I was so angry with so many people over the attempt to eliminate me from the political scene by the progressive education funding apologists that I had made a decision to turn up the heat even more and get personal in the levy fights at Lakota–so I called my political enemies “latte sipping prostitutes” and described how and why which became all the rage in Cincinnati. (CLICK HERE TO REVIEW). I had made a decision to break away from the orthodox approach and get even nastier since it became evident that the Lakota school system did not respect the wishes of the voting public and were positioning themselves for a fourth levy attempt, so I didn’t even listen to the interview I did for Scott Sloan’s show on 700 WLW during his morning program, which was very controversial, and difficult for me personally. It was strange to be referred to as a sexist, a woman-hater, and an activist on the same rhetorical level as a “Wall Street Occupier” making the interview shown below one of the most difficult I’ve ever given. In the interview at one point Scott stated that I had weakened my argument by yelling louder than the pro levy factions. But I didn’t agree. I yelled louder than my political enemies for the same reason a parent yells over screaming, disrespectful children—to get their attention and let them know that their behavior is intolerable. The pro levy people attempted to take my very targeted comments and apply them to all women of the world—especially Lakota, because it diffuses the attention away from the groups I had in mind. It’s an old strategy that has worked to advance many radical agendas over the years, and it was surreal to find myself involved in the middle one. But deep inside I knew I was saying what everyone was already thinking—but dared not speak for fear of ridicule—such as what I experienced during this very difficult interview. Click the video to listen.
I knew as I hung up the phone that most people understood what was happening by the way the Enquirer article was quoted, the way that it aligned itself as a paper with the public relations intentions of the Lakota school system. I knew my supporters would see this event as the political assassination attempt that it was. I knew such an attempt had been in the works for quite a long time, and that it was initiated by a sitting school board member to eliminate me from the political scene. I knew that other school board members were attempting to break bread with my friends at No Lakota Levy to soften our resolve against their reckless financial proposals. And I also knew that financially strong community advocates were putting serious pressure on several business owners through the Lakota school district to weaken their stance supporting No Lakota Levy. That pressure gave rise to the scholarship foundation mentioned in the interview which was not expected by the pro levy groups at Lakota and set off a violent reaction which prompted this character assassination attempt against me. The hard-core levy supporters who were the targets of my comments knew that if I were involved in taking away their extortion measures with a positive community campaign that they would lose their stranglehold on the district so they came after me with all guns blazing.
But you never quite know who is on your side until you face a crisis, and as Scott and I parted ways after that interview I had a sense of where the weak links were on my side quickly, and I had to decide to completely rebuild my efforts alone. Given the way the Cincinnati media quickly piled up against me biting down on the hook cast into the water by the pro levy, pro union, progressive feminists, it appeared that I would be fighting in the future differently—which I was prepared to do. So I didn’t listen to the interview, or read the paper, and haven’t now for over a month.
But something unexpected happened almost immediately following my interview with Scott Sloan. People were pulling me aside, men and women, and were—thanking me. At first it was just a couple of bold personalities who I thought were just trying to encourage me not to give up the fight, which was never in danger anyway. But from their perspective, they were concerned. In the days after, leading all the way up to yesterday—at gas pumps, restaurants, meetings, community events—there have been many people who have personally came up to me and thanked me for speaking on their behalf against “the mob” as they termed it. So many people approached me in the weeks that followed with such statements that I decided if 100 people came to me and thanked me for my very aggressive comments lambasting the pro levy government education supporters then I’d go back and listen to the Scott Sloan broadcast and post it here on Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom.
Yesterday I heard from my 100th person, a man who told me that it was about time that someone stand up to those cackling hens who think they can cheerlead all of society right down the crapper. I will admit that these comments were relieving, because you just never know. I knew my comments would get attention, which is why I made them, but I wasn’t sure they would be successful solidifying how many people really feel about being openly scammed by progressive social engineers attempting to do to our communities what they do on the national stage.
In fact it was a woman who told me just a few hours after my interview with Scott Sloan that I said 90% of what everyone already thought and that she knew I didn’t mean all women when I made my statements. She recognized that the targets of my comments had no other defense but to attempt to pull all women into their quicksand just as they’ve done over the entire feminist movement. The man yesterday told me that the “bitches had it coming” and he hoped that I would continue to call those progressive terrorists out by name as I did in the interview above.
What these pro levy people, and progressive activists don’t know is something that I only suspected at the beginning of that Scott Sloan interview—was that millions upon millions of people are frustrated and tired of the crying diatribes that many progressive activists use to advance their cause. In the case at Lakota it’s the radical mothers who are in the minority but seem unable to isolate their protective instincts from the logic of reason regarding funding decisions that affect the entire community—young and old alike. The radicals of my community are not unlike the racial radicals in Florida who want Zimmerman crucified to solve some social ill they are trying to advance in yet another progressive platform using the unfortunate death of a black child as their launch pad. Nobody in the media calls them progressives parasites for using a grieving family as a key to manipulating an entire society, but most reasonable Americans can see the sham for what it is—but they are taught by society to keep their comments to themselves otherwise they will be attacked—like I was.
I have spoken to many more hundreds, if not thousands of anti-levy supporters who are truly scared to speak out in public because they do not want the wrath of the activists to publicly humiliate them or their children. In the last campaign there were a lot of emails and personal correspondence where people showed their support of No Lakota Levy but did not want a sign in their yard because they were afraid they’d become targets by the radicals in our community who will stop at nothing to extort more money from the public to satisfy their unrelenting appetites for safety, security, and as much money as possible to throw at their children hoping it will overcompensate for their parental inadequacies. And a selfish labor force of union employees is all too willing to exploit this naive group of activists to loot more money for themselves. The rest of the community is far more experienced in business and in raising families and we can only shake our heads at the sheer stupidity of the whole scam. So when a person like me says what everyone is already thinking, it’s a feeling of relief, not shame that is the dominate emotion.
I had been keeping a count since March 15th of these people who thanked me, and the best one was last week, number 94. I was getting gas and a car pulled up across the pump from me. It was a Lexus and a businessman got out, someone who looked to me like he had children in the district and was a pro levy type of supporter. I noticed he kept looking at me as he pumped his gas–as if he were working up the courage to speak to me. As I finished up and was getting back on my bike, he stopped pumping and approached me. “Excuse me, but are you Rich Hoffman?”
“Yes I am,” I replied.
He smiled as though relieved. “I have wanted to contact you for a while now—I just want to say—thank you.”
I smiled as he shook my hand. “For what?”
“For putting those God damn, bitches in their place. For striking back at those Lakota Fu**kers and standing up for the rest of us the way you do. What you said took serious balls.”
I was shocked to hear him talk this way at a gas pump in the early morning before most people even had a cup of coffee. And he didn’t look like the type of person who would use such language. He was very animated. “Thanks,” was the only thing I could think to say. I looked at his hand and saw he wore a wedding band. “Does your wife share your beliefs?”
“She was the one who told me about you. She reads your blog every single night before she comes to bed. She’s very much a fan.”
“Well, that’s good to hear. You have no idea,” I replied.
Our conversation evolved into many other topics centering on his family and Lakota. He railed on about how high the taxes were and how dangerous it was for a small group of levy supporters to have so much manipulative power over a community of over 100,000 residents. We both agreed that it is done through extortion and force.
He left in his Lexus as I put my weather gear back on for my motorcycle ride feeling good inside. It is always good to hear when people see through the games being played to the essence of a situation. In this case, I had thought the man would be a levy supporter, not a guy on my side of politics. So he surprised me. In the wake of the March 15th broadcast on 700 WLW I learned that my frustration spoke on behalf of many thousands if the sample of 100 could be such an indicator. If 100 people went out of their way to tell me how they felt, there are no doubt 10 for every one of them who thought about approaching me, but didn’t. I like that math, and more than that, it is nice to see people finding their courage and beginning to call these progressive terrorists what they really are.
For too long we’ve all been too polite, too sensitive, too lack-luster. We admire characters in movies and TV shows that act boldly in their lives, but we find often we chastise the behavior in real life. And the enemies of America know we have this tendency, so they openly exploit our weakness with social terrorism. The way to counter that terrorism is with doses of it back in their direction. If the weapons they use are peer pressure manipulation through name calling and attacks on social and economic status in an effort to control political behavior, then it can work against them also. After trying everything else but that strategy I decided to turn up the heat and throw back at the social terrorists of my community the type of rhetoric they had been dishing out using my own special flare. I told those levy supporters what I thought about them. I was honest. And honesty is not something that we should ever apologize for. Sometimes it might hurt what we say and think, sometimes we might feel the situation wrongly, but the exchange of dialogue is necessary and when reason is not the governing factor, then fire must be fought with fire. In a raging inferno, water just evaporates to mist. That is what happens to the facts we present in the school levy fights. They come out of the hose cool, but the raging tempers of the estrogen driven radicals confusing biological protection for their young with endless financial justification for ever higher taxes becomes nullified at the point of attack—so a new strategy must be utilized.
For those 100 supporters over the last month who have given me that much-needed support, I thank you. It is hard to do anything that goes against the norm, especially when the strategy of your political enemies is to handcuff criticism of their actions with political correctness. This has taken away the ability of people to call things what they actually are. So when I decided to call the situation as I saw it, there was a risk that I might do what Scott Sloan suggested and that is lose supporters and validity in my arguments. And on that day as I hung up the phone I wondered if I had crossed the line. But over the last month, I realized that I hadn’t—that my descriptive terms were deserved, and appreciated by many people who feel run over by a process that can only be described as tyrannical. Fights like this one are not won by playing nicely while the other party kicks at your knees or groin. To win these fights you have to be willing to play every bit as dirty as they are—even harder. Because they have shown that they will not listen to reason, that they do not respect the opinions of the community majority, and will stop at nothing to satisfy their internal neurosis. So to the magic 100, thank you for letting me know you thought I did the right thing. It means a lot.