Popular political issues and real issues are two entirely different subjects. The current political establishment benefits from exploiting known political views on specific and often distorted issues. As an individual, a candidate, and a campaign, we pledge to focus on broader problems where actual improvements and solutions are possible. For example, we are perfectly willing to address broad energy and environmental issues but we plan to avoid and/or ignore the specifics of the Keystone pipeline.
Domestic and Islamic terrorism are two separate but important issues:
Domestic terrorism generally arises from mental illness and/or injustice. There is little we can do about some mental illnesses but we can address indoctrinated entitlement which can result in inability to deal with reality. In other words, we can teach our kids to deal with reality instead of protecting them from life so they don't shoot up movie theaters or schools when they can't deal with reality. Injustice is also easy to address and the need to constantly root out injustice from our government and society benefits all citizens. Domestic terrorism and mass shootings are national tragedies which should not be encouraged by glorification of underlying "justifications" but that does not mean that we should make no effort to cure the problem or that injustice should be expanded/promoted in an obtuse denial of reality.
Islamic terrorism is much more complex. Islamic extremists can develop naturally as can radicals of other religions. Islam is very good at self-promotion and growth, especially under adversity. The low level warfare since the 9-11 attacks is almost ideal for generating Islamic militants/terrorists. The rise of the Islamic State (IS/ISIS/ISIL/Daesh) and the declaration of a Caliph with open support for terrorist attacks against civilians further complicates issues on a global scale. Additionally the commonly misunderstood nature of Islam and Islamic governments/organizations is fertile ground for additional radicalization.
The current Bush/Obama "plan" is genocide over a long period as are all other plans that call for rooting out unacceptable interpretations of Islam; killing militant Muslims over a period of years and decades until no resistance remains effectively means killing all Muslims as warfare will continue to create new radicals and expand the definition of which interpretations are "unacceptable". The most effective means of addressing Islamic terrorism is full-scale war to remove control of all territory from the Islamic State; without territory there is no Caliph with global potential and no safe-haven for promoting extremism. The other choice is complete withdrawal from military strikes. In any case, long-term success at limiting future growth of Islamic extremism requires the unthinkable: Freedom of Religion (domestically and in predominately Islamic nations).
Gun control discussions are typically distorted. Gun ownership is a fundamental right in this county. The idea that limiting guns will limit violence is specious and possibly completely backwards based on the results of gun restrictions and mandatory buy-backs in other nations. Ironically, recent mass shootings have resulted in calls for greater gun control when a mass shooting is by definition a failure of government to protect citizens which indicates a need for citizens to be able to defend themselves.
Ultimately, arguments to limit guns have little potential to limit violence and would be easier to understand and dismiss if they were re-worded into the following format: "Wouldn't you prefer to be stabbed or beaten to death than shot to death?" & "Wouldn't you prefer that mass casualty attacks involve explosives or biological/chemical weapons rather than guns?".
Our legal system currently suffers from a corrupt Judiciary with a subsequent rise in injustice that affects all citizens. Judges have interpreted and distorted law to erode individual rights in a hollow attempt to cover up impropriety in the Justice System and/or to expand privileges for the Judiciary. The cover up of criminal wrongdoing by others is generally deemed criminal conspiracy and our system is so corrupted by the concept of "Protect the Judiciary" that they fail in their fundamental duties in favor of protecting their associates/privileges and the Justice System now effectively exists as a criminal organization.
Injustice creates justified and unjustified lawlessness and every consideration of stability in society must recognize removing this cancer as a priority as you can't cure "criminal" acts which are effectively sponsored by a corruption of justice with additional enforcement of unjust laws/interpretations. The first step is to root out bad judges, prosecutors, cops, et cetera. The second step is to bring long-term accountability to the Justice System. The third step is to re-establish and expand individual rights and to clearly nullify inappropriate/corrupting privileges for the Judicial branch.
Medical care is not a right of citizens. It is a benefit of a well functioning society. Critical care is an obligation of the medical community. Confusing their obligation with a personal right risks undermining the functioning of society and healthcare.
Generally government intrusion is counter-productive, however, government is already involved in the healthcare system and there is room for a great deal of reform and improvement. A hybrid critical care safety net within a privately run for-profit medical system appears to be a much better option than a single-payer system or Obamacare. In other words, limited universal coverage for something like two Urgent Care or Emergency Room visits per year (up to unlimited with medical certification of need) and life saving care/medications would remove most of the burden of medical worries from the general public.
Personally, I feel the minimum wage is potentially counter-productive. Prevailing wages give distressed areas flexibility to evolve and adapt which are potentially quashed by rigid minimum wage laws. However, the President's job is to listen and weigh the views of constituents not to impose his own. Currently the group most likely to be negatively affected by a minimum wage increase is supporting an increase. With that in mind I would not oppose a minimum wage increase to any point up to $18.00/hour. I would petition for automatic adjustments to account for inflation to avoid some of the problems of minimum wage stagnation. I would also push for a micro-jobs provision and other exceptions where the job is not offered as a primary full-time position.
Approved by Joey Berry for President