Hillary's VP: Who is Tim Kaine

Senator Tim Kaine was chosen as Hillary Clinton's running mate.  The man is a Harvard law graduate, attorney and a Senator since 2012.  Additionally he served as Mayor of Richmond Virginia, and lieutenant governor and then Governor of Virginia as well.  So who is he?

For one he is an environmentalist and a believer in climate change even going so far as preserving over 400,000 acres of land.  He signed legislation banning smoking on government property and in restaurants in Virginia.  He also expanded mental health care access in Virginia after the Virginia tech shootings and has it so that anyone involuntarily committed cannot get a firearm.  As Virginia's governor he made tough decisions on cutting spending to meet that State's requirements on balancing the budgets.  He also proposed a $4 billion in tax increases but none of these passed.  He also served as Democratic national committee chair from 2009 to 2011.  He served as a member on the armed services committee, committee on budget, and committee on foreign relations while serving in Congress.  While in the Senate he serves on numerous other committees and sub committees relating to national security and power projection including "Emerging threats and Capabilities", "Sea power" and also served on committees relating to counter terrorism in Parts of Asia and trade.  Basically this guy has experience in areas that Hillary Clinton may be lacking in and more.

Final Thought:  Senator Kaine is actually somewhat conservative.  He is personally against abortion, but supports Roe vs Wade.  So he basically does not want the Federal government to be making reproductive decisions but does support some restrictions like parental involvement for minors.  Also, he is in favor of LGBT community rights such as gay marriage (something I am not opposed to either).  Overall he is more middle of the road than Hillary Clinton and more likely to compromise on issues.  So a great choice by her to attract people who have not decided who they are voting for or are middle ground politically which normally would be turned off by Hillary's far left Progressiveness. 

Trump's VP: Who is Mike Pence

So Donald Trump chose Governor Mike Pence of Indiana to be his running mate.  Before that he represented Indiana's 2nd and 6th congressional districts from 2001 to 2013, before being elected Governor in 2013, a position he has held since.  But what does he stand for?

He is a supporter of the TEA Party and their support for limiting the size of government, taxes, and government spending.  He has served on multiple committees in congress including the judiciary committee, small business committee, agriculture committee, international affairs committee and foreign affairs committee.  Basically he has a well-rounded background with respect to government experience and knows his way around Washington, hence this is the reason why Trump chose him.  Trump needed someone who could help him know how to work the mess that is Washington D.C.'s politics and it turns out that it is Governor Pence.  Likewise Pence is a TEA party guy just like Ted Cruz, and just like Cruz is against abortion, something that will appeal to the more conservative crowd of the Republican Party and the conservative groups in between.  He also opposed the Wall Street bailouts, opposed "card check" (something that would have eliminated the secret ballot for union votes) and called for a flat tax that would allow for people to keep more of their income.  Pence even voted for Earmark reform, for partial privatization of Social Security, and is in favor of free trade agreements.  Overall a very staunch conservative and his policies reflect that.

Final Thought:  To me he is a white Ted Cruz!  They share similar views and ideas on reform, and both support the TEA party and reform in Washington D.C.  Even their views on homosexuality and abortion are similar.  This man, Governor Pence was a great choice in making Trump more palatable to the Republican base and staunch conservatives.  

Trumps Acceptance Speech

Ok, so some of the wording in Trump's speech had me and other libertarians worried, those libertarians being John Stossel and Glenn Beck.  Basically something did not sit right and sounded very fascistic.

In the speech the words "I am the Law and Order candidate", “I am your voice", "I will fix the problems", "I will end the violence" were all used.  It felt very top down.  As if a President Trump would be akin to an emperor and order all our problems away.  That the people had nothing to do but do as they were told.  For libertarians like myself this is antithetical to our thinking.  A president to many of my ilk want a President to hold back the corruption and say "yes you the people will" and "I will empower you and protect your freedom".  But instead we got chants from the crowd saying "yes you will" with Trump being the "YOU" as the person to take care of everything.  Essentially we are chaining ourselves to someone as metaphorical slaves.

On top of the aforementioned, Trump said that he will not allow businesses to move overseas, a statement reiterated by Ryan Priebus (current head of the GOP) and some of Trump's children.  Basically a fascist policy of punishing businesses from going overseas (a sentiment shared with the Democratic Party to my knowledge).  Problem is, no law and no government is allowed to infringe upon a business's right to leave the country or to do any sort of business overseas.  This is based on the principle of tacit consent where if you do not like the laws in your home country you can move with the expectation of obeying the laws of the place you move too.  Basically you can choose which laws to follow by moving somewhere else.  But the way it sounds from Trump and the current RNC is that freedom will be taken away.

Final Thought:  These are the key points that made libertarians wonder if Trump is the lesser of two evils and if such a concept can be accepted in American politics anymore.  At the rate it is going, Hillary and Trump are both potentially equally as bad as each other (Hillary being as bad with respect to government takeovers of businesses, the economy and health care).  Hopefully me, Beck and Stossel are wrong and that those words are merely for the impact and not the policy, but words tend to have deeper meanings behind them.  I hope I am wrong.

RNC reaction

We have come a long way from the old school politics of backroom deals, or have we?  The Republican National Convention and this week's Democratic National Convention both give the illusion of choice with respect to which candidates are chosen to possibly lead.  However, like all Presidential picks, it is the party uplifting select members of the party and then having the core of the party choose who will represent them.  In this case it is Donald Trump.  Which basically means he was chosen because he can bring in more votes than the other potential candidates and thus a win for the Republican Party this November.

Like most conventions, the family of the candidate is used like a chess piece.  You need to humanize the candidate so that people know that despite being well off that they are family men and women and thus can emphasize with the little people.  Also, if you notice that the media made sure to place emphasis on the fact that Trump and his children did not use Teleprompters.  This in part is a dig at President Obama and at the same time to show that these kids and this potential President are special (not many people can memorize a 50 to 120 minute speech and then say it as well as they did).  

There were some well-deserved critics of some of the speakers though.  Governor Christie among others mocked Hillary, but this was neither the time nor the place to do so according to analysts at Fox news.  The analysts said that this is supposed to be a time to prop the candidate up and show support, not a time to attack.   Needless to say when President Bush and his family, along with Senator Cruz said they will not be supporting Donald Trump it caused a stir in the crowd, especially Cruz's speech which was all about being principled.  Cruz of course was mocked, but he is standing up to his principles and there should not be anything wrong with that.

Final Thought:  In my opinion, the RNC did what it normally does.  There was nothing unexpected that occurred at all during the event save Cruz's speech.  However Trumps acceptance speech for the nomination had some disturbing elements which I will be focusing on tomorrow.  Overall rating of the convention by me is a 5 out of 10.  It appealed to the base and people who are patriotic and that is it.

News overshadows News

It was an eventful and saddening weekend to say the least.  Thursday was a terror attack in France, then Friday was the coup in Turkey and then Sunday the Police being murdered in Baton Rouge.  With each incident the stories got overshadowed by one another in the media, even Trumps Vice presidential pick.  A cycle of attention flipping that seems to be never ending. Once Turkey's coup occurred the American media went silent on France, and then on Sunday they went silent on Turkey for the shooting of the police.  It goes to show you that when a news event occurs they are more concerned about ratings rather than the story that needs to be told.  All the events are important and should not overshadow one another in my opinion.  

This overshadowing I think plays into corporate greed and our attention spans.  The Media jumps from one event to another to keep people watching their ads. and entice more companies to buy ad space so that they make money.  Basically, the more attention grabbing stories will get all the focus because it is new and fresh. Thus  yesterday’s story becomes just that, yesterdays.  I find the lack of analysis annoying.  I want more details and knowledge of potential impacts on my way of life and the world at large, but the media just wants you and your money.

Final Thought:  Reporters are supposed to be historians as the first recorders of history.  They have an obligation to wrench out every little detail and then confirm all the facts so that history does not get it wrong and that we can learn lessons from these incidents.  But news just flips from one subject to another to accommodate our short attention spans while filling the news media's pockets with cash.  It is upsetting to me because the victims and those sacrificed in these incidents, including potential future victims, deserve more from our media.  They deserve more from us so that we learn how to prevent evil from occurring again.

Louisiana Police Shooting

On Sunday, Louisiana had a different kind of terrorist incident.  In this case it was domestic terrorists who sought to murder police in reaction (as far as we know) to police/black American conflicts.  

Police (according to CNN) responded to a call that a man was walking while carrying a rifle along the highway in Baton Rouge.  Once the police arrived the suspect and potentially two other suspects opened fire killing three officers and wounding another three.  The firefight apparently took place in a known drug trafficking area at a spot where police regularly go to for coffee.  Police were even concerned about potential bombs and the area had to be cleared and secured.  

It seems people are forgetting that our Justice system is supposed to judge criminals, not vigilantes, but in this case the murderers are terrorists through and through.  They did not act for the sake of justice in my mind, but instead targeted cops who had nothing to do with any of the past cop vs black American shootings.  While real vigilantes fight for justice, this was cold blooded murder.

Final thought:  Baton Rouge is now being described as a powder keg ready to explode.  It seems some people want a race war and more police on black American incidents.  Our nation is burning and crying out for peace and true justice, not cold blooded murder.  Pray for the families who have lost their loved ones.  Pray that this situation gets resolved before it is too late. 

Turkey's Coup.

On Friday last week the Turkish military attempted a Coup to take control from its current President Erdogan.  The military sees itself as a protector of secularism and democracy in Turkey and this coup was a direct reaction to Erdogan's Islamist policies and his crackdown on democratic freedoms such as freedom of the press.  However the coup failed.

This coup was the fourth in Turkey's history and this one failed.  The military failed to gain public support or even support from the rest of the Turkish security and military forces.  As such Erdogan escaped and is now using the security forces he has to rout out all the members of the military and government that plotted the attempt.  According to the BBC over 6,000 have been arrested so far and more are expected to be as military and governmental facilities are taken back one by one.  Interestingly, the Turkish people see Erdogan as tyrannical and yet they did not back the militaries attempted takeover.  This could mean two things.  One, the Turkish people favor democracy and its ideals and thus trust their system and or two, there is enough refugees from Syria and other places that believe in Erdogan's version of Islamic politics that the Turkish citizens are intimidated into supporting Erdogan and his dictatorial policies.  That, or they are more fearful of Erdogan and what he can do to them if they support the other side.

Final Thought:  The situation obviously ended in failure for Turkey's military.  But the question is, did the United States and other countries back the wrong horse? (Yea America backed Erdogan).  Should we have supported Turkey's military coup as a means to save their democracy and the gateway to Europe rather than let the country fall into Islamic Fascism and become a terrorist haven?  In this only time will tell.

July 14th Terror Attack

Yet again France was attacked, this time on their Independence Day, Bastille Day.  What occurred was horrific.  A terrorist used a truck to slam into a crowd of people killing over 80 people.  The evil man responsible waited for the police to remove the vehicle barriers and disperse so that the truck could obtain its maximum killing potential.  As terrorist plowed through the crowed he began shooting from the crew cab as some heroic members of the crowed tried to grab on to remove the driver.  That terrorist was shot and killed by police.  It was planned and it will happen again.  

This is what we can expect from terrorists from now on.  They seek death and destruction alone and everyone is fair game.  Isis/Isil of course later claimed responsibility for this heinous attack on innocents.  These terror organizations have to be taken far more seriously and we have to be willing to get our hands dirtier.  These people use others as human shields and some of those "human shields" do so purposefully.  But because of how the Middle East is and its culture you cannot tell who is good or bad or even what side they will be on that given day.  Even Senator John McCain was embarrassed to find that he had taken a picture with a known Isis/Isil terrorist when he was in Syria.  These terrorists, Jihadists, flock from terror group to terror group seeking martyrdom and death.  People think we are taking this situation seriously, but in my opinion we are not.  Simply using drones to bomb the enemy will not work.  Also, according to a report from the "Blaze" show "For the Record" they are not even bombing all the targets of opportunity such as Isis/Isil headquarters in Dabiq Syria because it is in the middle of the city.  We Americans have become squeamish in this fight.

Final thought: France and other countries are suffering because of terrorism because we are failing to use the full resources available to strike back.  These people in France, or the terror attack last month in Istanbul or anywhere should not die needlessly because we fail to fight back.  We must mourn our lost loved ones and then strike in the same way a General Sherman or a General Patton would and rend the enemy asunder. 

Tax Returns: Public Knowledge!!!

Should how much we pay in taxes be made accessible to the public?  Let us review some of the arguments for and against.

The against unsurprisingly sights privacy.  You can see how much people pay along with how much they deduct for their debts, medical bills and even charity.  Some people don't want others to know they have high debts or medical bills as they feel embarrassed or they feel it may hurt them when interacting with their peers or potential job opportunities.  Basically, an employer, or group can see if you look like a liability more easily, or people can learn of your financial situation and try to take advantage of you.

Those in favor of release, it helps insure people pay by embarrassing people who try to dodge their taxes.  So it makes it harder to hide them siphoning money into a tax haven, and prevents corruption as all eyes are now on the people who earn so much yet contribute so little.  It basically leaves no place to hide for people with respect to paying their taxes.  Additionally, Sweden, Norway, and Finland all have public tax records.  Their reasoning according to the Economist is that it spurs continuous debate on the tax code to see that it is not too burdensome and that it helps people see if they are pulling their own weight with respect to contributing to the government in taxes.

Conclusion:  I find myself siding against people's privacy on this issue for government is something that is owned by the people and people do need to see who is pulling their weight with respect to contributions.  Not to mention embarrassing people into not having a tax haven and preventing corruption and tax dodging is an extreme benefit as we can boycott those people who try to usurp the system.  It even ensures that our politicians don't take bribes as we can see all the money in all of the bank accounts if they multiple and are able to ask where the additional money came from that they did not earn through their job.  Basically we can tackle corruption and tax dodgers all at once.

Drones and cops

For the first time a drone was used to kill a person in the United States by police.  In this case it was the active shooter who shot police in Dallas Texas.  This is history making.

Now I do not celebrate death of anyone including a murderer.  However, it is important to note that a drone (one typically used to disarm bombs) was used to detonate a bomb close enough to the suspect to kill him.  It is these kinds of situations where a shooter holds an advantageous position that drones in my opinion should be used in place of an officer.  If police went in to apprehend the shooter, the shooter would have opened fire, potentially killed more police, and the cops would have shot the shooter anyway.  In essence the shooter was most likely going to die anyway.  And this is exactly the kind of jobs drones excel at.  They perform the dull, the dirty and of course the DANGEROUS.  Once a suspect is determined to be nonnegotiable and is a danger to police and those around them, then a drone should be sent in to settle the matter.   It was excellent police work by cops, in my opinion, in order to protect themselves and other innocents in the area.  

This however sets a precedent where cops may begin deploying drones more readily to "end" incidents.  As such this particular incident must be looked at with close scrutiny to help develop standards and procedures for when drones may be used to exhibit deadly force.  If not developed carefully by using the Dallas shooter situation as a case study, then the drones may be abused with respect to lethal capacity.  Remember, drones were originally used in war as recon machines and to disarm bombs which correlated directly with what police do in various situations.  Now the drone’s capacity for killing is being explored as well.

Final Thought:  Like I said, we must be careful so as to not screw this up.  Cops know this was an extreme situation and they also know this is going to change how they operate.  So cops, and lawmakers are going to have to decide how to use this "tool" in future situations.  I am glad it exists for it will protect more lives, but the potential for abuse and misuse is still there.  Thankfully I have faith in police to do the right thing. 

Should Cops wear cameras?

After all the incidents and questions of innocence or guilt between Black Americans and cops I feel cops have to wear cameras.  Not to protect the people from the cops, but to protect the cops.

An audio/visual camera recording a cop constantly especially during an incident can mean all the difference in keeping a cop out of jail in these situations where onlookers can be confused or misinterpret what is going on between a cop and an individual they are interacting with.  But to do this, a 360 degree view is needed and really good microphones.  So we would be able to see what happened in the Ferguson shooting, or the shooting in Dallas from the cops’ point of view.  No longer will we question what a cop is saying or what the suspect is doing/saying as we will get a clearer picture of who and what cops are dealing with.  It even may help with investigators seeing things they may have missed and can also help in court cases with the claims of suspects and inmates who resist while being detained and the public having a conversation on uses of force by police.  Basically a camera and microphone covers all the bases with respect to covering the cops from being harmed in the public eye.

Police may even begin to announce what they are doing to clarify what is going on via these cameras so that people who do not know of police tactics or procedures can readily understand why cops do what they do.  Basically it will aid in clearing up misunderstandings.  Also, a 360 degree camera may aid in identifying witnesses and cameras in the back of police cars and on and in police vehicles will help with cases like with the death of Freddy Grey.  

Final Thought:  Cameras and microphones can give us a 360 degree view of the world around a police officer.  They can even identify where a particular sound is coming from and from whom via technology and with a heads up display can warn officers of approaching danger from behind.  We can protect our police and even eliminate the select minority of bad officers who abuse their power.  Let us end the confusion and the potential race war by giving our cops a tool to help protect themselves.

On the Cops and Shootings

This is entirely my opinion and mine alone as a reaction to the violence going on between Black Americans and Police.  

I am watching the news and all I am seeing right now is misunderstanding, hate and anger.  If the cops in question are guilty, then let the system work. We must have faith in a jury, people chosen for their neutrality to judge innocence or guilt based on facts and arguments.  Yes, I know historically Black Americans did not get fair trials and likewise evil men got away with murder of black Americans.  I know my history, but we live in a different America where whites and blacks serve on the same jury and a consensus has to be reached.  In other words whites and blacks on a jury have to be unanimous for such trails in judging innocence or guilt.  So why are we not relying on the jury to decide?  Why are people commuting acts of violence against cops who had nothing to do with the indecent in question?  Those officers should not have been murdered in Dallas Texas or other places in the country.  We are not in a race war, but if we continue down this path then we may just end up in one.  

The media is not helping at all in disarming this violence.  All they show is an indecent without adding context.  As such all we see on the media is a black man being killed without knowing the circumstances.  Is not the media supposed to help report what goes on and provide all the facts they know as the first recorders of history?  I think they are, but all I see is a commentator making up a play by play of a man being shot.

Final Thought:  I think Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would be crying.  I think he would be asking where is the love for each other that overcomes violence and hate.  But no, we stab each other in the back because of a perception that people are out to get Black Americans, when I don't think they are.  I think the officers are scared because a country is turning on them which makes them jumpy.  I think they are victims too of laws that force police into confrontation with people who commit what are known as victimless crimes which in my opinion should not be crimes at all.  Our country is in pain and we must try to remember what we learned from Jesus and reiterated through Dr. King, to solve hate with love, to solve injustice with justice.

Living the Milgram Experiment

The "Milgram experiment" (look it up, it’s interesting) was a series of tests done at Yale University to see how willing people are to Obey someone in authority.  In the tests, a man (who was actually an actor) was put in a booth, and the unknowing test subject was set up as a questioner.  The test subject would ask questions of the person in the booth and if the person in the booth got the questions wrong they would get shocked, with each wrong answer causing the shock to be worse than the last one.  Next to the questioner would be the authority figure.  As the test was conducted the questioner, at the urging of the person playing the authority figure would continue shocking the person in the booth even when the person in the booth begged for the test to be over due to the pain of the shocks they were receiving (the shocks were of course fake as the person in the booth is an actor, but the test subject has no knowledge of this).  At some point the actor would stop responding to indicate they were passed out, at which time the authority figure would urge more shocks because of the failure to respond to the questioning.  Our test subjects continued to shock the passed out person and then the person in the booth (our actor) let out a dramatic scream to indicate the test subject had shocked them to death.  

Surprisingly the test results show that we human beings have a tendency to listen to authority figures.  Of the 40 subjects, 26 administered the lethal dose, but all subjects in the course of the experiment at some point questioned the experiment and apparently exhibited emotional distress.  Milgram would repeat the experiment with some colleges around the world with similar results (he and his colleges even tried it in groups of people).  Basically the reason why the Germans obeyed the NAZI's is because of this psychological flaw that we have.  Now the question is, are we being told what to believe even by people who want the best for us?

I say yes.  President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump and those in power have the same authority and position that many of the world’s greatest heroes and villains had.  When Obama says Republicans are bad, how many think long enough to question him?  When Trump says to ban Muslims for a time, how many cheer?  We allowed concentration camps to exist in America during WWI and WWII for those people we perceived as our enemies (German, Italian, and Japanese concentration camps to name a few).  And do you know who gave the order for those to exist, President Woodrow Wilson, and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.  People in authority ordered us to do things even though at the most basic level we knew it was wrong.  President Bush and our Republican and Democrat lawmakers ordered the spying on American citizens via the Patriot act.  And we blindly follow these authority figures by justifying our actions by citing things like safety, comfort and at times even greed.

Final Thought:  We have a problem.  Maybe we listen too much to authority.  On top of this, we give radicals like Trump and Hillary our tacit consent to seize property, ban our freedoms and harm individual groups simply because it is convenient.  I think we rely on them so much that we think they are indispensable.  Truth is the old boss is the same as the new boss and is the same as every other boss.  They are expendable and our politicians don't even realize that is what they were designed to be with respect to being public servants.  It is time we questioned everything and stop listening to people who tell us to throw away our morals and our ethics.

Religious/Ethics in the Workplace

Taken from an Economist Article subtitled "Cross the Boss" it looks at how displaying religious values and ethics in the workplace affects how you are treated there.  Here are the conclusions of what that study revealed as conducted by Ms. Sreedhari Desai of the University of North Carolina.

Bosses ask employees to do unscrupulous things.  Nine percent of American employees said that managers pressured them to do things that violated their beliefs (Ethics and Compliance initiative).  However, this was not the case of those employees displaying religious symbols on their desk/person, or having a virtuous quote in their emails.  In these cases the study showed that the boss was less likely to ask them to act unethically.  Even simple displays of religious symbols in the workplace impacted the managers want or desire to ask employees to do unethical things, but when symbol actually belonged to the employee, then the boss was even less likely to ask that particular individual.  Basically, if you do not want your moral compass violated by a boss, then display you faith proudly.  Both Americans and Indians (people of India for those who cannot differentiate the term from Native Americans alternative post-colonial name) were used in these studies.

Interestingly bosses who were religious were more likely to discriminate in favor of those who openly share their faith via symbols as opposed to people who displayed nothing.  As such, people who hide their faith or have none were at a disadvantage to the openly religious people in this situation.

In contrast white collar people in India did not give preference or discriminate as much compared to their American counterparts with respect to if they shared the same religion.  Instead Muslims in India were more likely to respect people displaying their Christian or Hindi symbols.  Thus this demonstrates to me that it is partly culture and religious values that impact how people are treated in the workplace.

Final Thought:  Interesting isn't it.  People will be less likely (at least in the U.S.) to pressure you to do unethical things simply by displaying your faith visually and shield you from work place pressures.  Food for thought.

Respect those older than yourself

People older than us have experience and wisdom that only we younger people can only hope to have.  I used to think differently when I was younger, but then I noticed changes in myself from year to year and began to understand.  I understood that people older than yourself should be respected because they are more knowledgeable due to life experience.  Now why is this important?

This is important because of the knowledge we can obtain from them.  Sure, they may have some facts wrong or they perceive things differently but their opinions and knowledge hold value which can be used by those younger than them.  Basically, I talked even more with the seniors in my family and took in their stories and their experiences and learned from them whatever I could.  Actually it is part of why I know even half of what I know today.  Some cultures and groups recognize this such as people of Spanish, Japanese and Chinese decent.  When they walk into a room, they will go to great the person who is the oldest in the room first and then make their way down based on age.  It is a way of paying homage to the life of those older than.  Some people even take this a step further by worshiping their ancestors in a form of ancestor worship.  They have shrines to their dead family members and pray to them for help and guidance.  

Now what if the whole world did this.  What if we remembered the people in our family for the deeds they did and the knowledge they passed on and wrote it down.  It would resemble a Bible, save for the fact that it was written based on the knowledge and life experiences of our current and past members of our family.  No, it would not be just the good deeds, but the bad deeds as well so that we remember them so they are not repeated.  A shrine to our own ancestors works too to show respect to the people who guided us in life.

Final thought:  This can lay the foundation for a more respectful and peaceful society.  No one wants to be remembered for being stupid, or even being evil.  They would rather be respected by those around them.  As such, showing respect to those older than you (obviously as long as that respect is not abused) can lead society down a more enlightened path.  We can all become Confucius, Buddha and more.  Rather than creating a faith, we can turn men and women into idols even after death in a more pronounced way where our ancestors are worshiped and mimicked like they were deities.  Will they ever replace Jesus?  Heck no, at least not in my book, but for those who don't have faith and those who need that extra motivation to be morally and ethically better, it could do wonders.

Happy July 4th

America is another year older and still one of the most successful Republics in the world.

So on this Fourth of July I would like to say thank you.

Thank you to the Founding Fathers and their families for their sacrifices.

Thank you to our Soldiers that gave the ultimate sacrifice both during the Revolution and to the Present.

Additionally, I want to thank all the inventors, entrepreneurs, businessmen, and all the dreamers that built this nation.

Thank you all for the country I grew up in and for its limitless future.

Happy 4th of July and God Bless.