I’m Sick of Homosexual Marketing: Their lifestyle choices are imposing, and disrespectful

Personally I’m really sick of the whole social homosexual issue and don’t have much sympathy for the Indiana and Arkansas governors under protest from gay groups over their recent legislation which should be covered already by the 1st Amendment anyway. I’m not gay, and don’t personally associate with gay people because they typically don’t share my values, and I have no plans to change that value judgment. I think the Rocky Horror Picture Show was a terrible movie, and I hate gay pride parades because of all the stupid color combinations. Yet in spite of the opinions of the progressive left and right, that does not make me a homophobe—as they like to call people who don’t share their appreciation for anal intercourse—which is gross in any fashion—man or woman. When I look at people I try not to think about what kind of sex they enjoy, just as I don’t want to know if they like fried chicken or sushi. Whatever their choices—keep it to themselves, because I likely don’t want to know. Sex is a very small part of existence, so policy should not be built around any sexual orientation. Gay people don’t have a right to molest straight people with audacity and gross behavior in public—then cry foul when people don’t like what they see. When those people utter such, they don’t deserve to be called names and attacked socially by a collective mob to change their behavior under coercion, which is what has been happening in Indiana. At that point gay people lost their sympathy and have simply become bullies. They may have a rainbow inspired aggression—but they are still bullies.

An example of how gays step over the line all too often occurred when I was much younger—I was at a video game arcade using the rest room when a very wiry person came up to the stall next to me. Now it was a big bathroom so there were many other stalls he could have used, instead he stood right next to me. That was problem number one, because I don’t like people too close to me unless there is no other option—and there were options. Then he tried to have a conversation with me, which was mistake number two. I really don’t like to talk to people when using the restroom. I like to get finished as quickly as possible and get out of those places—because they usually smell bad. So I didn’t want to talk to him. Then he tried to look over the divider at my assets, and he was not shy about it. I’m not ashamed of anything there, so that didn’t bother me so long as I’m dealing with a heterosexual. But as it turned out, the guy was gay, and he asked me if he could perform oral sex. That was it. I called him a fag. He called me a hater and grabbed my shoulder to look me in the face as if he had authority to touch me, so I punched him. I heard a pop when my fist hit his face and he went down and stayed there. I stood there for a moment to see if he would move, which he did a little. I finished with my bathroom visit taking extra time to see if the guy would try to engage in conversation—but he didn’t. Instead he stood up, refused to engage in any further conversation not even bothering to wipe the blood from his face in the sink and left. It was a really strange ending to a really uncomfortable trip to the restroom.   He was obviously embarrassed that he ended up on the floor after trying to engage in sexual activity, and left quickly once he could stand again. I expected security to come, but they never did so after waiting around for about 15 minutes, I left never to see that guy again. If that had been today, I would have had an army of PC police there to put my face on the news and the newspapers would have written about it until they ran out of ink—but back then distinctions in such behavior were still judged as something negative—and the sentiment toward change has not enriched our culture. There have been similar incidents over the years, but that was the worst and most obvious—and the question I’ve always had is–why should I have to put up with those people?

Men and women have separate bathrooms for a reason, so that sexual conduct doesn’t get mixed together. But with gay people, there are no barriers, and they defiantly have the advantage because only they really know if they are gay or not. If a guy wants to use the stall next to me in the restroom, my wife has a right to know if some rival for her affection is trying to get a mental picture of her private affairs. If the guy is heterosexual, she doesn’t have a rival, but if he’s gay, she does. This is a problem, as a straight person, I should have a right to use the restroom without sexual advances—and in this modern society—you never know. If you’re endowed, you can’t hide that stuff behind a stall, so the eyes of a gay person can see everything clearly—if they want to. So where are the rights of heterosexuals in this whole discussion over non discrimination—because in order to protect ourselves from sexual advancements, one must make a value judgment against those who clearly are willing to cross the lines of acceptability?

It is baffling to me how critics of the new Indiana law interpreted The Religious Freedom Act. Gay advocates as reported by The Blaze in the following article reflect the lunacy.

MSNBC host Ed Schultz clashed with a conservative guest from the Heritage Foundation Tuesday night over Indiana’s controversial religious freedom law.

The liberal host opened up his show asking Ryan Anderson, “How does this law open it up for blatant discrimination?”

“This law doesn’t open the door for discrimination,” Anderson quipped back. “This is the law that’s been on the federal books … and it governs over 30 states.”

“Wait a minute, that’s not true,” Schultz responded, contending those laws don’t have “the definition of a person connected to a corporation.”

“No, no it does,” Anderson rebutted. “The Supreme Court held just last term that the definition of person in the federal RFRA includes corporate persons.”

“Cut his mic off! Cut his mic off! We’ll bring him back if he wants to be courteous.”

Share:

Schultz disagreed and reiterated his view that the law opens the door open for discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals.

“Corporations do have rights!” Anderson said. “The New York Times has free press rights. It goes not just to each reporter, but to the institution. … In the same way, people who form organizations also have their religious liberty rights protected.”

Schultz then asked Anderson if it was the position of the right-wing that business owners should be permitted to tell gay people to “get the hell out” of their restaurants.

 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/31/msnbcs-ed-schultz-loses-it-on-conservative-guest-over-controversial-indiana-law-cut-his-mic-off/

To make matters even worse, members of the UConn coaching staff are boycotting the Final Four in Indianapolis because of the Religious Freedom Act saying “UConn is a community that values all of our members and treats each person with the same degree of respect, regardless of their background and beliefs, and we will not tolerate any other behavior.” Well, given that they are a progressive institution to begin with, their statement is consistent with the teachings of the progressive movement—but they fail to identify one glaring issue. In order for this whole thing to work—this equality thing, it requires people like me to put up with swanky perverts who want to turn our bathrooms into pick-up joints and to treat them with some level of restraint. If I were to walk into a women’s bathroom undoubtedly there would be quite a stir as woman would likely scramble to cover their private parts from my male eyes. But we are supposed to disregard this restraint in the presence of gays and allow them to view without any feelings of guilt the fruits of our privacy for the benefit of their sexual perversions. The action on their behalf requires nothing. But for someone like me, it requires an abandonment of value and preservation reserved typically between the sanctity of a husband and wife.

If there is a business that typically caters to a religious crowd, don’t they have a right to discriminate against those who might drive away other members of their business who seek refuge in their endeavors? Don’t straight men and women have a right to use the restroom without being eye candy to the deviant—or will UConn protest the term deviant to describe a person who spends too much time thinking about sex? Don’t businesses have a right to sport productive enterprises that might be negatively impacted by a couple of dudes making out in public with pink tights and a hat full of flowers? Of course they would. To argue otherwise is insane. Yet the progressives have done just that and revealed to what extent they wish to impose themselves on society. They want normal people to lower their expectations to the level of the valueless, and to allow themselves to be sacrificed to the mass whims of collectivism. And when faced with such a vile understanding, the conservatives don’t even have the guts to speak out against it—except for Ryan Anderson from the Heritage Foundation. He defended the law quite well and you saw what progressive Ed Schultz did—he cut off his microphone.

The only way that gays can win their position is to stop the debate against them with name calling, or break down any moral retribution that might be cast in their direction due to them being entirely too focused on sex instead of higher elements of mental acuity. In both cases they act as a parasitic organism against society at large, and personally, I’m tired of hearing about their feelings. Homosexuals represent between 2% to 10% of the total population depending on the survey source. At best they are asking 90% of the rest of the country to put up with their marketing efforts toward finding more dating options. That’s pretty much what it boils down to. And for the rest of us, particularly me, I’d say we’ve heard enough from them. I’d like to go to the can without worrying about some rainbow princess trying to watch me, and if two drag dressing transvestites want to suck face in a business of mine, I should have a right to toss them out to keep from intruding on the privations of the other customers, and all their kids. At some point enough is enough, and we’re there.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

The Obamanation: Just too embarrassing to discuss

I don’t like Obama, I think as a president he’s an idiot, and he’s at best one of the worst things that’s ever happened to America. But today I actually feel sorry for him. It would be terrible to live in his shoes, to have such an intellect that has led to so much destruction—and to be solely responsible for it. What a mess his presidency is—its not even dignified enough to have a closure as Nixon did—with a resignation ahead of impeachment. Obama’s time in the White House is such a miserable failure that it can’t even end with dishonor and an apology. He is so bad that such things wouldn’t even help.

“Was it worth it?”

That’s the first question Fox News host Megan Kelly posed to State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki on Wednesday night, several hours after the U.S. Army announced they were charging Bowe Bergdahl with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. The Obama administration released five Taliban commanders to free the former Army sergeant from captivity last year.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/25/megyn-kelly-gets-tough-with-state-dept-spokeswoman-on-bergdahl-swap-was-it-worth-it/

I hate to say it, but I reported on all this in 2014 when Obama brought the Bergdahl family to the Rose Garden for a press conference as if his actions in releasing a very controversial figure would give him a chance to wipe his hand across the ass of the deserter’s mother and allow the father to show the radical roots of their son through his speech. Obama stood by and smiled a knowing smile looking fully supportive of the misunderstood terrorist of the Taliban as Bob Bergdahl spoke Pashto–as if the Bergdahl family represented the future fate of all Americans—soon to buckle under the weight of Stockholm syndrome complete with a Taliban beard and worship of Allah from the White House. Obama had just made plans to release 5 terrorists for a deserter and had the parents of the weak-kneed solider thank the god of the terrorists in front of millions of people. Somehow Obama calculated that his Saul Alinsky tricks would wipe the minds of America so that they wouldn’t see what he was doing.

It took the army most of a year to release their findings but finally they had to agree that Bowe Bergdahl was in fact a deserter and had actually caused the death of American soldiers trying to retrieve him from his defection to the Taliban. There was no way for them to spin the situation in the White House but Jen Psaki tried—but to no avail. What was she thinking even going on the Kelly File to try to spin the story? As I watched I couldn’t help but feel sorry for her—as all her words would go down in history and never be forgotten. Even worse was the thought that Obama himself was watching and hoping for a half court miracle shot by Jen to turn the tide against public opinion. But she only dug the Obamanation deeper into the quandary of failure.

It was ugly. So ugly, I can’t even write any more about it. I’ve said all this before, and as usual, I was more right than I wanted to be. But even as much as I despise Barack Obama as an American president, I don’t hate anybody that much—to watch them make such complete idiots of themselves—the failure of the White House is complete. And they have nobody to blame on earth but themselves—and that is the worst punishment for their crimes imaginable, because it will be stuck to all of them for the rest of their lives. This Bergdahl situation is simply that bad. It is embarrassing, insulting, and deeply revealing all in a single action. And it is a story that will have legs for a long time, and go down in history books for centuries.

Even worse look who is defending people like Bob Bergdahl. Here is a quote from the extremely liberal New Yorker.

“Imagine that you have a child, a wanderer by nature, who gets caught up in a war that has persisted aimlessly for many years; his roaming has festered into a chronic pathology for which there is no known cure. Then imagine that the child, who had hoped to help make a change for the better, becomes so disillusioned that he or she decides that there is no choice but to just walk away into unknown territory. If that were your child, what would you do?”

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/bob-bergdahl-good-father

Clearly, Bob and his wife started the process of imbedding in the young Bowe the type of weakness that made him a deserter. For that family, as bad as the embarrassment is for Obama—it will be worse. What a mess!

These are just embarrassing human beings.

Rich Hoffman

 CLIFFHANGER RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

50 Years of Marriage: The Rams draft Michael Sam–the first openly gay NFL player

It was a rare privilege these days to attend the 50th wedding anniversary of some family friends hosted at a church they had spent their entire life attending.  Prior to the event my wife and I had just celebrated a few days ago our own anniversary of 26 years.  My parents were there and next year they will celebrate their own 50th anniversary.  Growing up I had two sets of grandparents who both went past the 50 year marriage mark which didn’t seem unusual back then.  In the middle of the celebration came the news through social media that Michael Sam had been drafted in the 7th round by the St Louis Rams—which was significant because he is the first openly gay player to enter the NFL.  Talk about locker room tension, or even on the field concern of being tackled by the guy who will unquestionably struggle to keep his sexuality in check around naked men every day.  The kind of idiots who think that gay athletes can be paired together without circumstance are the same fools who can’t fathom being married for 50 years to a member of the opposite sex, raising a family and falling in rhythm with that person in a lifelong dance that builds good people as byproducts to the relationship.

A long time friend of mine gave a nice speech to the crowd amassed in the bowels of the Grace Baptist Church in Middletown about how important his parents had been to he and his sister over all those years.  It wasn’t difficult for him to conger up many good memories of all the years his parents had been there for him like a rock to depend on.  As I listened I knew my own children and now grand children had similar thoughts which would become that much more pronounced when my wife and I hit our own 50 year mark.  That seems like a long time ago, but we realized during the speech that all these 50 year marriages had essentially all been present at our own wedding and they were at the stage then that we are now.  I remember thinking at the end of the 1980s when divorce was becoming rampant and easy by lawyers looking to make money off other people’s misery that many then thought 25 to 30 years of marriage was impossible, yet many were present at our own wedding at the Becket Ridge Country Club.  That in itself was sadly unusual.

Long marriages are not about sexuality.  They are about teamwork, commitment, determination, tenacity, love, and a willingness to walk through the fires of life and spit out the flames one by one at whatever cost.  No marriage over such a long time goes without pitfalls because life has a way of issuing out detours to such journeys without any compassion to our sensitivities.  Long time couples find a way to work through things and come out on the other end and their families are stronger for it.

The news of the new openly gay NFL player is a judgment based on a person’s sexuality only.  It is a progressive desire to destroy all resemblance of traditional family values and place before the world the progressive notion of an athlete that is gay as though such a thing could be normal.  Regardless of how one believes another might become gay, the fact that Michael Sam is will without question cause difficulties in the lives of his teammates.

Being married for a long time I can declare with safety that if I were playing football and the cheerleaders had to shower in the same location as my team mates, my wife would not be OK with that.  The reason is because sexuality needs to be focused and conducted in the bedroom of our home in order for her to manage all the other tasks of our family.  Having nakedness and sexual temptation outside of our marriage would then weaken all the important tasks in our relationship, such as picking out new trees for our yard, keeping track of events in the extended family, needs that the children might have and so on.  Seeing the naked bodies of many women even if the occurrences did not lead to sex would be distracting to our relationship.  It introduces elements that would pull the context of our marriage maneuvers into the primal realm which is not sustaining to families at large.  It’s not a matter of trust so much as sacrament.  If every other young woman prancing around gets a nice view of the tripod and can go home to satisfy themselves to its memory—what sacrament is there for my wife who is then supposed to worship it as a phallic beast meant only for her appeasement.  At football games she would know that all the little girls had the same knowledge of it as she.  They may not handle it but the vision of it is there in their minds for their enjoyment.

NFL player wives already have to accept that their husbands are likely cheating on them while on the road for away games.  That is bad enough.  But now they have to worry that Michael Sam will be doing more than playing ball on a football field and even if it isn’t beyond just looking—the act will be a sexual one.  For a man who likes to be under other men, nobody can legitimately ponder that for a gay male—being on the bottom of a football pile is not a fantasy that he will carry with him to his private acts.  For each man who adds a bit of sweat and odor to the fantasies of Michael Sam, it is sexual essence robbed from the wives of the players who are left with almost nothing sacred for their own bedroom.  Part of the appeal of a married couple is that their sexuality is committed to each other—not the world at large.

I do not like it when my wife goes to a doctor.  Her nakedness belongs to me.  Now, in the scheme of the human body we are all just clumps of flesh and once the soul is removed, the body decays away into dirt.  Humans bring value to such nakedness through their relationships.  If every other man out there has seen the naked body of a wife, then there is less sacred appeal in the bedroom—and anybody who has been married for a long time knows the need for such things.  Sure you get used to seeing each other but there is still purity in knowing that every neighbor up and down the street has not seen her which makes her treasures a gift of the relationship.  Without such enticements, fighting through the really hard stuff is not very appealing—and people usually give up.   This is also why being married to a stripper will bring unusual tension to a relationship.  It might be fun while she is young and attractive, but down the road when her old customers are lonely and looking her up online after she’s popped out a couple of kids—her naked body will be on their mind.   They don’t want to talk—but to remember.

To people who think marriage is a mystery and really have no clue to how relationships work, they are cheering for the progressive step forward society has taken as the St. Louis Rams drafted Michael Sam.  They believe that putting a gay man in a locker-room with other guys will actually work but it won’t, mark my words.  The two things are not biologically, or intellectually compatible and the tension of sexual premise will be distracting to the organization in a very negative way.  Progressives are fine with the conflict, because they are out to change the essence of how human beings conduct relationships.  They are interested in the social impact of changing behavior—especially in marriage.

An old friend sat at my table at this anniversary dinner—one I hadn’t seen in about 20 years.  We picked up our conversation upon the last sentences we had uttered two decades ago only he filled me in on the three marriages he had over that duration.  Such things are normal these days.  Having children with one wife then children with a second and third and trying to see all those kids who are essentially being raised by other men who do not share the same kind of values as the original father is simply destroying children—and these days it is normal behavior.  Nobody thinks twice about hearing his story—but when people find out that my wife and I have been married for a quarter century they almost act like they stumbled into a leprosy village.  Yet everyone yearns for the 50 year anniversary.  I doubt there is a woman alive who goes to her wedding day not hoping to someday celebrate 50 years of marriage to her husband. Yet increasingly, such thoughts are a fleeting fantasy.

The progressives have destroyed the lives of many millions of people by teaching them the wrong values; this latest stunt involving Michael Sam is just the most recent.  Unisex bathrooms, easy pornography, and cheapened sexuality mixing gender roles attacking the family unit of tradition aggressively have destroyed our modern culture and left the children to be raised essentially by government schools.  Behind every marriage these days is a parade of parasitic lawyers chasing after the couple like hyenas waiting for one of them to stumble so that legal action against the other can take place and the state can take control of the children.   What my friend was thanking his parents for at the anniversary dinner was for giving him a sense of tradition and value as the trend has moved toward thinking that the Michael Sam draft is fashionable. Anybody coming from such long-term marriages whether it is my friend, me, or my children are lucky and we know it.  But it will be up to us to protect such opportunities in the future as the trend is against it.  Yet it shouldn’t be.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Kelly Kohls for State Senate of the 7th District: Taking the stink bugs out of the State House–starting with Shannon Jones

Collectivists are a dangerous species in that they are like bugs specifically Halyomorpha halys–brown marmorated stink bugs.  This year for whatever reason stink bugs are popping up everywhere and whenever I see one in my home, I take it outside to free it, but also to get it out of my house.  But there are so many of them that even though I could crush one of the little bugs with little effort, the creatures can ultimately consume my time as I try to address each one of them individually.  The labor unions, political party driven insurgents, and other progressive groups have had a target on my friend Kelly Kohls for a long time.   She has put herself out there pushing for real change especially on the education front—and has drawn a lot of stink bugs into her life.  One of those stink bugs—Shannon Jones in a close alliance with the Governor John Kasich and the Republican Party in Ohio have looked at Kelly’s primary challenge of Jones’ Senate seat and come directly after the former Springboro School Board President using the same tactics progressive groups have used against her in the past—a bankruptcy filing.  Of course this action comes straight out of the Republican Party to defend their grip on power at any cost.  So Kelly wanted to get her message out and answer Jones’ accusations—and of course I helped her.  I take the stink bugs out of my house without killing them—but I also intend to do the same thing with all the progressives and weak-kneed politicians in Columbus and Washington, and Shannon Jones and her John Kasich boot licking ways needs to be carried outside where they can no longer stink up the place with apathy and inaction.   Here is Kelly’s message one week before the primary challenge for Jones’ seat on May 6th 2014.

Progressives thought it was outrageous that Kelly Kohls even had a mortgage of $829,000 on a $450,000 home—and that her bankruptcy was a sign of fiscal recklessness.  This is because most of Kelly’s harshest critics are those who work for government and make great salaries doing almost nothing.  Learning how to accept progressive causes into their lives preserves their incomes.  They don’t start businesses or deal with money-making opportunities.  They simply take money so to progressives, it is a mystery as to where money comes from—and they believe it to be finite.  They emphasize the large sums of money to point out that Kelly is operating above the average norm for the “middle class” which was a term created by labor unions.

However, Kelly has five kids and most of them have gone to college by now.  Kelly herself holds a doctorate so a lot of money has been spent in the Kohls family on education and college these days is a $50K to $100K enterprise.  So Kelly hasn’t been spending money hanging out at Jags buying $300 meals every night for her friends—she’s been getting her education, putting her kids through college, and starting entrepreneurial enterprises.  All that together easily adds up to a million dollars when you try to do all those things in the same fiscal decade.  Since progressives get most of what they want in life by begging, mooching, and looting—they don’t understand Kelly Kohls—but I do, and have no problem at all standing with her in a run for State Senate.

I know how the name calling game works and 90% of what is said derogatory about Kelly Kohls is of that variety.  I have been married for a long time; my wife is a “house-wife” in the traditional sense.  She makes herself 100% available to my grown children and now grandchildren and she is proud to be the kind of mom that the television show Leave It to Beaver would have recognized in his home.  For my traditional views on family life, my disdain for feminism as a progressive movement, and a belief that all children need a strong mother in the home guiding a family to prosperity, I have been labeled a sexist because most everyone in existence is doing things wrong in their families in my opinion—and these names came at me well before I called the PTA moms at Lakota “latte sipping prostitutes with asses the size of car tires and diamond rings to match.”  The name calling was already going on well before—I simply wasn’t going to play the game for the “good of the community” or any group which I was a spokesman for.  The personal attacks were designed to change my behavior just like the stink bug infestation can overwhelm you if allowed.

Kelly doesn’t share all my views, she is certainly an A type personality and that can rub other A type personalities the wrong way, but she shares with me a love of tradition and commitment to spirituality.  If she doesn’t want to cook meals for her husband and await him at the door with his slippers and a newspaper that is her business within her family and I’m alright with it.  It’s a decision she has to make between her husband and her.  It certainly wouldn’t stop me from voting for her for State Senator of the 7th District.  Are women equal to men?  Most of the time women are better—on intellectual matters especially.  But men are built for heavy lifting both physically and emotionally—and this is why traditional roles had men and women separating their tasks in such a way.  The man came home and was recharged by his wife for the next day’s battles.  However, politics is an intellectual pursuit, and in it Kelly Kohls is less prone to corruption, deals, and peer pressure than a John Kasich type because of her intellectual aptitude.

Shannon Jones is not as directed as Kelly is.  She allowed herself to be steered into proposing the Senate Bill 5 controversy to drastically pull back the power of public sector unions in Ohio.  When that bill was repealed Jones and Kasich retreated into progressive pandering and Obamacare Medicaid expansion.  Shannon went right along with the party line whatever it was and did not think for herself—so she needs to be carried outside with all the other stink bugs and set free from the State House.  Kelly is much better equipped intellectually, and spiritually to do the job of Senator of the 7th District.

I’ve known Kelly for quite a while and one thing that she is at her very core is something that I recognize as being the highest quality there is for a woman—she is a mom first and everything else second.  Kelly has been a political activist and political contributor now that her children are grown because she wishes to bring her nurturing tendencies to the State of Ohio instead of just her home.  My wife has no such desires—but she is not an A type personality like Kelly and I.  Progressives have created the modern definitions for womanhood and like their fiscal policies—they are all wrong and are ruining the lives of everyone who follows them.  The real roles of traditionalist, conservatives, and men and women is far more complicated than the progressive stink bugs can wrap their minds around and that is not Kelly’s problem—nor mine.

Kelly and her husband filed for bankruptcy trying to make things happen—the way they were supposed to.  But the business climate changed on them leaving them hanging over the edge of a cliff for which they were dropped.  The bankruptcy laws in America were created to encourage investment risk because that is the requirement of capitalism.  Government workers do not take risks, they figure out whose boots they have to lick—and they do so to protect their jobs and keep the tax money flowing into their pockets.  They don’t typically try to start businesses, they don’t typically take responsibility for raising their own children—they send them off to public school to have the task done for them—and they certainly don’t take risks.  Kelly Kohls has, and now she is doing it again going after an established Senator in Shannon Jones during the May 6th primary.  And for that risk, the stink bugs are attacking her with that terrible odor they emit, which the media is happy to play off of.

Kelly simply wants to take the stink bugs out of the State House one by one starting with Shannon Jones.  Of course they won’t like it, but they don’t have a choice.  Republicans and Democrats functioning from progressive politics are stinking up Columbus and they need to be removed so that order can be brought to our Houses of Legislation.  And that is the essence of Kelly’s run against Shannon Jones.  Kelly is a mother taking care of her house and her family.  Only her care extends out to the State of Ohio and all the people in it who just want a shot at the American Dream.   To some Kelly is an education crusader, to others she is a combative “A” type personality that wants to be in charge.  To others she is a fiscally reckless overlord who lives above the “middleclass.”   To others still she is a threat to the Republican Party and even more dangerous to Democrats.  But I know her as a mother who cares the way all mothers do.  She sees Ohio as her family and she wants to fight to do what’s right for it.  And for her the best way to take care of her family is to remove the stink bugs from the State House which is why she is running for a Senate seat and why the establishment Republicans are terrified.

Rich Hoffman

  www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Teachers Who Shrugged: Messages from Galt’s Gulch

It is time to have a serious discussion about education outside the realm of simple difficulties in funding it. It is time to challenge any assertion that government schools have of taking American schools into a realm suitable for a “global marketplace.”  Any educator who says such things should be instantly terminated for non conformance by American standards.  As proven, the rest of the world has been corrupted by the Cold War of the 20th Century where communism spread through virtually every institution of academics in the world, from Jakarta to Cambridge, to Yale.  To understand more clearly, read the book We The Living.  It will tell all everything they need to know about the current problems in public education.  There is NO doubt that the conditions described in that book are what’s causing our present problems in education.  Yet only in America has any real economic progress of any worth taken place.  If American economic markets failed, the car industry in Japan, China, Korea, Germany and elsewhere would be destroyed, the iPhone factories in China would whither away.  Many other products that are produced by American companies in oversee markets essentially to run away from American labor unions and the tyranny of the Department of Labor, and the EPA would cease, because the initiative to create those markets started in America and no place else.   It is time to have a heart to heart discussion of just how bad the situation truly is and to stop apologizing to the world for being so damn good, and America has been.  The rest of the world should try to be like America, not America trying to be like everyone else corrupted by communist attempts to alter their economies.

 

After my article the other day about the OEA union in Ohio, I received a lot of interesting feedback from my friends in Galt’s Gulch, it’s an online community who have created in cyberspace the kind of Atlantis found in Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged.  The filmmakers created the place to promote their Atlas films, but the site has taken on a life of its own where really intelligent people from all levels of society are spending time with like-minded enthusiasts who are generally philosophic Objectivists.  I would say that the intellectual capacities of the typical people who spend time in the Gulch are well above average, so feedback from them is very valuable to me.  After my article, I received two comments from Gulch members who have been involved in education for a great many years and left their impressions.  Those impressions were worth noting and have been listed below along with the links to the place in the Gulch where the original comments can be found.  They are worth reading as specific entries into the education argument and I offer them here for that purpose.  These are not people who are like me in that they just despise public education as a primary infringement on personal liberty.  These people tried to work within the system and have turned away to report their experience—something which I think is just the tip of the iceberg.  I have spoken to quite a few teachers in person, on the phone, and am friends with quite a few, and they all reflect these next two entries.  Once a few teachers see others breaking ranks and voicing their opinions, I am confident that many more will follow—and they need to.  

Posted by Susannah 2 hours, 33 minutes ago

I retired from teaching 7 years ago, after 20 years in education, for several reasons, one of which was that the Progressives had completely taken over public education. I taught American History to 11th graders. The textbook I was to teach from was ridiculously slanted left: half a chapter on the American Civil War, 1 chapter on WWI, 2 pages on the Spanish-American War, on 3 chapters on Progressivism, 3 chapters on the New Deal, 1 chapter on WWII, lots of information on LBJ, Nixon was the anti-Christ, the usual leftist views on Vietnam, etc.

I usually assigned the textbooks to the students because I was required to do so, then taught from my own notes and my own materials. Until the last few years, I had an assistant principal that did not concern himself with what I was doing and so I taught American History, not Revised American History. The last few years I taught, though, I had a new assistant principal who was a dyed-in-the-wool Progressive. The woman hounded me like a coon dog on the scent. I was reprimanded several times for not using the textbook, subjected to unannounced observations, and once suspended without pay for 2 days.

Common Core is the Progressive’s wet dream. It does not teach any higher thinking skills, no extended thought processes, no critical thinking. It turns out nice, stupid automatons who will not question TPTB. It destroys any interest in life-long learning, because learning under Common Core is so tediously not fun.

I don’t know how much this adds to the discussion, but I want to add my conviction that public education is broken … has been broken for some time. There is no quick fix; I don’t believe it can actually be fixed at all. At this time, charter schools or private schools are a parent’s best bet.

Read more at http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/4f180f8/becky-higgins-oea-introduction-a-tribute-to-communism-if-i-had-a-hammer#aWHMYbBHAMspMJWC.99

 

 

Posted by Stormi 3 hours, 38 minutes ago

This is definitely representative of what is happening in Ohio schools (as well as across the country), and has been for 15 years or more. 15 years ago we had Maslow group therapy and group hypnosis on all classes in grade schools here, instead of academics. We had history teachers teaching kids they had “rights” with no mention of responsibilities. We have ongoing values clarification in required health classes. It leaves one asking, “Where’s the academics!”

These teachers are brainwashed, either by the colleges where they get their free Masters degrees or by their unions. Our local union leaders once admitted to me they were turning children against their parents, because THEY thought it was best for them. Kids are taught, “There is no I in team.” – at which point I gave our daughter “Anthem” to read. khalling just talked to the father of a 7 year old the other day, who said he could not understand why his daughter suddenly acted to disrespectful to her family – I filled him in..Teachers and even administrators are all in for this collectivist agenda. I thank Tom DeWeese (Ohio guy) of American Policy Center for letting me know 15 years ago.we were facing a nationwide agenda. Actually it is UN driven at this point. Kids will be taught to embrace UN Agenda 21, and already learn property rights must go.

Yeah, I too started out the 60s as an anti-Vietnam liberal, while my grounded brother told me another Civil War was in our future. He read history more than I did, but being curious, I started reading history. Mao did it for me, I began to see the agenda around me, I began to learn that McCarthy was right, there were commies in the government and other professions, trying to turn the US. I should have known, living in North Dakota in the early 60s, my Dad moved us to Texas, after he felt overwhelmed by the scope of an active CPUSA up there at the time. I hated Johnson, still do, and that also helped wake me up.

Believe me, what you see on the excellent post by overmanwarrior is not just Ohio, it is coming for your kids as well, and Common Core is their hammer.
Read more at http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/4f180f8/becky-higgins-oea-introduction-a-tribute-to-communism-if-i-had-a-hammer#aWHMYbBHAMspMJWC.99

 

Rich Hoffman

 

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

 

 

 

Cleta Mitchell IRS Testimony: Why the government wants to be in “charge”

The primary reason that we have a Bill of Rights, specifically the First and Second Amendment, is that WHEN corruption takes over a government, that the people can wrestle that power away and remove those corrupted restoring order.  The Second Amendment is not to secure the ability to hunt, or provide personal protection in case some punk decides they want to steal all our cookies.  The Second Amendment is present so that American citizens can defend themselves against the federal government if that body of government gets out of control.   And the First Amendment is present so that the Second Amendment might be avoided.  Power corrupts—it happens even in silly fast food restaurants when a manager has power over other employees, it happens between companies who are both fighting for power and influence, it happens among family members arguing who will sit at the head of a table, and it will always happen in government.  There is no possible way that a centralized government can be expected to perform at an intellectually superior place of neutrality.  Power is leverage over others, and so long as human beings desire such things—corruption will thrive in any government activity.  This corruption has never been so evident than in the IRS scandal where Tea Party activists were directly attacked by government.  Lucky for the government there is a First Amendment, because as long as its respected, the Second won’t be needed—and testimony like the one that Cleta Mitchell performed below can take place.

Explosive testimony lit up a House hearing on the IRS targeting scandal recently, as GOP super lawyer Cleta Mitchell told representatives that the systematic effort to delay the processing of grass-roots groups’ applications for nonprofit status continues to occur.

Mitchell represents several grass-roots conservative organizations whose applications under sections 501c3 and 501c4 of the internal revenue code were delayed for years in the run-up to the 2012 election. She said that targeting had not stopped.  As seen in the video above, she listed a number of instances which are gigantic red flags concerning the IRS scandal that link directly to the President of the United States.  In the case of the IRS, and history will certainly make note of it—the media has been complicit in a deception right along with the federal government.  They have openly suppressed the scandal for the ideological benefit of their own power grab as those enjoying the current power of being in government wish very much to see that power grow.

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/irs-targeting-tea-party/2014/02/06/id/551274

Years ago I worked at a Wendy’s restaurant as a part-time job doing grill cook obligations during their busiest times of the day.   I needed the extra money to pay off a tax obligation from a business start-up that didn’t work out, and I didn’t want the money to come out of our normal family budget, so I took on an extra job just to pay my tax obligation.  I already had a normal full-time job along with dozens of hobbies to fill my time, so my time at this Wendy’s restaurant was something I could take or leave.  One of the managers was a girl about my age who I got along fabulously with.  She understood what I wanted out of the job, and she clearly understood the trade-off that her restaurant received by my services.    On a normal day I saved her anywhere from 2 to 5 staffing positions because I was so fast.  But there was another manager there whom was a disgusting, self-indulged, narcissist.  She was a typically school levy supporter—she had a gigantic ass, an obtuse cranium from the very little brain capacity going on behind her skull and she was deeply in love with power.  She loved having power over all the teenage employees and she relished instructing them what to do.  Of course she and I clashed often as I was not responsive to her at all.  She certainly wasn’t going to tell me what to do, and that was the end of it—but she tried often—and we fought just as much.  She turned a simple task of making food for people into an excruciating ordeal just because she loved power.

I was also a waiter at Frisch’s for a number of years, again, as a second job making extra money.  Frisch’s didn’t pay much, but I did make a lot of money in tips.  I worked at the Fields Ertel location for a few years, and I did it because of the money I could make.  Readers of my novel The Symposium of Justice can enjoy a bit of trivia to know that the climax chapter, “Salad Bar Goddess” is based on my experiences as a waiter at this job.  The location described is the Frisch’s location at Fields Ertel—where the suicide of the hit man occurred, it was there on I-71—where he threw himself in front of an oncoming simi so to rid the earth of his corrosive—irredeemable presence.  That’s why the book is called, “The Symposium of Justice.”  Anyway, there was a manager there, a guy who was obviously miserable with his personal life, had no real personality, and was an otherwise social outcast who was the manager.  He would invent tasks to perform at the close of business long after the tips stopped flowing just to exert power over people.  Just when you thought all the closing duties were performed as a waiter, or waitress, he’d come up with a whole list of things to do at 1 AM in the morning just to show that he had power over you.  Of course I also clashed with this guy.  I made his life such a miserable mess in retaliation for the things he attempted to do to me, that he eventually was transferred away.  On one particular instance I was on my break in the back reading one of my books when he came to tell me to handle another section because they were getting busy.  Well, they weren’t that busy, and he didn’t need me to end my break.  It was well-known that he hated that I read so much because he spewed about it all the time.  So I refused.  When he grabbed my book and tried to wrestle it from my hands, I grabbed his throat and threw him against the wall pinning him in place with some much directed dialogue that shut him up for several months.  I got rid of him by going to corporate headquarters and letting them know what kind of guy he was.  A few months later, he was transferred to another store.  I still see him around town as he is still a manager at Frisch’s.  He is currently a manager at one of the Liberty Township restaurants—and when he sees me he never makes eye contact.  With him it was always about the power and when he sees me, it is a terrible reminder that I did not respect his authority, so he chooses not to deal with the reality which he has built up in his mind.  I could tell hundreds of similar stories very closely related, but when it comes to fast food—where the pay is low, the work is hard, and the hours are disastrously difficult—there are always these types of power-hungry scum bags.  There isn’t anything in it for them to be that way.  The companies don’t promote them more than other people, and the pay is always bad.  They are often forced to work lots of strange hours and in the case of the Frisch’s manager, he hated it that I read so much because he was afraid that I’d become something that he couldn’t ever become—and it drove him crazy.  Yet he didn’t want to put the work into becoming better himself.  His desire, and the levy supporter mentioned prior took jobs in management just so they could mess with people and have power.

Government is filled with these types of people—people who really only want to have control over other people—for the simple reason of having some sense of control.  It’s an infantile desire that exists in every strata of society.  But in the jobs mentioned, I was free to choose whether or not to work in those places, or whether or not I would ram the manager’s head through the back of a Frisch’s wall for interrupting my reading time during a break.  When it comes to government when those types of people work in the IRS, the TSA, the local police and fire departments, zoning, code compliance you name it—those government jobs are filled with insecure despots suffering from deep insecurities that they wished to overcome being in charge of other people.  Like I’ve said, I have lived a very colorful life—and I’m proud of it.  I used to come to work at Frisch’s wearing a Mexican poncho and a cowboy hat with my whips strapped underneath to my shoulder.  I wasn’t going to war, but between jobs I would practice in an abandon lot off Fields Ertel road.  My day job was a kind of political one, where I would spend a lot of time down at Cincinnati City Hall.  During an occasion where I had to deal with Mayor Qualls back in the 90s her office was wreaking with these power-hungry types.  She loved the power of the Mayor’s office in Cincinnati even though she was a long way from qualified to perform management of any kind.  After dealing with people like that I had a need to re-center myself, so I dressed the way I wanted, said what I wanted, and lived how I wanted.  I had the eccentricity of a rock star without the tour bus especially during my tenure at Frisch’s which infuriated the manager mentioned.  He became so frustrated with me that he actually pretended to have a nervous breakdown hoping that my compassion for him would pull me in line.  It didn’t.  As he fell to the ground with an apparent seizure flopping around like a fish I said to one of the waitresses as I stood over him that if he died, we’d be able to leave on time for a change.  Miraculously, as the paramedics came to revive him, he got up and locked himself into his office.  Four hours later, he was back to himself as he ran out of gas to perform the charade—at the end of the night he stopped me as I was leaving.  He asked me if I cared about anyone.  I said yes, my wife and kids.  He then asked me why I worked at Frisch’s if I spend my days hanging out with mayors and Cincinnati “big wigs” then spend my evenings in his restaurant reading books that aren’t even taught in colleges dressed like I’ve walked out of a Clint Eastwood movie.  I said—to make money.

The IRS, The White House, the military, the police, every government agency is filled with these types of people, and they are not capable to rule over anybody.  If left alone, they will become corrupt with power for the simple reason that they have a psychological need to rule over others to justify their insecurities.  For that reason alone, the progressive position of large centralized government will never work.  They can’t even do basic tasks correctly—yet ideologically, all those who support such things have been willing to lie openly to protect that desire. This is what is behind the open lies going on over the IRS scandal.  The power to rule over others is what committed the crime, but the denial that government is filled with these types of personalities propels it—because once that is admitted to, the foundations of progressivism—and liberalism in general—falls apart.

Government is not capable of self-correction.  When confronted, they will attempt every ploy known to shake the truth from their actions so to avoid the grim reality of their personal tyranny.  So we have the First Amendment to call out the bad behavior when we see it, just as Cleta Mitchell did in the testimony seen above.  It’s not just one or two people involved in this scandal, its entire branches of government and most of those workers have similar problems as the people mentioned in my story.  They fear to stand on their own—fear that they lack intellectual resources to do things on their own—so they are attracted to government.  Once they have the power of an office, or the federal government at their back, they are free to be little tyrants to those they see as their intellectual superiors.  With the IRS, they see the Tea Party movement as a threat to them—so they targeted them with all their power in the same way that the Frisch’s manager targeted me just for reading a book.  My action made him feel bad about himself and he didn’t want the self-reflection.  So he attacked me.  The same thing has been happening between The White House, the FBI, the CIA, the DHS the IRS, and the Tea Party groups.

But there are rights and government is not allowed to harass people, so by using the First Amendment as a way to keep those corrupt souls in check, a balance of power can be maintained.  If that doesn’t work, then we have the Second Amendment. But losing one or both of those options is not in the cards as much as progressives would like to see.  They of course want unchecked power—but so long as humans desire such things, there will always be needed balances of power to counter those aggressions.  Presently power has been abused by the IRS and the federal government in general—and action against those villains is justified—and expected in defense of the First Amendment.  If it does not happen, well, then that’s why we have the Second.  But turning away and letting the situation die down is not the path to justice—as we can’t expect the bad guys to do the right thing and throw themselves in front of a truck to rid us all of their intellectual burden.  Cleta Mitchell has every right in the world to be upset.  Crimes were committed and since the government is in charge of the investigation, nothing is happening—which is corruption.  This is why government can never be so large, or can even be trusted to do basic tasks—and why progressivism is a failure that should be eradicated from the tongues of mankind forever.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Liberalism is a Mental Illness: Why the media is so quiet about Karl Pierson–the “Socialist School Shooter”

If liberalism were classified as a mental disorder, we might have stopped many mass shootings; at least that was the reasoning Ann Coulter espoused during a recent episode with Sean Hannity.  That comment may sound inflammatory—but in all reality—there is more truth to it than rhetoric.  The proof is in the recent school shooting at Araphoe High School outside of Denver, Colorado which occurred on Friday December the 13th 2013 and was a dead story more or less by Monday, December 16th. On Friday the news coverage on CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and everywhere else was wall to wall—as usual.  But by Saturday morning, less than 12 hours after the shooting the coverage dried up.  By Monday on the Special Report by Brett Baier there wasn’t a single mention of the shooting during the entire program—a news station thought highly to be a conservative leaning network.  Oddly missing from the many news stations were the Hollywood elite with constant calls for gun control, the prayer vigils, the sorrow of the poor kids shot by the made gunman Karl Pierson foolishly, maliciously, and for no reason at all struck down.  It seemed as if the media in general wanted to move on to another story and forget about this school shooting even as the anniversary of the Sandy Hook Massacre had just occurred prompting schools all over the country to begin staffing armed patrol officers to stop such things from happening—Araphoe being one of them.  The reason…………..well, Pierson unlike the other mass shooters of recent memory who were rumored to be politically left, but not clearly—the Araphoe shooter was clearly, unequivocally—and boldly was a socialist.  Socialism is the political philosophy that most of the media had accepted in small doses, a concept that is taught in public schools—not by name of course, but by practice, and is the current philosophy of the current President of The United States—again, not by name, but in practice.

Karl Pierson’s attack at Arapahoe High School lasted just 80 seconds.  He rushed into the school Friday with a bandolier of ammunition strapped to his chest carrying a machete, three Molotov cocktails and the pump-action shotgun that authorities said he bought days before to avenge a grudge he had against his debate coach for kicking him off the team.  Pierson was such a radical socialist—such a maniacal collectivist, that when even his teacher tried to reel him in, he thought like most left-winged tyrants do—that he had a right and obligation to force others into his way of thinking—by force if necessary.

The teen apparently harbored a grudge against his debate couch Murphy after being disciplined by him in September. The discipline came after Pierson made a verbal threat against Murphy to a group of students. Law enforcement was made aware of that threat, and the response to it remained under investigation.

Pierson’s Facebook page, before it was taken down, was a window into the mind of the accused shooter. He wrote a lot about economics and politics, calling himself a “Keynesian” and jesting that neoclassic economic theory would not fix the economy.

He also used his Facebook to routinely mock Republicans as seen below:

The Republican Party: Health Care: Let ’em Die, Climate Change: Let ’em Die, Gun Violence: Let ’em Die, Women’s Rights: Let ’em Die, More War: Let ’em Die. Is this really the side you want to be on?

One classmate described him as harmless but said he could get verbally aggressive and very heated when debating and discussing politics with teachers and students.  It is obvious that the left-winged radical was not harmless.  Pierson cared enough about socialism and Keynesian economics to go home, buy a gun, and kill his teacher for not being allowed to continue debating on the team—to have a platform to spread his message of collective endeavor through socialism.

Here are several articles covering the story as it unfolded:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/15/dad-says-daughter-critically-wounded-during-arapahoe-high-school-shooting-is-not-doing-well/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/13/sheriff-at-least-two-people-injured-in-colorado-shooting/

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_24724553/arapahoe-high-school-shooting-sheriffs-office-interview-hundreds

http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/12/karl-pierson-arapahoe-high-school-shooter-colorado/

When progressive types run into any issue such as gun violence, their very first reaction is more regulation, more government intervention, less personal freedom, and stronger public school presence, yet these things keep happening in schools where many perceive such places to be safe—even though it is far more likely that their children would be involved in a school shooting than to be involved in an airplane accident.  There is still a fear of flying where there is not a fear of public schools.  Liberals often proclaim that these school shooters are mentally ill, and must be detected by the government schools and treated before they ever bring harm to anyone.  Yet it is never considered what made the shooters ill to begin with—it is never considered that the illness came from institutional failure and no other contributing factor—and that more government intervention will indirectly lead to more mass shootings, and more people who think the way Karl Pierson did.

Does anybody think that Pierson learned to be a socialist from his home environment?  Likely, he learned it from school.  Most children learn about liberalism in public schools by their teachers and college professors.  They vote for Democrats for the first 15 years of their adult lives, then once they maintain jobs for a while have kids of their own, purchase property and live responsibly—they grow out of liberalism and slowly become conservative.  By the time they reach their 50s and 60s they become those stuffy Republicans they used to rant about.  It’s a bit of a cycle of life that we needlessly endure because we allow the government to teach our kids with left-leaning methods that are destructive to their minds.  For people like Pierson—who was probably a bit different from most children from the start—after his debate teachers told him to watch shows like MSNBC and CNN’s Pierce Morgan—and other “recommended” viewing, so that the kid could become a better debater—his young mind became tainted as he observed the socialism of his school, the socialism of his President, the socialism of the news—and he put his finger to the wind and decided that he would become a liberal because he saw that the masses endorsed those views—from his perspective at the public school.  The teachers ripped on Republicans—so if he wanted good grades—he could do the same and get better grades—and maybe even become the next Michael Moore.  After playing at this game for a while, he began to believe that Keynesian economics was the salvation of the world—instead of its destroyer, and that socialism was a benefit to equality—instead of the great slayer of it.

The silence from the news came in the wake of the shooting because most of the people covering the story realized that they had contributed just a small bit to the violence because of their endorsements of soft socialism hidden behind mixed economies so prevalent in The United States.  Karl Pierson was a product of public education—and like most Frankenstein experiments—he became a monster that nobody wanted to acknowledge.  The political theory, the economic theory, and social justice that Karl Pierson learned in his public school became a monster that went on to bring great harm to the other collective occupants of Araphoe High School.  Pierson took what he learned further than the school intended and they tried to pull him out of it too late—they had let his mind go too far to the left—so much so that Pierson become dangerous.  Instead of growing up to become the next Al Gore, or Nancy Pelosi, or even Barack Obama, they had created a Frankenstein monster that got loose and wanted to destroy its maker—his teacher.

Liberalism by default of the frequent actions by many mass killers should be designated a mental illness—so that future people like Karl Pierson can be avoided.  But to admit that would require most people in the mainstream media, and political structure to admit that they are also suffering from the mental illness of liberalism—just not to the same degree Pierson was.  The great fear is that it might not take much for them to become as crazy as Karl Pierson—because they too support concepts of Keynesian economics, they too support socialism, and believe that liberalism is a benefit to society—instead of a detriment.  If anybody were really serious about stopping school shootings, they would not look to laws, guns, or more pansy teachings in public school, but would eliminate liberalism from the American consciousness.  By eliminating liberal instruction, education would not feed the mental illness that tends to occur in mass collectivists who believe that socialism should be the spine of all national economies.  In Karl Pierson’s case, he believed in liberalism so intently that he was willing to kill for it.  There really isn’t any other way to stop such a person once they get loose from a teacher’s control, and that is what scares so many media outlets.  Because they have helped put in motion large doses of the liberalism mental illness—and there will be more Karl Pierson types created by them for the destruction of mankind.  When they show themselves, the responsibility for their actions will fall on the shoulders of those most silent—the national media.

Rich Hoffman

 www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com