Dear flag I’ve known you most of my life, I recall the first time we met when my mother brought you home after my grandfather’s funeral. You knew him well as he raised you and defended you in World War II in the Pacific theater of War. At the same time my cousin Sir ADM Ramsey in the Mediterranean was setting his sights on victory at Dunkirk and DDay in order to free Europe from fascism. Little did I know that just a few years later my brother would be carrying you overseas in Korea. I always looked at you with pride knowing how many of my family fought alongside you. My father quickly showed me what the Stars and Stripes meant to our family. My father served in the Korean War and protected numerous Shipmates, he later shared how many of those same flags were given to his friends wives.
Podcast – STAND FOR TRUTH RADIO with guest JOSHUA MACIAS
Please join your host SUSAN KNOWLES with her guest JOSHUA MACIAS on Stand For Truth Radio on Monday, February 27, 2017. Joshua Macias will be speaking about issues important to all Veterans and to all Americans who love our Veterans.
Joshua Macias shares the grand vision for ending Veteran homelessness across the nation. Following his honorable discharge from the Navy, Joshua had the same experience as every transitional Veteran – he was a hardworking veteran with a strong résumé but no job.
Now, as an expert in business systems and Veteran housing, with over four generations of family involved in real estate, Joshua is an experienced and creative housing crisis problem-solver.
In addition to 16 years of grassroots, faith-based, and nonprofit service, Joshua founded Vets For Trump in 2016 to insure the Veteran Voice was heard. In fighting the homeless housing crisis Joshua’s contributions started by volunteering as a Project Manager with the 2011 Virginia Beach Extreme Home Makeover project.
Continuing as Co-Founder of Veterans Homefront whose team was honored as a key instrument in the 100 day governor challenge in 2014. This success allowed Virginia recognition to be the only one to reach functional zero in Veteran Homelessness. Most recently Joshua was honored to be designated as Chairman of the Veterans For Trump Coalition growing with his team the largest Veteran Coalition seen since World War II around a President.
Joshua spends his days speaking to business owners, congressmen and women, cabinet members and their policy makers alike. Working with the Vets For Trump team he maintains communication with 500,000 grassroots Veterans asking for change in their backyard through Vets-For-Trump.com. Alongside 2nd District Congressman Scott Taylor Joshua looks to create jobs supporting the DOD as well as our Veteran Communities. As a Bio-Technology innovator Joshua continues on his track for PhD in Industrial and Organizational Psychology working on projects in B.C.I (Brain Computer Interface).
As a father of three young boys, Joshua believes in modeling philanthropy and has devoted his time to creating housing solutions across the country. He hopes to set an example, for both his sons and others in the community, by establishing a legacy of Veteran housing assistance, Veteran Activism, Technology and Social Integration.
You can read more on his projects and endeavors at www.joshumacias.com or Twitter @JoshuaMacias or FB @JoshuaMaciasTeam
|Date:||February 27, 2017|
|Appearance:||PODCAST – STAND FOR TRUTH RADIO|
|Outlet:||Stand For Truth Radio|
Goto my contact page for more insight or to engage in business opportunities to support the community.
|Date:||December 18, 2016|
|Appearance:||Joshua Macias: Our Veteran’s Voice Has Been Taken From Us|
|Outlet:||The Pavlovic Today|
|Location:||New York, NY|
DAYS OF THANKSGIVING | EARLY VETERANS VOICES
Pete Hegseth is first a Patriot, Second an OathKeeper, Thirdly a Combat Veteran and fourthly a Media knight who has stood steady through such a tumultuous onslaught against our community over the years. It is in no small part through his courage to stand against the tide he helped to lay the groundwork for the Veterans For Trump Coalition to gain such momentum. Had the Concerned Veterans of America not made it a point to educate, expand and unify the Veteran Vote I personally do not believe that the flame which ignited the nation would have burned so brightly in the beginning of it all. We all made it our focus and mission to ensure the Veteran Voice was heard across this great nation of ours. By keeping the Veteran cause at the forefront of the presidential debates we maintained the narrative of America first and her servants in the military community as the heroes they are. I want to personally say Thank You Pete Hegseth for standing in the gap and holding the line while your reinforcements were on their way! JM
Article By : Pete Hegseth | FOXNEWS
“Today, on November 11, America pauses to thank our veterans for their service to our nation. The freedoms we enjoy in this country—which are the exception to the rule in human history—were literally purchased by men and women of all generations who have courageously worn the uniformed cloth of our country.
We live free because warriors—and then veterans—have selflessly served our nation in dangerous places.
At the very least, make sure to use this Veterans Day to honor and thank a veteran in your life.
Veterans Day is about honoring veterans, not politics. But we also cannot ignore that our nation’s policies impact the way we empower, and care for, our veterans. We have failed our military and veterans too often over the past eight years.
That said, the current state of our country for military members, and our veterans, is disappointing at best, and dangerous at worst.
At the Defense Department—the government’s largest department—deep spending cuts, failure to modernize our weapons, and utter strategic drift have created a readiness and morale crisis that makes America far too vulnerable.
At the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA)—the second largest federal department—a waiting list scandal exposed a corrosive, bloated, and unaccountable bureaucracy that is very good at serving itself—but not good at serving veterans.
On both fronts, thankfully, I believe a new era dawns. On the campaign trail, candidate Donald Trump made both rebuilding our military and fixing the VA two of his signature issues.
President-elect Trump is poised to do the same. President-elect Trump has pledged to get rid of the disastrous defense sequester, invest in long-overdue future military technologies, grow the ranks and numbers of ships and aircraft, and repeal stifling rules of engagement that handcuff our troops.
In just a few years, the posture of our military could look much different—ensuring America both deters aggression and can swiftly defeat enemies.
At the VA, President-elect Trump has pledged to “clean house”—an aggressive mandate veterans have been clamoring for. He has vowed to choose an aggressive VA secretary, and empower that leader to swiftly fire VA employees who have failed veterans. This will mean confronting the VA unions, as well as the VA bureaucracy; something Trump has unapologetically said he would do. Moreover, President-elect Trump has vowed to empower veterans to choosetheir healthcare—either from VA facilities or from a private physician. When veterans can choose, then VA must compete and is incentivized to treat veterans like customers, not numbers. It’s about time.
Veterans Day is about honoring veterans, not politics. But we also cannot ignore that our nation’s policies impact the way we empower, and care for, our veterans. We have failed our military and veterans too often over the past eight years.
My sincere believe is that President-elect Trump will muster the courage, leadership, and clarity of purpose to ensure America brings back “peace through strength” with our military posture and the enacts real reform at the VA.
It’s the least we can do for our warfighters.
Pete Hegseth is the former CEO of Concerned Veterans for America and the former executive director of Vets for Freedom. A Fox News contributor, he is an infantry officer in the Army National Guard and has served tours in Afghanistan and Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay. He is the author of “In the Arena” and serves on the Advisory Board for United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI).”
The roster of retired military officers endorsing Hillary Clinton in September glittered with decoration and rank. One former general led the American surge in Anbar, one of the most violent provinces in Iraq. Another commanded American-led allied forces battling the Taliban in Afghanistan. Yet another trained the first Iraqis to combat Islamic insurgents in their own country.
But as Election Day approaches, many veterans are instead turning to Donald J. Trump, a businessman who avoided the Vietnam draft and has boasted of gathering foreign policy wisdom by watching television shows.
Even as other voters abandon Mr. Trump, veterans remain among his most loyal supporters, an unlikely connection forged by the widening gulf they feel from other Americans.
After 15 years at war, many who served in Iraq or Afghanistan are proud of their service but exhausted by its burdens. They distrust the political class that reshaped their lives and are frustrated by how little their fellow citizens seem to understand about their experience.
Perhaps most strikingly, they welcome Mr. Trump’s blunt attacks on America’s entanglements overseas.
“When we jump into wars without having a real plan, things like Vietnam and things like Iraq and Afghanistan happen,” said William Hansen, a former Marine who served two National Guard tours in Iraq. “This is 16 years. This is longer than Vietnam.”
In small military towns in California and North Carolina, veterans of all eras cheer Mr. Trump’s promises to fire officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs. His attacks on political correctness evoke their frustrations with tortured rules of engagement crafted to serve political, not military, ends. In Mr. Trump’s forceful assertion of strength, they find a balm for wounds that left them broken and torn.
“He calls it out,” said Joshua Macias, a former Navy petty officer and fifth-generation veteran who lives in the Tidewater region of Virginia, where he organized a “Veterans for Trump” group last year. “We have intense emotion connected to these wars. The way it was politicized, the way they changed the way we fight in a war setting — it’s horrible how they did that.”
Now, as battlegrounds in the Middle East smoke and rumble once more, as V.A. wait times creep up instead of down, Mr. Trump’s candidacy — and its resonance among veterans — is helping expose the gulf of culture and class between many Americans and those who fight wars in their name.
There are 22 million living veterans in the United States, and many love or loathe Mr. Trump for the same reasons other Americans do. But polling, interviews with dozens of veterans and those who study their political views indicate a strong preference for Mr. Trump over Mrs. Clinton. He now leads Mrs. Clinton by 19 points among veterans registered to vote, while trailing her among all voters by three points, according to a Fox News poll released Oct. 18.
Veterans are more likely than other Americans to view Mr. Trump favorably, and less likely to rate Mrs. Clinton positively. In mid-October, 43 percent of veterans expressed a favorable view of him in a Gallup tracking poll, while just 30 percent saw Mrs. Clinton positively.
In interviews with more than three dozen veterans, many praised Mr. Trump for candidly criticizing the costs of war, an issue they see few politicians in either party taking on. And they are unconcerned with how or when he arrived at his positions.
“The Iraq war was a disaster,” said Dustin Stewart, a former Army captain and Iraq veteran. “He is at least not trying to tiptoe around it. And I think some of the other Republicans were afraid of it.”
Growing Military Caste
For decades, Americans who serve in the armed forces have been growing more segregated from their fellow countrymen. Fewer than 1 percent of Americans now serve in the military. Those who join are likely to have parents, uncles or aunts who served before them, forming a kind of military caste. And on the post-9/11 battlefields, lower-income and less-educated communities have shouldered a greater share of American casualties than in past wars — even Vietnam.
Medical advances reduced battlefield deaths but also, paradoxically, made veterans’ sacrifice less visible to the public. They came home not in body bags but with missing limbs and traumatic brain injuries, leaving Americans less sensitive to the costs of further war, according to Douglas L. Kriner, a political scientist at Boston University who has studied post-9/11 veterans.
Nonfatal casualties seem “not have the political punch that fatal casualties do,” Mr. Kriner said.
By the middle of Mr. Obama’s first term, the majority of post-9/11 veterans said they believed Americans did not understand military life, according to the Pew Research Center. Sixty percent said that the United States should pay less attention to problems overseas.
Some former and current military personnel have embraced libertarian candidates, such as Ron Paul, a former United States representative from Texas, who criticized American interventions abroad. In 2012, Mr. Paul raised more money from active-duty service members during the early phase of the campaign than all other Republican candidates combined, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Mr. Stewart grew up in a conservative family in Texas, where Rush Limbaugh’s show often played on the radio. In 2000, he cast a proud vote for George W. Bush. But six years later, he was leading an infantry platoon outside Ramadi, a hotbed of the insurgency then enveloping parts of Iraq. Mr. Stewart returned home alive but disillusioned. He supported Mr. Paul in the 2008 Republican primary race and Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party nominee, in the 2012 election.
“I don’t want pity. I just want people to care,” said Mr. Stewart, adding, “Do you know what your politicians are sending us to do?”
In mid-February, boos rang from the rafters of a performing arts center in Greenville, S.C. Mr. Trump, onstage with remaining rivals for the Republican nomination, had just committed what seemed like a major apostasy, assailing the Iraq war and attacking Mr. Bush with gusto. “They lied,” Mr. Trump said. “They said there were weapons of mass destruction — there were none and they knew there were none.”
His words startled the Republican establishment. But in the front row, Daniel Cortez nodded along. Mr. Cortez, a 65-year-old Marine Corps veteran who served in Vietnam, did not like everything about Mr. Trump. Yet he seemed to be speaking a different language, Mr. Cortez said in a recent interview, more like the one veterans themselves spoke. Mr. Trump argued for a military that was bigger and better equipped but also used more sparingly.
“Mr. Trump is a breath of fresh air because he is promoting peace through strength,” Mr. Cortez said.
For some conservative veterans, Mr. Trump’s criticisms of the Iraq war have allowed them to vent a stew of emotions: Relief and regret, bitterness and pride. They were repelled by liberal antiwar politics and felt little in common with the war’s most prominent critics. So they held back their misgivings for years, unable to admit to their friends and sometimes themselves that so much had been wasted.
“Nobody likes to say that George W. Bush was a bad president,” said David Fuqua, who spent four years in the Marines and served in Afghanistan in 2011. “Having to defend the rationale for the Iraq war for so long, and then to have someone on the stage talk about how it was a mistake, touched a real nerve.”
Mr. Trump’s national security proposals, some veterans supporting him acknowledged, are often vague or contradictory. But many heard in Mr. Trump’s voice a return to the days of big military budgets and boundless manpower. His sweeping denunciation of Washington elites echoed their own grumbling.
“They look at Clinton as a continuance of what we’ve had for the last 16 years through two administrations,” said Anthony Zinni, a retired Marine Corps general who led the United States Central Command in the late 1990s.
Where Mr. Bush acted rashly in sending troops into Iraq, some veterans said, the Obama administration had acted politically in pulling them out. When the black flags of the Islamic State rose over Falluja and Mosul two years ago, they recalled the sweat or blood they or their friends had shed there. Politicians had started the war, they felt, and politicians had lost it.
“Under George, all we could do was straight right hooks and a couple of uppercuts,” Mr. Hansen said. “When Obama took over, we could only do straight lefts — and we had to say ‘we’re going to punch you’ first.”
‘I Think He’s Genuine’
In 2010, in a bloodily contested river valley in southern Afghanistan, Michael Verardo stepped on an old Russian-made land mine wired to two jugs packed with explosives, rocks and nails. He lost most of his leg immediately. To save his left arm, medics sewed it temporarily onto his back.
Three years ago, Mr. Verardo and his wife, Sarah, moved to North Carolina, where the winters are easier. Though he has two Purple Hearts, it sometimes takes months for him to get an appointment with a neurologist at the V.A.
This summer, at Mr. Trump’s invitation, the family flew to Cleveland for the Republican National Convention. On the first night, Mr. Verardo and his wife sat in the V.I.P. box with Mr. Trump’s family. Mr. Trump seemed to understand, Mr. Verardo recalled. Maybe he would be different.
“I think he’s genuine,” Mr. Verardo said.
One of Mr. Trump’s earliest policy speeches, last October, offered a plan that would allow federal officials to more freely fire and discipline V.A. employees. After the V.A. scandal two years ago, when investigations revealed widespread delays and the deaths of some veterans while waiting for care, public employee unions fiercely oppose such measures.
Mrs. Clinton, who has her own plan for improving V.A. care, said last year that the scandal had “not been as widespread as it has been made out to be.”
“Trump was the first guy to recognize the populist appeal of this problem,” said Paul J. Rieckhoff, the chief executive of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.
Mr. Trump has “an empathy and a sentiment about what the military has been through, the low morale,” said Howie R. Lind, a Republican activist and former Navy commander who lives in Northern Virginia.
When Mr. Trump talks about veterans, Mr. Lind said, “it’s not like it’s a ‘them,’ or a special interest group. It’s America.
Mr. Lind began hosting weekly Trump dinners for local veterans last spring, promoting them on Facebook, booking back rooms in diners. A few dozen people turned into 80, then 100.” – NY TIMES
“The new support line dates back roughly one month. Clinton is, indeed, a dangerous candidate. And yes, she has broken above steeply descending resistance over the past two days. Let us be clear though, this does NOT put her in any sort of safe space. She is NOT winning right now, in spite of the utterly and overwhelming media blitzkrieg saying that she is. Winning would have looked like an earlier breakout above resistance and a more sustained new formation in the positive direction. No, I’m not predicting anything. I’m simply stating, factually, that this is NOT a victory formation yet. If in coming days a new support formation appears, and is ascending, that will be dangerous. This, right now, has all the appearance of a head fake. We’ll know soon enough, but it’s not looking intimidating to me yet.
Honestly, I couldn’t be happier. A slow, gently rising support line is all I ever ask for. The Max support you see ascends too rapidly to be sustained. The rapid descent of resistance is also too rapid to hold. And, the fact that support was found, even for just one day, yesterday, at the minimum support level you see is a type of beautiful good. We’ll of course see where we go, but if we begin to slowly build forward and upward gently again, we’ll win.
Absolutely tied. Sure, Clinton’s support is up. Yes, Trump’s resistance is down. But, even one day where she drops down a little and he rises up a little indicates that momentum for her and against him is NOT absolute. Even if she does rise above him temporarily in coming days, we still have time to reversed that trend. And, if the actual momentum we had before the video was released is re-attained, then we’ve won for sure. We will know within the next 7 – 14 days, at least as far as the numbers go, here at the macro level.” (C) GivingVeterensTheirVoice.org
Veterans For Trump Al Balderasaro retired USMC speaks in support of Mr. Trump’s donations for veterans. Al Balderasaro states, “I have been involved in many veteran fund raisers, Mr. Trump did the right thing vetting the veteran organizations. Mr. Trump gave 100% and is doing this from his heart. Look at Mr. Trump’s plan to help veterans how to fix the Veterans Administration. The media needs to focus on the real issues”.
LEADERSHIP IS ABOUT INFLUENCE | My recent Reading and analytical response on the Topic of Negotiation in Organizational Leadership.
Everyday people are faced with situations in life that demands us to make choices. Leadership of a Delegation is one of the ideas that got developed by Raymond Saner in his book Expert Negotiator. He illustrated how leadership gets exhibited in different situations and the influence that it has to people. Various leadership styles that get used differ from one cultural background to the other as explained by Saner. According to Saner, group functions is closely related to leadership as a group of team members can get directly involved in developing leadership systems hence make crucial decisions. The purpose of a team gets related to the subject at hand which accrues from the identified problem, information that needs to be collected and disseminated. Leadership and groups go hand in hand with each other, and the two are inseparable where the personal interest of each of the member in a group needs to be satisfied. Leadership gets characterized by the ability to involve negotiation skills, effective communication and decision making that is ethical.
In making decisions, the involvement of a team is crucial where members of a team get involved in reaching a consensus on matters about issues at hand. Leadership is essential in making decisions where the leader direct other members of a group on what need to get done. It is, therefore, that we ensure there is effective leadership with the aim of reaching for quality decisions that will lead to development. The applicability of leadership is evident in the real world and revolves around day to day operations. For example, a close friend once worked as a team leader for a group that was involved in community mobilization activities targeting in educating local population on hygiene and proper sanitation. As a team leader, one gets entitled with providing leadership to the other members of the group which at times is not an easy task. He faced challenges concerning negotiation skills where some of the members felt that they could stand out and oppose what the leader decided. He, however, ensured that he undertook all communication initiatives to inform them what gets expected of them depending on what needed to get done at any level. In making successful negotiation skills, it is important to employ good leadership qualities to ensure that as a leader you have the significant influence towards other people.
Negotiation skills and effective communication are vital in the ethical decision-making process. Our daily routines demand that we make decisions that are healthy to our well-being which is unavoidable as they are part and parcel of our life. Various researchers have built their work on identifying how negotiations vary from rationality. (Raiffa, 1982) developed a decision analytic approach to negotiations which dictated how we should behave. Raiffa focused on offering prescriptions to negotiators but called for descriptive research to assess the behavior of their counterparts who are impacted by the decision that gets made. His ideas got based on the argument that as a negotiator, one should get to understand the likely behavior of the other people.
Studies have revealed that because people egocentrically interpret what is fair in negotiations, they can adopt different standards, which get based on whether they introduce a certain decision or they are a victim of the same (Babcock and Loewenstein, 1997). People tend to develop these different standards and qualities without their conscious awareness (Banaji, 2003). These varying perceptions have been viewed as a way of initiating conflicts between parties. If one party views a certain action as ethical and the other sees it as unethical, there tends to exist a barrier which gets to continually develop a significant barrier hindering the development of a relationship. From this statement, we can conclude that decisions will always affect one party or the other either negatively or positively. Failure is never welcome to people and thus when such result affect one negatively; it gets viewed as failures which can results to more barriers between the parties involved.
According to Forgas (1998), emotions get connected with how negotiators select certain strategy to implement in certain decision making processes. Those who exhibit anger were found to be less competent compared to those who were jovial. According to Loewenstein et al., (1989), anger makes negotiators more self-centered and this affects their preferences hence making them decline offers that would assist in the development of ventures. Research has also focused on the role of emotions and how they affect the ability to judge and behave. It also aimed at examining cognition and the distinguishing element between good and bad moods and how they lead to different information strategies (Forgas and George, 2001).
More so, emotions influence decision making in negotiation processes. Some of the regulatory processes may be expressed through emotions control efficient decision making through both implicit and explicit knowledge (Damasio, 1994). The connection between emotional intelligence skills and negotiation outcomes got laid down by Barsade and Gibson (2007) where they sought to find the effects of generalized versus discrete emotions on decision making. This means that the mental condition of an individual gets to influence his ability to engage in decision-making and the quality of decisions that he makes.
Negotiation is closely related to intuitions, and as much as we tend to think that the ability to negotiate is a natural occurrence, we cannot assume that the gut feeling plays a greater role in this process. Keith ( 2000) developed two systems of thought that characterize emotions which influence how we negotiate. One of the systems got viewed as being automatic and effortless while the other as deliberate and systematic situations. As much as we have control over how we think about situations, when it concerns complex decisions and negotiations, the effort shifts to the thought that is automatic and effortless. According to Dijksterhuis and Nordgren (2006), what we strongly feel may indeed allow us to make better decisions especially when it has to do with decisions that get to be complex. According to research, some negotiators are better than others and as Thompson (2005) stated, successful negotiation can get primarily attributed to natural skill or talent. However, arguments against this have gotten developed with the ideas that we all learn to become better negotiators. Research has also shown that the ability to negotiate can increase with training and boost the level of interactive agreements too (Thompson, 2005). The benefits of training may also be transferred over time although there are suggestions that the type of training may affect the optimal levels that can get reached.
Despite the existing knowledge about the positive impact of training on negotiation performance, implicit beliefs concerning skills and performance may not necessarily match explicit knowledge (Brown, 2009). The idea of whether we are born with certain levels of negotiation skills or whether we learn them remains a matter of discussion to most researchers. This ability is a determinant of the communication levels and strategies to engage in when making decisions.
Developing a key communication strategy is vital in ethical decision-making procedures. Leaders need cross-cultural negotiation skills to maintain their competitiveness (Okoro, 2012). They need to develop a system that is easy to inform as well as enquire if anything is not clear so that it reduces cases of misunderstanding. Tones and words that are chosen to deliver information should be friendly so that a good and friendly relationship gets maintained. It is recommended that leaders undergo training related to interpersonal development so that group success (Okoro, 2012). As the saying goes that “Actions speak louder than words”, leaders should get to recognize their nonverbal communication methods and be aware of acceptable behavior as well as restrict the same depending on cultural variations. Open communication can lead to a well-developed relationship between the leader and the followers thus leading to trust and respect in the leadership system. The presence of effective communication develops the leader’s credibility and increases the royalty of the followers towards their leader (Choan, 2003). In this regard, every communication opportunity should get treated as a way of building a relationship between the leader and the group members. A leader should have the ability to understand his team so that he can detect how to involve negotiation processes with them and make vital decisions that are crucial to everyone.
Leadership cuts across all spheres of life and all the leaders are expected to portray certain traits that are relevant in the world today. As a leader, one is mandated with the powers to lead others into developing courses of actions which are applicable depending on the situation at hand. When we talk of leadership, we cannot leave out the negotiation element since it acts as a backbone to any decision maker. A good leader should have the necessary negotiation skills and use them to source for appropriate strategies. Communication goes hand in hand which is a vital part in the success of any agenda. When there is no appropriate communication between different parties, there develop loopholes which lead to communication shortcomings.
In making decisions, leaders should ensure that there is an ethical standard which meets the criteria that get set. Group dynamics should be observed and ensure that all the members are directly involved in all of the decision-making procedures. A consensus is necessary so that the decisions made are acceptable among all the team members. Great delegations have fallen apart without this observation.
Watching current organizational leadership grow in the world of Political Science I have seen first hand how this lack of decision making hierarchy leads to further dissension and disorganization. Cultural differences and the lack of proper communication style can lead to disenfranchised spirits and further ether is brought between team members. By breaking down the separation between interconnected groups more efficient decision making was seen in a local Volunteer group that I organized. Through team building exercises built around a local campaign for Veterans Initiatives I watched this unfold in a real time situation. The results of this leadership style built influence, organization, partnership through the divide which lead to productivity completing the needed missions in hand. Furthermore although the Gut cannot be scientifically proven it’s influence in the outcome of every negotiation or decision cannot be negated either.
How many times Have you spent countless hours preparing, then to watch it end so quickly?
For me as I reflect on the past 90 days for certain it would be my most recent speech on a Veterans perspective of our SOTU. As I was opening in Manassas, Virginia for a rally in front of five thousand people. I was able to share all my passion revolving Veteran Service needs and it’s definition and correlation to why I was there. For those who have messaged me for this speech this post is one of three which will highlight my speech that night.
“Right now times are tough and we need to be encouraged I look at the dollar Bill and read In God We Trust along with the Photo of our First President General George Washington. Just 45mins from here, above his tomb. It reads the “remains of General George Washington.” He wanted history to recall him as a General, a military leader and with it the epitome of sacrifice. At this time of year; along with his wife, they endured bitter, cold, hardship, and shortages of food as, they braved the elements. It was a hard; hard, difficult life. Today, the service members of our country face their challenges, perhaps not with the same degree of hardship, as George Washington, but by all means, with the same emotional strain.” – Joshua Macias 12/4/2015
“How would you respond to the State of our Union?”
I was asked this question from a recent circle which brought me to listen to Nikki Haley this evening who just a few miles south of me runs an amazing state.
Governor Haley showed true focus while giving direction with sound advice allowing me renewed hope in a correction. With inflation growing, stagnation in job growth, tech sector outsourcing overseas, technology businesses in America must look to these questions and answer them as well. If we are to shape the future for our generations to come now is the time to communicate. Cumulatively we have the processing power through our collective minds to answer any problem known to man. Given the right focus, determination, Grit with leadership our Nation will be the beacon of light the world has always looked to.
Shortly I will be consulting alongside numerous organizations for this very purpose.
I look forward to my subscribers connecting with me regularly inquiring those answers which are around the corner but not quite clear. This year of 2016 will go down in history as a true change in this millennium for never has a human the power through technology to transfer answers, insights and leverage the powerful of the mind to one cohesive moment as now. I look forward to the answers to come to these many questions that are plaguing our humanity with you.
Article Review : SOTU Response | Gov. Nikki Haley
U.S. President Barack Obama gave his final presidential State of the Union Tuesday evening in a rousing address that focused on the future of the country, but that won’t be the last speech of the night. Soon after, representing the opposite side of the ideological aisle, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley will deliver the Republican rebuttal. You can watch the response live here.
Haley gained national political clout last summer for acting quickly to remove the Confederate battle flag from her state’s statehouse grounds after a racially charged mass shooting at a predominantly black church in Charleston. The GOP response to the president’s remarks show that she’s a rising politician in the party, joining several leaders who have responded to the president after State of the Union speeches, including presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio, Fla., and the current speaker of the House, Paul Ryan.”