How Trump Beat Hillary Clinton: The realities of a new kind of politics

It was pretty clear to me that while watching the Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton debate on September 26th 2016 that the New York billionaire won the debate.  The Donald maintained control throughout the entire debate negating the moderator Lester Holt and forcing Clinton to spend much of the event quiet with that stupid chipmunk awkward smile she uses when trying to rationalize through her various learned behaviors to evoke some level of confidence on topics she is uncomfortable with.  So it came as a shock to me that all the establishment types declared her the winner of the debate during the spin room conversations that took place afterwards.  Nobody with a sane mind could rationalize that Clinton had won the debate—yet most did evoking some invisible standard which the rest of the nation didn’t respect.  Online polls—not the most accurate—but ones that reflect direct passions of the electorate voted that Trump had won—handedly, while establishment media from all walks of life enjoyed the status quo performance of Hillary.  Likely their standard of success was that she didn’t pass out on stage because that would be the only measure of success that I’d give her.  The proof is in the debate highlights seen below where Trump clearly dominated with his performance. 

After the debate it was evident the Clintons hoped to work the VIPs in the room by shaking their hands.  Bill Clinton avoided the Trump family leaving them on the stage alone for several minutes.  I watched this with my tongue in my cheek because it was obvious they weren’t pleased with Hillary’s performance.  Usually the families mingle a bit showing the country that the election is bigger than the candidates—but that’s not how things ended on Monday night.  After a few minutes of the cold shoulder, Trump and his family left the stage for the spin room where Trump himself worked the media.  Hillary played the celebrity shaking hands with her sergeants hoping they would do that job for her.  While Trump was still giving his interview to Sean Hannity, Hillary and her husband Bill—carrying a beverage casually as if he just woke up at a hotel somewhere and was taking his time getting started in the morning—walked to the Econoline van that picked up the passed out Clinton from the 9/11 ceremony recently, and they left the debate facility rather quickly.  I thought it was a very interesting strategy for an unnaturally weak candidate.   Even though I don’t like Hillary Clinton or her family, even objectively thinking—she is just a weak person and can’t help coming across that way.  The more she talks, the worse she sounds, including in the debate. 

So it was stunning that so many establishment types declared her the winner.  Charles Krauthammer from Fox News declared it a draw—which seemed fair for him—but most others thought Hillary Clinton had won which left me scratching my head.  I have a great memory and during the entire debate I was pretty happy with the way Donald Trump asserted himself and literally handled the entire room with confidence.  He owned the stage by every account.  He controlled the pace of the discussion, and he controlled the topics.  He purposely didn’t go for the knockout because it had been decided it would be bad for a man of over 6 feet tall to slap around a little 5’ 4” elderly woman on stage which might actually bring her to physical harm—so Trump avoided the bait—looked presidential, and stayed on the high ground the best he could.  He defended all the sensitive areas well and avoided being pulled into a defensive position without getting himself out of it by the end of the segment. 

So what on earth were the establishment types looking at?  Clearly they were judging the performance based on a measure of static intellectualism which sought to protect itself from the dynamic force Trump represented and they had turned away everything he had said to protect their known reality.  It was a classic case similar to the woman who knows her husband is cheating on her, yet is afraid to disrupt their family income so chooses to ignore the facts to protect her livelihood.  Or the abused spouse married to an alcoholic that is afraid of the conflict that might occur by intervening in the destructive habit.  Hillary Clinton and her supporters—many in the media who have learned to live their entire adult lives under the destructive habits of establishment politics—and fear any changes to that system, are more than happy to preserve that system because they have some level of expected success they wouldn’t have any other way.  So they fight to preserve it even if that means ignoring some simple facts.

Hillary Clinton is a wounded animal representing a status quo political aristocracy that is being rejected—globally—and in the United States Trump showed that he was willing to take on that entire institution fearlessly and with mass charisma—and “they” hated him for it.  So they inserted “their” own static deductions hoping to ignore the dynamic force of change Trump represents.  They created a fictional outcome that simply did not exist at the debate—and time will show over the coming week that people will continue to choose Trump in the polls leaving her reeling from the competition.   Hillary Clinton spent over five days preparing for that debate and she needed a dominating performance which Trump denied her of.  She relied afterwards too much on the establishment media—which has been replaced by The Drudge Report, blogs like this one, and broadcasts like Infowars, leaving her without representation where it counts most in the 2016 election.  That is the reason Donald Trump has been surging to begin with—because the rules are now different and shockingly, the entire establishment ignored those rules in favor of some outdated engagement procedures which no longer have any relevance.

I think Trump won big and that isn’t just wishful thinking.  He achieved his objectives—but Hillary didn’t.  She didn’t show that Trump was unfit, or that she could outmaneuver him.  All she showed was that she could run out the clock and get out of the building with her skin still intact, which was what Trump wanted from the outset, to show that he had compassion for an old woman who is smaller and less powerful than he was.  In the aftermath, Trump’s online presence with potential voters far eclipsed Hillary Clinton leaving her to resort to old tricks about calling women names like “Miss Piggy” and other derogatory names—which in the minds of the typical sports bar attendee—is accurate assessments of various female embodiments—which actually leads credibility to Trump’s truth telling.  Just 12 hours after the conclusion of the debate Hillary was desperately grabbing for a life raft as the world around her had changed without her understanding—and she was truly lost.  With the amount of energy, she put into this first debate to get such sluggish results the path to victory just got a lot longer and more narrow—and for such a weakling as her—much more unachievable leaving the vision of her dreams dimming by the moment.  And if I didn’t hate her so much—I might feel sorry for her sorry ass.  But I don’t.  She’s a vile criminal who deserves all this and more—and then we have October and the surprises yet to come—and the gray clouds around her political future embroiled within them leading to a satisfying conclusion for those who hate her as much as I do. 

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.

Four Minutes of Hillary Clinton: Remember the time she lied about being under sniper fire?

Forget the lipstick that was on her teeth during her DNC speech, forget the fact that she is a felon who illegally deleted over 30,000 emails from her private server to avoid a FBI investigation, forget that terrible screech that comes from her mouth when she tries to raise her voice—forget all that for a moment.  Forget that she cost four Americans their lives in Benghazi then lied about it to the families of the slain.  Let’s take a moment to look at her distant history—particularly when she lied about being fired at by snipers in Bosnia and how a reporter caught her on it.  See if you can take a test and watch this short little four-minute video and see if you can make it to the end.  Then ask yourself if you can take four years of her as president.

I already know your answer.  I feel the same way.  Be sure to send this article to an independent voter so that they can learn what you already know.  That lying, flop happy loser needs to be soundly defeated in November 2016 so that we can close her out of the book of politics—forever.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.

Trump’s Monstrous Press Conference: Getting into the face of the enemy–because it is a war

As I mentioned in a recent article on the upcoming Annie Oakley event, I am involved in a lot of things.  I have a lot of talents—and I know how to use them.  One of those talents is “political consulting,” which I do in a non invasive way–I don’t charge for it.  I get to go to an occasional VIP event and talk to people, but I don’t charge money—because to me we are in a war—it’s not a career move.  I do other things for money—but what I give to the war I think is cheapened by money.

I can’t help but think of the original generals of the Continental Army who often gave of their private fortunes to keep money in the pockets of their soldiers—and I expect the same of myself in this modern fight—which is more with words than bullets.  The very reason Benedict Arnold is considered a disgrace is because he traded his heroics with the rebels, to choose a woman and finance with the British which made him a dismal character in my book.  So I do a lot behind the scenes, and I don’t ask for anything for what I provide—strategically—except for those I give it to–to win.  And I have been saying for a long time what Republicans needed to do to win against Democrats—and few have listened.  Those that have, have won.  Those who haven’t listened experienced the same old lackluster results.  My basic premise has always been this, when you have the moral high ground—use it like a club over those who are intellectually, and morally deficient.  That is why I have been supporting Trump.  So it was enormously refreshing to see Donald Trump’s press conference on 7-27-2016.

It was a brilliant move by Trump, it sucked out all the air from Bill Clinton’s speech the night before and it aired precisely one hour after both President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were on the morning shows slamming Trump on foreign affairs—anticipating that the Republican would honor the long-standing ceasefire during political conventions.  Trump didn’t honor that agreement, which is wonderful, and he opened up with both barrels at the stars of the Democratic Party—including Anthony Weiner who had just 12 hours prior was attempting to pick a fight with Donald Trump Jr., who emerged last week as a very capable potential political rival.  The Democrats really thought they’d get a chance to take some cheap shots without a response from the Republicans—as things have been in the past.  This is what I had to say on Twitter about Anthony Weiner—so it was great to see Trump defend his son quickly, and decisively.

You don’t win these things against vile people playing nice.  I will say it again whether we are talking about the presidency, governor races, mayor races, or school board candidates—you have to get into the face of the enemy and spook them into retreat.  And if you make threats be prepared to make good on them.  You cannot yield ground to the vile—because if you do, you empower them to rule over the rest of us—and that is why our republic is in the situation that it is in presently.  It is so good to see that Donald Trump has no problem attacking those he knows are intellectually crippled, and morally reprehensible—and that is a game changer.  That alone is something to get excited about, and believe me, I am.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.

A Convention Run by Losers: Protesters send DNC into chaos and anger

The news coming out of the DNC convention in Philadelphia is quite extraordinary.  Not only are the democrats in trouble with all the Wikileaks problems that are showing what kind of people they are behind the cameras—forcing resignations and an adherence to an even more progressive platform than any right mind would think is possible—but they are in a state of extreme chaos.  Strangely, the media—even Fox, is avoiding showing much of the trouble—so I am providing videos from the same people who showed the dark side of the RNC convention to expose the DNC. Obviously, the protests and malcontent ratio at the DNC is much, much higher.  Given that Wikileaks is about to unload another barrage of revealing emails about the Clinton Foundation—this convention on only day two is a complete disaster.  There is no way they can recover the momentum they have lost only halfway through.  The public impression has been now cast in stone.

Listening to Bill Clinton’s speech, you can tell they are all guilty when they can’t address the issues directly, but choose some “high road” as a means to defend themselves.  If they weren’t so guilty of so many criminal escapades, they would defend themselves more valiantly, but they can’t, and even the socialists Millennials who were Bernie supporters know it—which is actually quite sad.  For instance, the number one concern that most in the world have right now is ISIS—yet on day one of the DNC convention nobody mentioned it.  But that is just the tip of the iceberg with these idiots.  Obviously I’m not a fan, but even so, it is amazing how jagged their convention is both inside and out.  The videos above show what’s really going on—and not even the national media outlets can avoid the specifics.  Those tricks simply don’t work anymore.  By the end of the week, I don’t see Hillary getting a bump in the polls.  I think she’ll actually lose ground because the idiocy of the DNC convention cannot be ignored.  Normal people are seeing what a bunch of losers are attending and running it—and when you can’t even appease the anarchists and the socialists—you have a real problem if you are the Democratic Party.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.

The Corrupt DNC: Looking to divert attention away from their terrible actions

With a lot of pleading by the DNC to keep the protesters at their Philadelphia event appearing somewhat content—so that the “picture” they wanted to paint of a “unified convention could be realized—the obsession they have with criminal and manipulative content cannot be ignored.  They have been busted yet again with Wikileaks revealing 20,000 emails showing how much manipulation they do within the media and how they essentially rig the American election system.  Yet, they are seeking to steer away the attention to the Russians for discovering the information.  The problem for them is that they actually committed the acts—whether it was the Russians or some school kid tucked away in some college dorm who did the hacking is irrelevant.  It is their behavior behind closed doors that matters.  This video shows some of the information that isn’t being covered by the media that is obviously in collusion with the DNC scam—and it needs to be seen by voters.

What this reminds me of is the strategy utilized against all the women Bill Clinton slept with as president.  The DNC has the same approach away from their misconduct toward those simply reporting what they see.  These are bad people who have no place in any office of trust under any circumstance.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.

The World War Against Donald Trump: What we can learn from Ferris Bueller

It is quite stunning that more people don’t understand what Donald Trump is to the Republican nomination for President of the United States.  Some of what I am about to say will require some additional information and review, so CLICK HERE for the start of that understanding, as well as all of the following hotlinks for further substantiation.  The typical run for POTUS has established in the American electorate certain memorized hot points largely shaped by the media and the political class to always protect themselves from outside insurgents.  Was I concerned that Donald Trump didn’t know the three primary functions of government with an answer “security, security, security” then further created a problem for himself by declaring that healthcare and education were the next priorities?  No, I wasn’t.  He gave a typical response of the everyday American who really hasn’t been a part of the political establishment—and has thrown money at politicians his whole life to purchase what he needs to get done to ensure his success.  He gave a slightly better answer than the average businessman hanging out on a golf course.  Does that make him out-of-touch?  To people who spend their whole lives studying constitutional law, worshipping the integrity of past presidents like a king, and insisting on having a POTUS that rivals some European royalty—Donald Trump is a nightmare of bumbling irrational statements.  But what I see is a down to earth guy who gets most of his information about the world the way the average cab driver does—and he’s clearly grounded—remarkably, untouched by pretension by being a “political insider.” To me, the weaknesses he is coming under fire for are his strengths. I want to see someone totally different in the POTUS role—and I want private sector influence instead of political experience. I want competent people managing the government, not a political class.

What Trump has that nobody else does is the ability to hire better people than him for a job, which is how he’s made most of his money.  He has raw instincts about people who gives him tremendous leverage over someone like Ted Cruz.  Cruz would be someone who Trump would hire for a staff position, but Cruz would never be in a position to identify and establish a similar criterion.  Trump hires people, listens to them, and then formulates his objectives—so he doesn’t need to know all the details. He pays other people to do that.  His job at the front of the train is to make important decisions at the proper time with the courage to actually do it.  The current political order is stuck in a “static pattern” of what is considered normal behavior whereas Trump is mostly a “dynamic influence.”  His very presence is changing the entire way that politics is run and those profiting off that “static pattern” are justifiably terrified of it—so they are throwing everything they have at Trump trying to drag him into their “static pattern” value system.  Those static patterns consist of very rigid party guidelines on both sides—for Republicans, a calculated approach to abortion, a party established position on Israel, taxation, and healthcare.  Essentially, the beliefs of the typical Republican candidate are formulated by the party instead of the actual beliefs of the candidate.  Trump jumps into things, tests the water, listens to people then figures out what will work without thinking about any group affiliation.  He is not prone to group assimilation which makes him far superior to any other offering.

The political establishment expects its presidential candidates to adopt a “static” position that they can then build a party around.  Trump is so “dynamic” that things could change in a moment’s notice.  Anybody who has witnessed any success in their life understands that one of the biggest attributes of success is a dynamic presence that can adapt quickly to changing circumstances and formulate them toward the original objectives.  Politicians often can recite all the party positions but are statically welded to Capitol Hill politics and can seldom ever do anything that they promised on a campaign trail.  So Trump figures, why waste time on things that might change completely within a year from now.  It’s a pointless exercise.  He knows what we need to do, and he has a track record of success—and he will find the right combination of resources to implement it.  Genius can’t yet be plotted on a chart and no college has figured out how to teach it—so Donald Trump is something completely outside of their static understanding.  That certainly isn’t his fault—it is the failure of the static system that we have all become addicted to.

That static system now to protect itself is looking at the statistics and noticing that there are a lot of people lacking a college degree that support Donald Trump and those same stats are not prevalent with other candidates.    College trained people have a tendency to support static patterns because after four critical years in college learning what those patterns are right after high school, from the ages of 18 to 22—the final nail in the coffin for a lot of people is placed toward all future dynamic influences.  I have been to college, my wife has to—I even spent a few years living on a college campus—and let me tell you dear reader, I hated it—because I am by nature a very dynamic personality.  I relate to Trump because of that dynamism.  To put it in terms that average people can understand think of the movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, which is a popular 80s film featuring Mathew Broderick, that most everyone understands.  Ferris was an example of an extremely “dynamic” personality and he would likely grow up to become like a real life Donald Trump if he were allowed to be free enough to survive the static systems  that imposed its will upon him.  When I was a teenager, I was very much like the character of Ferris Bueller in that movie and I did impulsive things like he did all the time—and I always managed to come out on top no matter how dire the situation.  People loved and hated Ferris Bueller for all the reasons that they love and hate Donald Trump.  He doesn’t always know how or why something will work, Trump simply wakes up in the morning meaning to achieve success in whatever it is and he uses his dynamic personality to overtake whatever static imposition is in front of him.

So the reason that the people who lack college degrees—or those who live in rural areas support Trump is because they have not been conquered yet by the static pattern progressivism that has been imposed on college graduates and the urban settings which often force people to concede their natural desire for individual integrity.  Nothing about Trump fits well into a debate format or the media driven talking points.  He is best when he is clashing with static patterns with great dynamic authority and bravado.  Trump has slipped a bit lately in the polling because he was trying to fit his personality to the static pattern of the Republican Party—as the head of it.  He backed off the thrusters to show that he can be more “conciliatory.” But he shouldn’t, he needs to just do his thing and stay as dynamic and unpredictable as possible.  If Cruz wants a debate, Trump should accept the challenge but to demand that it be done on ground he controls, such as Trump Tower’s lobby in New York.  That way Cruz couldn’t say that Trump is chicken when in fact all Trump is concerned with is being pulled into the senseless static pattern of Cruz and the Republican Party which has actually given us all these problems. Cruz is a great debater, but his key weakness is that if he can be taken off his “Holy Roller” persona and beaten into submission with sheer force—especially in the surroundings of a person who has had actual success in life–Cruz could be embarrassed beyond recovery.  The press conference with Carly and Cruz over the sex scandal showed a major weakness in the Cruz façade which will be exploited sooner or later.

But the trouble between Trump and everyone else is not that the billionaire is “stupid” or his supporters.  It’s just that we know that Trump is a needed injection of dynamic persona that is desperately needed in our political system.  Just as I’m hoping that Warren Davidson, my new congressman holds to his values when he gets to Capitol Hill, I have watched all this before and am always disappointed by the results.  I stood shoulder to shoulder as a major supporter of Rob Portman when he ran for office.   I knew him as a normal guy that would go out to eat with me after a debate.  He blew it after years in Washington.  And John Kasich went from a Tea Party darling to a softer version of Hillary Clinton.  He is a major letdown.  Actually, I could go on and on for quite some time naming politicians just like Ted Cruz that showed lots of promise when they were running—memorized all the things that the media wanted to hear, then turned around and was just a terrible representative.  I don’t so much blame them as people—I blame the static nature of politics.  It needs a major infusion of dynamism to change it forever.

Now that Trump has shown what’s possible, every celebrity who thinks they can will try running for president in the future.  The party system is essentially over—and that is a good thing.  Within the decade we will likely get stars like The Rock running for president and major rap artists who have the money and celebrity to gain media attraction on a daily basis.  Four years ago Mitt Romney wouldn’t hardly go on any talk radio shows or cable shows—not even Bill O’Reilly—because he feared being knocked off message.  He certainly wouldn’t do Chris Mathews—who is a flaming progressive.  The whole abortion topic is something Romney and every other presidential candidate for the republicans would have avoided with diversionary tactics.  Trump has forced all these candidates to do these shows to compete—because he is so confident himself—even when he steps in it—that he can find a way to come out smelling wonderful.  That is why all these static pattern addicts hate Trump so much, but also why he has such strong support from an electorate that recognizes that the static system of politics that has nearly destroyed our country needs a major infusion of dynamic influence.  Now that the dynamic influence has wrecked the previous static patterns—for both parties really—there is no going back.  The Republicans either embrace Trump or they will get worse in 2020 and 2024.  Celebrity will be the new criteria for better or worse.

The old methods of electing a POTUS have not been effective and America needs to develop something dynamically different.  I’m not looking for a George Washington to lead me to some salvation.  I don’t need an authority figure of any kind.  All I need out of government is to manage the resources it takes to keep the country running and to stay the hell out of my way.  I don’t need the government for much.  I don’t even need their protection.  Them standing between me and villains likely makes for a more civil society—which is good for most people, but I personally don’t need them—and I certainly don’t need a “leader.”  I want a more dynamic government that isn’t afraid to sell capitalism to the world.  Trump is the best candidate I have ever seen or heard of for that very dynamic job. Like Ferris Bueller, I know that Trump can wing his way through anything—and I want someone representing our Republic to the world who has that ability for a change.  And I certainly don’t want a political party in charge behind the scenes.  I’m ready for a major change, and for me Trump is it.  Whether he makes it or not, politics is changed forever.  So Republicans if they want to survive might as well embrace it.  Failure to do so or to stick to the old static patterns will lead to their self-destruction.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.

Ann Becker’s Stand Against Ohio’s Central Committee: How John Kasich became an idiot–understanding Kantian philosophy

I remember doing a radio show several years ago with Matt Clark about how communists planned to take over both political parties in America and how they were going to infiltrate the media as far back as the late 1950s.  Obviously we have seen that happen in regard to the Democrats and the major media sources.  They call them progressives, but essentially they are communist leaning sympathizers by the nature of their philosophy.  But Matt and I also talked about the same thing happening to the Republican Party.  To many of us, the behavior of the GOP since as far back as 9-11 caused questioning minds to scratch their heads in bewilderment.  When John McCain lashed out at Bill Cunningham for being “divisive” during a campaign stop in Cincinnati during 2008 for which the WLW host was the emcee further preponderance of the evidence was presented.  These Republicans were not conservatives—but rather were something else and their strategic aims were much more centrist in their nature.  That by itself would not be alarming, but they seemed to be working with Democrats to pull that central position over time radically to the left.  Today’s “centrist” used to be yesterday’s socialist and yesterdays neutral supporter along the political spectrum is now openly communist—(progressive).  I dare one person to describe to me how progressivism differs from the communists of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1919.  (I’m waiting.)

Obviously I have known about this for a long time to even be able to talk about it in hindsight on Matt Clark’s show.  CLICK HERE TO REVIEW.  But the rest of the country really hasn’t noticed because of all the noise of modern society.  The evidence gets drowned out by the furious pace of our lives.  A lot of times the participants themselves don’t even realize the role they play—because they don’t know enough about history to understand.  One such example is the governor of my state John Kasich, who started off wonderfully six years ago, but is now an openly progressive loser who has evoked “god” as an excuse for expanding government reach and balancing the Ohio budget with more federal money through Obamacare exchanges.  If you want to know how deep this corruption has spread then look at the radicalism of the Ohio State Central Committee in supporting Kasich for the upcoming primaries when it is clearly evident that he doesn’t stand a chance at winning the popular vote.  Like trained drones the Ohio State Central Committee is sticking by the plan hashed out long ago—that Kasich the “moderate” would be elected president making it easy for the radical leftists to run over our nation without resistance.  Even though polling of prospective primary voters favor Trump and Cruz, the State Central Committee is doing what they planned all along.  They don’t listen to voters, they listen to the party bosses as to how and who to elect—and that plan was never in the favor of the American population.

This little trick is never talked about literally.  Every State Central Committee person is not part of some vast conspiracy—not knowingly.  It wasn’t that long ago that people like my friend Ann Becker from the Cincinnati Tea Party encouraged me to run for a Central Committee spot in my district.  Ann and her people are doing the good work of knocking moderate leftists out of the Central Committee to put more reasonable traditionalists on in their place.  To my eyes the functioning philosophy of the whole enterprise was noticeably Kantian and I knew that the basic philosophy for which they were functioning had to be changed before truly effective management of the Central Committee system could fully be implemented.  However, that doesn’t stop the good work of people inclined to suffer the daily abuse it takes to make micro changes along the way from doing so.  My role in all this has to be “different” so we all do what we are best at.  Ann is one of those people who likes to fight it out on the inside and she issued the following statement in regard to John Kasich.

I heard you! You do not support Governor Kasich for President – even if the Ohio GOP State Central Committee does. 

You reenergized my faith in the Constitutional people of Ohio! Yesterday I sent out an email about the Ohio Republican State Central Committee’s endorsement of Governor Kasich. An endorsement by a party means the members of that party are expected to support the candidate.

I received over 200 emails in two hours yesterday telling me ‘Hell No.’ The stories about Governor Kasich and the disdain for the Ohio Republican Party State Central Committee’s endorsement of Kasich was incredible. I could feel the anger coming out of my computer. 

Governor Kasich says he balanced Ohio’s budget – all Governors have to balance Ohio’s budget, it’s in the Ohio Constitution. He says he created jobs in Ohio – his term started after the crash in 2008. Yes, there were more jobs created in Ohio after 2008 but was it Kasich that created the jobs or the free market starting to improve? He takes credit for the jobs that our small business owners work hard and create – you didn’t build that Governor Kasich. 

Governor Kasich’s support of Common Core, his expanding Medicaid using Obamacare, his increase of spending in Ohio by 30%, his standing in the way of Right to Work, his raising taxes – all of these things and more are reasons that he is not the best choice for President.

I think we all agree that we want a President that will stand by the Constitution and give America a plan to move this country forward, not backward, toward freedom. Whoever that candidate is for you, vote for him or her. No one has the right to expect you to vote a certain way, party or not.

We want political parties that stand on principle, not on who they can get elected. Shame on the State Central Committee. They are up for reelection this March; we must watch those races. 

Your mission over the next eight weeks is to make sure everyone you know is ready to vote on March 15, or early vote at your county Board of Elections, starting February 17th. This is the most important primary in the history of the United States of America. Everyone who cares about the future of this country needs to get out and vote!

One of the biggest issues I heard about regarding Governor Kasich was his support of Common Core. I really thought he would flip-flop on this by now, but he is standing strong with Common Core. 

A horrible choice for our kids and Ohio Governor Kasich!

I had the privilege of hearing Heidi Huber give an update on Common Core last night. The video is below. We must stand together to make the change we want to see. 

Heidi Huber Common Core Update


Yours in Liberty,

Ann Becker

Kasich has been a disaster.  New York pundits like Bill O’Reilly on Fox News think that Kasich has done a fantastic job as governor.  But that’s because Kasich used to host his show and that Bill doesn’t live in Ohio.  Also, compared to New York, Ohio seems like a bastion of conservatism.  To Bill’s eyes, I’m sure Kasich looks like a conservative, but that’s only because the noise of modern politics drowns out the truth.    Kasich is broken at the level of his foundation philosophies.  He and the establishment types in the GOP have been taught to think incorrectly and now they are leading the party toward aims that were always intended to be noticeably communist.  Here is the evidence, first a definition of Kantian ethics followed by a nice little quote from the blogspot “Marxist Update.”

Kantian ethics refers to a deontological ethical theory ascribed to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. The theory, developed as a result of Enlightenment rationalism, is based on the view that the only intrinsically good thing is a good will; an action can only be good if its maxim – the principle behind it – is duty to the moral law. Central to Kant’s construction of the moral law is the categorical imperative, which acts on all people, regardless of their interests or desires. Kant formulated the categorical imperative in various ways. His principle of universalisability requires that, for an action to be permissible, it must be possible to apply it to all people without a contradiction occurring. His formulation of humanity as an end in itself requires that humans are never treated merely as a means to an end, but always also as ends in themselves. The formulation of autonomy concludes that rational agents are bound to the moral law by their own will, while Kant’s concept of the Kingdom of Ends requires that people act as if the principles of their actions establish a law for a hypothetical kingdom. Kant also distinguished between perfect and imperfect duties. A perfect duty, such as the duty not to lie, always holds true; an imperfect duty, such as the duty to give to charity, can be made flexible and applied in particular time and place.  (Sound like Kasich?)

In political philosophy, Kant has had wide and increasing influence with the major political philosopher of the late twentieth century, John Rawls, drawing heavily on his inspiration in setting out the basis for a liberal view of political institutions. The nature of Rawls’ use of Kant has engendered serious controversy but has demonstrated the vitality of Kantian considerations across a wider range of questions than was once thought plausible.

The poet Heine, who was a friend of Marx and upon whom the latter at one time had a great influence, depicted very vividly Kant’s motives for treading the two paths. Kant had an old and faithful servant, Lampe, who had lived with, and attended to, his master for forty years. For Kant this Lampe was the personification of the average man who could not live without religion. After a brilliant exposition of the revolutionary import of the Critique of Pure Reason in the struggle with theology and with the belief in a Divine Principle, Heine explained why Kant found it necessary to write the Critique of Practical Reason in which the philosopher re-established everything he had torn down before. Here is what Heine wrote:

“After the tragedy comes the farce. Immanuel Kant has hitherto appeared as the grim, inexorable philosopher; he has stormed heaven, put all the garrison to the sword; the ruler of the world swims senseless in his blood; there is no more any mercy, or fatherly goodness, or future reward for present privations; the immortality of the soul is in its last agonies — death rattles and groans. And old Lampe stands by with his umbrella under his arm as a sorrowing spectator, and the sweat of anguish and tears run down his cheeks. Then Immanuel Kant is moved to pity, and shows himself not only a great philosopher, but a good man. He reconsiders, and half good-naturedly and half ironically says, ‘Old Lampe must have a God, or else the poor man cannot be happy, and people really ought to be happy in this world. Practical common sense declares that. Well, meinet wegen, for all I care, let practical reason guarantee the existence of a God.'” [Heinrich Heine, Collected Works. W. Heineman, London, 1906. Vol. 5, pp. 150-151.]

That’s how the political left has been able to implement and enact a communist strategy while at the same time convincing people who think they are hard-core conservative Central Committee members that they are doing the work established by Immanuel Kant.  What they don’t know is that Kant put down the foundations of Marxism which would evolve into open communism to essentially destroy the economy of Russia allowing Europe to rise to power after World War I.  It’s all German philosophy people.  But eventually Kant would influence John Rawls who nearly singlehandedly brought detrimental liberalism to most political institutions academic and social.  His magnum opusA Theory of Justice (1971), was said at the time of its publication to be “the most important work in moral philosophy since the end of World War II[4]and is now regarded as “one of the primary texts in political philosophy”.[5] His work in political philosophy, dubbed Rawlsianism,[6] takes as its starting point the argument that “the most reasonable principles of justice are those everyone would accept and agree to from a fair position”.[5] Rawls attempts to determine the principles of social justice by employing a number of thought experiments such as the famous original position in which everyone is impartially situated as equals behind a veil of ignorance.[5] He is one of the major thinkers in the tradition of liberal political philosophy. According to English philosopher Jonathan Wolff, while there could be a “dispute about the second most important political philosopher of the 20th century, there could be no dispute about the most important: John Rawls”.[4]

It is because of Kant then Rawls that Governor Kasich and the Ohio State Central Committee is a bunch of idiots.  It is their foundation philosophy that Ann Becker and her purists are fighting against.  Of course Kasich and his gang don’t understand what Ann is talking about just as they can’t understand why Trump and Cruz are doing so well nationally in the 2016 presidential race—they continue to function based on the beliefs they have been taught by education institutions following the philosophy of John Rawls.  CLICK TO REVIEW.  They don’t understand because their thinking is wrong and out of touch with the rest of the world.  So I suggest dear reader that you do as Ann has asked, over the next eight weeks you need to register to vote in the primary and you need to defy the Ohio State Central Committee leadership and vote for anybody but John Kasich.  He is a failed person not because he’s bad—but because he was taught to be an idiot who follows Kant instead of some American philosopher with proper foundation thoughts, such as Thomas Jefferson or Ayn Rand.  Send the German philosophy back to Europe the way they sent it to Russia to destroy that nation.  Keep that stuff out of America and especially the state of Ohio.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.