, trick ropers and magicians intent to put a smile on the faces of young people and wow the adults who graced the grounds of the 2014 Annie Oakley Festival in Darke County.  The venue this year was moved from the usual fairgrounds in town to a more remote location just to the north.  It felt a long way out and even deeper into “God’s Country” but a very large crowd turned out and what they found there were shooting contests, fast draw contests from the Single Action Shooting Society, theater drama, and the 12th Annual Annie Oakley Western Arts Showcase accompanied by the many venders selling goods.  Most of the venders very unique with little booths set-up mingling among the trees of York Woods.  For over ten years now some of the best whip crackers in the country have gathered to meet with their own kind at the event and as usual it was a marvelous enterprise.

I said many times during the day which was absolutely perfect for July weather with mild temperatures and occasional rain bursts erupting just to the north and south painting a menacing sky at times across the vast plains of farmland extending out into Indiana—that my love of this event was yearly maintenance; it restored my faith in humanity.  The people who attend are some of the few people left in the entire world who do these kinds of things which used to be common place during Annie Oakley’s time.  A few are in long-term marriages which are inspiring, and most have spouses that they bring with them where they enjoy each other in a healthy way and it is just good to associate with people of that character.  I’ve said it before, but it is applicable, the people in our group are nearly identical to the characters shown in the Clint Eastwood film Bronco Billy—which is a favorite of mine.  They are a small group of people who are all that is keeping a way of life in America alive for the next generation.

There are many in the world who might say good riddance to classic American arts—particularly those residing around large metropolitan areas—which is why attending each year restores my faith in humanity.  It is so refreshing to spend time around genuine people who truly love something rooted in classic Americana.  But to lose these values, the whip cracking, the gun spinning, roping, and knife throwing—with vaudeville type shows conducted from corn fields in the middle of nowhere—U.S.A would be treacherous.  The heart of what it means to be an American is in those shows, I have now known the ring master of the Annie Oakley event—Gery Deer for over ten years and each year he finds new ways to change-up the show to always keep it interesting.  At first there were concerns over moving the Annie Oakley Festival to the outskirts of Greenville—but quickly those worries proved pointless.  Large crowds attended and the celebration was nothing short of inspiring.

It took me a while to get warmed up but by the time we got to the Speed Switch contest which allows bullwhip artists to strike at ten targets as fast as they could–first with one hand then with the other on the way back up the target row, I had hit my stride.  This year it was obvious that everyone was a bit smoother and had been practicing.  The times were faster generally for everyone which made for an exciting show for the people watching from the bleachers.  I had my fastest time ever on the Speed Switch—just a bit over 11 seconds which is fast for even the Speed and Accuracy contest so well-known to seasoned veterans.  I enjoyed the location, the vast open spaces all around the touring bus of the Brother’s and Company set up as a backdrop for the stage as a generator provided all the power needed for the show.  The crowd sat in the beginnings of the York Woods where shade gave them shelter from the sun which peaked out often around menacing storm clouds.  If anything pushed my speed a bit it was a combination of those elements.

Many of the same people who came last year came this time around again traveling from far away destinations to arrive.  Some couldn’t make it, but the beauty of the event is that each year there are opportunities to do it again and recharge their batteries from a punishing year.  It is punishing to stand behind these classic American art forms when the current trend is to run away.  Often the skeptics will stand on the outskirts of the roped off area and watch with curiosity as most of their thoughts were created by pop culture—but after a few moments, they can’t help but smile at the cheesy jokes and purity of the type of Western Showcase that Gery routinely puts on.  There is a playful innocence in it that is unmistakable and it doesn’t take long to reach into the inner child of the typical viewer to touch that part of themselves which has long ago been ignored—and suppressed.

I saw some of that at the end of the day when my wife and I went to the restaurant we normally gather at in Greenville to make reservations for the back half of the dining room.  The rest of our group was on the tour bus coming down from the York Woods location so we wanted to have everything set up for when they arrived.   As the manager arranged tables I saw some of that modern cynicism in the bar where my wife and I waited.  A corner contained a group of young twenty-somethings watching a baseball game and as I stood silhouetted in the doorway between the bar and dining room a young kid with his date looked my way and started texting his friends sitting next to him murmuring—it’s “Crocodile Dundee.”  I stared at the kid just to make him feel uncomfortable and to let him know that I could hear him, which he hadn’t expected.  He wanted anonymity from the security of his reality among his friends so I made a point to not give it to him.  This isn’t the first time this has happened and it won’t be the last.  On more than one occasion in that same bar we’ve encountered worse but quickly converted them over into fans.  One year Chris Camp took a skeptical woman outside and made her into a whip target stand in the parking lot in front of her husband cracking straws from her outstretched hands.  Moments before she had been similar to the kids in the corner, but after about five minutes was gushing all over herself at the coolness of having a weapon break the sound barrier right next to her face.  The only references modern people have toward such things outside of the type of events that Gery puts on, is music, movies, and television which has turned dramatically against the American Western, or any form of rugged individualism.

The clash of cultures is one where the values of two groups of people crash in places like that bar.  At the Annie Oakley Festival the context is already presented.  It is not unusual for members of the Western Arts Showcase to roam around the event in costume.  I typically wear my whips with me, and nobody bats an eye—they expect it because of the context of the show.  When our members used to attend the Fairlawn restaurant in years prior the strip of road separating it from the Darke County Fairgrounds was filled with people attending the festival.   This year there was no late night activity in town, because the Annie Oakley event had moved far to the north—so the Fairlawn was filled with regular people living their regular lives watching baseball games and trying to show how well they fit into the modern world of the big nearby cities like Dayton, Columbus and Cincinnati to the south.  So for the kids in the bar they had no idea there was an Annie Oakley event in town as it had moved.  The boy who made the Crocodile Dundee comment likely hoped that his girl friend would be impressed by his remark and the laughs and giggles among his friends would earn him an honor of some kind, to prove that he was just as much of a douche bag as the next guy.  What kids like that don’t know, because it’s not part of their experience, is that the heroes of old, which the Ohio Western Arts group is dedicated to preserving are people like Lash LaRue, Douglas Fairbanks, and of course Annie Oakley—people they have no experience with.  If they did, they’d have a much more fulfilled life—their marriages would last longer, their lives would be richer, and they’d be generally happy people.  Some of the members of our group travel in trucks and vans that are twenty years old filled with stage props.  Often they sleep in a cramped back seat traveling from gig to gig in a hope that their sheer charisma might improve the lives of just one person with the kind of hopes and dreams born from the mind of America.  Most of the time they get paid decently, but are drained from the experience only to dust off the feeling and do it again weekend after weekend year after year.

I have never seen a young girl who didn’t melt away into butter when a confident whip handler removed a target from her lips.  If the kid wanted to impress his date—and I wanted to tell him this—the best thing he could do for himself is to learn the skills our group brought to the Annie Oakley Festival.  As our group arrived and filled the back of the room, the kid stood in the doorway wondering who all those people were sitting with that same guy in the Australian style outback hat.  His perplexed look was one of realizing that there was a group of people in the world functioning around him who were different from the patterns he had learned—that certain music was popular, certain modes of dress acceptable, and that there were people out there who considered non-conformity to be far superior to social conformity.  It is that trait that the Annual Annie Oakley Festival in Darke County, Ohio appeals to best, and the primary reason that so many make the yearly pilgrimage.

I certainly have a lot of experience with such things measuring public temperament.  Unlike the other attendees I have chosen a more controversial roll using my desire to preserve the Western Arts in a way that I think the real Lash LaRue would have done in his day—I have made it part of my political discourse.    I have fought higher taxes and known political corruption using the skills nurtured along over the years with the bullwhip to have the same effect the young guy in the bar experienced.  When it comes to traditional American art, I feel that the best ground to defend it is outside of the shows where viewers can watch comfortably from behind a roped off area.  I take great pleasure in bringing the show to the safety of the herd because it is there that they need to see it most.

At the end of the night there were jokes about how out-of-fashion we were as a group and pride was taken in being so out of style.  I remarked that all we needed to do was wait another 50 years and there will be hordes of people desiring deeply the traditional American arts displayed yearly at the Annie Oakley Festival—it will at that time become fashionable again.  But right now, especially with the failure of the Lone Ranger at the box office last year, nobody in movies or television is going to produce a film like Zorro or Lash LaRue in the jaded culture we have now.  But for those who still desire such things, the way we do who perform them, the yearly event of Annie Oakley is a real treat.  It recharges my batteries with meaning after a year of typical cynicism in a way nothing else does.  I typically wear my hat year round everywhere from Michigan to Florida and in every possible venue from wealthy to poor—so it is routine to get the kind of reaction I received from the kid in the bar.  But what is unique is that a horde of people dressed similarly who share my values don’t often come walking in behind me.  And while I might want to take Lash LaRue off the silver screen and plop him down into America in 2014 with my real life antics, it is the one and only time a year that I get more from everyone else than I typically give leaving me feeling uncharacteristically fulfilled.  In that regard, I hope that Gery gets the circus tent next year that he’s talking about—because that would be absolutely grand and a good next step to the new venue at York Woods marking of the start of a second decade in a long march toward eternity.

Rich Hoffman   www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com 

About these ads

Occasionally, some of your visitors may see an advertisement here.

The Nature of Productivity: Lessons learned from the 20th Century Motor Company

leave a comment »

The following three videos should be listened to completely—for they contain the secrets to manufacturing success within them.  To understand the effects of positive GDP forecasts, or the growth of a manufacturing sector in a country—the following clips read from the pages of Atlas Shrugged contain the hidden knowledge that is required to comprehend the cause and reasons for any kind of productive growth or decline.  In the fictional 20th Century Motor Company as described in the classic 50+ year novel—an entire company is driven to ruin for some mysterious reason.  That reason would later be confirmed cryptically by the entire  real-life city of Detroit, General Motors, and hundreds of thousands of smaller companies who like the factory in the novel that were once thriving places of industry but soon found their doors closed and overtaken by plant life from abandonment, followed the same path.  The philosophy of productivity for good or bad is contained within these three videos.  Once understood all the books written about modern finance, management, or lean manufacturing techniques will become obsolete as the truth contained is undeniable.  No matter what one’s opinion of Ayn Rand might be—whether or not they agree or disagree with her politics of small government, pure capitalism, and  value based society represented by money—her understanding of economics and business in general is among the greatest minds over the last three hundred years.  Let me explain why.

As a young man I saw on a much smaller scale the same type of things talked about in the 20th Century Motor Company as narrated by a former employee in the presented videos.  One place that I worked at nearly right out of high school while attending college night school was a metal stamping factory full of tough guys born and raised nearly exclusively in unionized households where their parents worked for General Motors or large local paper companies which had gone out of business.  They had deep in their internal workings the same beliefs as the narrator describing the 20th Century Motors situation and I immediately came into direct conflict with them.  Lucky for me, my background included hard-working parents, two sets of grandparents who owned professional farms and my first work experiences where around members of the Chicago Chinese mob.  So I had the opportunity from a very young age without reading Atlas Shrugged to learn about what values money represented about people and learned about the nature of good and evil as related.  My job at the stamping factory was a clash of two worlds, one where a majority of the people thought just like the narrator in the Atlas Shrugged excerpts, and I.  At this factory there was a piece per hour rate that was established by management of 400 parts on average.  The presses had lines of workers who each operated a part of the process in making compressor housings for air conditioners, the first press would press out a rough shape from a sheet of metal, the second would trim the excess away, the third usually involved several workers who had to do a number of punch operations to make connection holes.  Each had a unique challenge to physical labor that had to be done quickly to even think of getting close to 400 parts per hour.

I learned without much time expiring to do well over that 400 part per hour rate and soon found that management put me on the lead at the start of the line to set the pace for everyone else.  Employees downstream on the line when they realized I was pushing to do more than 400 per hour would slow down and let the parts build up on the conveyors leading to their presses.  But having parts backed up would often stress them out forcing them to do more than they wanted anyway so productivity increased and the management was happy.  This of course led to many conflicts and parking lot fights.  However, with my background–some rough characters from my youthful enterprises, and my natural hobby with bullwhips as my primary exercise item, I never had to worry about handling myself against rough-neck employees and their labor union backgrounds.  Through conflict I earned their respect and even though they resented being pushed, came to like me well enough to not resist my wishes.

I never bought into the line of thought that believed workers should only produce 400 parts per hour if they could do more because it seemed wrong to regulate productive enterprise.  I learned quickly that no matter how hard I worked, a majority of the workers would gladly ride my coat tails without putting forth any effort, and if I wanted to produce excess—which to me felt natural, I had to learn to fix the line myself when maintenance issues arose, or other problems presented themselves.  Often I felt that I carried the manufacturing capacity of the place on my back alone by pushing the culture toward productivity. Eventually I would leave that job and they immediately went through a period of struggle.  The next company I went to had very similar manufacturing challenges but instead of metal, it was injection plastic.  Again, it was the same story, a part per hour rate, my desire to exceed it, and a company full of employees who wanted to fight me over it to protect their “rights” against “management.”  In this place I talked the management into letting me work double shifts every day of the week—(16) hours a day, and on the weekends I’d back off only working (8) hour days.  I worked (7) days a week averaging around 96 hours of work per week.  Many in management thought I would keel over but they wanted my efforts which essentially was outpacing around (7) of their hourly workers and I was doing it on 2nd and 3rd shifts which were hard to staff.  This was a big place and my average output alone outpaced much of the totals from their entire first shift because of the amount of time I spent in their building working.

I knew people were mooching off me both in my private life and professional by the droves and my response was to see how much I could carry.  I performed like that for nearly 2 years straight then left there to work at Cincinnati Milacron.  There I ran into extreme levels of the kind of behavior talked about in the 20th Century Motor Company.  There, I was doing a very individually based job which prevented my direct impact on the productive culture.  The jobs perished as a result—not just mine, but everyone’s.  The site where I used to work is now a shopping center.  The large campus of manufacturing at “The Mill” is now gone, and my job with it.  My next place of business to work was a unionized shop doing manufacture for Amazon.com distribution centers.  There I had many conflicts with the employees some of which have been discussed in detail, but I routinely produced 150% efficiencies over the manufacturing rate per day, as opposed to the normal rate of 40% to 60% that the union employees fresh off a strike were producing.  That company like Milacron soon was sold off from a company that was drowning in losses—so I lost that job too along with many others employed there.  The way that the employees were throttling the piece rate was that many of the manufactured units had a 4 to 5 hour time, and most of the union workers would milk out that time to produce one unit per day on an eight-hour shift.  I was routinely producing two which pushed my rate well over 100% on average.  In that shop a forklift had to bring supplies to build with, so I learned that when I was out of material not to trust the forklift operator sitting on his unionized butt to help me achieve my goals, I would grab a forklift on my own and get my own stuff.  Of course this enraged people—but I did it anyway the entire time I worked there.

The long story made short is that there is excessive truth contained in the video clips presented.  The evil talked about is an evil that I have fought without really knowing the definition for years.  I only knew at the time that I wanted to fight that evil, I didn’t understand why until much later.  When I had figured it out, I then read Atlas Shrugged to have that confirmation thought, but that has been within the last decade.  I figured out what made the 20 Century Motor Company fail by experience instead of being told by a book.  I am proud to look back on my life now never yielding to the pressures of the masses to restrict my outputs and thus prevented becoming myself a contributor to that evil described.  I never produced at such levels to get a pat on the back from management, or even to make more money—even though those things did come to me, I did them because there was something inherently right about it.  The culture I grew up with aside from my family, the mob, and the money laundering from a job I had before the metal stamping place (not conducted by me, but discovered), had signed up for the same evil that destroyed the fictional 20th Century Motor Company.  I luckily had learned the value of money from people who naturally possessed great value, and even learned a lot from a criminal class who clearly understood the benefits of capitalism.  Their crimes were against politics, not the morality of money—and this is something I learned very early in my life which was a real gift.  By the time my wife begged me to take up honest hard-working jobs that were clean of criminals, hit men, and money laundering, I had already met the worst that any factory thug could present, and I knew how to deal with them.  In this way I was never beaten down for doing too much, and never stopped from being productive.  And I was able to confirm the validity of Ayn Rand’s work through more than theory.  I saw it firsthand.  The difference between myself and Ayn Rand is that she developed her philosophy around removing her input through a strike—her John Galt quit the world and took the productive with him.  I on the other hand felt the challenge to carry everything on my back the way Hank Reardon did, but without ever breaking.  My life would have been easier if I had done things the way Ayn Rand suggested, but I chose to fight it instead, and I’m glad to this day that I did.  But whatever the position, she was right and the narrator who is speaking her words is spot on.  The thing that is killing our world of productivity is the evil described in these videos.  It is not a fiction; the evil is as real as the sun, stars and moon and cannot be trivialized no matter how much a collective mass of people wishes. Productivity is good when boundaries are pushed beyond their expectations because it is there that creativity resides.  And it is specifically in creativity that production springs forth.  If creativity is embraced, a company flourishes.  If it is stifled even in small ways, the way of the 20th Century Motor Company will spring forth and slowly destroy everything that the company stood for.  Profit isn’t evil; it is the natural by-product of excess achieved through effort, creativity, and honor.  I didn’t work those two years of straight 96 hour work weeks to arrive at any other conclusion—and I didn’t do it for the graces of management.  I did it because it was the right thing to do at the right time because the creativity which put the product before me to make needed that effort to deliver it to a market in need.  And because it was delivered, the owners were paid, and in turn I was rewarded for my efforts—and that is how it is supposed to be.

Rich Hoffman




“The Serpent Mound Disturbance”: A giant hole opens in Siberia–again

leave a comment »

For those living near Cincinnati, Ohio they would likely know of the strange archaeological remains of Serpent Mound off to the east—a mound built by an ancient people several thousand years ago clearly displaying a serpent design visible to the air which has astronomical calculations built into certain points of the large site. The people who built it went to incredible trouble for reasons that are even more mysterious. Thickening the plot the site sits on a significant portion of a crypto explosion which took place over 300 million years ago. There was no way that the ancient people could have at the time known of the explosion as erosion had removed most of the sight references visible without advanced scientific equipment.   Yet out of all the locations that Serpent Mound could have been built—it was on the edge of this gigantic 4 mile wide crater that looks to have come from inside the earth as opposed to a traditional meteor impact from space. The reason this is significant is that modern scientists are mystified–a helicopter spotted a large mysterious hole in Siberia Tuesday July 15th, 2014—and it has left scientists largely perplexed thus far. The first explanation rationed was that gas from deep in the earth exploded due to the mystical global warming phenomena perpetuated by paper-thin intellectuals—a falsehood designed to disguise their ignorance.

The massive hole, about 260 feet wide, is located in the Yamal peninsula and can easily fit several helicopters inside the entrance, according to the U.K.’s Independent. It is believed to be about two years old, RT.com reported.

The area’s name, Yamal, translates to “end of the world” and is home to some of Russia’s largest gas reserves.


Yet this wasn’t the first such hole to appear in Siberia.

On June 30,1908, a giant fireball exploded in Siberia’s remote Tunguska region, leveling trees for more than 20 miles around and causing atmospheric shock waves that were detected round the world. At the time, scientists thought that a giant meteorite had crashed into the earth. Later, when they failed to find a major crater or clearly identifiable meteorite fragments at the site, they began to question their earlier theory.

Many scientists have since attributed the phenomenon to a comet head that exploded in the air before hitting the earth. Others suggest that a stray clump of antimatter from elsewhere in the universe was the cause through some dimensional portal—a fold of space and time which is concealing the evidence.


971521_574480222593899_774166430_nBack at Serpent Mound just outside of Cincinnati, hardly a location at the “end of the world” the same type of thing occurred long ago. The valley beneath the effigy is really the western rim of a mysterious, four-mile-wide, circular crater – the eroded remains of a huge, catastrophic event geologists call “The Serpent Mound Disturbance.” About 300 million years ago, either an asteroid collision or an underground explosion blew apart more than seven cubic miles of rock. The central area was uplifted more than 1000 feet, while an outer rim dropped more than 400 feet.

What we see today results from eons of erosion, although the shattered fragments of the “Central Uplift” remain among the hills above Serpent Mound. The distant ridge tops, visible from the overlooks, stand high today because they are the much harder Ordovician bedrock that was offset by the event.

The strange geology of this spot was first noticed in modern times by Dr. John Locke of Cincinnati, who named it “Sunken Mountain” in 1838. Yet, it’s not hard to imagine that the ancient effigy builders could have recognized the unusual land forms. The serpent looks out from the edge of the Central Uplift zone.


This little recent hole in Siberia is much smaller than the four mile wide one that occurred at Serpent Mound but one thing is for sure about the Serpent Mound crater—it wasn’t caused by global warming and much stronger forces were at work.   At this time the two craters may have been caused by entirely different forces but what is clear is that even with all of our modern equipment and satellite analysis the hole in Siberia wasn’t even noticed for two years.   This confirms that there is very little that modern science really knows about anything as our study into nature is still infantile. The cause and effects of forces known and yet to be discovered are not complete, so static conclusions are impossible at this time.

But what is most mysterious of all is that a so-called primitive people knew enough about the geology of the Ohio area which had filled back in after hundreds of millions of years of erosion to build a tribute to it as if they knew that their monument in the shape of a serpent might appease the forces that created the impact.

Many societies could have risen and fallen over several hundred million years and not all of them may have been terrestrial. Yet by some word of mouth or written documentation which is no longer seen, the ancient people who constructed Serpent Mound likely knew about the strange ancient events that took place on that site. And in our modern times similar holes are opening up right under our feet and we have no explanation for them but to blame the occurrences on our own development and science. That only goes to prove how feeble our modern grasp on reality truly is. The mysteries of the earth are alive and well, and mankind looks upon them with fear of the unknown for which they lack the courage to probe with honesty to an origin that does not reside on this planet—but out into the Milky Way toward one of NASA’s recent proclamations—that within 25 years life will be discovered afar and the answers to some of these mysteries will then become known—and we may not like the answer as it will disturb our religions, mythologies and basic concept of existence.   If history is to be followed when matched up against a superior intellect and culture—it is likely that we might want to build a monument to appease them in the same way that a weak-willed politician licks the boots of those they perceive to be their superiors. In that future time the real answer to the mysterious crypto explosions on earth will then be provided by documents that left long ago only to return by the minds responsible.

The term cryptoexplosion structure (or cryptovolcanic structure) means an explosion of unknown cause. The term is now largely obsolete. It was once commonly used to describe sites where there was geological evidence of a large-scale explosion within the Earth’s crust, but no definitive evidence for the cause such as normal volcanic rocks. These sites are usually circular with signs of anomalous rock deformation contrasting with the surrounding region, and often showing evidence that crustal material had been uplifted and/or blown outwards. The assumption was that some unusual form of volcanism, or a gas explosion originating within the crust, was the cause. The use of the term went away with the rise of the science of impact crater recognition in the late 20th Century. Most structures described as cryptoexplosions turned out to be eroded impact craters, caused by the impact of meteorites. Today geologists discount former cryptoexplosion theories.[1]


Yet, geologists have yet to explain what caused “The Serpent Mound Disturbance” and have relegated their investigation to the back of their desk drawers and left investigations to theorists who must resurrect the term, “cryptoexplosion” once again to properly term the classification.  And such explosions are not regulated to the distant past, but still occur right under the nose of science who believed that just because they stopped using a term, that the need would cease to call attention to itself.  By the evidence of the new hole that has opened in Russia–“cryptoexplosion” would appear to be much more appropriate as a term than “global warming.”


Rich Hoffman


Declaration of Independance: Poor minds not qualified to care for such a wonderful document

with one comment

I do not believe that there is a single lawyer, politician or lobbyist who could write the Declaration of Independence today in 2014. When modern progressives, socialists, and domestic terrorists declare that they believe the founding documents of America are “living documents” they are wrong—because the quality of the minds that could contribute in the ways they propose would only diminish the meaning. It is possible that John Adams, Ben Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson were among the greatest collected minds in human history when they gathered to write the Declaration. They were as proficient philosophically as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle only all existing at the same time and without the murder of one by a society protecting itself from their intellectual advancement. When those three gathered and Jefferson wrote the founding document, a new era of philosophic endeavor had begun in the wake of war. A unique window had opened and the three of them stepped in bringing the rest of the new country with them. The results were the Declaration of Independence that was presented and edited by the Continental Congress in the following days leading up to July 4th 1776.

Congress ordered that the draft “lie on the table“.[66] For two days Congress methodically edited Jefferson’s primary document, shortening it by a fourth, removing unnecessary wording, and improving sentence structure.[67] Congress removed Jefferson’s assertion that Britain had forced slavery on the colonies, in order to moderate the document and appease persons in Britain who supported the Revolution. Although Jefferson wrote that Congress had “mangled” his draft version, the Declaration that was finally produced, according to his biographer John Ferling, was “the majestic document that inspired both contemporaries and posterity.”[67]

On Monday, July 1, having tabled the draft of the declaration, Congress resolved itself into a committee of the whole, with Benjamin Harrison of Virginia presiding, and resumed debate on Lee’s resolution of independence.[68] John Dickinson made one last effort to delay the decision, arguing that Congress should not declare independence without first securing a foreign alliance and finalizing the Articles of Confederation.[69] John Adams gave a speech in reply to Dickinson, restating the case for an immediate declaration.

After a long day of speeches, a vote was taken. As always, each colony cast a single vote; the delegation for each colony—numbering two to seven members—voted amongst themselves to determine the colony’s vote. Pennsylvania and South Carolina voted against declaring independence. The New York delegation, lacking permission to vote for independence, abstained. Delaware cast no vote because the delegation was split between Thomas McKean (who voted yes) and George Read (who voted no). The remaining nine delegations voted in favor of independence, which meant that the resolution had been approved by the committee of the whole. The next step was for the resolution to be voted upon by the Congress itself. Edward Rutledge of South Carolina, who was opposed to Lee’s resolution but desirous of unanimity, moved that the vote be postponed until the following day.[70]

Here is the text as it appeared after those edits:

Introduction Asserts as a matter of Natural Law the ability of a people to assume political independence; acknowledges that the grounds for such independence must be reasonable, and therefore explicable, and ought to be explained. In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America,When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Preamble Outlines a general philosophy of government that justifies revolution when government harms natural rights.[77] We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Indictment A bill of particulars documenting the king’s “repeated injuries and usurpations” of the Americans’ rights and liberties.[77] Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness of his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these states

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.Denunciation This section essentially finished the case for independence. The conditions that justified revolution have been shown.[77]Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.Conclusion The signers assert that there exist conditions under which people must change their government, that the British have produced such conditions, and by necessity the colonies must throw off political ties with the British Crown and become independent states. The conclusion contains, at its core, the Lee Resolution that had been passed on July 2.We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.Signatures The first and most famous signature on the engrossed copy was that of John Hancock, President of the Continental Congress. Two future presidents, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, and a father and great-grandfather of two other presidents, Benjamin Harrison, were among the signatories. Edward Rutledge (age 26), was the youngest signer, and Benjamin Franklin (age 70) was the oldest signer. The fifty-six signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows (from north to south):[78]



It is unlikely that there is a single mind in all of Washington D.C. who could write those sentences presently let alone put them into a contextual sentence.   Clearly those same minds are not capable of participating in a “living document” which evolves over time to accommodate changing circumstances. This is the actual sad part of our history is that the intention was that each generation would produce men and women like Adams, Franklin, and Jefferson, but this has not been the case. Instead, American society has regressed into the worship of stupidity and patted themselves on the back for passing gas in the form of a “fart.”

It would be my wish that I could associate with people like these Founding Fathers, instead of the weakened people of the modern age—people unable to understand the above document let alone produce another one of equal value. What is to be respected from this period in America is that intelligence was honored and valor was a part of daily existence and it is these traits that carried America to become the greatest country on earth. It was not the “come lately” types who spent years of their academic lives getting drunk, pursuing sex, and passing gas yet expecting to build their minds into understanding the need for the Declaration of Independence. Worse yet, to even entertain the belief that they were equal to men like the authors.

The sad state of our modern times is that intelligence is attacked and stupidity is worshipped, and it is for this reason alone that no modern man should even conceive of changing a single word of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution—because they simply are not qualified—intellectually. No modern Supreme Court Justice, no lawyer—anywhere, and no current resident of the White House are able to meet the task of intellectual aptitude required to care for the founding documents let alone amend them. They are only capable of winning elections and moving money from one pocket to another—but they are not stewards of America equal to the founders—and authors of The Declaration of Independence.

Rich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com 

Producers and the Second-handers: Why people prefer electric shock over thinking

with 2 comments

(Reuters) – So you say all you want to do is to take a few minutes to sit down and think without anyone or anything bugging you? Maybe that is true. But you might be in the minority.

A U.S. study published on Thursday showed that most volunteers who were asked to spend no more than 15 minutes alone in a room doing nothing but sitting and thinking found the task onerous.

“Many people find it difficult to use their own minds to entertain themselves, at least when asked to do it on the spot,” said University of Virginia psychology professor Timothy Wilson, who led the study appearing in the journal Science. “In this modern age, with all the gadgets we have, people seem to fill up every moment with some external activity.”

In some experiments, college volunteers were asked to sit alone in a bare laboratory room and spend six to 15 minutes doing nothing but thinking or daydreaming. They were not allowed to have a cellphone, music player, reading material or writing implements and were asked to remain in their seats and stay awake. Most reported they did not enjoy the task and found it hard to concentrate.


That information may seem extraordinary, but it’s really not—rather it is consistent with general human behavior and is caused by two basic roles that individuals evolve into as they mature into adulthood. People will become either a producer type personality—who makes things from self-initiative and are quite rare in the world or they will become a second-hander, a person who essentially lives through others. An example of second-hander behavior would be the type of person who dates a beautiful woman because of the prestige of being seen with her might provide. An example of a producer would be a person who dates a beautiful woman because they personally enjoy her. The same could of course be applied from women to men, cars, clothing, homes, food—just about every category of human endeavor. The typical “gold digger” personality from women who marry for money would fall into this category versus the woman who marries for “love.”

These behavioral conditions can actually be seen on any playground in the world where children play. Future producers are the kids who are the first to climb to the top of the monkey bars, or help a kid stuck on the slide whose nerve has left them as they descend. Most of the kids will reside in the safety of numerical superiority watching the producers be the first to climb to the top of a slide, or crawl under a strange obstacle, or swing across a crevice.   Once they see the safety of the task, they will then follow—gaining assurance from the leader—the producer.

The differences in creating these personalities come directly from the parents. If a parent lets children gain self-sufficiency by doing things on their own at the earliest possible moment—then there are favorable odds that a child will develop into a producer. But most parents coddle children and enjoy caring for them as dependents—as the behavior provides meaning to lives of parents who are otherwise insecure about their roles in existence. So too long parents carry children on their hips, feed them too long, and help them up when a child should learn to climb on their own stunting the growth of the young minds into the role of a second-hander. They learn as children to live through their parents. As older children they live through their peers. As adults they live through the rest of society.

This is why as adults they don’t know what to do with their own thoughts and would rather be electrically shocked than to think on their own for 15 minutes—a second-hander must get their next thinking actions from a producer otherwise they can’t function. It would be the producers who would happily sit for 15 minutes or more thinking quietly. The second-hander needs music made by someone else, television made by someone else, reading material made by someone else, video games made by someone else, etc—in order to have thoughts put into their head. With those things removed—they are terrified at the lack of thought in their minds and would gladly endure great amounts of abuse to have that sense of terror removed from them.

As has been declared on many occasions at this site—except without the direct correlation—public education systems are in the business of making second-hander children who will grow up to become second-hander adults. The entire ordeal of public education is primarily focused on building these types of minds which works well for consumerism—but not so great for capitalism as industry and invention are created by producer type personalities. Producer type children tend to not do so well in public school as the system is not geared to develop their skill sets—so they become frustrated. This is also why homeschooled children do better generally than publicly taught children, because homeschooled children are taught to be producers as opposed to second-handers.

As a test dear reader if you consider how something might make you look, or how others might think before you do something—you are functioning as a second-hander. If you do a task because of the curiosity of doing it when no eyes are upon you and enjoy thinking alone with no input from the outside world—then you are thinking as a producer. But it is very clear on the playground of children who will be who. The future lives of all those young people can be predicted just watching children play. You can see who will have marriage difficulties, who will have nervous breakdowns when their cars won’t start, who will bounce aimlessly from job to job—just by watching children play. You can also see who will be the future inventors, leaders, and wealthy elite—not because they are greedy, or vicious—but because they are often the first to climb to the top of the monkey bars, and will not hesitate to push bigger kids out-of-the-way to be the first to go down a slide.

What the test reported by Reuters above says—which is supposed to be shocking—is that public education systems and parents in general have successfully built a human race of second-handers who are all waiting for someone to tell them what to do next. It therefore should not be a surprise when there is so much apathy in the world. It’s not because people are bad—or stupid—it’s because they have been taught to be second-handers who cannot act until told what to do. It is for society to determine if this is acceptable.

Speaking personally, it isn’t for me. But then I’m the kind of person who could spend weeks alone in a room with everything turned off alone with my thoughts—and be perfectly happy.

Rich Hoffman



A Strategy Guide For Beating The Political Left: Removing brute force, emotion, and peer-pressure from a debate

with 4 comments

The interview Megan Kelly had with Bill Ayers was remarkable because it would have been impossible two years ago.  At that time, it was still considered conspiracy to discuss the relationship Barack Obama had with Ayers—who was a domestic terrorist and still holds very extreme positions.  This isn’t the only wall coming down—because the foundations of deceit are coming apart and mainstream commentators like Kelly, Bill O’Reilly and even Charles Krauthammmer are now starting to say the same kind of things that people like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Doc Thompson, Matt Clark and myself were saying two years ago  The evidence is now obvious and has taken them to the proper conclusions about Obama, Ayers, the silent threat of socialism in virtually every public policy and many other difficult topics.  So I think it’s time to reveal a little secret so that those reading here today can increase their own personal strategic impact against these forces more rapidly over the next couple years.

I’ve told a portion of this story before but now with context provided, it is time to give a proper answer.  When the Enquirer reporter Michael Clark was at my home photographing me for what was surely at some point in time to become a major circus scandal he asked me if I was sure that I wanted my picture taken with my bullwhips while making series claims against one of the largest and wealthiest public schools in Ohio for fear that my message might become lost in the entertaining antics.  I have said that it was part of a plan, but without context the words don’t have much meaning to novice readers—so I simply gave the steps without providing the meaning.  However, since this blog for many has become a sort of silent strategy guide for how to defeat the left—to understand what I was doing was important because it will help those same minds through this next—difficult phase with much ore assuredness.

It was my idea to do the bullwhip story in the same week that I went on WLW to argue teacher wages at Lakota.  Before going on the air I had many friends and family warn me against such a thing.  After all, they had seen labor strikes locally from General Motors, AK Steel, and many other union type organizations and it was well-known that teacher unions destroyed private property of those who stood in their way—and I was asking for trouble by going on WLW to call them out.  The Enquirer article was done to take away one of the weapons of the labor union—which was hard to explain at the time.  People would understand the wage issues I was bringing up, but all too often those stories are suppressed because people are afraid to put their name out there against such a collective force.

So here’s the little secret at beating the political left which can now be obviously confirmed with history—not just my own, but that of others who have also dared push back against the forces trying to reshape us all into something despicable and useless.  No group, especially the political left can win if two things are removed from them, their ability to exert force—and thus fear so to manipulate through silence the facts to their favor.  Whatever methods are used to create fear—threat of labor strikes, vandalism, personal name calling, physical violence you need to match them blow for blow.  When I showed them what I could do with the bullwhip, I was performing a strategy I learned from Bruce Lee’s Jeet Kun Do martial arts school.  Lee never worried about conflict with another human being because he had made himself into something that could not be beaten by another human being. He may not have won every confrontation, but he could decide if he would lose.  If you pick a variation of a martial art and become so skilled at it that you are the best there is—you have made yourself invincible so to speak to defeat in that particular category.  That is a very good thing, it doesn’t matter if it is bullwhips, knife handling, various forms of self-defense—the act at becoming so good at something that nobody can beat you is a sense of assuredness that provides freedom to an individual that is paramount to beating back any aggression committed against you.

After my WLW visit I had every manner of fear creating method thrown at me by the labor unions who had some type of stake in the Lakota levy—every kind.  But, because of my use of the bullwhip, opponents learned quickly that I could easily beat the monkey snot out of them without really breaking a sweat.  It didn’t matter if they came as individuals or groups—the result would be the same unless they decided to cross the line and elevate their terrorism with guns—which of course I also had an answer and they knew it.  Violence and threat of harm is the first desired strategy that labor unions use to get what they want—so I took that away from them.  This forced them into territory they were not comfortable with—a logical argument.

Quickly the liberals involved in public education—which is most everyone—tried to play the other strategy of the left—the theory of emotion where they use fear of speculative outcomes such as fear of death, fear of ignorance, fear of losing in competitive comparisons with the rest of the world as their means of advancing their own plot without ever getting into the details.  This is that Witch Doctor mentality mentioned on this site before—it’s the speculation of things to come based on raw emotion and justified by feelings, not fact.  I forced them—really an entire education industry from the Department of Education in The United States, and Ohio—college professors, tenured teachers, politicians, union presidents to beat the facts I presented to the public and on this site and not a single person could do it—for over four years now.  This is the big secret behind their push for violence and why if that weapon is taken from them—they are left naked as the day they were born—intellectually.  They cannot win an argument if they are on the wrong side of the facts—which they know they are.  They must bring emotion into their arena as an alley because they are seeking to supplant the facts with emotion to win their position.  Even the smartest people in the education industry—and you’d think that there would be a lot of smart people in education—could not refute a single claim I made in the public forums such as the Enquirer, all the television stations and over the radio.  Many of those radio broadcasts went out to over 100,000 to 500,000 people and not a single soul was able to refute the facts I brought up—which in essence was that teachers were overpaid, their instruction was ineffective to children, and that it wasn’t worth the cost of increased taxes.

When “they” could not win with threats of force, or feelings they resorted back to force—but instead of making it private they went public—which of course was predicted.  The Enquirer again played its role and put up all the residual impact of the word war that was going on between my opponents and myself showing how ugly things were getting.  But the essence of it was this—the levy supporters attempted to win their side with a combination of force and emotion by making the argument one about sexism—since many of the radicals were women—they hoped to play that old progressive trick, which worked on many of the weaker minded people on my side who actually feared those despots—I’ll get into that with more detail in a bit.  When I showed them that I would take a head for an eye in whatever manner they wished to pursue things it got out of control for a bit as the panic set in leaving Lakota as a large progressive organization with little to do but to retreat and regroup.  They cut a deal with me lasting for two years and spent that time not trying to incorporate what they had learned from me, but in trying to build on their emotional position.  They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on public relations to suppress the negativity caused by our fights so that they could come across as benevolent once again.  They eventually won their money but in the process had proven everything I claimed against them leaving the process open for all to see stripped away of fear in all its forms.  People were able for the first time to see how all these things worked together to impose social elements against the society at large and they were learning how to counter it.

If fear of violence and mystic facts based on emotion are removed from the left—or from anybody—they can be handedly defeated.  However there is one last element that must be utilized in such a conflict which the political left uses to prevent a challenge to either of their key strategies—it is the plight of the second hander.  The way that the left protects itself from scrutiny is through this mechanism.  A second hander desires the approval of others for internal sustenance—for instance, second hander people enjoy being told they look nice, they buy cars that they know other people will admire; they change their aroma hoping to present themselves attractively to other human beings and generally spend a lot of time seeking the approval of others.  What protects the political left most from challenges to their two primary attacks–physical violence and mystic emotion is the peer pressure of social judgment.  If challenges are presented to their two control mechanisms the default protection is this destruction of public acceptance.

From the time that I was a little kid up until about 15 years ago I used to get a lot of grief about wearing a cowboy hat in public.  For me, the hat was a symbol of traditional values which I hold strongly.  For the rest of society—it also represented that—which was out-of-step with the progressive direction of the country. People let me know about it.  Even as a twenty something young man living campus life at the University of Cincinnati I walked around everywhere with my cowboy hat—and people always looked at me funny for it.  Most of the time I was by myself as well—often I would get up in the morning and walk to Coryville to have breakfast and read my books with my hat on.  I would get the strangest looks, people actually felt anxious—first they couldn’t understand why I was by myself, and two, why I had on the hat.  Who was I trying to impress?  The answer was nobody—and this scared people.  What they never figured out—and which is a fact that remains to this day—is that I don’t care an iota what anybody thinks about anything.  When I do something I do it because I want to.  I wear what I want, when I want to and do it for my own reasons.  Therefore, I also do the same with thinking—I think what I want, say what I want, and in no way feel hampered by third-party judgment and am thusly immune to peer-pressure.

This is a very liberating attribute because it allows you to challenge the two mechanisms of liberal strategy–brute force, and emotional speculation directly without concern of being cast out of any group or the collective opinions that might be controlled by money, social prestige, or God forbid—consensus.  In this way, people have seen slowly what kind of scam has been perpetrated upon them and have taken action on their own to advance the plot.  Now that the first bricks of that intellectual damn have been removed the cracks are now crawling everywhere ahead of the break and what will be free finally are all the things hidden behind that damn by the political left for years—things put there through force and emotion.  Logic breaks the damn, and freedom from peer pressured allows the bricks to be removed one by one until the whole thing comes crashing down.

There are people who read here every day for their sustenance—because they want to see how the world really is and expect me to present it without fear from violence, or handcuffs by emotional debate, or the concern of being blacklisted from the latest charity dinner by socialites and despots hungry for attention and yearning for approval by their peers.  Through that journey they come to the truth and now that they facts are adding up, they are able to act upon those truths.  Luckily, I’m not alone in this journey and the culmination of these efforts is beginning to have a major impact.  The Bill Ayers interview with Megan Kelly is just the start—the left in the wake of a terrible Obama Presidency have to defend themselves really for the first time–and are now coming out to meet the challenge.  They really have no choice; public opinion is beginning to stack against them.  But now that other people know how to beat them at their own game—the frequency of these challenges are tearing away at their façade leaving them deeply exposed for the first time in over 100 years, and they don’t like it.  The way to fight them is now known and it is the task of the individuals reading here to carry these methods into their personal life to fight these corrosive elements in the proven fashion.  The guarantee of success is 100%.  So now that you know dear reader how to beat them………………..what’s stopping you?

imageRich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com 

American Exceptionalism on the 4th of July: Hidden messages behind the movie ‘ARGO’

with one comment

Dear reader, I am going to ask a lot of you today—there’s a lot to read here—but read it you must.  The future of America and all your children, grandchildren and even people you have never met yet are at stake and this critical issue requires your full understanding.

There seemed to be a lot more American flags out in 2014 during the 4th of July as paper patriots fearful of the direction of their American country thought simply saying they were patriots—or walking in a parade was enough, than there has been in the past.  It was good to see a little stirring of the American pride and as millions across the nation waited for a fireworks show as dusk crawled across the supposedly freest nation on earth, Megan Kelly on Fox News broadcast an epic debate between the filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and the domestic terrorist Bill Ayers—the same man who launched the political career of Barack Obama.  The theme of the interview, part of which can be seen below, was the concept of American Exceptionalism and a recurring theme represented most by the current American intelligentsia was extrapolated during the debate.  The cure for many of the current problems in America are actually quite easy to fix if only the concept of American Exceptionalism were understood.  The border situation with Mexico would be solved, the economic restrictions seen throughout the world, and basic premise of freedom could save the lives of millions if only the basic understanding of American Exceptionalism could be embraced.  Yet Bill Ayers revealed what many that have learned from him over the years wished to argue regarding American imperialism as opposed to Exceptionalism.  Their position is that American had no right to interfere with other governments throughout the world, or to rob the land of the “Native Americans” or that it was built on slave labor and that all Americans should pay for the guilt of their past sins and chastise themselves before the world.  Behind the waving of American flags this particular year there seemed to be a reconciliation behind the public who many had just realized that their president—Obama had delivered them to the enemies of the world on a plate provided with a bow and apology.  It was Bill Ayers who helped develop the young mind of Barack and Michelle Obama into being a future weapon of the Weather Underground—a radical from within the people’s house.  The flag waving and fireworks were a bit more vigorous as though the American people hoped at this late hour that their complacency could erase the impact of this domestic terrorism in the year of 2014.  But it can’t, only understanding the role America plays in the world will, and supporting that role with a philosophy much different from the one that Bill Ayers believed.

There are a lot on the political left who think the way Ayers does, many of them are those who are part of the education industry.  They aren’t as violent as Ayers, but they hold very similar beliefs which can be seen through their actions.   Recently watching a “Watters’ World” episode Jesse Watters managed to get a red carpet interview with George Clooney—who is a native of the Cincinnati area and a powerful mover and shaker in Hollywood.  He’s a generally talented guy who thinks he’s very smart politically—made worse because he donates a lot of money into liberal candidates—particularly President Obama—so he thinks he has a good political grip on the world stage—but if you strip away his belief system to its root core—it will be discovered that the kind of people who shaped his foundation thoughts were people like Bill Ayers from the 1960s.  In Hollywood right now there are a lot of these young actors who are little cardboard cutouts of Bill Ayers—just as Obama is.  Clooney made sure that Watter’s knew that Obama was our “president” and deserved respect for the title—as though he were the King of America—which is clearly disjointed from reality.  Some of those cutouts are people like Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, and Sean Penn who all have an anti-imperialist slant against America and have communist political leanings.  Their instruction in life has come from the type of beliefs taught by liberal professors like Bill Ayers and this has gone on for a long time.  Many of the current flag wavers who are just now realizing the folly of their ways are looking for answers but their belief system prevents them from seeing them.

As an example of this scenario let us look at Ben Affleck’s very good movie Argo, which won Best Picture for its 2012 release.  This was a great film about the cause of the hostage crises in Iran in 1979 and was generally a patriotic film about the very good work of a CIA agent in bringing out some stranded Americans home from that crisis.  However—Affleck couldn’t help himself.  George Clooney was a co-producer of the film so without question there was bound to be a left leaning political messages emitting from the movie—and there was.  Understanding that very simple element and making a decision on it—has the ability to fix many of our modern problems.  At the end of the film out of all the philosophers that could have been picked for a closing statement by the John Goodman character it was Karl Marx who was quoted.  This after a brief cartoon opening told the back story of Iranian history and essentially placed the blame of the westernization of Iran squarely on the backs of American influence.  Affleck skillfully showed during the opening that once Iran’s oil fields were nationalized—which is a communist concept—that all was well.  However–once Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi—the Shah of Iran started westernizing the country it upset the people who overthrew him. The blame for the hostage crises to begin with fell on the shoulders of America who had been caught trying to manipulate the Iranian people with Western influence, then threw gasoline on the fire by giving Pahlavi exile within The United States.  The movie Argo essentially proclaims that the fault of the crises fell on American imperialism—the same basic assertion that Bill Ayers and Barack Obama believe.

But they are all wrong, America and the accusations of imperialism come directly from the Cold War conflict with communism which was taking over the world during the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, and that people like Ayers, Affleck, Damon, and Clooney are all supporters.  The Easter egg is clear as day at the end of Argo and generally none of those political activists are shy about their faith which they hide behind the Democratic Party.  What they fail to mention is that the CIA operations in the Middle East, in Central America, in Cuba, in Vietnam in virtually everywhere that there was conflict was caused by a defense against communism.  The infusion of American culture against the proposed communist cultures was the battle.  It was a fight between the merits of capitalism and communism—a fight over regional control and freedom.  Iran was under the influence of communists in the 1970s and the cost was a reversion back to their nomadic past.  Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi had taken steps to modernize Iran but walked the line between becoming a ruthless dictator and a western loving visionary.  Ironically, and this is why I will say that Affleck did a brilliant job directing Argo—there was a wonderful scene showing how this transition was going in Iran—on one hand there were protestors burning American flags in the streets, but on the other they were eating Kentucky Fried Chicken which was a direct export of American capitalism.  So before drawing conclusions on these metaphors let’s study the real history of Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi without the slant of communism blowing in the sails of thought.  The following comes from Wikipedia but has been edited down to the relevant portions.  The link to the entire article follows.

Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi (Persian: Mohamad Rezā Ŝāhh Pahlawi, [mohæmˈmæd reˈzɒː ˈʃɒːhe pæhlæˈviː]; 25 October 1919 – 27 July 1980) was the ruler of Iran (Shah of Iran) from 16 September 1941 until his overthrow by the Iranian Revolution on 11 February 1979. He took the title Šâhanšâh (“Emperor” or “King of Kings”)[1] on 26 October 1967. He was the second and last monarch of the House of Pahlavi of the Iranian monarchy. Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi held several other titles, including that of Aryamehr (Light of the Aryans) and Bozorge Arteštârân (Head of the Warriors, Persian: Bozorg Arteŝdārān).[2]

Mohammad Rezâ Pahlavi came to power during World War II after an Anglo-Soviet invasion forced the abdication of his father Reza Shah. During Mohammad Reza’s reign, the Iranian oil industry was briefly nationalized under the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh before a U.S.-backed coup d’état deposed Mosaddegh and brought back foreign oil firms,[3] and Iran marked the anniversary of 2,500 years of continuous monarchy since the founding of the Persian Empire by Cyrus the Great. As ruler, he introduced the White Revolution, a series of economic, social and political reforms with the proclaimed intention of transforming Iran into a global power and modernizing the nation by nationalizing certain industries and granting women suffrage.

A secular Muslim, Mohammad Reza gradually lost support from the Shi’a clergy of Iran as well as the working class, particularly due to his strong policy of modernization, secularization, conflict with the traditional class of merchants known as bazaari, recognition of Israel, and corruption issues surrounding himself, his family, and the ruling elite. Various additional controversial policies were enacted, including the banning of the communist Tudeh Party, and a general suppression of political dissent by Iran’s intelligence agency, SAVAK. According to official statistics, Iran had as many as 2,200 political prisoners in 1978, a number which multiplied rapidly as a result of the revolution.[4]

By the early 1950s, the political crisis brewing in Iran commanded the attention of British and American policy leaders. In 1951, Mohammad Mosaddegh was appointed Prime Minister and committed to nationalizing the Iranian petroleum industry controlled by the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. Under the leadership of Mosaddegh’s democratically elected nationalist movement, the Iranian parliament unanimously voted to nationalize the oil industry – thus shutting out the immensely profitable Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), which was a pillar of Britain’s economy and provided it political clout in the region.

Pahlavi with US President Truman in Washington, c. 18 November 1949

At the start of the confrontation, American political sympathy was forthcoming from the Truman Administration. In particular, Mosaddegh was buoyed by the advice and counsel he was receiving from American Ambassador in Tehran, Henry F. Grady. However, eventually American decision-makers lost their patience, and by the time a Republican Administration came to office fears that communists were poised to overthrow the government became an all-consuming concern (these concerns were later dismissed as “paranoid” in retrospective commentary on the coup from U.S. government officials). Shortly prior to the 1952 presidential election in the United States, the British government invited CIA agent Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., to London to propose collaboration on a secret plan to force Mosaddegh from office.[8] This would be the first of three “regime change” operations led by Allen Dulles (the other two being the successful CIA-instigated 1954 Guatemalan coup d’état and the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba).

Under the direction of Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., a senior Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer and grandson of former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt, the American CIA and British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) funded and led a covert operation to depose Mosaddegh with the help of military forces disloyal to the democratically elected government. Referred to as Operation Ajax,[9] the plot hinged on orders signed by Mohammad Reza to dismiss Mosaddegh as prime minister and replace him with General Fazlollah Zahedi – a choice agreed on by the British and Americans.

Despite the high-level coordination and planning, the coup initially failed, causing the Shah to flee to Baghdad, and then to Rome. After a brief exile in Italy, he returned to Iran, this time through a successful second attempt at a coup. A deposed Mosaddegh was arrested and tried. The king intervened and commuted the sentence to one and a half years. Zahedi was installed to succeed Mosaddegh.[10]

Before the first attempted coup, the American Embassy in Tehran reported that Mosaddegh’s popular support remained robust. The Prime Minister requested direct control of the army from the Majlis. Given the situation, alongside the strong personal support of Conservative leader Anthony Eden and Prime Minister Winston Churchill for covert action, the American government gave the go-ahead to a committee, attended by the Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles, Kermit Roosevelt, Henderson, and Secretary of Defense Charles Erwin Wilson. Kermit Roosevelt returned to Iran on 13 July 1953, and again on 1 August 1953, in his first meeting with the king. A car picked him up at midnight and drove him to the palace. He laid down on the seat and covered himself with a blanket as guards waved his driver through the gates. The Shah got into the car and Roosevelt explained the mission. The CIA bribed him with $1 million in Iranian currency, which Roosevelt had stored in a large safe – a bulky cache, given the exchange rate at the time of 1,000 rial to 15 dollars.[11]

The Communists staged massive demonstrations to hijack Mosaddegh’s initiatives. The United States actively plotted against him. On 16 August 1953, the right-wing of the Army attacked. Armed with an order by the Shah, it appointed General Fazlollah Zahedi as prime minister. A coalition of mobs and retired officers close to the Palace executed this coup d’état. They failed dismally and the Shah fled the country in humiliating haste. Even Ettelaat, the nation’s largest daily newspaper, and its pro-Shah publisher, Abbas Masudi, were against him.[12]

During the following two days, the Communists turned against Mosaddegh. Opposition against him grew tremendously. They roamed Tehran, raising red flags and pulling down statues of Reza Shah. This was rejected by conservative clerics like Kashani and National Front leaders like Hossein Makki, who sided with the king. On 18 August 1953, Mosaddegh defended the government against this new attack. Tudeh partisans were clubbed and dispersed.[13]

The Tudeh party had no choice but to accept defeat. In the meantime, according to the CIA plot, Zahedi appealed to the military, and claimed to be the legitimate prime minister and charged Mosaddegh with staging a coup by ignoring the Shah’s decree. Zahedi’s son Ardeshir acted as the contact between the CIA and his father. On 19 August 1953, pro-Shah partisans – bribed with $100,000 in CIA funds – finally appeared and marched out of south Tehran into the city center, where others joined in. Gangs with clubs, knives, and rocks controlled the streets, overturning Tudeh trucks and beating up anti-Shah activists. As Roosevelt was congratulating Zahedi in the basement of his hiding place, the new Prime Minister’s mobs burst in and carried him upstairs on their shoulders. That evening, Henderson suggested to Ardashir that Mosaddegh not be harmed. Roosevelt gave Zahedi US$900,000 left from Operation Ajax funds.

U.S. actions further solidified sentiments that the West was a meddlesome influence in Iranian politics. In the year 2000, reflecting on this notion, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright stated:

“In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s popular Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs.”[14]

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi returned to power, but never extended the elite status of the court to the technocrats and intellectuals who emerged from Iranian and Western universities. Indeed, his system irritated the new classes, for they were barred from partaking in real power.[15]

In his “White Revolution” starting in the 1960s, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi made major changes to modernize Iran. He curbed the power of certain ancient elite factions by expropriating large and medium-sized estates for the benefit of more than four million small farmers. He took a number of other major measures, including extending suffrage to women and the participation of workers in factories through shares and other measures. In the 1970s the governmental program of a free of charge nourishment for children at school (“Taghzieh e Rāigān”) was implemented. Under the Shah’s reign, the national Iranian income showed an unprecedented rise for an extended period.

Improvement of the educational system was made through new elementary schools and additionally literacy courses were set up in remote villages by the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces, this initiative being called “Sepāh e Dānesh”, “Army of Knowledge”. The Armed Forces were also engaged in infrastructural and other educational projects throughout the country (“Sepāh-e Tarvij va Âbādāni”) as well as in health education and promotion (“Sepāh-e Behdāsht”). The Shah instituted exams for Islamic theologians to become established clerics. Many Iranian university students were sent to and supported in foreign, especially Western countries and the Indian subcontinent.

In the field of diplomacy, Iran realized and maintained friendly relations with Western and East European countries as well as the state of Israel and China and became, especially through the close friendship with the United States, more and more a hegemonial power in the Persian Gulf region and the Middle East. The suppression of the communist guerilla movement in the region of Dhofar in Oman with the help of the Iranian army after a formal request by Sultan Qaboos was widely regarded in this context.

On 16 January 1979, he made a contract with Farboud and left Iran at the behest of Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar (a long time opposition leader himself), who sought to calm the situation.[71] Spontaneous attacks by members of the public on statues of the Pahlavis followed, and “within hours, almost every sign of the Pahlavi dynasty” was destroyed.[72] Bakhtiar dissolved SAVAK, freed all political prisoners, and allowed Ayatollah Khomeini to return to Iran after years in exile. He asked Khomeini to create a Vatican-like state in Qom, promised free elections, and called upon the opposition to help preserve the constitution, proposing a “national unity” government including Khomeini’s followers. Khomeini rejected Bakhtiar’s demands and appointed his own interim government, with Mehdi Bazargan as prime minister, stating that “I will appoint a state. I will act against this government. With the nation’s support, I will appoint a state.”[73] In February, pro-Khomeini revolutionary guerrilla and rebel soldiers gained the upper hand in street fighting, and the military announced its neutrality. On the evening of 11 February, the dissolution of the monarchy was complete.

During his second exile, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi traveled from country to country seeking what he hoped would be temporary residence. First he flew to Assuan, Egypt, where he received a warm and gracious welcome from President Anwar El-Sadat. He later lived in Morocco as a guest of King Hassan II, as well as in the Bahamas, and in Cuernavaca, Mexico, near Mexico City, as a guest of José López Portillo. Richard Nixon, the former president, visited the Shah in summer 1979 in Mexico.[74] The Shah suffered from gallstones that would require prompt surgery. He was offered treatment in Switzerland, but insisted on treatment in the United States.

On 22 October 1979, President Jimmy Carter reluctantly allowed the Shah into the United States to undergo surgical treatment at the New York–Weill Cornell Medical Hospital. While in Cornell Medical Center, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi used the name “David D. Newsom” as his temporary code name, without Newsom’s knowledge.

The Shah was taken later by U.S. Air Force jet to Kelly Air Force Base in Texas and from there to Wilford Hall Medical Center at Lackland Air Force Base.[75] It was anticipated that his stay in the United States would be short; however, surgical complications ensued, which required six weeks of confinement in the hospital before he recovered. His prolonged stay in the United States was extremely unpopular with the revolutionary movement in Iran, which still resented the United States’ overthrow of Prime Minister Mosaddegh and the years of support for the Shah’s rule. The Iranian government demanded his return to Iran, but he stayed in the hospital.[76]

There are claims that this resulted in the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the kidnapping of American diplomats, military personnel, and intelligence officers, which soon became known as the Iran hostage crisis.[77] According to the Shah’s book Answer to History, in the end, the United States never provided him any kind of health care and asked him to leave the country.[78]

He left the United States on 15 December 1979 and lived for a short time in the Isla Contadora in Panama. This caused riots by Panamanians who overwhelminglyobjected to the Shah being in their country. Panamanians viewed it as their country being used as a stooge of the United States. The new government in Iran still demanded his and his wife’s immediate extradition to Tehran. A short time after Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s arrival in Panama, an Iranian ambassador was dispatched to the Central American nation carrying a 450-page extradition request. That official appeal greatlyalarmed both the Shah and his advisors. Whether the Panamanian government would have complied is a matter of speculation among historians.

After that event, the Shah again sought the support of Egyptian president Anwar El-Sadat, who renewed his offer of permanent asylum in Egypt to the ailing monarch. He returned to Egypt in March 1980, where he received urgent medical treatment, including a splenectomy performed by Michael DeBakey,[79] but nevertheless died from complications of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (a type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma) on 27 July 1980, aged 60. Egyptian President Sadat gave the Shah a state funeral.[80]

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi is buried in the Al Rifa’i Mosque in Cairo, a mosque of great symbolic importance. The last royal rulers of two monarchies are buried there, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi of Iran and King Farouk of Egypt, his former brother-in-law. The tombs lie to the left of the entrance. Years earlier, his father and predecessor, Reza Shah had also initially been buried at the Al Rifa’i Mosque.


If it is traced back the accusation of American imperialism being so vile it is the belief that cultures are better off left alone by removing American capitalism from foreign policy.  It wasn’t in the case of Iran a bunch of people who wanted to preserve Islamic faith or the sanctity of their country and its history—it was communists who wanted complete control, just as they did in Vietnam, Cuba, and Central America.  The trouble within America leaving the CIA to be so clandestine—a journey started by his grandfather Teddy Roosevelt with his vengeful commitment toward Progressivism—which would become a more “intellectual” name for communism in the states–Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. was all over the Middle East trying to stop the spread thus making those countries dangerous not just to America but their own people.  Domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers would continue to sputter the belief that America just wanted the oil from Iran to operate cars cheaply so they could drive over all the land stolen from the Indians—but behind such sentiments is communism just as those who hate America abroad are fearful of the kind of freedom that capitalism brings to people wherever it touches.  The communists in Iran didn’t care about justice; they wanted a head to put on a pike as they took over in the same manner that the French Revolution of 1948 attempted and elsewhere that the words of Karl Marx touched.

Yet Ben Afflect gave away his political sentiments in the closing scenes of his movie Argo just as his friend Matt Damon made an argument for communism in the science fiction film ElysumElysium only made $93 million dollars in The United States.   It made most of its money in the foreign market raking in $193 million around the rest of the world.  Americans could tell that there was something wrong with the message—but in countries where communism and socialism are already the standard, Elysium was a ray of hope that their poor political philosophy had merit.

America has a stake in those far-flung markets because when capitalism is not a part of their life—they seek to come to America to live.  So America to protect itself has an obligation to spread capitalism to Iran, to Iraq, to China, Afghanistan, to India, Mexico, and Central America because the restrictive economies of socialist and communist countries has impoverished people and they can’t all come to America for refuge.   It would be nice if everyone could live in America—but they can’t as America is only around 5% of the world’s population.  So America has to bring itself to the world—and not be shy about it.  But first the remnants of communism and a love for Karl Marx must be removed from the debate by confronting it directly.  Affleck put the reference in a movie offered to the American public as a patriotic film and surely George Clooney thought it to be high brow political theater.  Bill Ayers wants to see American capitalism crushed so that the land can return to the Indians—or so he thinks—and America will no longer have the ability to broadcast capitalism messages to the far corners of the world where communism is still the operating foundation of their governments.

It takes more than waving a flag on the 4th of July to keep America as the best hope the world has for freedom—and economic prosperity.  And the CIA shouldn’t have to behave the way Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. did to prevent communism from gaining the looted wealth of oil fields and to use that wealth as weapons against America funneling money straight into the black hole of communist Russia at the time.  The situation was then and still is far more complicated—but the essence is a decision between capitalism and communism.  America has a need to project capitalism to every corner of the world so that immigrants don’t topple its economy with welfare benefits but instead give the potential immigrants the ability to live freely in their own countries with economic vitality as their foundations.  America wasn’t trying to take over Iran, Iraq, Cuba, or any place else—it simply wanted to show those countries how to live in a capitalist society and how to benefit from it as partners throughout the world.  The hatred of America from Bill Ayers, George Clooney, Ben Afflect and others who utter sentiments about imperialism projected from The United States is that they fear capitalism and believe that a version of communism needs to be the ruling philosophy—it has nothing to do with the good of the indigenous people.  The root of the anger always comes back to capitalism versus communism.  These radicals like Ayers do not support communism with a capital “C” but with a little one—and that is a sentiment that is very popular among those who think they know better than everyone else.

The World Cup soccer matches were so terribly boring for The United States because soccer is a socialist game.  As pointed out in previous articles, the off sides rules and lack of ability to use hands during the game is metaphorical of socialist and communists governments.  Soccer is the game most enjoyed in countries mired down with socialism.  This is why there is a huge movement in America for many years to make soccer the dominate activity among young people—but as a sport, Americans, just like their rejection of Matt Damon’s Elysium know that there is something they don’t like about it—which of course is that they are both anti-capitalist in their primary philosophic foundations.  So it’s not enough to wave a flag and clap after some fireworks explode.  If you really love your country you’ll openly support capitalism not just in America—but in Iraq, Honduras, Mexico, China, and Russia—everywhere.  There is no way to support both; a passive attitude toward Karl Marx’s communism cannot be permitted because it cannot compete with capitalism. Communism has to destroy capitalism to survive and if it does that, people will live in oppressed huts, under the control of regional warlords, international bankers, and fanatic religious radicals—and the borders of The United States will continue to be flooded by refuges seeking opportunity where only capitalism can give it.

First however dear reader you have to know your history and understand what is really behind any animosity exhibited by people like Bill Ayers who has corrupted the mind of many people with his hatred of American capitalism.  A whole generation of Ben Affleck types have bought into his anti-imperialism hook, line and sinker and they make movies like Argo to support their thesis.  But now you know rest of the story regarding Mohammad Rezâ Šâh Pahlavi without the slant of Marxist philosophy clouding the matter.  Most Americans watch Argo and don’t quite get the Marx reference or the anti imperialism at the beginning until Barack Obama says something similar in a speech, or a teacher instructs something like-minded in a class room.  Americans have been taught that they must feel “compassion” for those other places and be respectful of their history—even as communism eats away at their foundations.  Americans sense it when they watch soccer or when the message is blatant like it was in Elysium so they vote with their dollars and work out their anxiety with a few more fireworks on the 4th of July and wave their flags a little more vigorously hoping to get back what they lost in philosophy to the dregs of society represented by Bill Ayers—exposed on the Kelly File on July 4, 2014.

You can’t play with America like a cat pawing at a ball of yarn, waving flags at patriotic holidays and putting your hand on your heart at sporting events.  You have to buy into the philosophy of America and support capitalism everywhere it has an opportunity to develop—and you have to do it now.  Because the enemies are deeply entrenched, and are everywhere—at every level of society—and they want their own kind of “regime change” and as Barack Obama has proven—mentored personally by Bill Ayers—capitalism is not the mode of operation.  America is exceptional, but it is not its job to confine that exceptionalism to only 5% of the world population.  It is not America’s task to yield to 95% of the rest of the world, but to teach them to be capitalists so that same 95% doesn’t try to cross over into the Mexican border to flee the communism and socialism of their home countries.  America to defend itself must turn those numbers around so that more people within their own countries can gain the opportunities they would have in only The United States because of capitalism. It isn’t imperialism and control that America has been doing throughout the world—it has simply been the self-defense of capitalism against communism that is as still alive today as it was in 1950—only the names have changed and moved underground only to be revealed behind some of Hollywood’s biggest names at the end of the movies they produce thinking they are the smartest people in the world—and the only ones who notice.

They weren’t……………………….now, watch all these videos, and take note of the  pattern. 

imageRich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com 

Why Men Crave BDSM: The long twisted road that must stop–self sacrifice and personal abuse

with 2 comments

While researching why the movie Cloud Atlas was so bad, I discovered that the director Larry Wachowski had turned himself into a woman named Lana, and that the film was assembled during his/her transition.  So I’m going to say something here that will likely make some people very angry and hurt some feelings—but so what.  These things have to be said.  As I say them consider this—I have spent over twenty years studying the cause of human sacrifice—most notably from the work of Joseph Campbell.  When I was a kid, I wanted to be something between an Archaeologist and a test pilot—but I have no patience for 6 week digs that take place over decades to find a few pots, or academic politics.  And as far as a military career, I have little respect for authority or chains of command so a military career has always been out of the question.  I have over the years however developed quite an extensive talent for handling bullwhips which has naturally led people to assume that I participate in BDSM practices.  Much to their disappointment when they see my reaction is that I don’t have a single cell in my body which desires a passive role in anything I do—and I have absolutely no desire to rule over others as a dominator.  I have met lots of people who wanted to be hit with bullwhips, who wish to be stripped naked in front of perfect strangers and hit the way only an expert whip handler can—with body wraps that make a violent sound but dissipate their energy while wrapping around the body before tearing away flesh.  When I have been approached by these people to have this done to them by me—I have always declined.  (Yeah, I know that guy, really well). I was in Hollywood once where an unnamed actress wanted to pay me a handsome amount of money to treat her in this fashion and I tried to explain to her why she wanted to have it done and that she needed to correct that desire.  Of course it angered her and she never spoke to me again—but let me be clear—I have a lot of experience in the how and why people desire BDSM, and I have always been against the practice.  Unfortunately, a majority of the people in the world these days desire BDSM in some capacity and this is extremely unhealthy.  The cause I will reveal at the end of this article, but first we need to understand why people do it—or want to have it done to them.  The best example of course is Larry Wachowski who started messing around in the Dungeon in Los Angeles and his experiences there ruined his marriage and made him realize that he desired submissive sex—and that he was really a woman.  No—that is not the reality—he just took it too far and misread his desires.  So below are quotes from an article on the topic by dominatrixs who are paid professionals whose task it is to turn people into sexual submissives—particularly men—and their observations on why their clients came to them.  Larry Wachowski’s story is actually one that too many people have, men and women and there is no way to solve the many riddles in American culture when these silly fantasies occupy the minds of a society the way that it currently does—so some attention must be given to it.  The part where my opinions on it will enrage people is that it is clearly a mental neurosis built on poorly constructed values which causes it and is the direct result of a failed personal philosophy.  If you dear reader are a man and have submissive fantasies—you are fu**ed up and need to be fixed.  Here is why.

Many men who turn to submissive fantasies do so for precisely the sort of vacation from responsibility that Roiphe suggests women are seeking.  Olivia Severine, a transsexual dominatrix living in San Francisco, says most of her clients were “very high-powered” men weighed down by responsibility. “They came to see me as a brief escape when no one was looking at them for direction or leadership,” she says. “The time with me is when they were told what to do, what to feel and how to act … and all the weight of their careers, families, lives, is lifted from them for a cherished few hours.”

Mistress Shae Flanigan, a Los Angeles dominatrix, says her clients are “CEOs, high-ranking managers, lawyers and wonderfully brilliant men from all over the business spectrum.” What they have in common is “that they come to me to create an environment where they don’t need to think,” she says. “Where they can trust me to keep them safe while I weave together an enticing, thrilling, euphoric and painful world where it is literally impossible to think.”

It isn’t that these guys wish they had less real-world power — it’s just, power is stressful, and submission provides a release. “BDSM is a hell of a lot more affordable of a vacation than the Bahamas, I promise you,” says Flanigan.

Melissa Febos, author of “Whip Smart,” a book about her time as a pro-domme, tells me, “As someone who spent nearly four years catering to the submissive fantasies of men, and who eventually had to acknowledge her own submissive fantasies, I can say with some certainty that I think all people experience anxiety about power,” she says. “Aren’t our objects of eroticization often the things we feel unreconciled about?”

Most of Febos’ clients “experienced an imbalance of power in their lives,” she says. For some it was “extreme disempowerment,” like child abuse, racism or poverty; for others, it was “an overwhelming burden of power,” related to everything from wealth to politics. (“During the Republican convention, business at the dungeon boomed,” she says.) All of that is to say that “eroticization stemming from anxiety is not gender-specific,” Febos explains — nor is it specific to the relative power one has in the real world.

“Everyone, regardless of career choice or level of importance, is saddled with the burden of making important decisions about their own lives and the lives of the people around them,” Domina Nyx of New York City points out.

While Natasha Strange, who has worked as a domme for almost 20 years, has had plenty of “men who are powerful and want to give up control for a bit,” she’s also had tons of “musicians, cab drivers, pharmacy reps, teachers and your basic blue-collar workers who are just kinky and want to feel desired for an hour or three.” Interestingly enough, she says, “The very first female client I had was a housewife and a mother of two.”


All of my creative written works up until this point have been focused on human sacrifice.  It is a topic I have long been obsessed over.  When I realized that becoming an archaeologist would not answer the questions I was asking I turned to comparative religion and philosophy to understand.  In my 1997 screenplay The Lost Cannibals of Cahokia I directly explored the horror of this topic and the work bounced around Hollywood for a number of years.  When I showed apprehension in joining the Writers Guild when directed by a Wilshire Blvd agent—the story died because with the promise of developing the script was a reworking of the sacrifice plotline and a refocus on the horror aspects.  Well, the point of the story for me was to understand why human beings felt they needed to sacrifice themselves to other people.  So I continue to retain the rights, but development died on the vine.  My 2004 novel The Symposium of Justice was essentially about a vigilante who protects people from the desire of an “evil system” to sacrifice the good for the many at the expense of the individual.   My 2012 novel Tail of the Dragon was essentially about a man who refused to allow himself to be sacrificed in any manner at all socially.  His refusal caused the greatest car chase in American history—it became a kind of Vanishing Point type story except much more intense.  But the central thesis was on sacrifice.  I have had many publishers, agents, actors, financiers and the like convey their appreciation of my works, but there is always something left out of our dialogue which goes unsaid and prevents further interaction and development. 

From 2006 to 2009 I conducted a number of onsite visits to areas known for their human sacrifice to understand better the cause.  I visited the site of Cahokia outside of St. Louis and the subject of my 1997 screenplay.  Based on some new information from that visit The Lost Cannibals of Cahokia screenplay won an award at the Indie Gathering Film Festival in the horror category.  Shortly after my wife and I visited the Chichen Itza archaeological site in the Yucatan Peninsula to study the actual location of many human sacrifice examples.  I had thought that the Mel Gibson film Apocalypto was actually one of the best Anthropological/Archaeological films done on the Mayan culture and on human sacrifice.  So out of all the world’s sacrificial sites—Chichen Itza held the best example of the practice that was the most fully preserved.   I had my thesis which was put into my books and screenplays and ironically, Mel Gibson was destroyed as a filmmaker after that film which came out during this period.  There was something about the subject matter of sacrifice which made people feel uncomfortable.  On one level they agreed—the Mayan practice of human sacrifice was terrible, and barbaric.  On the other, human sacrifice still occurs; it is just much slower and doesn’t necessarily mean that a person must be killed—literally.  Just metaphorically—the cause of most BDSM is to reconcile that metaphorical death within an individual life.

While helping Doc Thompson promote the first Atlas Shrugged film over AM radio, I discovered Ayn Rand and read all her books and found that she had already been down the road I was going in regard to human sacrifice.  She had approached the problem philosophically where mine was archaeological, but the conclusions were similar.   This helped me refine the argument from a big general thesis against sacrifice to a more pointed one backed by her previous work in Objectivism.  So this lead me to establish the proper background in declaring that I have spent a lot of time on this notion of sacrifice and explored its nature as a corrosive social element and am fully capable to speak on the matter with authority.

The reason that men desire to “not think” and to surrender themselves to a dominatrix is because they have been taught that not everyone is a superman—that not everyone can support the world—and that weaknesses are virtuous.  It is inconceivable to me that a “powerful” man responsible for the jobs of many people and the fiscal merits of a company he works for—or owns, would desire to have his pants pulled down like a child and be spanked—harassed, and dominated by another human being because they want a vacation from making hard decisions.  The cause is a failed philosophy at the heart of their very minds.  But the cause of the belief that not everyone can be a superman is that the notion of self-sacrifice has been embedded into such men from the time that they were children.  If a man is too successful, he feels guilt about it and seeks to reconcile that guilt by being dominated—the way he dominates others.  It’s a silly belief that a social balance must be maintained and that it can only be found through masochistic pain.  That is the start, and like Larry Wachowski who went from zero to a 1000 after the success of his Matrix film—he did not have the mental capacity to deal with the success other than his instruction of self-sacrifice by a society still functioning like the now extinct Mayans.

When the actress asked me to beat her with one of my whips, I understood what she wanted.  She sat with me at the catering truck talking about how tough it was to get roles in Hollywood, how relationships were tough to maintain, that everyone expected you to be one way or another and that if you didn’t fit those molds—you didn’t get parts.   She went on and on about her father’s expectations, her mother’s feminist declarations—her agents typecasting—I don’t think I said a word during the entire lunch hour on set.  It was like nobody had listened to this girl for a decade and for whatever reason she felt she could talk to me.  At the end she put a stack of ten $100 dollar bills on the table and asked me to hit her with my whip the way I had been doing on set—only privately.  She talked about the culture of Los Angeles and how much money I could make providing such a service to the frustrated actresses in Beverley Hills, the confused house wives of the studio executives up in the hills around Burbank and the cultural immigrants of Glendale looking for the kind of abuse they received in the countries they came from in the safety of a person they could trust would not hurt them permanently.  She told me about places like the Dungeon where Larry Wachowski lost his mind and manhood.  Apparently this nice clean-cut girl who was married to one of the producers with several of her children on the set spent a lot of time in those kinds of places.  I told her I didn’t do that kind of thing—that my interest in bullwhips was inspired by Douglas Fairbanks and the old serials of the 30s, 40s and 50s.  I hoped that by mentioning old Hollywood, we would find common ground—but instead she went cold and got up embarrassed from feeling so vulnerable in what she revealed to someone who wouldn’t jump to the dark side with her.  “Fu** Douglas Fairbanks” she said as she took her tray back to the truck.  She left the bills on the table, angrily dispensed her tray, then came back to retrieve the money and sat down next to her husband who had been doing his best to avoid my gaze—until his wife sat back down next to him.

These broken thoughts—these desires to be abused don’t just regulate themselves to the bedroom.   They come out in voting booths where voters secretly desire to be dominated by a Barack Obama, or commanded around by a Harry Reid, or lied to by Nancy Pelosi.  Men and women want to be seduced by Bill Clinton—they know he is a scum bag liar, but they have this notion of wanting to be abused by him to satisfy the internal need they have for insult—pain, and suffering.  The more comfortable their lives are, the more they feel they must pay someone or something back to the universe to balance out existence.  And non-thinking pain and abuse accomplishes two things, it does give them a retreat from responsibility, but also it equalizes the guilt they feel from being successful and having the ability to get their nails done, or play a round of golf at 1 PM in the afternoon until 5 PM while most people in the world are working.

Chances are dear reader you have these same thoughts and feelings and they were given to you by a failed society and its ridiculous philosophies built upon crumbled civilizations from the past.  If you desire to be spanked, slapped around, have your hair pulled—to be called disgraceful names, to be handcuffed, raped, or have things clipped to your skin by someone else until it hurts—you are messed up.  You are broken and need to be fixed.  What you are feeling are ancient thoughts that should be eradicated.  They are not healthy thoughts given to you outside of your control by some deity living in the hereafter.   They are screwed up philosophies given to mankind by the past which always lead to failed societies.  In the case of Larry Wachowski he destroyed his life and is seeking justification in the form of being a woman to excuse his mistakes.  It is only because he is a progressive that the studio bosses keep him employed hoping that one of his films will be the next Matrix—which was a fluke—a one shot wonder.  But the entire nation of America is seeking a similar punishment through self-sacrifice and under such a belief system nothing can endure.

Consider the absolutely stupid notion that we are supposed to thank our troops for their service to their country.  The popular phrase—“some gave all” implies that giving one’s life to the freedom of everyone in the country is the noblest thing anyone can do—and that is just stupid.  The sudden appreciation of our troops over the last decade of treacherous debt (nearly $18 trillion and counting) only confirms to individuals everywhere that the state is the highest authority and its continued preservation must be endured at any cost—even if it means death.  Therefore, with that basic premise intact success is believed to be reconciled through pain and suffering.  And because sex is a major part of every adult life, punishment has entered the bedroom to align the minds of warped individuals with the insanity they are being forced to contend with due to massive mismanagement and poor philosophical choices of the world’s governments—particularly America.  It is worse in America not because it is a bad nation, but because there is a pretense of freedom which is assumed, but the old diabolical need for abuse still persists in the human mind forcing the behavior underground on a massive level.  This duality causes many of the problems we are seeing.

In Asian countries where the governments are communist and abusive, the old desires to be abused by an authority figure satisfy their innate impulses so the sexual deviancy does not go underground the way the cultures of Los Angeles or New York conduct their affairs—living one way in the open, another when nobody is looking.  But the causes are all the same—mankind has not grown up and away from the self-sacrificial nature of their ancestors and are still just as primitive.  Until a mind grows up and away from such a desire of sacrifice—the evils of personal destruction through masochistic abuse and internal hatred will continue.  And that will cause more movies like Cloud Atlas to be made instead of films about people who have overcome self-sacrifice—like in Atlas Shrugged.

Rich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com 

Matt Clark and Rich Hoffman Blast The IRS: What ‘Les Misérables’ and a -2.9 GDP drop really mean

leave a comment »

The other day when I told the story of Attila and the Witch Doctor, which has been around for quite a long time now as a metaphorical reference to the corrosive tendency contained in governments—and currently polluting the American government, it was the only way to explain the current IRS situation ( CLICK TO REVIEW).  I realized during one of my visits with Matt Clark on WAAM radio in Ann Arbor, Michigan that the only real way to explain the crimes of the IRS was with that Attila comparison, but before I espoused on live radio about aspects of deep-seated philosophy which many AM radio listeners during the day time hours are not interested in—I had to introduce the concept in a way that modern readers and listeners would understand.  This left Matt and I to recollect the previous week’s events in a gear that radio audiences understand which was pecking around the surface of the IRS controversy.  Those broadcasts can be heard below, we did a full hour for his Saturday show which of course captivated audiences with a truth they get few other places.  We recorded it with a video feed from my end, but Matt was having technical issues but made the whole thing work anyway the best he could.

The IRS is guilty of several crimes and they are stuffing the information behind a veil of social masks designed to conceal their actions.  During our talk it hit me that the only way to explain this IRS situation is through the proper context of the history of Attila which was actually a concept Nathaniel Branden provided to Ayn Rand.  Those two archetypes, Attila and the Witch Doctor were constructed during a period of American history where near pure capitalism was seen being snuffed out by regulation and the events which would create The Great Society were being implemented.  The book discussing Branden’s archetypes was For The New Intellectual published by Ayn Rand in 1961 well before any of the current troubles occurred—but the signs were clearly present.  The temperament of talk radio which requires a lot of back and forth as a fluid discussion would not allow for the introduction of the Attila concept without all the back story—so it wouldn’t fit during our one hour talk radio show.  But as Matt played several clips from the IRS hearings—things I had heard, but not in the condensed order that he played them—it was obvious where America was going wrong and how it had to be fixed.

The IRS clearly has become the modern Attila—an entity which rules by force and is controlled by the Witch Doctors in the White House and Supreme Court.  They were hiding their obvious crimes against the American Constitution which was created specifically to protect citizens from future Attila types so that the protection of the Constitution would be eroded away before America realized a crime had taken place.  All of America had been trained to support either Attila or the Witch Doctor through their education systems—provided of course by the government and their metaphorical Witch Doctor lawyers.   That is a mouthful to say on live radio but it was dashing through my mind as Matt and I spoke.  This leaves Americans defenseless to deal with a corrupt IRS because most citizens have either already submitted to Attila the ultimate dominatrix or a committed alliance to a Witch Doctor following the philosophy of Immanuel Kant essentially declaring that reality is anything that the mass collection of people in a democratic government believe it to be.  So if the masses believe that the IRS is innocent of a crime—then this is to be the projected fact in the news media and legal briefs for all time.  When the IRS commissioner revealed to Trey Gowdy—which Matt and I spoke of—that the commissioner did not believe the IRS did anything wrong he was playing the Witch Doctor role.  His assertion was that the government was spending considerable time and money convincing the masses through public relation tricks that a crime at the IRS had not been committed, that evidence had not been destroyed and that there was nothing to see for the inquisitive eye.   The arrogance found on the face of the commissioner was the knowledge that if the government through the Witch Doctor antics of Obama could sway enough American support to believe in their innocence—that the reality of their innocence would follow—therefore leaving the IRS free of conviction.

This obviously was not the case; The IRS is guilty of using its power to harass citizens into a particularly desired political direction—good for the Attila regime represented by the IRS.  The IRS is not serving the needs of the people, and government certainly isn’t serving the tax payers of The United States—they were falsely believing that they were part of an exclusive culture of aristocrats and that the IRS were their personal minions to force compliance protecting that aristocracy.  I blame much of this trouble on the philosophers of the past, people such as Kant, Marx, Descartes, Hume, Hegel—basically the Rationalists, and the Empiricists—or put more simply those who abandoned reality and those who clung to it by abandoning their mind.  Those philosophers shaped the modern world to fit the mold of old world Europe.  Marx was so backward he had no answer for capitalism which he sought to destroy after watching the two primary revolutions in France, particularly the Revolution of 1848.  The workers of the world unite slogan was built up against the Attila aristocracy so affiliated with Europe at the time.  Capitalism freed the minds of man—especially in America.  But for anyone who has seen the play Les Misérables it is clear that it was the Attila of aristocracy that was suppressing the people of France.  Capitalism would have freed them, but Marx had arrived first to their radical minds in the form of the Witch Doctor who wanted to rule over Attila—so the young communists used Attila tactics to overthrow the aristocracy thus catapulting them all not toward freedom, but to continued oppression because they didn’t understand what they were doing—philosophically.  That is why there is a red flag in the play—and the movie—it represents the blank red flag of socialism as proposed by Karl Marx—a fellow Witch Doctor from the philosophic school of Kant.

In America roughly 50 year later the IRS formalized itself in 1918 after first being created during the Civil War in 1862 to raise funds for the effort.  Once the government received a taste of the revenue collection system they became addicted and continued to collect taxes long after the war was over passing law after law not because they needed to—but because they could—the Witch Doctors had the power of Attila and they intended to use it—and did.  As that same European socialism came to America through its universities by way of Marx and Kant the IRS gained more and more Attila like tendencies becoming essentially Javert from Les Misérables the mindless functioning Attila with a terminator like persistence to recapture Valjean at any cost—in spite of him becoming a successful factory owner and caretaker of Cosette.  This was a classic case of cutting off one’s nose to spite its face—but being a non thinking servant of the Witch Doctor aristocracy Javert mindlessly served that order and in the end when he had failed could only commit suicide in self sacrificial obedience to the Witch Doctor oriented “law” which he enforced with brute force and conviction.  The IRS as a government organization became this “Valjean”—the Attila by default and would spend the next hundred years destroying capitalism in America until as Matt and I pointed out during the broadcast America only had a -2.9% GDP in the first quarter of 2014—which apparently shocked everyone—except me.  I’ve only been saying it for four years now.  That drop is a direct result of too many Attila types in American government imposing force upon job makers instead of freeing them up to create jobs and products.  (Why is this so damn hard for people to understand, the hero in Les Misérables was a factory owner.  Fantine suffered because she lost her job at the factory–had to sell her hair, teeth and her body to care for her child—but why—because not enough people built factories for god’s sake.  She was poor because there weren’t enough jobs.  There needed to be more people like Valjean, not less and only capitalism provides such things)  The IRS has spent a century destroying capitalism and now they have been caught as law breakers—and the government instead entrenched itself to protect its Witch Doctors.  Obama got on a plane and flew to the Midwest to rally support seeking protection from a congress that wants to sue him over Executive Order malpractice.  Again, the philosophy Obama exhibits is the one of Immanuel Kant—that if enough people believe something—the reality is subjugated toward that majority belief.  So the facts of the IRS case are ignored in preservation of Attila and the Witch Doctors in Washington.

Matt Clark and I had a great talk as usual—and it was very productive.  Many people who avoid reading, thinking, or taking responsibility for the state of the world were not aware of the Branden/Rand metaphor developed in 1961 because universities are teaching Kant and Marx, not the new philosophies born in America by minds defending capitalism. Instead, the goal has been to return America back into the European fold of Attila and the Witch Doctor through art, like Les Misérables and the persistence of the IRS who is the metaphorical Javert protecting the aristocratic system of government with mindless commitment.  Too much to discuss on AM radio, but it was the essence of the problems covered on Matt’s show.  It is because of Attila and the Witch Doctor that the IRS has been committing so many crimes in the light of day and getting away with it—and why the government itself is powerless to do anything about it—even though justice is crying out for attention—and revenge.

Rich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com 

‘Cloud Atlas’ Possibly the worst movie ever made: Director Larry Wachowski is now a woman named Lana

with 5 comments

Yikes, I watched recently what may be the worst movie I have ever seen—which is very embarrassing for the movie.  I mean, Jesus Christ—it was absolutely terrible.  Diabolically ridiculous, lampoonist, flawed, disjointed—it was a wrecked concoction of poor philosophy, disastrously stupid politics, and a sheer waste of the three hours I spent watching it.  Tragically, I hoped it would be good, Tom Hanks was in it, Halle Berry was as well, the Wachowski family was involved who did films like the Matrix and Speed Racer—so even though I thought I would dislike the politics—which were noticeably progressive—I hoped the movie would have its moments.  It didn’t.  It was just terrible and the only reason I am reviewing it is so that I can show readers here that not every movie review is good.  Some people have accused me of working for Warner Brothers because of my glowing reviews of the Batman films, and Eastwood projects—but this—this Cloud Atlas—it was just wretched.  It was like looking at something a dog puked up after eating feces in the yard mixed with freshly cut grass and garbage out of the hamper.  It is unbelievable that anybody ever gave a green light for that movie because if that is what people in Hollywood think is a good movie, we are in big trouble.

I gave the film a chance because Roger Ebert loved it—he said he thought it was one of the most ambitious films ever made and was a complicated riddle that deserved multiple viewings.  And parts of it were very ambitious, the budget was large, the visionary attempt was epic, and it had stars.  Susan Sarandon’s inclusion almost made me not even watch it because of her active progressivism—but I recorded it on my DVR in March and finally got around to watching it in June out of obligation really.   I felt because of what Ebert said that the film deserved attention, but I knew it was a progressive film—so I treated it like a trip to the dentist—something you don’t really enjoy, but is needed from time to time for basic maintenance.  My conclusion was that Roger Ebert lost his mind.  Cloud Atlas was that terrible.

The foundation of Cloud Atlas is deeply flawed making all the interesting interconnected storylines worthless.  The film is about gay love, slavery, feminism, and is clearly against big oil.  It is also about the worthless nature of individual lives and only concerned about how they fit into the larger tapestry of existence.    Considering Ebert died shortly after Cloud Atlas I’ll give him a pass—maybe the idea of resurrection through a future life was something appealing to him in those last moments and he saw in the Cloud Atlas insanity a ray of hope for himself.  The film was released around the same time that Atlas Shrugged Part II hit theaters and I remember well having to defend that film from people who loved Cloud Atlas.  So I made a point to see the film at the first available moment which is why I recorded it.  Being an open supporter of the filmmakers producing the Atlas Shrugged films, I wanted to understand how the other side could make such comparisons, and what I learned was that Cloud Atlas is the exact opposite philosophy of Atlas Shrugged.  The two couldn’t be further apart in values—they have nothing in common other than the word “Atlas” in their titles.

And before anybody says that I didn’t understand the film………………….please, don’t waste the time.  I understood all the metaphors in the film and I get the interaction of the characters and the various time periods.  But to what point—so that the sick guy on the ship trying to get home to his wife who was really the future goddess of civilization could tell her bigoted father that she was running off with her husband?  That was the closing scene and the climax of the picture??????????????????????????????  No, there was another climax, the one with Tom Hanks and Halle Berry married and living happily on another planet well into the future telling the story of Cloud Atlas to his grandchildren who wanted to look up at the stars and know which one was earth.  Really????????????????????  I wasted three hours to come to that stupid revelation?  You can refund money but you can’t refund time—and I am resentful that I lost three hours of my life to Cloud Atlas.

imageHowever, one thing that I did learn is that everything I say about progressives is absolutely 100% correct.  Their world vision was on full display in Cloud Atlas and philosophically, they are like children right out of the womb—yet they believe they are at the height of human knowledge.  Cloud Atlas was presented as an exclamation point and epic triumph toward progressive thought.  Tom Hanks is a smart guy and a great actor—so he consciously took on multiple roles in the film.  It was obviously for him a labor of love—he believed in the project intensely—and that concerns me greatly for his very mental health.  There was nothing profound about Cloud Atlas.  It was like watching the news with a progressive slant.  It was ridiculously simple and anti-climatic.  I mean crap…………..it was just terrible.

I understand that I hate progressive and liberal philosophy.  Those idiots can call me a right-winger all they want—because if Cloud Atlas is what they think merits thought—they are thoughtless.  They do not even have the ability to make a compelling argument if that is the best they can do.  Cloud Atlas is the culmination of that kind of crappy Hollywood politics where screenplays are written by boot lickers at parties where drugs flow freely and everyone thinks they are brilliant from the vantage point of the little flat of land nudged up between the Pacific Ocean and the Nevada desert mountains.  The Wachowski family is not the second coming.  They likely ripped off the concept of the Matrix from another writer and have struggled to make a good film since—even though studios have thrown massive budgets at them.  Larry Wachowski wrecked his life in the Hollywood Dungeon when he started hanging around with Iisa Strix and Buck Angel the transsexual known as “The Dude With a Pussy.”  Worse yet, one of the directors of Cloud Atlas was Lana—who used to be Larry after he went through a sex change operation—so he is one of those LGBT people and that wrecked identity became Cloud Atlas.

It’s not that the many incidences in Cloud Atlas where male characters play females, and females play males was artistically wrong—it was just too simple.  Anyone who bases their identity purely on sexual function is a lost cause—and in essence, this is what was going on in Cloud Atlas.  The premise of the characters is from the vantage point of the kind of person who desires to engage in bondage in the Dungeon which is a huge part of that transsexual community in Los Angeles.  But for the rest of the nation—it’s considered stupid.  So while Cloud Atlas had a 10 minute standing ovation at Sundance and progressives raved about the film—it is only hard-core progressives who enjoyed it.  For everyone else—it is ridiculously simple—and tragically limited in its philosophical outlook.  What makes a person is not the holes they have in their bodies which allow for sexual penetration—it is the content of their minds—and in Cloud Atlas, the minds are disasters who made a film seething with liberal talking points ridiculously displayed as a work of art that belong nowhere else but in a litter box.

Ironically, I didn’t even know that Larry had turned himself into Lana before I watched Cloud Atlas.  I discovered that trying to figure out why the movie was so fu**ed up.  I was trying to understand how and why Warner Brothers distributed the film and discover who put up the money for the project and learn what on earth the directors were thinking.  That’s when I learned that Larry never recovered from his divorce after being caught with the dominatrix Strix in the Dungeon—and had poured way too much mental energy into becoming a woman.  He then directed a film about the quality of a soul regardless of gender roles over a long-span of time to justify his/her terrible decisions in life.


Do yourself a favor———never watch Cloud Atlas.  Something’s are better left alone—and that movie is one of them.image

Rich Hoffman



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 890 other followers