My Political Identity, a Hazy Reality

My Political Identity, a Hazy Reality

In today’s era of rampant political discourse, one’s political identity is a much talked about mechanism to how we view and label each other. For how much I appreciate the Pew Research Center, I think the political party test is a little off-base for an accurate prediction across all spectrums. Determining an actual party is easy and generally, has to do more with leadership in the Party then actual core values. (For me at least) I had always been a Republican until somewhere around Spring of 2016 when I attended the Missouri Republican Convention as a delegate for the City of Ferguson in Missouri. (Yes, that Ferguson)

I took the liberty of copying the questions from the quiz to this report in an effort to better dissect the questions as I think that there are many more factors involved. (1) Which statements comes closer to your own views – even if neither is exactly right? Business corporations make too much profit, or most corporations make a fair and reasonable amount of profit. This is a rather easy question we are in a free-market capitalist society, as long as Corporations are following the rule of law then they should be able to make as much profit as possible because it helps the economy.

(2) Which statements comes closer to your own views – even if neither is exactly right? Problems in the world would be even worse without U.S. involvement, or U.S. efforts to solve problems around the world usually end up making things worse. There is a middle ground here. If the U.S. didn’t help at all then we would be a Giant Switzerland, minus the pretty mountains and Rolex watches. If we limited it severely then we would fall under the category of a libertarian nation. (Too extreme and cultish) There needs to be a happy balance which I don’t think Republicans or Democrats do well. The current layout of our worldwide assistance and strongholds are derived mostly from a post WWII era. I lean towards the former, that problems in the world would be worse without us.

(3) Do you think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure all Americans have health care coverage? No, I do not. If the founding fathers thought that the Government needed to run dozens if not hundreds of programs, then it would be in the Constitution. Universal Healthcare in its current status is not affordable for the people paying for it. It is affordable for the people who get it for next to nothing, subsidized through my payments. This could be a paper all on its own.

(4) Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally? In an effort to not be branded a bigot, I’ll just say oppose. The reasoning for one’s answer to this question ultimately comes down to how religious they are. If you stand by the fundamental tenants of a monotheistic religion, Christianity, Judaism, or Islam you likely oppose this.

(5) Which statement comes closer to your own views – even if neither is exactly right? Government is doing too many things that would be better left to businesses and individuals, or Government should do more to solve problems. This is a vague question, yes, government should do more to solve problems, but what problems? Poverty? Low education scores? The Federal Government is a monstrosity, an ungreased goliath of greed, power, and abuse. More should be left up to businesses, individuals, and the over 89 thousand local governments as they know more about what is good for society and what can solve problems than the federal government.

(6) Which comes closer to your view about how to handle undocumented immigrants who are now living in the U.S.? They should not be allowed to stay here legally, or they should be allowed to stay here legally. I think there is a middle ground here. I also think that the question doesn’t properly define “legally.” I don’t think illegal immigrants should get auto-citizenship or be grandfathered in. I think that depending on the length of their time here and how they are contributing to society should make a difference on how they are allowed to proceed. The criminals and those purposefully skirting taxes should be jailed or deported.

(7) Which statement comes closer to your own views – even if neither is exactly right? This country has gone too far in its efforts to protect the environment, or this country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment. I think that some politicians have un-scientific views about the disposition of the environment, but I do think that all should be done to protect the environment within reason. “Whatever it takes” is rather extreme but I lean towards this view specifically on the grounds of clean air and pollution. More money should also be put into making solar power more affordable.

(8) Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases? Yes, illegal in all cases. Murder is murder. This would be a whole book of an explanation.

(9) Which of the following comes closer to your view about the federal government’s efforts to prevent terrorism? Muslims living in the U.S. should be subject to more scrutiny than people in other religious groups, or Muslims living in the U.S. should NOT be subject to additional scrutiny solely because of their religion. If the Muslim’s living in the U.S. are here legally or are citizen’s then they should not be subject to more scrutiny. All religions are protected under the freedom of religion clause in the first amendment, period.

(10) Having an increasing number of people of different races, ethnic groups and nationalities in the U.S. makes this country a better place to live, a worse place to live, or doesn’t make much difference either way. Diversity makes any country a better place to live if they are all accepted equally. Different views coming together bring well rounded views to this melting pot of a society.

(11) Which statement comes closer to your own views – even if neither is exactly right? The economic system in this country is generally fair to most Americans, or the economic system in this country unfairly favors powerful interests. As the final question this is annoyingly vague. What specific economic system? Capitalism? Taxation? I firmly believe that in America you can make as much money as you want, doing whatever you want. Whether it is running a Fortune 500 company or turning empty whiskey bottles into lamps at a small boutique shop.

All-in-all I was labeled a Conservative Republican. I’m shocked! The real problem with this is that I’m a Conservative Independent. With the election of Donald J. Trump in November, a severe identity crisis has overcome the Republican party. I look forward to it returning back to the Party of Lincoln so I can rejoin in the future.

Buzzfeed #ThinkLeft

Buzzfeed #ThinkLeft

I tend to promote the ideologies and positions of those that have right-leaning attitudes. I am tired of the millennial generation constantly being pulled towards the left with help from sites like BuzzFeed. The newest motive of this site is to initiate conflict by antagonizing Chip and Joanna Gaines, a very popular christian couple who has a show on HGTV called FixerUpper. They belong to a Christian Church where the preacher has a religious opinion about homosexuality, big surprise. Buzzfeed’s immediate attack is what do the Gaines’s believe and how can we exploit them? This is not good.

My wife and I thoroughly enjoy watching Fixer Upper. It is one of those few clean and wholesome shows on television today. It is charming, funny, and shines a great light on what marriage can be like. We live in a Christian nation, and I don’t think anyone would be shocked to know that Texas harbors a good portion of them. Although there are Christian undertones in the show Fixer Upper, who cares? They don’t push their beliefs on anyone else and they have many successful business ventures. In this day and age with small businesses constantly being threatened and killed by big government, should we not be excited and happy that some people are succeeding? Should we not applaud these good people for bringing a little bit of their cheer and happiness into our homes? The entire and only purpose of their show is to “Find the worst house in the nicest neighbor hood and make it beautiful.” That is all; nothing more, nothing less.

Every once in a blue moon (which according to astronomers is a rather rare event) Buzzfeed may actually post an article that is somewhat newsworthy. So why would they try (and fail) to derail such a great show? Today’s left-leaning media is constantly pushing agendas, as opposed to objective truth’s. What can you do? Train your ears and your mind to pick apart fake news stories. Even if you disagree 100% with the Gaines’s pastor,  does that really matter? Let us not forget the famous words of President Obama’s former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who said, “God damn America.” Yet the left applauds him as an innovator and champion for all people. That kind of hateful rhetoric that he defended is exactly what is wrong with certain portions of this great country.

“Let the person among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone…”(John 8:7)

If there is nothing visibly wrong with something then why try and derail a perfectly good organization? In recent years HGTV has been rather well known for being more diverse in the clientele associated with its shows, so why not just let it go? Why invent a story about a potential situation when there is no data supporting its occurrence? Every single Catholic politician who is a Democrat has a priest that is diametrically opposed to same-sex unions, so does that mean we should be going after Biden, Pelosi, or Kaine? Let’s leave the witch hunts to sophomores reading the Crucible by Arthur Miller, and go on with our boring lives binge watching Fixer Upper.

Our Flag. Our Anthem.

Our Flag. Our Anthem.

Most would say that freedom of speech is pretty black and white. In two cases in particular I beg to differ. We live in a time where anything we say out loud will most likely offend every 1 in 5 people. No matter what it is, someone will find issue with what you say.

Our Flag represents all Americans, but most of all it represents our Freedom. Why would you burn down your best representative? You want to bring those that hate you to your side? Then wear that flag and wear it proudly. You want to anger those who hate what we stand for in America? Then sing our anthem and sing it loudly. That flag was sewn in a time where every American was persecuted by tyranny. That anthem was written in a time where our very freedom and unity was at stake in the war of 1812.

The only tyranny you have now in America is your mom taking away your smart phone at the dinner table. If you do not think you are being treated fairly by your government take a little trip to a country where you can’t pray or speak when you want and how you want. I’ve been there and I’ve seen it first hand.

Our flag represents all Americans, Red or Blue. Black or White. Our Anthem represents all religions and all creeds. Look to the Olympics and you will see the untainted pride of those that represent us on their athletic fields. The cheering and the 100% authentic patriotism is what should bring us together.

Trust me when I say that sitting down during the anthem because you are a household name will do absolutely nothing to help your cause. The only thing you will get is a week of publicity, good or bad. Somebody in the position of Colin Kaepernick who was given opportunities that no low-income African-American would normally have, should not be silently protesting in this way. There is no “effect” to his “cause”. Start a program and talk to local leaders. BE A LOCAL LEADER. Sitting on your bum during a song about inclusion of freedom will only get you mocked by both the left and right. It really just shows an ignorance of your knowledge in the plight of struggling minorities while introducing a certain level of “black privilege.”

People don’t realize the value of living in America anymore, we take everything for granted. Is there hate? Yes, but that will never go away because we are not perfect. One of my favorite meme’s about the status of the American youth is an image showing 18 year olds on D-Day in 1944 storming beaches, jumping from planes, and charging into almost certain death. While in 2016, 18 year olds need safe places, because words hurt. Wear our Flag don’t burn it. Sing the Anthem don’t turn your back on it. Be a leader. Be informed. Be smart.

“Even fools, keeping silent, are considered wise; if they keep their lips closed, intelligent.” (Proverbs 17:28)

 

Firearms. A Misconceived Reality.

Firearms. A Misconceived Reality.

Since the Orlando shooting early Sunday morning, gun control has once again come into the spotlight. It’s often been at the forefront of the Left’s movement to quell individual freedom, and that is unacceptable. On the flip-side, the Right talks too much about being allowed to have whatever firepower we want.

These groups are missing the point on the gun question. Killing is bad. Even killing in defense of yourself or loved ones is something we never wish to happen. The Right’s argument is that if at least one person is carrying a gun they can help prevent some heinous act from happening. The Left argues that if they put more measures on one’s ability to obtain a gun at any level, than that will limit the amount of violence.

The sad reality is that both sides are a little off target (no pun intended), even though there may be some truth to their arguments. I say this as a conservative Army veteran who probably has more range time than most people who carry guns on a regular basis. In the military, especially combat arms (Infantry for me) we are taught that there are no accidents. If you are pulling that trigger the barrel is pointed either down range or at an enemy. We focus so much of our thought and control on what level of security our weapons are at so that we do not “negligently” discharge our weapons. These are very important things to talk about in reference to the regulation of guns. What are we doing to teach people about safety?

Newsflash: an 8 hour concealed and carry class will not cut it.

Every legal citizen of the United States who is sane and not a violent threat to society should be allowed to buy firearms and use them at their discretion as long as it is within the boundaries of the law. Obviously, they must adhere to state-specific statutes as well. One of the biggest pitfalls in what I just said is the word “sane.” In the last five years the majority of mass killings or domestic acts of terror that were gun related were initiated by someone who would not be qualified as “sane.”

The level of individual sanity and amount of training are two of the main causes of these tragic gun incidents. Now, as we have seen, time in and time out the Left does not give the same amount of levity to criminal killings as they do to the mass killings of innocent school kids and other groups of individuals. Local crime and one-on-one murders seem to escape the view of national attention. Instead the Left hovers around, waiting on bated breath for the next Sandy Hook killing to take place while they could be actively brainstorming ways to curb gun-related deaths in a bipartisan fashion.

Newsflash: Buying a scoped rifle, wearing camouflage, and going deer hunting does not make you a gun expert.

(1)  There needs to be local-government-sponsored gun safety courses. State legislatures have made it possible to have minimal amounts of safety requirements in order to obtain permits. So why not have additional training, either free or chargeable to the public in order to enhance knowledge and skill?

(2)  The problem is not the legal guns but all of the illegally obtained guns that are out on the street. We need to do a no-questions-asked buy-back program every 6 months for 2 years. Local, State, and Federal spending is ridiculous anyway, so why not put that money into getting rid of excess weapons? I compare this to nuclear de-proliferation. The governments should not hold these weapons but instead should publicly destroy them. You can never remove all of the illegal weapons off of the street, it is an impossibility. But boy you sure can make it harder for the bad guys to not get guns.

(3) This may seem like a radical idea but what if, before the legal purchase of a firearm the local government made the individual receive a notice of mental stability from a licensed professional? If you are spending money on a gun anyway what is an extra $25-$50? We currently have no gauges in determining a person’s mental health and therefore we will continue to see horrible shootings by the mentally unstable take place. Something must be done to curb this problem.

In conclusion, you may own as many guns as you want but there must be more safety nets and protocols in place to limit one’s ability to either have an accident or obtain weapons to kill innocents. We must come together in this effort and resolve it in a unilateral way to limit those who will cause harm, access to these weapons.

H.R.Clinton, America’s Newest Failure

H.R.Clinton, America’s Newest Failure

This writer has no love for the Clinton’s, their scandals, their corrupt foundation, or their ability to manipulate the American people into believing that they are the answer. Sad thing is, we do not have to imagine any longer because it has become reality. The front page of the WSJ has her sprawled across the cover of the paper. The main stream media is pushing all of this Clintonian inebriation down our throats that we are completely over powered.

We will hear nothing of the server/classified documents scandal because all anyone wants to talk about is this “history” in the making. Honestly, to me, there is no difference between Clinton being the presumptive party nominee today versus Clinton being a regular nominee 2 days ago. Virtually no difference! Now if (God forbid) she becomes President that’s a different story altogether. Seeing as I am a betting man, I would almost consider Clinton the red and Trump the black in the proverbial game of presidential roulette.

I am not one to go on about how the DOJ is corrupt and that President Obama influences AG Lynch in the decision making processes of her cases. I will however surmise that if the President endorses Clinton, that could somehow be construed as a “lay-off order” directed towards Miss Lynch in regards to the looming indictment. We are reaching a busy time on the political calendar and it would be unusual for Obama to hold out an endorsement to longer than 2 weeks from today.

Let us not forget about the reason behind this “historical moment,” the people are so excited because she is the first woman to achieve this position in the 240 years of our countries existence.

I say phooey!

It is absolutely shocking, almost abhorrently so, that we the people care more about her being the first woman than her being the best woman for the job. Americans everywhere were so excited to elect President Obama based off his skin color and not based off of his record, that we ended up voting the wrong guy in. (Herman Cain, an African American ran in 2008, and Dr. Ben Carson ran in 2016, what about them????)

I am almost inclined to think a constitutional monarchy is a better option in some scenarios. We might have a couple bad rulers but at least we will have some good ones that rule for longer than 8 years. At this point what is the difference? All we do in America nowadays is find which former President to blame, for whatever problem is in our way at the time.

This is the bottom line America, do not settle for the status quo. Settle for the best option, be satisfied when you are done voting, do not be nervous and angry that some new nut job may take over the most powerful position in the world.

As of this moment, I plan on writing in Mickey Mouse in November, because the current options for Presidency couldn’t even do well as a manager of a McDonald’s, let alone the manager of an entire country.

Carry on!

 

Voting for the Corrupt: A Disturbing Reality

Voting for the Corrupt: A Disturbing Reality
        Over the last 12 months I have been hip-deep in politics. Reading, researching, and developing reasons for liking certain candidates as well as reasons for utterly despising others. I have never been a Democrat and I never will, but it is absolutely shocking that the Democratic Party would put their trust, money, and control into the hands of a woman as corrupt as Hillary Clinton.
 
        Barrack Obama was tailor-made by the DNC to be president, having rarely voted in favor or against controversial bills and usually abstaining, which gave him a transparent background that wouldn’t hurt him in the general election. Hillary Clinton while unjustifiably clinging to both his and her husband’s coat-tails, promises a third term of the Obama White House. President Obama isn’t stupid; he knows that Hillary despises him for ruining her chances in 2008 and she is just as much a deceiver to him as Donald Trump is to the RNC.
 
        Soldiers get busted down for mishandling one classified document, and she has mishandled hundreds while simultaneously allowing an active unsecured server to be used for government work. It’s not only ethically wrong and potentially illegal, it is downright embarrassing. People are laughing at us from Moscow to Beijing to Pyongyang. Patriots like myself do not take that lightly. 
 

“We do not take lightly the security of our country, the security of our embassies, or the security of our freedom – for so many have already paid the price protecting it.”

 
        Gone is the time for the purity of character that is so desired in a presumptive nominee. We need experience, but we also need courage, strength, and honor. None of the aforementioned virtues are found in the likes of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Here am I alone and confused as to why the simple farmer and the educated doctor can come to the same conclusion that Trump is the answer. Here am I alone and confused as to why the progressive liberal is so satisfied in the likes of the socialist Sanders and the closet-socialist Clinton. The three of them have a combined age of over two hundred years. Trust me when I say that wisdom does not necessarily come with age.
 
        Clinton tries to appeal to the middle class and to the union families, but when was the last time she ever did a lick of hard work? Everything she has received has essentially been given to her. When was the last time she kept clicking on the refresh button hoping that it would magically place money in her checking account so she could buy diapers for her children? When was the last time that she actually cared about the things she speaks so fervently about? She claims to despise the Wall Street giants yet gladly puts the bag of cash they give her in the trunk of her car after a big speech.
 
        Trump tries to appeal to the everyday Americans who are fed up with illegal immigration, who are fed up with a lack of jobs, and who are fed up with the “establishment.” What does he know about how we feel? Here is a guy who has never been turned down for a loan at a bank. Here is a guy who was handed a check for one million dollars to start his career and life. He tries to claim what Mitt Romney did in 2012, about how being a business man will make him a great president. However, he has bankrupted four companies and failed at over a dozen business ventures. His ignorance to the issues, his lack of gentlemanly qualities, and his utter disdain for people that are not in line with his beliefs will be his downfall.

 

 
        We cry out for change, we cry out for the removal and disposal of all those who are corrupt and drunk with power, but here we are electing them to the highest office in the land. Here we are standing before Pontius Pilate and chanting with the crowd to crucify, even though we know it is wrong. Here we are throwing our country to the wolves who will eat it alive and leave the bones for the vultures. Let us no longer allow for this to happen, let us stand up and create such a disturbance, the likes that have not been seen since the removal of tyranny from America.

A National Presence with a Regional Approach.

A National Presence with a Regional Approach.

 

        We all want to drive down the street in our neighborhood and see clean yards and tidy houses. In today’s era of rampant foreclosures this is increasingly impossible. I want to bring your attention to a way that I feel we can help curb this stigmatic issue. If we make the house livable inside and out it will restore prosperity and a lasting desire to build future growth in that neighborhood. We must live up to the description of “preservation” and not just tape it up so it doesn’t fall down. The real problem is community blight and the real solution is a greater intimacy with the preservation of properties, which can be done best on a regional level where the company in charge is able to apply a much greater amount of attention to detail. In states with little or no redemption period it is imperative that the preservation company gives the right information to the lender or big costly mishaps could happen. Bigger national companies with less direct oversight are more likely to make a mistake that shouldn’t have happened in the first place.

The most important parts of managing a preservation company are dissolving community blight through timely and good quality work. Limiting the amount of internal errors by utilizing a thorough quality control program, and ensuring that every property is managed at every level whether it is worth 4 million or 30,000.

Communities in the United States are complex melting pots of diversity. People in the city do things differently than those in the suburbs. People in the country do things differently than those in the suburbs and vice versa. To people that live in small towns like Thurman, Iowa just one foreclosure on a prominent street can change the whole tone of how outsiders view that town. Which could also mean a lack of perspective economic growth.

While National Preservation companies boast large portfolios, deep pockets, and the ability to appear in perpetual compliance, they may not be the best answer for the big banks goals. With a national grasp comes the inability to tailor ones preservation tactics to the individual needs of all different types of communities.

It is almost an impossibility for a large national preservation company who thrives on large portfolios to pay attention to outside properties that are near impossible for them to reach with a vendor network that is designed to prosper based off a large amount of properties. A boots on the ground network thrives with volume based increments of properties and a contractor will gladly take care of medium to large portfolios of properties but is less likely to go to the properties on the outskirts. Completion percentages and service level agreements will remain high for those National entities because they will tend to have great completion rates in their metropolitan statistical areas. With a regional approach all properties hold the same value and are cared for on all levels.

From a preservation perspective the only way we can limit the length of a home in foreclosure is through expediting the process of preserving that individual unit. A positive way we can do that is through changing the conversation away from this national mentality of “bigger is better” and down to the idea of a compliance oriented structured system that allows for much better control over every aspect individually. Every foreclosed home needs to be of equal importance in order for the proper job to be done.

***
Originally seen on: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/national-presence-regional-approach-mike-colombini?trk=pulse_spock-articles