Rich Hoffman's Blog, page 472

‘Dirty Dancing’ Rebellion Against Ayn Rand: Why Hollywood is so far on the political left

(Note–the hotlinks on this page are full of support information. Click on them for more information to dive deeper into the history shown below.)

If it’s not yet obvious to the average person, there is a deep hatred for Ayn Rand in Hollywood, which has been infected with a collectivism ideology that runs deep in the entertainment culture. So when Atlas Shrugged Part 2 hit theaters last week, the ripple of anger resounding through the progressive community was one of utmost panic. But where does this anger come from and why is it there? For a hint as to the start of it one has to trace the origins of communist infiltration into Hollywood through the Democratic Party during the 1940’s and 1950’s that was very real in spite of the protests lobbied against the participants of the McCarthy hearings. Ayn Rand, Walt Disney, John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Ronald Reagan and many others joined together to warn movie studios of this invasion coming into America through the entertainment labor unions, and prepared a pamphlet to protect themselves from communist influence. CLICK HERE TO READ THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT.

However, as more progressive political types came into power, and the old guard in Hollywood died off, people like Wayne, Disney, Heston, and Rand—leaving the next generation of film makers to control the financing of movies and what kind of actors, writers, and producers would be in movies, a shift into communist theory began to take hold. This is how Hollywood became so far on the political left. These events happened rapidly during the Reagan White House years as films simultaneously exploited violence and individualism while at the same time promoting collectivism. Studios had to make this concession because individualism is what Americans buy tickets to see, heroic actors like Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson, Arnold Schwarzeneggar, and Clint Eastwood all political conservatives were extremely popular at the box office while the communists worked their long-term plan, the gradual erosion of American value with small doses of collectivism that would add up over time so slowly that like the hands of a clock, were hard to see moving. To see a modern example of this mixed message Hollywood creation of a utopian existence that is the foundation of their communist background just look at the trailer of the new Tom Hanks film Cloud Atlas. (By the way, I’ll probably see the movie because it looks good, in spite of its collectivist, Kant-like philosophic message.)

Tom Hanks is a great actor, but is a byproduct of the modern Hollywood system. Actors by their nature are not persons of great conviction and they are very vulnerable to the type of diatribes discussed at dinner parties and fundraisers that they all attend in order to secure financing for their films. For the last thirty years, many of the people who have been funding films have been George Soros types who openly wish to turn America into a global community by destroying the wonderful images of the past, with demonized appraisal in the current time turning an entire generation of American youth against their parents and grandparents generation, which was carefully outlined in the 1958 book The Naked Communist. For Hanks to survive in Hollywood he adapted his thinking to the movers and shakers of the film industry and gradually they have separated themselves from the Clint Eastwood/Arnold Schwarzenegger ultra-man models. Progressive Hollywood financial backers have been so successful they have even managed to reinvent the ultimate male superman James Bond into a more progressive hero played by Daniel Craig. The modern Bond is much less sure of himself than the Bonds of Sean Connery, Roger Moore, and Pierce Brosnan which is to reflect the progressive Hollywood goal of diminishing individual achievement.

Part of that erosion of the ultra strong male, and the ultra sexy female traits coming out of “old Hollywood” was an eradication of the old symbols. Walt Disney has been smeared as being anti-Semitic; Mel Gibson’s career was completely trashed as he was baited by the media continuously after his very successful film The Patriot—covering The American Revolution in a positive light and of course The Passion of Christ. But behind these schemes was an attempt to eliminate the literary material that Hollywood actors and producers secretly loved, because it made them a lot of money, and that was Ayn Rand and the ubermensch characters of her novels. Their image and their legacy would have to be destroyed otherwise collectivism would never manifest within the entertainment industry the way it was intended. And one of the ways that screenwriters wanting to suck up to film financiers under the advice of movie producers was to smear Rand in subtle—cleaver ways to shape the next generation of youth into a belief that Ayn Rand was the ultimate villain to everything that was good. One film that was produced in 1987 that was very popular, won Academy Awards for the songs it produced and played on top 40 radio stations becoming one of the most popular women’s film in history—the extremely progressive and fashionable film Dirty Dancing.

A year ago my sister had baby twins and while we were in the hospital waiting for their birth some of her childhood friends where there to greet my new niece and nephew to the world. Growing up my sister and her friends were absolutely in love with the movie Dirty Dancing which seemed innocent enough. The songs were catchy and what was the harm in a story, it was just fun—right. Wrong. The plot of Dirty Dancing covers many of the progressive issues so important to specifically the Democratic Party–class warfare, abortion rights, the breakdown of personal family value, and the demonization of Ayn Rand as a writer. There are also seductive allusions toward ménage à trois to help usher in the open sexual relationships and the un-possessive sex of communist utopian fantasy. When the villain of the movie name Robbie declares that some people are more important than others, he then pulls out a copy of The Fountainhead that is well-worn and apparently all marked up with personal notes. He offers it to the female lead character played by Jennifer Grey, who then heroically pours ice down the crotch of his pants and tells him that he disgusts her.

While at the hospital Cincinnati television station Channel 19 wanted to do an interview with me, so I left the lobby to go down into the parking lot to meet with the reporter and while I was gone my wife got an earful from some of my sister’s friends who live in our school district, which was the content of the interview. I was talking about all the reasons the local school levy should fail speaking out against the proposed tax increases which my sister’s friends supported. My wife of course defended me while I was gone, but the gist of the women’s complaints was that they had children in the district who couldn’t ride the school bus because of me, due to the district cutting busing to punish the tax payers for not passing the last school tax increase. My sister’s friends thought I shouldn’t speak out against the levy on TV because they were having a hard time driving the children to school because of the loss of public transportation. She wanted the tax increase to pass so that she had transport for her children to go to school, saving her the responsibility.

When I returned from the television appearance my wife told me what had happened and the rest of the day was stressful. I wasn’t about to back off my position, and they were blaming me for their personal situations. As young girls of 14 to 16 years old in 1987 Dirty Dancing was their favorite movie. Now these people are parents of their own kids, and they still have in their mind the values they grew up with, which films like Dirty Dancing helped shape. Dirty Dancing alone didn’t do all the damage, but it certainly did plant the seeds for progressive thinking. Women like my sister’s friends are more likely to vote in favor of school levies favoring the labor union position, more likely to vote for politicians like Obama, to vote in favor of pro abortion policies because their favorite movie Dirty Dancing was all about those issues, and they think of that movie while they listen to music on the radio to this very day and hear the songs that remind them of that film.

Ayn Rand warned about this, and as can be seen clearly now that hindsight is available to us, the makers of Dirty Dancing were taking the progressive political position against Ayn Rand and the types of characters, and personal philosophy she advocated. Of course the villain character in Dirty Dancing who liked Ayn Rand was a social climber was more like Peter Keating–the villain from The Fountainhead, and certainly not the hero Howard Roark. But young girls seeing Dirty Dancing as 14-year-old girls fantasizing about being Jennifer Grey dancing with a much older Patrick Swayze and they learned that The Fountainhead was the favorite book of the disgusting villain in Dirty Dancing. The result is that they would be against that book for the rest of their lives and would discourage their own children from reading it in the future.

This all comes into play in 2012 now that many of those young 14-year-old girls are now head editors of magazines, newspapers and communications programming positions all over the country. They now have subordinates fresh out of college eating out of their hands willing to scrap their personal integrity like the Bosom Buddies television star Tom Hanks willing to sacrifice their integrity in order to social climb. This is how the hatred for Ayn Rand has become so pronounced. Over the last twenty years, Dirty Dancing is but one small film in a long line of television, movie and popular songs passing through the entertainment culture that advocate against individuality and personal liberty.

The war over personal ideas is currently at a fever pitch. The Hollywood community is absolutely insulted that the filmmakers of Atlas Shrugged Part 2 would even dare to make such a movie in spite of Hollywood’s long term commitment to ending any mention of Ayn Rand. But the fight is not over. Like one of my readers here pointed out recently, and actually gave me the Dirty Dancing reference–she was one that has taken what she has learned today and re-evaluated the past so she could verify the extent of the danger. And the situation is dangerous. The Trojan Horse has already unloaded the communist enemies behind the protective mechanisms of our culture, and it happened so gradually, and so subtly that nobody paid any attention to the messages. Unknowingly, millions upon millions of young people, who are now adults, were taught that Ayn Rand was a bad person that was selfish, delusional, and a diabolical menace to society. The trouble is, Ayn Rand was a menace to society—to the kind of society that collectivists, and communist utopians desired to build for America behind carefully placed messages such as what was seen in Dirty Dancing and thousands upon thousands of similar products produced by the entertainment industry not only to make money for the creative artists, but to undo America from the inside out and to ensure the transformation of America into a society of panicky lovers of Dirty Dancing and the fantasy of progressive social infestation.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

Review of ‘Atlas Shrugged Part II’: Finding “Atlantis” within America

Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is a bold, ambitious film that is about gigantic ideas, and is grand in its geography. It is limited only in the fact that due to the nature of the material from Ayn Rand’s classic book, it has had to operate with very small budgets more akin to modern independent films. As a person who attends independent film festivals with great enthusiasm I am amazed when a handful of very creative film makers produce a film where they are the directors, editor, actors, sound engineers, marketing department, financiers, and special effect technicians. Because Hollywood doesn’t have the temperament for conservative films, or figures of a pro capitalism message like Ayn Rand, they have not made films like what was released nationwide on October 12, 2012 in the great new independent film Atlas Shrugged Part 2. Hollywood will produce pictures like the new Matt Damon film “Promised Land” which is an environmentalist project that will prove far more restrained with boring dialogue than Atlas Shrugged, yet it gets made and has the star power from the Hollywood machine because the message is one that the entertainment industry enjoys, leaving only one memorandum of social collectivism to resonate from movie town in Southern California. Every other film produced through the rest of the world becomes an independent film which Atlas Shrugged Part 2 certainly is. Many working in modern Hollywood forget that the machine they enjoy today in a robust entertainment industry was built on the backs of filmmakers such as Douglas Fairbanks, Walt Disney, and Cecil B. Demille, whom Ayn Rand worked for as a screen writer. So it should come as no surprise that Atlas Shrugged written in 1957 is more like the great Disney film Island at the Top of the World than the polar opposite of Oliver Stone’s anti-capitalist film Wall Street.

Independent films have emerged over the last couple of decades in film festivals like Cannes in France, and Sundance in The United States to provide a format for stories that Hollywood doesn’t buy for the big stage to be seen by an audience in a theater. Because of the improvement in shooting techniques that has exploded due to the conversation of film to digital technology, filmmakers now have tremendous freedom to make whatever movie they wish, and Hollywood has incentivized such creative endeavors by sending agents and producers to film festivals to purchase ambitious films to show during the autumn and winter marketing periods making independent film a process of film making that is like panning for gold in California during the days of the great Gold Rush. The weakness in independent film is that Hollywood still controls the process. Always on the minds of independent filmmakers is to keep the content of their films on target with the kinds of projects that the big studios are buying, because investors hope for a Hollywood distribution deal.

Atlas Shrugged Part II is an independent film that was made in a lightning fast manner. It was green lit in the winter of 2012 and released in the fall. It is a very ambitious film with great special effects, especially for an indie film, most notably a train wreck that was far more powerful than the big budget studio train wreck in the film Unbreakable, and a flight action sequence that reminded me of Clint Eastwood’s Firefox. Critics of Atlas Shrugged Part II might be tempted to say that technology has come along that would allow kids to make special effects on their Mac’s as well as what was seen in Atlas Shrugged Part II, and that ‘s true. But those comments are also leaked from the Hollywood community run by labor unions who are very concerned that Independent films will put them out of business at some point in the future because more and more films are being made out of Hollywood, to avoid inflated unions demands. (ALL UNIONS USE SUCH TACTICS. CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO.) One such film is the upcoming Hobbit by Peter Jackson, which is essentially an independent film with a big studio backing, and a lot of money to pour into the best special effects that money, and time can buy.

[image error]

Atlas Shrugged does not have the luxury of money, time, or the safety net of Hollywood. In order for Atlas to be made into a film John Aglialaro, Harmon Kaslow and a handful of financial backers had to create a studio, and the entire infrastructure of film production just to make the movie, because Hollywood didn’t want anything to do with the film. With that said, there were some sentimental actors from years gone by in entertainment like Biff from Back to the Future, who played a bureaucratic board member. There was also the pleasant face Steven Keaton from the 80’s TV show Family Ties along with a number of surprising cameos. Every frame of Atlas Shrugged Part 2 oozed with ambition, including some impressive crane shots that I found very technically stimulating from the vantage point of behind the line camera talent. If Atlas played first in a film festival where Hollywood could control the process of the film being shown to the public, there would be a lot of praise for Atlas Shrugged Part II. But the producers of AS2 are not playing tidily winks, they are taking a real crack at penetrating the entertainment culture of Hollywood which makes films with a noticeably left leaning political message, and rejects films that speak to the political right—as though Hollywood believes they can control mass culture with such restriction. The filmmakers of Atlas Shrugged Part 2 went from a screenplay in December to shooting in the spring, to post production duties in the late summer to distribution in the fall, and they did it at a level with the big boys of Hollywood like Warner Brothers, Paramount, Twentieth Century Fox, and other well known powerhouses.

[image error]

I can think of many films put out by those big studios in years past that had cheesy special effects and bad acting, neither of which Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is guilty of. But the level of modern audience expectation, particularly among young people with the memories resembling an insect are very high without context against the history of film. Production values in all films and television have increased, and studios have evolved raising their internal expectations. But since Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is a measure onto itself the filmmakers are going through this process independently. The technological gap seen in Atlas Shrugged Part 1 is quite dramatic in relation to Part 2. The filmmakers of Atlas 2 graduated into a new technical level from the previous film to this one. CLICK HERE TO SEE MY REVIEW OF PART 1. The big studios went through the same process in the 80’s and 90’s that the makers of Atlas Shrugged are laboring through presently.

[image error]

It is not the fault of John Aglialaro or Harmon Kaslow that they have had to learn as they go. The filmmakers of Atlas just wanted to see a film version of the great Ayn Rand literary classic, and nobody had tried to make it work in the past, mainly because the role of many filmmakers in Hollywood resorted themselves to controlling the social message of humanity. This is why filmmakers like George Lucas set up his operation near San Francisco and Clint Eastwood ran Malpaso from Carmel, another San Franciscan suburb. Peter Jackson operates out of New Zealand, so the filmmakers of Atlas Shrugged Part 2 are in good company with their film strategy. The internal politics of Hollywood make it difficult to function creatively, so filmmakers to preserve their own integrity move away from Hollywood so they don’t end up like Steven Spielberg, caught in a creative vortex that consumes all their ingenuity with Hollywood progressive culture. Spielberg makes great movies, but he could do better, as he has in the past. I am looking forward to his new film Lincoln, but he lost his magic touch when he allowed Hollywood to sap him dry, beginning with his first Academy Award for Schindler’s List. I thought of Steven Spielberg while watching Atlas Shrugged Part 2 when Richard Halley the concert pianist was performing before a crowded auditorium and when the curtain closed, Halley left the stage and disappeared for unknown reasons. The reason that Halley left was he realized that the audience had lost their ability to really appreciate his art, so he did what all the rest of the great minds of Atlas Shrugged did, they left society. Spielberg stayed in Hollywood much the way Hank Rearden refused to leave after others had left for the same reasons Halley did in the film. Hank stayed because he just couldn’t quit, and he let himself be manipulated off his emotional high ground. It is those kinds of messages that the Hollywood machine despises because there is more truth than any of them care to reveal publicly.

[image error]

All these qualifiers are necessary so that historical context can be applied to just how big of a deal Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is to the film industry. Aglialaro and company have done the unthinkable, they decided to enter the filmmaking market completely outside the controls that were put in place with nearly 100 years of filmmaking, and it has ruffled the feathers of virtually everyone in show business. With that said, the product put on screen was very good. In the screening that I was at, people openly laughed when Dagny had to fill up her car with gas that was $40 dollars per gallon. And the train crash was visually stunning. The plane chase I thought was remarkably good, and John Galt’s plane was very advanced. It reminded me of something that belonged in Star Wars. The tension through-out the story was intense. People who haven’t read the book might find some of the events too quick and fragmented, but a lot of material is covered, and the filmmakers did a good job of presenting the most abbreviated versions possible. The “money speech” that is so well loved from the book was done powerfully, and Rearden’s court appearance was very effective offering a commentary that is directly pertinent to the politics of our current day. But for me the best parts of the movie were the mystery surrounding the mysterious engine introduced very early in the story. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is a love story, a story of political struggle, an argument in favor of capitalism, but it is also wonderful science fiction adventure resembling a type of film that does not get made any more in Hollywood. I found myself mesmerized watching this mysterious engine come to life throughout the film as Dagny tracks down the creator. I found myself smiling when Dagny met the former employee of a factory where the engine she discovered was built, which gave her insight into the kind of man who built it.

I thought Samantha Mathis did a great job as Dagny. It is repulsive that many Hollywood insiders have made fun of her middle-aged appearance in the film, as she played the part of a very tenacious woman, that is strong willed, independent, vulnerable at times, but deeply passionate about always looking toward the next great thing. If Atlas Shrugged Part 2 were a big studio film by Paramount or Warner and played by Charlize Theron the role would win an Academy Award, but Mathis’ role in Atlas will be rejected by Hollywood because the film was made outside of their control. Samantha Mathis did a wonderful job and was cast realistically which was refreshing to see for a change.

Even with all the pressure, it was nice to see the filmmakers having fun with the film this time around. They obviously loosened up a bit with the script, and that made this film a noticeable improvement over the last, which was good in its own way. Atlas Shrugged as a novel is a very heady piece of work which is a challenge for anybody to put into visual form. In this film, the decision to abbreviate the material with humor was a dramatic improvement. I expected to like the film, but I didn’t expect it to have so many fun moments that drew laughs.

[image error]

For those who don’t know the story of Atlas Shrugged, I won’t ruin it here. But the ending of AS2 was particularly powerful, and very satisfying. The filmmakers pulled off a stunt that the Disney Studios attempted to do with their animated 2001 film Atlantis: The Lost Empire. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 with all the discussion of political commentary, and left versus right dialogue, is a superhero story about the origin of Atlantis. And in Ayn Rand’s classic novel, Atlantis was not geographic, but metaphorical. The story of Atlas Shrugged is at a fundamental level an observation of political methods, but more than that it is the classic analysis as to why many believe in the mythical city of Atlantis, as described by Plato to hold the key to all civilization. All human societies over known history have fallen short of their utopian aims, and Atlas Shrugged is a study as to why. The adventurous journey shown in Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is all about finding the metaphorical city of Atlantis in the classical sense, and modern equivalent. The film is essentially a treasure hunt that must break free of the political shackles which hold humanity to the archaic diatribes of collectivism keeping us from seeing the answers right in front of our faces.

All through Atlas Shrugged Part 2 I thought of the many films I loved growing up, such as The Island at the Top of the World, Journey to the Center of the Earth, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and Around the World in 80 Days. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is an adventure film trying to break free of the shackles imposed by a government obsessed with socialism–trying to answer all life’s solutions beyond the grip that has stopped the magic motor of humanity from being developed culminating during the movie. The answer to these problems is in Atlantis, which is what Dagny is trying to discover with all the gusto of any great adventure story. The film itself, like the characters in the movie is trying to break free of the kind of shackles that have prevented filmmaking and society to create a real life Atlantis. The ambition and great love for the Ayn Rand’s original material can be seen in every frame of film presented with great passion. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is a good honest movie that is telling an intense story about superheroes and treasure hunts. It just so happens that the villains are all too reminiscent of the kind of politicians that currently occupy our government with all the collective greed that has ruined every civilization on planet earth from Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Incan Empire, The Mayans, all the cultures of the Indus Valley, on down through every culture man has ever created since—Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is an examination into the answer of how to avoid such a peril in America. And the answer is in a metaphorical and actual Atlantis, which the viewer gets to discover tragically and rapturously at the end of this very good film.

I would recommend repeated viewings of Atlas Shrugged Part 2, especially if the content of the book is not known before hand. Critics will not like the film for many of the same reasons that they did not like George Lucas’s Red Tails, which I adored (SEE MY REVIEW HERE). Many of the young people working in the media today were teenagers in the 90’s and have never seen a movie made before the computer age, so they expect to be entertained with special effects, not a powerful story so they measure everything in their lives off those faulty standards. But their weaknesses in perception do not make a film bad or good–they are not qualified to measure the worth of a treasure hunt, because so many people have given up on looking for the treasures in life. When it is asked, “Who is John Galt” it is the same as asking, “Where are the treasures that can save mankind.”

This is the ambitious quest of Atlas Shrugged Part 2 and the film makers hit the mark squarely. They did a wonderful job with the film and made a picture that is worth seeing several times. It’s a unique work of art that has a lot of style and grace but more than anything it oozes a love for Ayn Rand and a celebration of her ideas. I wish every movie made in America had just a fraction of the passion shown in Atlas Shrugged Part 2 because if they did, America would become the Atlantis described in Plato’s writings. And this is the point of this very good film, it’s not just a warning of political science, it’s an offering into why the willing shackles mankind places upon their own hearts and minds are done so methodically, and is the reason the “men of the mind” in Atlas Shrugged are dropping the world and leaving to live and thrive in a world of their own making. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is the latest edition in a long line of adventure films that seeks to cut off the chains of politics and emotional bondage away so that the viewer can touch the face of genius and relish in what the entire world could be if only mankind had the courage to become—John Galt.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

The Ghost of Robert Welch: Being right in a world that wished he was wrong

Robert Welch during the 1950’s and 1960’s was the epitome of a right-winged radical as defined by the left-winged radical fringe of progressive thought.  Welch was so far off the ideology of the left, that he appeared extreme to most sensible minded Americans who didn’t wish to see the communist infiltration of The United States that was happening all around them.  Everywhere Welch looked he saw a vast communist conspiracy that was a world-wide movement.  He was so concerned about this communist infiltration that he founded the John Birch Society in 1958, a group that was so conservative that it denounced presidents Nixon and Reagan as being “too liberal.”  Welch felt that the American people were divided into four groups, “communists, communist dupes or sympathizers, the uninformed who have yet to be awakened to the communist danger, and the ignorant.”  His language was harsh, showing his Baptist, North Carolina roots where he was taught at home by his mother—a school teacher.  He was a brilliant student and would later join the United States Naval  Academy and Harvard Law School, but he dropped out of both to become independently wealthy on his own efforts.  Welch was a man who was self-made, and held fierce convictions.  His view of the world was untainted by cooperative endeavor so typical in most people who work for others, so he could afford to see the world in the “long view.”  This led him to see communists everywhere, and he was at war with them using the John Birch Society as his club to defeat communism in America.  In 1958 he gave the speech seen below, and in it, many of the crazy conspiracy theories that the political left tried to discredit can be seen coming true to this very day.  Time and history have siphoned through the liars and the prophets separating the tin-hat kooks from the masks of thieves.  In that process, Robert Welch has been confirmed a prophet, and all too correct as many of the far-flung conspiracies he suggested were rooted in truth, as confirmed by the status of modern America.  Listen for yourself. 

 

Welch was in his day the modern version of Glenn Beck and Beck has seen much the same level of scrutiny that Welch did from the political left.  As modern history has shown, Beck has been much more right than wrong, most notably in declaring that the Muslim religion was attempting to form a Caliphate to unite the former Ottoman Empire, and hiding their actions behind religious debate and political sovereignty.  Welsh in his day took the facts of his time into account and added them up to the logical conclusion that the communists were attempting everything they said they would during the Bolshevik Revolution, and that was to bring communism to the entire world.  Leftists wish to practice evasion and not add up any facts, they only wish to feel their way through the world, so it is not hard to hide such conspiratorial plots from their un-inquisitive minds.  But to people who are fully awake and observing the facts of reality for their true value, people like Glenn Beck in the modern age, people like Ayn Rand from the days of Welch, or Robert Welch himself, the facts point into one direction, and the events that follow are easy to predict once they are accepted as reality. 

I didn’t know anything about Robert Welch and only learned about the events of his era, and his communist concerns by studying Ayn Rand and the events that occurred around her.  I have said much of what Robert Welch said in 1958 here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom in the modern age through independent conclusions, by simply adding up the evidence and arriving at conclusions based on that sum.  All that is required is simply acknowledging the evidence, and following it wherever it points, and in the case of modern issues, it is collectivism that is bringing much of the worlds evils upon the human race whether it is through religious rhetoric or political philosophy.  Communism as Robert Welch feared was in fact imposed upon American culture through “The Insiders,” and such an insidious plot was hatched from the basic human need of collective acceptance.  It didn’t require a great conspiracy of secrecy to induce; all that had to happen were that communists create a modern environment centered on collectivism and the world’s religions and political parties would fulfill the objectives of The Naked Communist also printed in 1958.  CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW. 

Leftists have attempted to paint me as a radical right-winged advocate just as they painted Welch, and Rand.  But the reality is that my position is only considered radical compared to those who have accepted collectivism in various degrees out of rejection of personal liberty.  My position is the one of reason and logic built upon evidence, not emotion.  It is the advocate of emotional decisions that find their philosophies fall apart in their hands like water trying to run through their fingers.  And to be fair, few people had a history behind them to show how well capitalism worked, so communism was very appealing to a society of soft minded intellectuals.  It was easy to call Welch in 1958 a conspiracy theory advocate, because America was still riding the wave of near perfect capitalism seen in America from 1880 to about 1905.  The impact of socialism in the American economy was disguised due to the impact of World War I and World War II wrecking the world’s economy leaving only The United States to profit.  When Robert Welch gave his speech in 1958, people on the left and in the political middle giggled at Welch’s naive world vision.  But as history would prove 50 years later, Welch was correct about nearly all his assertions. 

Action is now dictated.  A choice must be made, because the mixed economy in America that has been laced with collectivist communism must be removed before America can restart its economic engine.  That requires an acknowledgment of what Welch stated half a century ago, and to understand that it has come true in our day and time.  Such times require our personal courage to make the hard decisions, the unpopular social position that is against collectivism, which is the parasite of capitalism. The decisions of today demand an understanding that the best way to help everyone in the world is to convince them all to look out for themselves and to strive for independence in a way that has only been flirted with in the past, but never fully utilized. 

But calling the prophets of American society names because they state the inconvenient won’t fix the problem.  Ignoring the facts of reality won’t make them go away.  America will not survive another 50 years of mixed capitalism induced from communist infiltration to such an extent that the original perpetrators are long since dead and have given birth to progressive spawns who no longer know the technical definition of communism, but instead call themselves democrats and progressives, or MTV viewers who get their news from Comedy Central and consider themselves “worldly.” Those same fragmented minds will always declare that people like Robert Welch were crack-pots who should be ignored.  The reason is that they are the ones who advocated the evil upon mankind thinking that they were saviors fighting on behalf of collectivism.  In reality it is collectivism that is the true evil parasite that is seeking to destroy life itself beginning with personal liberty on a long documented quest for power and conquest in the ancient tradition of candidacy into the priesthood on the shores of “Diana’s Mirror.”  Intellectuals, the same fools who advocate collectivism know precisely what my reference to “Diana’s Mirror” is.  If not, they can Google it. But it is there where the trend toward communism begins, and such roots must be pulled up from the mind of which they grow so that America can return to the foundations of freedom that made it the greatest country on earth, land of the free, and home of the brave, before communism rotted away the minds of the intellectual and seduced the hearts of the weak. 

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

‘Tail of the Dragon’ Interview on the Doc Thompson Show: Detroit is a “WAR ZONE.”

“Tail of the Dragon is a cross between Smokey and the Bandit, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” That’s what I told Doc Thompson during his 1270 AM radio show in Detroit during the interview that can be heard below at the link. Doc Thompson and I go back a few years, and have fought many school levy battles and public union campaign issues on the airwaves of radio. Doc had me on to discuss a new crisis that is going on in Detroit where the police presence is advocating its support of Proposal 2, which is a state constitutional change to guarantee collective bargaining rights for public employees. Ironically this is one of the major villains that have wrecked the economy of Detroit leaving the town a devastated “war zone.” My visit to the Doc Thompson Show came on the heels of a police union stunt headed by Joe Duncan who had 400 of his officers passing out fliers to fans of the Tigers first playoff game against the Oakland A’s, declaring the city unsafe for entry. Doc and I had seen this kind of behavior before with Senate Bill 5 in Ohio during 2011, and it just so happened that this kind plot line matched the story of my new book.

On the flier Joe Duncan and his officers declared “Enter Detroit at Your Own Risk,” as fans poured into Comerica Park. “Detroit is America’s most violent city and the city’s police force is grossly understaffed.” The intention of the fliers was the old fear game that all public unions use to advance their cause—which is not safety, but financial security. Unions on the backs of the unwitting participants such as Duncan and his officers are caught up in a plot to hatch communism in America designed long ago, and has been gradually accepted over a long period of time using fear tactics of terrorism to advance their agenda. The protesting police officers don’t care about the history of communism. They are working a dangerous job, and they simply want to get paid as much as they can for doing that job. From their perspective it’s only fair. But what they don’t understand, or have the historical background to decipher is the communist infiltration in America during the Red Decade of the 1930’s brought labor unions and collective bargaining ideas to the closest thing of pure capitalism ever known in the world and corrupted it with the taint of collectivism.

Proposition 2 in Michigan is attempting to go the opposite way as Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana who are all working to reform their public unions from extortive control over public services. Seeing the writing on the wall, the Michigan public unions are seeking to protect themselves from these changes by putting “collective bargaining” into the state constitution, which is why the police were at the Tiger’s playoff game looking for sympathy and votes for Proposition 2. They want to ensure that collective bargaining is in place for their entire careers, because it represents why they got into public service in the first place—because the money is great and the retirements come early and is profitable. But what they don’t know is that collective bargaining is the direct result of the Bolshevik Revolution started in Russia in 1917 and is a product of communism. Most likely the police passing out fliers at the baseball game have never heard of a Bolshevik let alone read the Ayn Rand classic about the start of communism in Petrograd from her novel We The Living. I would doubt they read a TV Guide let alone a 75-year-old novel that describes why the police are the modern-day pawns of the communism movement in America.

Detroit is not dangerous because of the amount of police there are. Detroit could hire a 1000 police and they still could not stop all the crime that is happening there. What is happening to Detroit is the same thing that has destroyed the Soviet Union and is currently destroying China. It’s the same thing that has wrecked the economies of Greece, Spain and is about to push France under—which is the influence of Socialist International as a political party advocating a world-wide push toward global communism. In the past Detroit had too many labor unions, so the business left to manufacture in regions where the labor is cheaper. Taxes are too high, there are too many public housing developments, there is simply too much government involvement. Detroit is a victim of socialism and the destructive experiments of communism coming out of the Red Decade. It is those policies of social engineering that had destroyed the Motor City which once boasted a thriving economy into the crime ridden battleground that it is today. It is those same policies that created collective bargaining and a gradual acceptance of communist thought in America hidden on the backs of trusted public sector workers like firefighters, cops and teachers. The blueprint for this Trojan horse of communism in America was outlined in the book We The Living published in 1936 and Detroit is the result of the communist attempt in America.

This was all predicted by Richard Cloward, which I discussed in my book Tail of the Dragon using the fictional Governor Wellington Royce to pontificate the frustrations that many progressives feel to this very day, which is people have unpredictably voted with their feet. Cloward wished to collapse capitalism in the 1960’s in favor of a communist insurrection by toppling the American economy that was overwhelmed with welfare demands. In Detroit, as in every major city in the United States with the exception of New York and Los Angeles, the people with money did as the producers in the book Atlas Shrugged did; they left and took their money with them when taxes became too high. When the money and businesses that made the money left Detroit because of the unions, both public and private, the high taxes, the government bureaucracies, it left Detroit with only the poor government dependents to pay into the tax base draining the city budgets, and crime has exploded as a result. These are hard concepts to discuss which is why I placed them into the context of a very intense story in my book Tail of the Dragon. Detroit is only the most obvious victim of these progressive policies that have masked the intentions of communist infiltration in America.

Detroit is in trouble today because they let themselves be seduced by the fear mongering of many public workers like Joe Duncan in the past, which used fear the same way that a terrorist does, to change social behavior. The crime is high in Detroit because the productive people who created jobs and made all the money in the city left, only to leave the weak to fend for themselves on government programs in perpetual need of more money from a tax base no longer present. Joe Duncan and his officers only want to get paid, because their union has made promises to them that they accepted as an American idea, even though collective bargaining was born in Petrograd, Russia at the start of the communist revolution that began in 1917. The result of such communist dreams is the condition of present day Detroit.

The best thing that Detroit could do for itself is to rid itself of public unions, collective bargaining, and lower tax rates so businesses might wish to return. Detroit needs to create economic stimulation so that the poor and jobless can have a job and become a part of the free enterprise system and force government to get out of the compassion business. Compassion cannot be created by government or enforced through force, and that is at the heart of collective bargaining. It is only good for the recipients of a government pay check. It is treacherous for those who have to actually pay the bill. With that said the worst thing Michigan could do in this upcoming election is vote in favor of Proposition 2. Voters in that “dangerous” city will have to take a hard-line in the sand and stick to it if they wish to save their city. No amount of tax money, police hires, or increases in government welfare can save them from the Cloward strategy that bankrupted their city for aims that are foreign to most Americans. The only way to save Detroit is by voting NO on all tax increases, and expansion of government services, especially those involving collective bargaining.

Rich Hoffman

Tail of the Dragon

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

‘Tail of the Dragon’ on WDTN’s “Living Dayton”: Zuri Hall interviews Rich Hoffman

I enjoyed my visit with Zuri Hall and Nathalie Basha on the noon time program Living Dayton to promote my new book Tail of the Dragon. I was very impressed with the production quality and the executive producer handling of Rhonda Roberts to perform their brand of a daytime news/lifestyle program on Channel 2 in Dayton every weekday from noon to 1 PM. The show is a nice mixture of national and regional news mixed with lifestyle segments dotted throughout each episode. It had a living newspaper feel that Zuri and Nathalie are the heartbeats giving it life. I had been looking for a good television program to do the kind of interview that Zuri and I did on October 9th, 2012, that captured the mood and feel of the Great Smoky Mountains as shown in my new book. Living Dayton was the perfect forum with just the right mix of news—which is my background, and personality interaction that is so common with creative arts like book and movie promotion. To see the clip from the episode of Living Dayton click on the link below which goes to the Living Dayton website, or watch the clip that I took some creative liberty with to create a video advertising Tail of the Dragon.

http://www.wdtn.com/dpp/living_dayton/tail-of-the-dragon

As I was on the set of Living Dayton watching Zuri and Nathalie work my friend Gery Deer who does a lot of work with WDTN television working closely with Executive Producer Roberts told me that the whole set had recently been redone in High Definition. The High Def upgrade gives a program like Living Dayton the color it needs in today’s market, pertinent for daytime television. Gery told me that this was the same set that used to host the Phil Donahue Show prior to moving to Chicago in the 1970’s where the famous Ayn Rand interview took place that I have exhibited at this site. It was interesting to see the set where Donahue started in a day when he built himself into a national name from this same stage. Nathalie and Zuri are on track to do something similar with their new show. Nathalie joined WDTN in January of 2012 as host/producer of “Living Dayton” a one-of-a-kind, local lifestyle talk show. Prior to joining WDTN, Nathalie was working and living in her native Los Angeles as a multi-platform host. Nathalie hosted for E! Entertainment and The Insider, and worked as a red carpet correspondent for GBK Productions and Agenda Magazine’s online entertainment site. Zuri Hall joined WDTN in December of 2011. Prior to becoming producer/host of Living Dayton, Zuri beat out hundreds in the search for the next Face of MyINDY-TV. At WNDY-TV, she represented the station in commercials, PSAs, and public appearances; covered local events, games, and concerts; and interviewed celebrities, from Grammy-award nominated rapper B.o.B. to famed Hollywood director, Rob Reiner. Only one year after having graduated from The Ohio State University on academic scholarship, she won her first Emmy in the “Outstanding Host – Talent” category. So needless to say, I was impressed with the level of talent and quality of the production.

As I was interviewing with Zuri I thought about the gradual transition that I had undergone in the last two years, from a political activist trying to make sense of an impossible situation centering on political theater that put me on TV often and gave me a lot of opportunity to do a lot of talk radio. But much to my frustration, no amount of logic injected into the debates would ever go anywhere. The political system at its core is essentially corrupt, and cannot be saved directly. Over the last couple of summers my long time friend Gery Deer had been trying to talk me into using my other creative talents to reach more people without getting pulled into the black hole of politics. And in many ways, the reason I wrote Tail of the Dragon was to take what I had learned in political activism and apply it in a story that articulated properly the very complicated news stories of our day, because out of all the interviews I had ever done, they end up lost to most people because taken as isolated issues, they are never portrayed correctly upon the tapestry of living that is quite involved, interconnected, and difficult to understand. The best vehicle for grappling with the kind of issues that I am interested in is a novel, and this is how Tail of the Dragon came to be.

Thanks to Zuri in a lot of ways, I can say that this interview was one of the most pleasant that I’ve ever had. I had several realizations during the interview that occurred at the point in discussion talking about the kind of road that the real Tail of the Dragon is, where I realized that I was stepping into a new door, professionally. Even though I had done dozens, maybe hundreds of interviews in the past on other projects and issues that I’ve attached my name to, this was the first interview that I had done over a body of work that I’ve produced designed to attack the big themes, where I could sit back and not be personally attached to the subject matter intimately. It was very nice to sit on a couch with a competent hostess and discuss themes without having to have my name on the line to succeed or fail a political issue like I experienced in my various levy campaigns—where it was my name alone that stood between antagonizing anger, and financial success. As I sat on that couch speaking with Zuri, I realized that I liked it—a lot.

I enjoyed the emotional distance being an author gives to the subject matter and this interview afforded me the proper distance I have been creatively craving for a very long time. Doing that interview with Zuri made me want to write more books so that I could give more such interviews, because the depth of the communication was so much more robust than what I’ve experienced in the past with more targeted, and more emotional issues. It was quite a pleasure to go through all the work it takes to write a novel, to get it published and go through all the production tasks, to have it culminate in an interview with Zuri Hall on a couch reflecting the past of Phil Donahue mixing with the future of these two hospitable hostesses. And when you come upon such doors, you turn the knob and go inside.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

The Box Office/Political War: Cutting the collectivists out of ‘Atlas Shrugged Part 2′

When I put my support as aggressively as I have behind Atlas Shrugged Part 2 there is a good reason. A movie is a way that information the rest of us already know can be shared with those who are coming to know it. There is no reason to have petitions signed, to hold up banners at rallies, to even vote, if a majority of the adult population continues to be treacherously stupid and undo all the work that has been attempted on their behalf. This is why I now write full-time, because I feel this is the best way to help the world around me, by giving readers ideas that will help them undo the intentional evasion they have been taught to practice. My new book Tail of the Dragon is intended to deliver the message of freedom with the ornamentation of an intense car chase. Because I know the character of Rick Stevens requires an action packed plot to help the hard medicine go down easier, since he is an unyielding, personality that many people aren’t accustomed to dealing with, the intention is still to celebrate freedom and individuality. I am not interested in any other kind of character. Thousands of other kinds of characters have been created, but only a few handfuls of the strong individual types that I am interested in have been created. That is why the name of this site is called OVERMANWARRIOR. If the average man these days is one who is addicted to evasion, to a mediocre blandness in their existence, then I aim to be more than that—an overman who strives to exist beyond the limits set by collectivists to ruin the human race.

When many thought I had lost my mind months ago by publicly calling my political opponents latté sipping prostitutes with asses the size or car tires, I knew what I was doing. They thought I was playing by the old rules of politics that they had established. But I wasn’t. I was reflecting the front of the train mentally where people are beginning to realize that you cannot argue with some political ideologies, while others are out-right dangerous, and cannot be reasoned with. When those ideologies are confronted, they must be crushed without apology because no matter how nice you are to those types, or how much you attempt to cooperate with them, they have their agenda, and they will lie, steal, and manipulate anything it takes to destroy you. So compromise is not a definition compatible with the current war we are in. And at the front of this war of ideas are books of old and books of new along with movies competing with the entertainment that has captured generations. The battle is being fought there, for the hearts and minds of audiences in music, movies, television and books.

This is why Atlas Shrugged has been so important in fueling the Tea Party movement, because such burning movements need food for the thoughts, so that context can be placed on the argument. And the movie version of Atlas Shrugged increases book sales, which ultimately gets more people thinking seriously about free market economies and personal liberty. Communists have The Communist Manifesto and they have used it like a club to hammer America into the kind of mixed economy, mixed political ideology that America is enduring presently. So it is only fair that those of us who reject those ideas are using Atlas Shrugged as our own club to beat down the communists, who are virtually everywhere like a termite nest in a hollowed out tree. From the outside the tree looks healthy with leaves on the branches until a great storm comes and breaks the tree in half with a heavy wind to reveal how much damage the termites have done over a long period of time. So for me, and it appears the makers of Atlas Shrugged Part II–we are at war, and we are working toward common goals. We are at war against collectivism and the machine that was built-in the entertainment industry to advance communism through the college professor who taught young media students journalism, to the story editors who work for the major Hollywood studios, to the producers who associate with Communist Party USA directly or indirectly through the Democratic Party, to the film critics who work for the newspapers. It is time to challenge them with material that represents capitalism, and individual strength against the collective.

Playing such a game does not call for handshakes or tip-toeing around the issue. I can declare that I won’t do it anymore. Playing nice with those collective advocates isn’t going to happen on my end of the deal ever again. And I’m not alone in this stance. Increasingly over the last year it has been understood that collectivists do not deserve compassion, they do not deserve understanding, because they truly want to destroy the version of America that we love, so the gloves are coming off. To get a sense of this all one has to do is look at the way John Aglialoro has approached the release of Atlas Shrugged Part One as opposed to Atlas Shrugged Part Two. In Part One he had a big opening and invited Hollywood to view the film along with other media professionals and they did exactly what Ellsworth Toohey did in The Fountainhead, which was attempt to crush Atlas Shrugged Part One because they didn’t like the message, because they wanted to suppress it in favor of collectivist oriented entertainment, which has had a monopoly for a long time in America—too long. Aglialoro’s trust in the media business to treat him fairly cost him dearly, millions of dollars of lost box office receipts because the system shut down access to the film. Later, once Part One hit Netflix and came out on DVD, people rented it, and watched it, and enjoyed it, once the media hype had died down.

This time, for Part Two, it’s a whole different story. Aglialoro and his team prior to the October 12th release of Atlas Shrugged ‘Ether Or’ have had a premier in Washington D.C. and two screenings in Los Angeles, and not a single member of the traditional press was invited. Aglialoro said of the decision, “They won’t like it, so why give them the sword to cut off our own head.”  His approach was to invite those they know are with them to see and write about the film leaving the media out of the loop. More or less, the Atlas Shrugged film group is by-passing the traditional media, the studio system, all the channels who control the flow of information, and they are well aware that it will ruffle feathers, which is the point when you’re at war. John Aglialoro, when talking about the media’s response to Part I said, “The movie critics en masse immaturely bullied Atlas Shrugged mercilessly. Not because the cast or producers made a technically or artistically inferior movie, but because of its philosophical message of individualism. That’s what’s unforgivable. The critics prostituted their profession for politics.” Ahhh, it’s so nice to hear someone else say that, to have the balls to put his personal fortune on the line to make a film the establishment will absolutely hate while he is hanging by a thread at great personal risk to himself, he tells the media that they “prostituted themselves.” That’s the measure of a man, and the new way that the battles will be fought for now on in this war of ideas.

So understand that we are at war, and what’s at stake is freedom over collectivism, and money is the ballot box. This is why I am so intent to see Atlas Shrugged Part II successful, because in this kind of war I am the media. So are you dear reader, because you can’t trust the traditional sources on this matter. They support only one kind of idea, and that is the one advocated by collectivism, which is a crime against truth. If the ideas of collectivism were so strong, they would not fear competition from the theories of individual liberty and laissez-faire capitalism over the crony capitalism of a mixed economy. But they do fear it, and wish with all their power to shut down the message. I plan to use the literature that gained traction in the past to pound my wishes into the future, and I plan also to add to it with new work for future generations. But surrendering life to the quicksand of the collective is simply not an option. Peace with the collectivist is not desired. Their way of life can only be cast away from the continent of The United States because they have proven a desire to rule with a dictatorship of the proletariat, and the damage they have done to millions of people and the human race in general has been, and is unforgivable. Much harsher language will come in the days that have not yet seen the sun. That is a promise.

In the meantime, prepare to see Atlas Shrugged Part 2 at a theater near you on the weekend of October 12th. Go see the movie for no other reason than to stick a fork in the eye of those who have embraced collectivism at the expense of personal freedom.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

Altruism is the Mask of Modern Evil: The do-gooder’s of injustice spin a complicated web

Altruism is one of the most sinister forms of human behavior ever to take hold on the human race, and it is so dangerous that like a parasitic organism disguising itself as part of one’s own body with full intention to continue feeding off that body, or else kill it, altruism allows bad negative behavior to be disguised as good. When people declare that they willingly gave to charity, or donated their money to the Boy Scouts, or made a great sacrifice for the good of everyone else, what is really being said is that there are fundamental lies in the life of the propagator that are being concealed. While it is genuinely nice to help others with whatever difficulties they are enduring, such action may not technically be good. It is the definition of “good” that is at fault, the measurement of “good” that is most at error and allows bad people to believe they are acting honorably, and with justice for the “greater well-being.”

When a school levy is proposed to a community, it is propagated on behalf of the “good of the children” when in fact it is a lie, it’s the good of the labor unions and teachers’ bank accounts. When a police or fire levy is proposed to a community it is for the “safety of the neighborhood” that is the mantra of destruction, for the levy does not go to helping make anyone safe, as the work is currently being hired out to complete. It is to protect the pay increases and pensions of the workers without having to increase their personal production to increase their revenue streams. The neighborhood is used as the cover story to hide the greed and evil of lazy public employees wanting to pay off their bass boats while believing to themselves that socially the action is for the “greater good.” Consider the Washington congressman who attends a charity dinner for a “needy cause” but the reality is that the congressman is there not for the cause but to network with lobbyists so that they can learn how they can enrich themselves through the money being funneled into their direction. There are millions of possible variations to these examples, but in short altruism is used as a mask to hide much evil—so much so that any good created from those enterprises is destroyed by the actions in reality.

This behavior trend was never more evident than in the Texas cancer doctor, Dr. Burzynski who has managed to produce a cancer treatment for various cancers including breast cancer and prostate cancer that bypasses many of the violent surgeries that our society has become accustomed to. Throughout the 90’s up to the present there was a lot of panic over Burzynski as the FDA tried to throw him in jail for producing a drug that was a major threat to the pharmaceutical industry. (CLICK HERE FOR REVIEW) Logic would declare that Burzynski had discovered a cure for most cancers, and was able to save thousands of patients from destructive chemotherapy. But the problem is not so simple because of social altruism. Think of how during NFL football games the players wear pink shoes and ribbons attached to their uniforms to raise awareness for breast cancer. Think of the public relations industry that is behind those pink ribbons, think of the speeches and fundraisers that so many politicians attend—millions are affected in some way or another to the altruism of breast cancer awareness. Many dirty minds are allowed to conduct their lives as parasites off the human race under the guise of goodness, because they are promoting “women’s health.” Yet there is nothing more beneficial to women’s health than curing breast cancer, as Burzynski is well on his way to doing. Yet he has spent over twenty years defending himself from jail just because he invented a way to cure cancers that would put all the parasites that thrive off those miserable conditions out of business.

Altruism is evil not because it occasionally, accidentally does good to a small few; it is evil because it seeks to hide evil behind the mask of goodness. If the trend of altruism were removed from human society, that mask would not be able to hide such evil, and the evil could then be dealt with in a straight forward way. For each person who heard of Burzynski’s cancer treatments who said, “oh, but what will happen to my job if people are cured of cancer,” each of them are committing a sinister evil in hoping for the continued death and decay that cancer creates just so they can continue to be employed making the stupid pink ribbons that are passed out at football games and other social events to project a belief in goodness. When someone proclaims that society should “sacrifice” their time and money to great causes—look out, there is a villain among you. The great causes are in most cases an artificially created crises designed to use emotional turmoil to bring about financial gain to the villain.

Think of the man who cheats on his wife Saturday night with a grotesque orgy of sin, drinking, gambling, and sexual forays in the bright lights of Vegas then catches the red-eye flight back home to attend church with the family on Sunday. The members of his congregation see in the pews with them a great man who loves his family. They think even higher of the man because he placed a $200 donation in the basket. The man’s wife, the children and the congregation from their vantage point believe the man to be virtuous because he gave a great sum of money to the church to help give the entire congregation a church to gather in to rejoice in the presence of God. What they don’t know, that behind the mask of altruism the man took the $200 from a prostitute who passed out in his Vegas bedroom and that he won over $5000 at the tables that his wife will never know about because he plans to spend that money else ware. The $200 is cover under the mask of altruism to hide his crimes and camouflage his intentions.

If altruism were frowned down upon in our society, ironically things would improve a great deal socially. The thieves who hide behind large charitable organizations, the pudgy socialites of community foundations, the school levy advocates, the fire chief who appears about to give birth crying for a new fire truck, the cancer awareness parasites, the Sunday morning do-gooder, they are all harboring evil by allowing goodness to be eaten away from the inside out through the social recognition of altruism. Unfortunately goodness has been captured in this way by bad people, who are allowed to believe they are good due to the definition of goodness being corrupted by evil, and we are not talking about isolated incidents—this is a widespread tragedy. In almost every case, if the tendency toward altruism is examined honestly, many evils will be seen just below the surface. For those who claim there is not enough altruism in the world, behold, there is your thief. Examine their lives carefully and you will find a villain seeking to hide their crimes behind the banality of altruism.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

‘Anthem’ Book Review: Walt Disney and his ‘Epcot Center’ Dedication to Ayn Rand

There is no doubt in my mind that if Uncle Walt Disney were alive today and away from friends and family who carefully guard his past, that he would not deny that it was Ayn Rand’s book Anthem that set in his mind the first lingering necessity to build a theme park dedicated to mankind’s future called Epcot Center. Ayn Rand and Walt Disney along with many other professionals working in the creative industry had shared a genuine fight against communism in the period of The Red Decade to the 1960’s. The Red Decade is a term coined by journalist and historian Eugene Lyons to describe a period in American history during the 1930s characterized by a widespread infatuation with communism in general and Stalinism in particular. Lyons believed this idolization of Joseph Stalin and exultation of Bolshevik achievements to have reached its high point in 1938, running deepest amongst liberals, intellectuals, and journalists and even some government and federal officials, saturated American life during this period. Rand, Disney, Reagan, Cooper and many others took a harsh stand against this communist spread and were deeply concerned about what it would do in The United States. CLICK HERE FOR A REVIEW. Few know that Ayn Rand corresponded with Walt Disney about making her novel Anthem into an animated feature. The story appears to have resonated strongly with Disney the rest of his life, so much so that the large plaque shown to the right can be seen at the American Heritage Pavilion at the Epcot Center which opened 6 months after Rand died and Disney had passed away with a drawing of the conceptual amusement park taped to the ceiling of his hospital room so it was the last thing he saw while he died.

I have said it before; Epcot Center is my favorite place on planet earth. I am most happy, most comfortable, most excited about the future of mankind when I visit the Epcot Center. I fully believe that Disney desired to build the theme park to prevent the future that is at the beginning of Ayn Rand’s Anthem. It is becoming increasingly evident that the human race has had to reinvent itself not just once, not just twice, not just three times, but many, many, many times over millions of years and Ayn Rand was aware of this tragic trend. People who hate Ayn Rand’s work are the kind of people Rand as an author was trying to warn society about. And for those who want an easy way to understand Ayn Rand, and are mystified as to why her book Atlas Shrugged is so beloved, and why to this day The Fountainhead is quietly cherished, it is her book Anthem that grabs hold of the themes that would become her legacy, for it is aptly named. The last two chapters of Anthem are two of the most declarative, and profound statements in human literature by an author of any kind or time.

In 2012 communism has already corrupted much of society and the entire globe is marching backwards on a predictable path that was clear to Disney and Rand many years ago. Rand sets Anthem approximately 200 years into the future of the present and in that society the word “I” has been eradicated from all human knowledge. The time we presently live in was called The Unmentionable Times and the entire society assumes that communism has taken full hold, and is the governing world power. The result is that innovation has been eliminated and society has regressed back into a primitive form. In Anthem, there is much celebration when their future society has spent 50 years developing and gaining permits from the World Council to invent a candle. When the hero named Equality 7-2521 discovers evidence of our present civilization in a box of unused light bulbs he takes it to his masters thinking they will be very happy. They of course are not. In fact, they are furious, and desire to burn him in a public execution. While reading about these events I couldn’t help but think of all the executions done during The Dark Ages, and clearly this was what Rand was concerned with in her plot device. The theme is that collectivism socially by its very nature regresses backwards and to such an extent that the people in Equality 7-2521’s time are not even allowed to contemplate the events of “The Unmentionable Time.”

Modern readers may wish to snicker at Ayn Rand’s premise in Anthem. They may find it hard to believe that such a thing could ever happen which is understandable in a world of smart phones, air planes, and the Internet. But Rand had watched the process happen first hand before she fled the Soviet Union which was chronicled in her book We The Living. She watched the backwards social advancement of collectivism and she hated it. When she came to The United States she wrote about life in Russia under communism in We The Living that the publisher Cassell put in print. But they turned down Anthem saying that “the author does not understand socialism.” Rand was trying to publish Anthem during The Red Decade and few people today understand how powerful the communist influence was in America, because after the Cold War, our grandparents didn’t talk about it. Even Ronald Reagan gave communism a chance until he made a film and witness firsthand the destruction by socialism in the small tenements around Elstree Studios, in England. People today laugh at Ayn Rand and her anger at collectivism because they do not have the context of history in their understanding. Few people know today what life was like before FDR’s New Deal, which was a direct response to The Red Decade. They assume that labor unions always existed, that there was always Medicare, always Social Security, always a time when money wasn’t backed by gold, and that public education was always the center of every community. In reality, most of those things happened after Anthem’s publication because Rand saw it coming, and tried to warn Americans to not follow the demise of the country she had just ran from.

But Uncle Walt listened, and he corresponded with Rand, specifically about Anthem. And his answer to the crises exhibited in the novel that humanity might not forget the achievements it had so far gained was a new amusement park dedicated to the cause. It would appear that Disney wanted to fight collectivism through creating a place that would not allow technology to fall under the rule of proletariat dictatorships. Epcot Center was intended to stop the constant periods of invention, then regression that has impeded the human race for many beginnings over time. That is why even with all the controversy surrounding Ayn Rand, even with all the modern progressive types who run Disney World and the many youthful employees who have been raised under philosophies of collectivism, that Rand’s quote is prominently displayed at the American Heritage Pavilion. Disney was very concerned about making good family entertainment which they still are great at today, but Uncle Walt—the man behind the billions and billions of dollars generated by the Walt Disney Company is one of Ayn Rand’s “men of the mind” from Atlas Shrugged, and he knew it. A world without people like Walt Disney, or the modern day equivalent in George Lucas would be a desolate world already well on its way toward the beginning of Anthem.

I was pleasantly surprised that Rand didn’t stop in the dystopian arena that surrounded stories of the period like Soylent Green and Brave New World. Anthem goes beyond those grim visions and actually earns its title in a bold way that would later become The Fountainhead. Anthem is a bold declaration to the world of the human right to be an independent man. The book is awesome and if you’ve ever visited the Epcot Center and find that you love the place you will love Anthem. If you are the type of person who finds Epcot Center boring, you will probably hate Anthem, and Disney had people like you in mind, that’s why there is a Downtown Disney. Go shopping and eat some ice cream if you are that kind of person. But for the thinkers, the lovers of life, the energetic minds striving to see what is next for the human race fighting against collectivism to achieve those next steps against the tide of communism that is attempting to place us all in shackles, Anthem a book that you must read.

For the advocates of collectivism who are perplexed as to why John Aglialoro and Harmon Kaslow spent small fortunes against conventional Hollywood logic to make Atlas Shrugged Part 2, as fans show up to see the film in spite of the bad reviews and why Ayn Rand books are flying off of book shelves in perplexing quantities, all you need to do is read that plague from Ayn Rand displayed proudly at the Epcot Center to understand that Anthem is more than a warning on the direction of mankind. It also exhibits perfectly the two different directions of two different types of people functioning in America today and the battle that is presently being waged. The fight of our day is to avoid for the first time that human beings have breathed air into their lungs to revert into collectivism after having small tastes of freedom. If we ever did, the Epcot Center would be available to remind mankind of what it’s giving up in order to have a world of the inclusive “WE.” (collectivism)

The heart and drive of Anthem is to rediscover a very simple concept that we all take for granted, the meaning and understanding of the world “I.” Anthem is in a fashion a treasure hunt not for gold or unlimited riches or political power. Anthem is a treasure hunt for the value of a human being—which is defined with the noun—“I.”

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

‘We The Living’ Book Review: ABSOLUTELY STUNNING–Thank you John Aglialoro

Stunning is the best way to describe Ayn Rand’s classic novel, We The Living. Absolutely stunning! I feel upon completing that novel similar to what I felt when I finished Allen Eckert’s novel The Frontiersman—by asking the question, “why hasn’t this book been read by every single eighth grader in America?” Because We The Living should be read by every single person who either calls themselves Americans, or wants to become one. The book is absolutely knock-your-socks-off—stunning. The entire time I was reading the book, I kept thinking back to my teenage years when the restaurant chain Wendy’s used to air commercials like the one shown below at the height of the Cold War during President Reagan’s time in the Oval Office.

I used to think that commercial was a gross exaggeration of what life in the Soviet Union was really like. I thought it was just propaganda designed to steer people away from communism and toward capitalism. But I now know because I read We The Living, that life in the Soviet Union was about 20 times worse than what was shown in that old Wendy’s commercial and I am literally stunned that academia in The United States embraced communism to the high level that they have, because We The Living takes readers on a very intimate journey into the lives of many characters who are struggling to live under the Dictatorship of the Proletariat brought about by the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.

I suppose I have to thank John Aglialoro who is the financial mind behind making Ayn Rand’s classic book Atlas Shrugged into a movie. It was because of the upcoming Atlas Shrugged Part II film that I picked up We The Living to enjoy while I waited for the movie to come out. I waited so I could celebrate Ayn Rand in the weeks leading up to the film’s release with a book that I hadn’t read by her. If not for the Atlas Shrugged movies I may never have picked up We The Living because honestly I have had no desire to read about life in Russia, even though I have always been curious about it. When I think of Russia I think of snow and communism, neither of which I am particularly fond of. I like snow a little bit, but I absolutely despise communism. Collectivism for me has always been a dirty word, well before I ever bumped into Ayn Rand’s work. I feel that way to such a degree that I don’t even let people call me, “brother,” including when I was a part of a large motorcycle group in Ohio. I withdrew as Vice-President of that group because I recognized the collectivism in the bikers as I was making a documentary of how motorcycle riders were, so “independent.” I abandoned the documentary when I acknowledged that most bikers were behaving with collectivism down to the simple process of riding in formation behind a pack leader on the highway which to me was unacceptable. As I delved into the Easy Rider Chillicothe Rodeo and learned that public displays of sexual intercourse and drunkenness were important parts of the culture, I felt so disenfranchised that along with college fraternities, athletic institutions, academic politics and labor unions determined collectivism was a rampant problem that threatened the sanctity of The United States by intending to crush individual identity.

Today Ayn Rand is so hated, so despised by all the members of groups like the ones mentioned because her opinions threaten their existence. Yet the truth is the truth. It cannot be escaped. The hatred for Ayn Rand will be on full display once again when John Aglialoro, Harmon Kaslow and the rest of the Atlas Shrugged film team release ‘Either Or,’ (Part II of the Atlas Shrugged trilogy) on October 12th. Fans will love the movie. Collectivists, democrats, progressives, communists, intelligentsia, hippies, welfare recipients, neurotic parents, bleeding heart liberals, tree hugging green tech advocates, most of the viewership of Comedy Central, MTV, and fans of daytime soap operas will hate the movie. In fact if forced to watch the film they will wither about as though Holy Water had been cast upon their foreheads during a Catholic exorcism ritual inciting demons to flee from their bodies when Atlas Shrugged Part II hits screens in spite of all their efforts to keep the world from reading Ayn Rand or seeing a movie adaptation of her literary work. The question then comes to pass, why is she so hated? If so many people think one way, and only a few think the way she did—in a democracy—aren’t the majority entitled to rule over the majority? The answer is———a resounding——NO!

To understand who Ayn Rand was and how she thought, reading her book We The Living is absolutely essential. I can understand why Rand’s later characters are so hated by collectivists. John Galt and Howard Roark were the way they were in Rand’s later literary work because it was revealed in We The Living the true relationship that Ayn Rand had with her very first love as a 17-year-old teenager in a man named Leo. Leo in the book We The Living was trying to live a good life under a Soviet system that absolutely would not allow for such people to exist, and all during the book I kept thinking that life in America is not very much different. The heroine of We The Living is Kira Argounov which is the literal antithesis of Ayn Rand herself living in Petrograd in the year of 1924 trying to start a life with the man she loved, which was impossible without allowing her personal identity to be smashed into collective soup.

We The Living was the first time I had ever gained intimate knowledge of what life was like behind the Iron Curtain. This was my first realistic glance at what went on behind the Berlin Wall, and why people risked life and limb to climb over, to get away from the oppressive, Soviet dominated East Germany. We The Living takes readers on a journey into the bread lines at the co-operatives, into the minds of the communists ruling as Karl Marx’s proletariat, into the minds of the bourgeois, into their education system, into their economic engine, into their whole philosophy. The genius of the book is in how effectively the characters are developed so that their demise into having their individuality stripped away completely is revealed from the years of 1924 to 1926. In just a few years, once proud families were stripped down to nothing, forced to live like insects in public housing seized by the state, and begging for a job run by the state so they could receive a food ration card. The living conditions were absolutely appalling. The way the communists gained control of each and every person’s life in Russia was revealed in graphic detail and their motivations for doing so was also exposed. Many of those methods can be found in the modern United Nations Agenda 21 initiative, which was written by former fans of open communism, now calling themselves socialists and progressives.

For me the most heart-wrenching scene was when a young couple was thrown into Siberian jails because of their counter-revolutionary intentions against the great Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The couple simply wanted to eat, and because they didn’t belong to any of the trade unions, they couldn’t get a job, and therefore couldn’t get a food ration card. So they plotted to overthrow the government by passing out flyers in factories urging people to stand up against the communists. They were sentenced to 10 years in Siberia at different prisons which they both knew was a death sentence because nobody came back from Siberia. They typically died from suicide or consumption, there just wasn’t any food in that frozen land but what was brought in by train. The couple rode for most of the trip together in a train holding each other as long as they could. Then at a particular train stop the woman was ripped from the arms of her man and put on another train to head to a different prison and that was the last they would ever see of each other ever. It was a terrible scene beautifully written. I often thought of Steven Spielberg’s Schindlers’ List during these kinds of scenes where the content was just terrible, but the delivery was magnificent.

The book is filled with scenes like that; all of them absolutely catastrophic. It is no wonder that it took three years to get published in the United States in 1936 and was rejected by a dozen publishing houses before Macmillan finally considered it over the violent protests of Granville Hicks, who would later get revenge on Ayn Rand through the New York Times when he was sought out by them to review Atlas Shrugged twenty years later. The owner of Macmillan overruled Hicks by saying “I don’t know whether the book will make any money, but that it was important and ought to be published.” Hicks was revealed to be a card-carrying member of Communist Party USA as was many members of the media, academia, and labor unions in the period of the 1920’s to the 1950’s. They were later forced to go underground into hiding behind the Democratic Party disguised as political progressives. And it was clear that the Soviet Union Dictatorship of the Proletariat planned for the entire world to be converted to communism. They had extremely elaborate plans to move their utopia of misery to every nation on earth, and many in the United States were willing to help them do it, because they didn’t see the real conditions of what the people in the Soviet Union were undergoing. All they saw was the idealistic utterances broadcast from Moscow through the G.P.U, and later the K.G.B.

During my reading of We The Living I kept thinking of modern life in America and how much communism has shaped the way many people think. I thought of the green movement, particularly the smart meters that are going onto all of our homes for all the reasons that the government in 1920 Russia controlled the food supply, so that the citizens would have to follow instructions in order to eat, and if they stepped out of line, the card would be taken, and the people would starve. This control was not taken over night, but gradually, over a ten-year period. The same thing has been going on here in The United States over the last thirty years. Government, which leans toward communism by its very nature, is gaining control of the food supply, and is placing a particular emphasis on power supply. If the government can control how much electricity flows into a home, they can control the behavior of the people who live in that home and this is how so many people in Russia allowed themselves to be ruled by a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, because their everyday lives were completely focused on just trying to eat. They didn’t have the time, or mind to question anything about freedom—because they were just trying to survive moment by moment, which was by design.

It would seem that a book written over 75 years ago would resemble very little of the modern world, but on virtually every page I read something that reminded me of what I read recently in my local newspaper, or heard from some politician declaring that the rich in America make too much money and that they should give some of it to the poor. That statement started in the Soviet Union in the opening days of communist rule chronicled so effectively in We The Living and we hear it today under labor unions, and politicians—particularly on the Democratic side. After reading We The Living it is not far-fetched at all to consider that communists would plot with great care to place a president into power like Obama. For those who have seen the movie Dreams of my Real Father, you know what I’m talking about. The communists have planned for such things as far back as the turn of the century. Progressives started in America what the communists did in Russia. The only difference was that America had a culture of independence that was difficult to overcome, and it would take a long time—but they were prepared to wait. In We The Living the communists spoke of Soviet education, which is alive and well in America right now. If you have a child in public school, they are getting that education right now. If you are going to college, or sending a child through college, then you already know the rest of the story. It is not by accident, it has all been on purpose. We The Living shows clearly what the plan has always been and we are living it today in 2012 what was planned with great detail in 1920 to implement.

If I hated communism before I read We The Living, I don’t think there are human words yet invented to describe the level I despise such a collective concept now. I liked Ayn Rand before I read We The Living, but now I think she may be the greatest author in the last 200 years. I think Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead are two of the greatest books not only in American literature, but in world literature, and yes that includes the great classics. I would say that We The Living is more important than The Diary of Anne Frank, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, or Life Among the Lowly by Harriet Beecher Stowe, Moby Dick by Herman Melville, or The House of the Seven Gables by Nathaniel Hawthorne. We The Living should be read by every single human being on planet earth.

We The Living is in its most simple form a skeleton key to understanding Ayn Rand. If only 50% of the book were true, which I think is closer to 80%, but even at fifty, Ayn Rand had great reason to hate communism and those who advocated it, which these days are a majority of the American population. Rand lost her first love to communism and she despises it for damn good reason. It destroyed everything she cared about. She was unique because she didn’t allow communism to crush her spirit the way it did so many of her friends and family. If she hadn’t gotten out of the country, she may have been crushed within a year or two of 1926 when a guest at a party she attended in Russia found out she was leaving The Soviet Union and asked her to get the message out of what was happening behind the Iron Curtain. “When you get there, tell them Russia is a huge cemetery and that we are all dying. Tell them We The Living told them.” Ayn Rand kept her promise and wrote We The Living which was criticized, and shut down in the United States for nearly 25 years. It was only after the success of Atlas Shrugged in 1957 that Random House finally re-released it to the public. Today We The Living is enjoying a renewed interest almost 80 years after its publication in large part because John Aglialoro, and Harmon Kaslow are making a modern movie of Ayn Rand’s work Atlas Shrugged and curious minds like mine are reading We The Living because we want more of what Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead offered. It is too bad that the new interest didn’t happen 60 years ago, otherwise America might avoid the pain and suffering it is about to go through. So when the bad reviews for Atlas Shrugged Part II come out, it is for all the reasons told above and more, not because the film is bad. Communist sympathizers, which extend from Barack Obama and Joe Biden all the way down to the local unionized firehouse and FOP station, do sympathize with communism. Anyone who preaches the message of the proletariat (middleclass) advocates communism and that message is no clearer upon the world stage than in the book We The Living.

We The Living is a must read. If you have not read it then you must do so as soon as possible. I would recommend closing this site right now and going over to Amazon.com and buying We The Living right now! Don’t rent any movies, don’t go to any public meetings, don’t watch any sporting events until you have read this book and understand that the communism of that book is as real today as it was then. IT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IN AMERICA FOR GOD’S SAKE, and Ayn Rand was trying to warn the world, and they didn’t listen, because the communists were already in place the way the party began to come into power in 1915 in Russia, when the world thought the Bolsheviks were “small potatoes.” It is not an overstatement to say that this is an emergency. It might have taken nearly 80 years to get the message out, but don’t let it become 81 or 82 years. Get the message today so you can act tomorrow, because you have to know who and what you’re fighting. In America we let the communists change the names of what they are without calling them on it, and we are paying for it dearly. 12 years of the Bush presidents, 8 years of Clinton, and now 4 years of Obama have delivered America to the doors of communism as it was established as a world revolution in Petrograd–1924 after the revolution of 1917. And it took one little woman out of the millions trapped in that country of collectivism to escape and report to the world what was happening, and that the wave was about to hit them too. That warning came in her book We The Living, but people didn’t listen. So she knew that she had to provide a blueprint for how to rebuild society after communism collapsed it. That is why she wrote The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged, so people could see for themselves how things “should” be, since they were unable to act based on what “was” happening. We The Living is just a stunning portrayal of life in the Soviet Union and a vision of what intelligentsia has in mind for America, and provides the evidence to even the dullest minds what the intent has always been. It is a book that must be read, must be understood, and must be communicated to every friend, family member and loved one. It is in my mind the most crucial, historical novel of our time, not because its content is uplifting, but because it’s all too real.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure:

 
 

Presidential Executive Orders: The path to tyranny by servents who think they’re celebrities

When people point out that government is out of control, that it must be pulled back into reasonable levels of staffing and regulation, they are often viewed by mainstream society to be radical dissidents who are acting as counter-revolutionaries to the revolution of socialism that has infected America since Teddy Roosevelt used Presidential Executive Orders to bypass congress, and make rulings like a king over the legislative process in the House of Representatives, and the Senate. For many years this process has been abused to reflect the personal desires of American presidents, but other than FDR who had 11 Executive Orders over a 16 year period, most of the presidents up until Bush Jr. showed a tendency to not abuse their power.

However starting with Bush Jr., presidents began to run the Executive Branch as a dictatorship and it cannot be questioned that the national deficit has increased along the lines of presidential executive orders. When congress and the senate learns that a President is willing to bypass the entire legislative process with monarchy-like executive orders they tend to have shown an unwillingness to engage in the hard discussions of balancing a budget and going against a president who may be their party representative, even though they know full well that the president has overstepped their boundaries in a thirst for power.

It was an Executive Order from Kennedy that made public sector unions legal in the United States which has led directly to the chaos in government budgets now being experienced with serious union resistance to austerity measures on budget cut-backs. Yet that is only one of the many Executive Orders issued by American presidents, which a small sampling can be seen below. The frequency of the issued Executive Orders obviously has increased over the last decade and demand censorship by the people of America. Reeling in the power of these politicians is the obligation of all Americans, and without a willingness to do the difficult, and “unpopular” work of tongue lashing out-of-control politicians, more Executive Orders can be expected in the future.

Here are a few of the Presidential Executive Orders over just 100 years, which started the modern progressive era that has caused so much trouble. There may be some debate about the numbers. Different sources are given below for comparison. But the general idea is evident.

EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED : –

T. Roosevelt 3

Others to FDR NONE

FDR 11 in 16 years

Truman 5 in 7 years

Ike 2 in 8 years

Kennedy 4 in 3 years

LBJ 4 in 5 years

Nixon 1 in 6 years

Ford 3 in 2 years

Carter 3 in 4 years

Reagan 5 in 8 years

Bush 3 in 4 years

Clinton 15 in 8 years

George W. Bush 62 in 8 years

Obama 139 in 3½ years!

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990

Allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995

Allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997

Allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998

Allows the government to take over ALL FOOD resources and farms.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000

Allows the government to MOBILIZE CIVILIANS INTO WORK brigades under government supervision.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001

Allows the government to take over all health, EDUCATION and welfare functions.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002

Designates the registration of all persons. Postmaster General to operate a “National Registration”

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003

Allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004

Allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005

Allows the government to take over RAILROADS, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049

Assigns emergency preparedness function to Federal departments and agencies,

CONSOLIDATING 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051

Specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international TENSIONS and economic or financial crisis.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/executiveorders.asp

http://www.combatveteransforcongress.org/

There are many more but this certainly provides context of just how serious the problems over executive orders truly is. Executive Orders are too reminiscent of a dictatorship and they should be ended as a practice that is today all too common. Obama in just 4 years has entirely too many Executive Orders. The whole reason for the orders is Obama wished to by-pass the legislative branch which is the direct representatives of the American public, so in issuing Executive Orders, Obama has declared that he does not respect the wishes of the American people.

The people who are wrong in the manner of politics today are all those who wish to continue a government that spends money in a deficit toward promises that do not make American culture stronger, and has a tendency not to respect elections leaning instead on cleaver public relations and executive orders to do whatever they want, just for the sake of doing it. It is time to have the serious discussion that little of anything in our current government is good for the future of America, or the people who make it a great country. There is no compromise with the kind of people who would dare to issue Executive Orders by-passing the legislative process so that politicians who are merely public servants can pretend they are kings.

An American President is not a king, a god, or even a celebrity. Our modern public wishes to see them this way out of an immaturity that mankind has not yet grown out of, but in philosophic principal a president is a servant of the people who elect them. The legacy of a president which so many are concerned with is not in the best interest of the country, it is only in the interest of a leader. In America, we are supposed to be a people who don’t require “leaders” to hold our hands while we cross the street, or wish to start a new business. Leaders are for weaklings in other countries. Presidents are not American leaders, and therefore should not have a right to issue Executive Orders like a European monarch. Yet they do, and the public lets them because people don’t wish confrontation or even ridicule by those in power. So they smile and line up to shake the hand of a shriveling politician who disguises their bad breath with bucketfuls of mouthwash—for it is more than tooth decay that the mouthwash hides in a typical politician, especially presidents. It’s a lust for power that is most easily seen in the behavior of Presidential Executive Orders that decays the soul of the small minds who crave public approval and votes so they can sit in an old building called The White House.

Rich Hoffman

If you like my work at this site then check out my books shown below, along with quotes, interviews, reviews, and ways to find them.  Clicking the pictures below are your doors to even more adventure: