This video is NOT an endorsement nor a renunciation of Barack Obama becoming Speaker of the House. I non-partisanly explore the idea and it's consequences (except perhaps that little jab at the end) because I'm interested in how power can be obtained and enlarged. You can take this video as a warning or a hope, but in the process I hope you learn a few things about the U.S. Constitution and American congressional history. (can barack obama stand for president again, barack obama speaker of the house, can barack obama stand for president again) Let me know your thoughts in the comments! ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRCDojaob1Y

The Republican Party officially supports Puerto Rican statehood: "We support the right of American citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state. We also recognize the historical significance of the local referendum in 2012 in which… 61% chose statehood. Once the 2012 local vote for statehood is ratified, Congress should approve an enabling act with terms for Puerto Rico's future admission as the 51st state of the Union." And then as the Speaker of the Puerto Rico House of Representatives concluded, With a Republican majority and a Republican president, armed with the party’s platform, there shouldn’t be any more excuses or delays. The American citizens in Puerto Rico are entitled to the same rights and protection as their counterparts living on the other fifty states. The people have spoken. So if the Republican Party supports Puerto Rico statehood then why didn’t they put it up for a vote? They didn’t vote for it because they were lying. You don’t understand American politics if you actually thought Republicans would’ve admitted Puerto Rico as the 51st State. The truth is that Republicans were pretending to support it to avoid being called racist and therefore losing even more of the Hispanic vote. As an unabashed conservative, I’ll give you the low-down: we don’t support Puerto Rico statehood because it comes down to patriotism, power, and money. PATRIOTISM The fact is that the 2012 and the 2020 referendums were far from a mandate for statehood. In 2012 eligible voters were presented with two choices: (1) continue with Puerto Rico's territorial status, or (2) indicate the political status they preferred from three possibilities: statehood, independence, or a sovereign nation in free association with the United States. Only 54% voted for (2) and of that slim majority only 61% voted for statehood. In other words, only 44% of all voters chose statehood. And then in 2020, for the first time in the territory's history, only one direct question was asked: "Should Puerto Rico be admitted immediately into the Union as a State?” With a turnout of just 55%, only 52% voted for statehood. Now would you want someone joining your lifetime membership club who was only about 50% sure they want to join? And where they primarily want to join NOT because they like your club, but because they want to get more money out of it? If you look at the campaign for Puerto Rico statehood it wasn’t about how great America is and what an honor it would be to join the ranks of the other 50 states, but it was all about how they could get more federal aid and then be able to declare bankruptcy, i.e. not pay people back who they took money from. And the fact is statehood remains a highly polarizing issue on the isl ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCVZnniYmrc

This video explores what President Trump said at a recent Michigan rally about the late congressman Dingell and how he supposedly provided "A+ treatment". Trump said at a recent Michigan rally… "Debbie Dingell, that's a real beauty…. so she calls me up like 8 months ago. Her husband was here a long time. But I didn’t give him the B treatment. I didn’t give him the C or the D. I could have! I gave him the A+ treatment. Takedown the flags! “Why are you taking them down, sir?” For ex-congressman Dingell! “Oh, okay.” Do this! Do that! Rotunda! Everything! I gave him everything! I didn’t want anything for it. I don’t need anything for anything. She calls me up, “[groveling voice] It’s the nicest thing that’s ever happened. Thank you so much. John would be so thrilled. He’s looking down he’d be so thrilled. Thank you so much, sir.” I said, “That’s okay don’t worry about it.” Maybe, he’s looking up. I don’t know. {audience reacts with a mixture of laughs, whistles, and audible groans} Maybe. Maybe. But let’s assume he’s looking down! But I gave him A+! Not A! Not B+! I gave him the A+. She calls me, “Ohhh ahhh ohh”… I won’t go into the conversation because it’s not fair to do that." To which Debbie Dingle responded, Mr. President, let’s set politics aside. My husband earned all his accolades after a lifetime of service. I’m preparing for the first holiday season without the man I love. You brought me down in a way you can never imagine and your hurtful words just made my healing much harder. Ronald Reagan’s daughter then jumped into the mix, “[Trump] knows full well the impact of attacking people so publicly. Maybe some of those in his audience on Wednesday finally began to perceive that his cruelty is limitless, his sense of decency nonexistent.” As a conservative, this single clip of Donald Trump highlights several of my problems with his presidential style: reactive, dishonest, indecent, egotistical, and victim-playing. Trump is not an active visionary in the mode of Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, John F. Kennedy or Ronald Reagan. Trump is a reactive transactionalist. If we were going to give Trump the benefit-of-the-doubt we could say that at the time maybe Trump didn’t want anything from Dingle for providing her deceased husband “A+ treatment”, but the fact that he threw his “generosity” in her face for doing something he disliked means that he, in fact, wanted at least some degree of loyalty in return. And Trump says he provided “A+ treatment”, but what did he have to lose by using taxpayer dollars to fund a funeral service? John Dingell holds the record for the longest-ever serving Congressman in American history, representing Michigan for more than 59 year ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xphpsis36MY

We are all natural born minimalists. But as we got older our demands got more extravagant - we wanted the coolest kicks, the graphic tees, the computer, the car, etc... But as of 6 years ago when I started reading minimalist blogs, I became a born-again minimalist! In college I had the barest room with a few fake plants and framed posters. After college I bought a 21 foot RV, which also minimized my ability to own a lot of stuff. Today I live out of a suitcase, which makes it easy to live with 100 things. What you own reveals a lot about who you are. It's a direct signal of what you value most. What do your things say about you? If someone walked into your house would they think you're disciplined, organized, caring, loving, happy, focused, smart, adventurous, etc? Tips 1. Ultimately there is a subjective nature to this challenge when deciding what counts as a "thing". Do you count each piece of paper you own or all your paper as one? Choose whatever works for you! 2. If you live in a big home with a lot of family members then just count your personal possessions. 3. Box all your stuff, then take 1 thing out that you use. And then after a set period of time you get rid of what is still in boxes. 4. Whenever you buy something new, throw something out. 5. Read minimalist blogs 6. I put everything I own in a pile. Organized it and then started tallying off each thing I own, coming out to 90 things. BENEFITS • Focus on What Matters: Ultimately minimalism is not about owning 100 things or less. It's about only owning those things that bring you joy (or are necessary). "Possessions = Stress" • More Time: When you aren't spending a ton of time packing and cleaning you have more time to do the things you really enjoy. And happiness research is clear that people derive more satisfaction from spending money on experiences. • More Freedom (risk taking): When you have more stuff, you have more expenses, which means you are more dependent upon the income from your job. Give this 100 thing challenge a try, or some version of it, to limit your stuff and focus on the bigger things in life! Good luck! Minimalism. UPDATE: 07/23/17 Thanks for all the likes and subscribes! I'm still going minimalist hard. I'm still living with less than 100 things. I even fantasize about owning even less, i.e. less clothes. That is about one of the last remaining things I can reduce. For example, I could probably get rid of all my socks if I wear sandals and depending on the sandals I might be able to run in them so I could also get rid of my running shoes (research says barefoot-like running might even be better for us although still controversial subject in running community). I can own less clothes because I wash them in the shower every day. I'll make a vi ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_M8Hl2VZxc