Your beloved Peasant, Milwaukee city and county resident,
is endorsing our incumbent sheriff, David Clarke, for re-
election. Clarke, a conservative Democrat (an almost extinct
creature!), a lifelong citizen of the city, is a dedicated law
enforcement agent who has kept Milwaukee from becoming
more dangerous than it is; he would be able to make the city
even safer if he were not opposed and stymied by a soft-on-
crime mayor, his allies on the city's Common Council and
the County Board, bolstered by maddeningly lenient local
judges. Your favorite Peasant will expound on the Milwaukee
political scene regarding this situation later on; for now I
want to urge you, my locally-based readers to mark your
calendars to remember to vote on Tuesday, August 12,
to return our courageous sheriff to office!
Clarke has worked in law enforcement and public safety
locally for the past 35 years, beginning his career as a
Milwaukee Police Officer, rising to the rank of Lieutenant
of Detectives, then rising even higher to become Commanding
Officer of the MPD's Intelligence Division. Clarke later was
selected for training by the FBI's National Academy in
Quantico, Virginia, gaining leadership and management
instruction at this prestigious school. Clarke is also a
summa cum laude graduate from Concordia with a degree
in Criminal Justice Management. The university later honored
Clarke with their Alumnus of the Year Award in 2003.
Sheriff Clarke knows his role: to protect and serve the people
of Milwaukee County, not the left-wing, winking-at-criminals
pols and special interests. That is why he is feared and hated
by the latter. Oh, and he also happens to be black. Gee, he's
black, conservative, and a no-nonsense sheriff; a triple threat
to the local libs! And get this: Sheriff Clarke has gone on
record, stating on local radio talk shows, and even appearing
in ads supporting Wisconsin's Concealed carry gun law, and
has recommended that people get trained and licensed to
carry firearms to protect themselves from muggers and other
criminals. Our sheriff knows that one cannot always call
9-1-1 to get the police to come to one's aid in all such
situations, and even when one can the police cannot be there
quickly enough to prevent the crime from being carried out.
Moreover, response time has at times been horrendously
slow, making things easier for the criminals and harder for
their chosen victims. Yet the local powers-that-be think that
calling 9-1-1 is the proper response when facing criminals
preying on you here in Milwaukee; if there's a long wait time
for the police to arrive too bad, so sad. Better somehow that
the thugs have the guns rather than the law-abiding folks,
for that makes fewer guns out on the streets. I guess the local
honchos never got the memo saying that when guns are
outlawed, only outlaws have guns. But if they did, would
they care? With their upside-down, inside-out priorities,
don't bet on it.
Appointed Sheriff of Milwaukee County by then-Gov. Scott
McCallum in 2002, Clarke would win election and re-election
by landslide margins over politically liberal opponents, each
year gaining more votes and percentage points for greater
victory margins. He is being opposed in the Democrat primary
on August 12 by a police lieutenant who is a toady to the current
Chief of Police Ed Flynn, who is in turn a toady to the left-wing,
criminal-coddling mayor Tom Barrett. Now THERE'S a puppet act!
Your law and order loving Peasant recommends to my Milwaukee
-based readers to vote for Sheriff Clarke in the Democrat
primary. The date for the primary is coming up fast,
and I wanted to get this endorsement posted in time for you,
my fantastic local readers, to act! Please join your faithful
Peasant in voting for Sheriff David Clarke to remain our
sheriff and our buffer against the criminal class and the local
pols who favor them above we, the law-abiding citizens,
especially those who have been preyed upon by these thugs.
MEM
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Thursday, July 17, 2014
James Oberstar, R.I.P.
A unique and distinctive Democrat, a mindful
and dedicated public servant, and a friend from
long ago passed away recently. Former U.S.
Representative James Oberstar, from Minnesota,
left this world on May 3 at the age of 79.
The son of a miner in the Iron Range, the north-
eastern part of Minnesota, Oberstar attended the
University of Saint Thomas in Saint Paul; my
alma mater as well. In fact, that is where we met,
on the occasion of his giving a speech there.
We got to chatting and discovered that we had
much in common politically despite our being
in opposing parties: pro-life, pro-preservation of
wilderness areas without making it difficult, if
not impossible, for people to access these areas
to enjoy camping, fishing, hunting, and snowmo-
biling, to name a few. And on topics where we
differed, the congressman was every bit as
courteous and cordial with me as when we were
in agreement on those topics where we had common
ground. We also were fellow Catholics, and the
desire to attend Saint Thomas which we both had
was based in part on the fact that we wanted to attend
a Catholic institution of higher learning.
After serving thirty-two years in the House of
Representatives, Oberstar lost in a stunning upset to
Tea Party-backed Republican Chip Craavak.
Oberstar represented Minnesota's Eighth
Congressional District, a district so overwhelmingly
Democratic that the few times when the
Republicans did bother to endorse and nominate
a candidate for any office in or from the district their
candidate was fortunate to receive 25% of the vote.
It was 2010, the year that the Tea Party came to the
forefront of the national political scene, and the
movement capitalized on the growing discontent with
President Obama's "Hope and Change", and many
Democrats, like Rep. Oberstar, felt the wrath of the
electorate.
But James Oberstar had some stands on some key issues
which set him apart from, and above, Obama and those
Democrats who rushed to sweep the country away in the
zeitgeist of Obama was the driving force. Most of his
constituents, however, did not think it was sufficient to
keep him in Washington to continue to serve their
interests. Still, Oberstar respected their decision to
bring him home, as he always listened to them and
tried his very best to represent them and their wishes,
their hopes, and their desires, never forgetting that they
the people of his home district were the bosses of him,
not his being their boss. That is a quality that too many
representatives and senators from both parties lack these
days, to the detriment of the country.
Rest in peace, my old friend. It was a pleasure and a joy
to know you.
MEM
and dedicated public servant, and a friend from
long ago passed away recently. Former U.S.
Representative James Oberstar, from Minnesota,
left this world on May 3 at the age of 79.
The son of a miner in the Iron Range, the north-
eastern part of Minnesota, Oberstar attended the
University of Saint Thomas in Saint Paul; my
alma mater as well. In fact, that is where we met,
on the occasion of his giving a speech there.
We got to chatting and discovered that we had
much in common politically despite our being
in opposing parties: pro-life, pro-preservation of
wilderness areas without making it difficult, if
not impossible, for people to access these areas
to enjoy camping, fishing, hunting, and snowmo-
biling, to name a few. And on topics where we
differed, the congressman was every bit as
courteous and cordial with me as when we were
in agreement on those topics where we had common
ground. We also were fellow Catholics, and the
desire to attend Saint Thomas which we both had
was based in part on the fact that we wanted to attend
a Catholic institution of higher learning.
After serving thirty-two years in the House of
Representatives, Oberstar lost in a stunning upset to
Tea Party-backed Republican Chip Craavak.
Oberstar represented Minnesota's Eighth
Congressional District, a district so overwhelmingly
Democratic that the few times when the
Republicans did bother to endorse and nominate
a candidate for any office in or from the district their
candidate was fortunate to receive 25% of the vote.
It was 2010, the year that the Tea Party came to the
forefront of the national political scene, and the
movement capitalized on the growing discontent with
President Obama's "Hope and Change", and many
Democrats, like Rep. Oberstar, felt the wrath of the
electorate.
But James Oberstar had some stands on some key issues
which set him apart from, and above, Obama and those
Democrats who rushed to sweep the country away in the
zeitgeist of Obama was the driving force. Most of his
constituents, however, did not think it was sufficient to
keep him in Washington to continue to serve their
interests. Still, Oberstar respected their decision to
bring him home, as he always listened to them and
tried his very best to represent them and their wishes,
their hopes, and their desires, never forgetting that they
the people of his home district were the bosses of him,
not his being their boss. That is a quality that too many
representatives and senators from both parties lack these
days, to the detriment of the country.
Rest in peace, my old friend. It was a pleasure and a joy
to know you.
MEM
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
A Good Man Who Can't Be Kept Down
News from your faithful Peasant's Badger State:
In Wisconsin Senate District 21, which includes
Racine, former Republican State Senator Van
Wangaard is running again for the seat he held
but lost in a controversial recall election in 2010,
which is referred to in my home state as The Year
of the Recall. This was the year in which several
state legislators from both parties, as well as Gov.
Scott Walker and Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch were
subjected to recalls themselves. Democrats wanted
to recall Walker, Kleefisch, Wangaard, and other
GOP elected officials in Madison for passing
Act 10, the revolutionary budget reform act which
clipped the public employee unions' wings concern-
ing their impact on Wisconsin's budget and taxes;
Republicans wanted to recall key Democrats in the
capitol for fleeing the state to deny the GOP
majority a quorum in order to pass Act 10 and
related measures.
Today's post is about Van Wangaard and his campaign
to regain the seat in my state's Senate which he lost in
a heated recall election with some shenanigans along
the way. Wangaard, a former Racine police investigator
and a solid conservative, challenged incumbent Democrat
Jim Lehman for the District 21 Senate seat in 2010, the
big Republican year in which the party won both the
Assembly and the Senate in Wisconsin and Scott Walker
was elected governor, and the GOP won big in many other
state races around the country while also winning the
House of Representatives in Congress. The brutal battle
between Wangaard and Lehman ended with Wangaard
winning the seat in a close contest, taking 52.5% of the
vote. Lehman and the district's Dems would have none
of it; when they geared up to recall Walker et. al. they also
added Van Wangaard to their hit list, and nominated Lehman
to set up a rematch.
Under Wisconsin law, the state's Government Accountability
Board (GAB) has 31 days to determine if enough valid sig-
natures have been submitted to mandate a recall election.
But with 1.9 million signatures to review for six recalls,
the GAB asked Judge Richard Niess of Dane County,
where capital city of Madison resides for an extension.
The judge granted the GAB an additional 30 days. Now,
the GAB has, for the last few years, been mostly made up
of Democrats appointed by the Gov. Walker's Democrat
predecessor Jim Doyle, and have long been accused of
acting in a partisan fashion on many issues. The state,
with a specially-created software, had workers scan the
petitions into computers and the software read the names,
then converted them into type. Next, a human operator
verified the name, correcting any errors before it was then
entered into the GAB database.
Wangaard filed a signature challenge on February 9, 2013,
eight months after the election. He questioned 7,491 of the
signatures, stating that they were either listed more than
once, or were illegible, or the signers were not of the legal
voting age (18), or otherwise ineligible to vote. Also note-
worthy, the recall election took place in the "old" district,
which was the district before the 2010 redistricting that
changed it from a 60-40 Democrat district to a 70-30
Republican one. This was ordered by a Democrat judge
(big surprise!) to be so conducted. Unofficial results had
Lehman winning by 779 votes, and Wangaard called for a
recount which added 40 more votes to Lehman's original
vote tally, giving him the election, thus returning him to
the Senate. But Van Wangaard is running again this year
and interestingly enough, John Lehman is giving up the
seat to seek a statewide office(!). While the Dems choose
a new nominee, John Stitz, a Republican businessman from
Racine, is challenging Wangaard for the Republican nod
to run for the 21st District Senate seat.
Both GOP candidates are accentuating economic issues in
their campaigns. Van Wangaard is the only one of the two
with public office experience, and has authored a solidly
conservative economic issues record of low taxes, private
sector growth and budget reduction while also backing
legislation helping communities to have safer environs.
One example of this is Wangaard's authoring the Castle
Doctrine Bill, which gives residents the right to attempt
defense of themselves, their families, and their property
if an intruder invades. In addition, Wangaard co-authored
the state's Concealed Carry Law, which was passed by
both houses and signed by Gov. Walker, making Wisconsin
the nation's 49th state to legalize concealing gun on one's
person while carrying the weapon. On abortion, Wangaard
is solidly pro-life and has proven himself to be a major
thorn in the side of Planned Parenthood, working to
prohibit receiving state health grants. For these stands and
others of this conservative vein Van Wangaard has received
the support of the Racine Tea Party PAC, and your discerning
Peasant congratulates the Racine Tea Partiers for making a
splendid choice!
Although Jonathan Stitz is a good candidate and an honorable
man, The Peasant endorses Van Wangaard for the Wisconsin
District 21 Republican State Senate nomination and election to
that office. He is experienced, savvy in the ways of Madison,
and is the best candidate to serve the interests and needs of
the people of this district as well as to be a most competent,
and reliable ally for Gov. Walker. I met Van Wangaard when
I attended the Wisconsin Republican Convention in Milwaukee
on May 2, and was impressed by his command of the issues
as well as his enthusiasm for running again for the seat that
he lost under questionable circumstances. Van Wangaard is
proof that you can't keep a good man down!
MEM
In Wisconsin Senate District 21, which includes
Racine, former Republican State Senator Van
Wangaard is running again for the seat he held
but lost in a controversial recall election in 2010,
which is referred to in my home state as The Year
of the Recall. This was the year in which several
state legislators from both parties, as well as Gov.
Scott Walker and Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch were
subjected to recalls themselves. Democrats wanted
to recall Walker, Kleefisch, Wangaard, and other
GOP elected officials in Madison for passing
Act 10, the revolutionary budget reform act which
clipped the public employee unions' wings concern-
ing their impact on Wisconsin's budget and taxes;
Republicans wanted to recall key Democrats in the
capitol for fleeing the state to deny the GOP
majority a quorum in order to pass Act 10 and
related measures.
Today's post is about Van Wangaard and his campaign
to regain the seat in my state's Senate which he lost in
a heated recall election with some shenanigans along
the way. Wangaard, a former Racine police investigator
and a solid conservative, challenged incumbent Democrat
Jim Lehman for the District 21 Senate seat in 2010, the
big Republican year in which the party won both the
Assembly and the Senate in Wisconsin and Scott Walker
was elected governor, and the GOP won big in many other
state races around the country while also winning the
House of Representatives in Congress. The brutal battle
between Wangaard and Lehman ended with Wangaard
winning the seat in a close contest, taking 52.5% of the
vote. Lehman and the district's Dems would have none
of it; when they geared up to recall Walker et. al. they also
added Van Wangaard to their hit list, and nominated Lehman
to set up a rematch.
Under Wisconsin law, the state's Government Accountability
Board (GAB) has 31 days to determine if enough valid sig-
natures have been submitted to mandate a recall election.
But with 1.9 million signatures to review for six recalls,
the GAB asked Judge Richard Niess of Dane County,
where capital city of Madison resides for an extension.
The judge granted the GAB an additional 30 days. Now,
the GAB has, for the last few years, been mostly made up
of Democrats appointed by the Gov. Walker's Democrat
predecessor Jim Doyle, and have long been accused of
acting in a partisan fashion on many issues. The state,
with a specially-created software, had workers scan the
petitions into computers and the software read the names,
then converted them into type. Next, a human operator
verified the name, correcting any errors before it was then
entered into the GAB database.
Wangaard filed a signature challenge on February 9, 2013,
eight months after the election. He questioned 7,491 of the
signatures, stating that they were either listed more than
once, or were illegible, or the signers were not of the legal
voting age (18), or otherwise ineligible to vote. Also note-
worthy, the recall election took place in the "old" district,
which was the district before the 2010 redistricting that
changed it from a 60-40 Democrat district to a 70-30
Republican one. This was ordered by a Democrat judge
(big surprise!) to be so conducted. Unofficial results had
Lehman winning by 779 votes, and Wangaard called for a
recount which added 40 more votes to Lehman's original
vote tally, giving him the election, thus returning him to
the Senate. But Van Wangaard is running again this year
and interestingly enough, John Lehman is giving up the
seat to seek a statewide office(!). While the Dems choose
a new nominee, John Stitz, a Republican businessman from
Racine, is challenging Wangaard for the Republican nod
to run for the 21st District Senate seat.
Both GOP candidates are accentuating economic issues in
their campaigns. Van Wangaard is the only one of the two
with public office experience, and has authored a solidly
conservative economic issues record of low taxes, private
sector growth and budget reduction while also backing
legislation helping communities to have safer environs.
One example of this is Wangaard's authoring the Castle
Doctrine Bill, which gives residents the right to attempt
defense of themselves, their families, and their property
if an intruder invades. In addition, Wangaard co-authored
the state's Concealed Carry Law, which was passed by
both houses and signed by Gov. Walker, making Wisconsin
the nation's 49th state to legalize concealing gun on one's
person while carrying the weapon. On abortion, Wangaard
is solidly pro-life and has proven himself to be a major
thorn in the side of Planned Parenthood, working to
prohibit receiving state health grants. For these stands and
others of this conservative vein Van Wangaard has received
the support of the Racine Tea Party PAC, and your discerning
Peasant congratulates the Racine Tea Partiers for making a
splendid choice!
Although Jonathan Stitz is a good candidate and an honorable
man, The Peasant endorses Van Wangaard for the Wisconsin
District 21 Republican State Senate nomination and election to
that office. He is experienced, savvy in the ways of Madison,
and is the best candidate to serve the interests and needs of
the people of this district as well as to be a most competent,
and reliable ally for Gov. Walker. I met Van Wangaard when
I attended the Wisconsin Republican Convention in Milwaukee
on May 2, and was impressed by his command of the issues
as well as his enthusiasm for running again for the seat that
he lost under questionable circumstances. Van Wangaard is
proof that you can't keep a good man down!
MEM
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Independence Day Thoughts
As we enjoy our nation's birthday, my fabulous readers,
let us remember the people who made it possible all of
those 238 years ago, and all the people who followed
that protected what was created for us, and those people
who this day are also protecting all that which was
made for and left to us. And let us do our part by being
the most aware, the most diligent, the most responsible,
the most active, and the most appreciative citizens we
are capable of being. Vote. Contact your elected repre-
sentatives when something is on your mind. Work on
a campaign for a candidate for elected office whom you
believe in. Work for a cause which you believe in.
Contribute money to these if you can. Run for office
yourself if you feel you can make a difference that way.
Did I mention vote?
In the meantime, enjoy the parades, the picnics, the games,
the concerts, the fireworks, and the warm summer weather!
And count your blessings, starting with the fact that you are
Americans! You live in the most free, the most prosperous,
the most secure, the most wonderful nation on this earth!
Yes, I know, believe me I know; the economy is still sickly,
the federal government is watching us all much more closely,
and the reigning regime in Washington is encouraging, if
not instructing, the IRS to harass citizens who don't agree
with the policies of the regime, businesses are being choked
to death with red tape galore with small businesses getting
the worst of it, people thinking about starting a business
seeing this and rethinking their plans, and our children being
taught in their schools that the United States is the cause
of the world's ills as well as a most unjust and unfair place
for those who live here, and that the Constitution is at best
an outdated piece of paper and at worst a giant shackle on
the rights of the people rather than a guarantor of those very
rights, and that certain amendments in the Constitution do
not say what it has long been acknowledged that they say
(the Second Amendment most notably). But we as a nation
have thrown out a king, beaten back Barbary pirates that
preyed upon our seafaring commerce, defeated again the
very nation which we had won our independence from
when they tried to snatch us back, fought, survived, and
healed our nation after a bloody civil war and ended slavery
in the process, fought and won two world wars, the second
in which we stopped an evil axis of thuggish dictators who
led (or misled) their nations into attempting to conquer the
world and vanquish freedom throughout it, put men on the
moon, and have been --- throughout it all --- the beacon of
hope for humanity, the ray of bright liberty and the bright
promise of a better life for the oppressed and downtrodden
people of the world, attracting them to our shores to build
and enjoy lives that they could only dream of doing in their
native countries. And we often faced, and had overcome
impossible odds along the way. We can turn around our
situation which we now face if we remember our heritage,
and if we believe in ourselves and each other.
Enjoy the Fourth! And save a hot dog or a burger for your
favorite Peasant!
MEM
let us remember the people who made it possible all of
those 238 years ago, and all the people who followed
that protected what was created for us, and those people
who this day are also protecting all that which was
made for and left to us. And let us do our part by being
the most aware, the most diligent, the most responsible,
the most active, and the most appreciative citizens we
are capable of being. Vote. Contact your elected repre-
sentatives when something is on your mind. Work on
a campaign for a candidate for elected office whom you
believe in. Work for a cause which you believe in.
Contribute money to these if you can. Run for office
yourself if you feel you can make a difference that way.
Did I mention vote?
In the meantime, enjoy the parades, the picnics, the games,
the concerts, the fireworks, and the warm summer weather!
And count your blessings, starting with the fact that you are
Americans! You live in the most free, the most prosperous,
the most secure, the most wonderful nation on this earth!
Yes, I know, believe me I know; the economy is still sickly,
the federal government is watching us all much more closely,
and the reigning regime in Washington is encouraging, if
not instructing, the IRS to harass citizens who don't agree
with the policies of the regime, businesses are being choked
to death with red tape galore with small businesses getting
the worst of it, people thinking about starting a business
seeing this and rethinking their plans, and our children being
taught in their schools that the United States is the cause
of the world's ills as well as a most unjust and unfair place
for those who live here, and that the Constitution is at best
an outdated piece of paper and at worst a giant shackle on
the rights of the people rather than a guarantor of those very
rights, and that certain amendments in the Constitution do
not say what it has long been acknowledged that they say
(the Second Amendment most notably). But we as a nation
have thrown out a king, beaten back Barbary pirates that
preyed upon our seafaring commerce, defeated again the
very nation which we had won our independence from
when they tried to snatch us back, fought, survived, and
healed our nation after a bloody civil war and ended slavery
in the process, fought and won two world wars, the second
in which we stopped an evil axis of thuggish dictators who
led (or misled) their nations into attempting to conquer the
world and vanquish freedom throughout it, put men on the
moon, and have been --- throughout it all --- the beacon of
hope for humanity, the ray of bright liberty and the bright
promise of a better life for the oppressed and downtrodden
people of the world, attracting them to our shores to build
and enjoy lives that they could only dream of doing in their
native countries. And we often faced, and had overcome
impossible odds along the way. We can turn around our
situation which we now face if we remember our heritage,
and if we believe in ourselves and each other.
Enjoy the Fourth! And save a hot dog or a burger for your
favorite Peasant!
MEM
Thursday, June 26, 2014
A Thought for Parents
Your gimlet-eyed Peasant saw this message on
Facebook recently, and I want to share it with you,
my fabulous readers, especially those of you with
youngsters not yet through their teens. This wee
bit of wisdom will do much to bring about respect
for girls and women, as well as to revive true romance;
we as a society could only benefit from this knowledge.
WE NEED TO TEACH OUR DAUGHTERS TO KNOW
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN:
A man who flatters her and a man who complements her,
A man who spends money on her and a man who invests
in her,
A man who views her as property and a man who views
her properly,
A man who lusts after her and a man who loves her,
A man who believes he's a gift to women, and a man
who believes she's a gift to him,
And then we need to teach our sons to be that kind of man.
I posted this piece on my Facebook page as soon as I saw
it. If all parents did this for their children, our families,
our communities, our society, and our country would be
so much less contentious and so much more civil, loving,
respectful, caring, kind, warm, and joyful.
Don't you think?
MEM
Facebook recently, and I want to share it with you,
my fabulous readers, especially those of you with
youngsters not yet through their teens. This wee
bit of wisdom will do much to bring about respect
for girls and women, as well as to revive true romance;
we as a society could only benefit from this knowledge.
WE NEED TO TEACH OUR DAUGHTERS TO KNOW
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN:
A man who flatters her and a man who complements her,
A man who spends money on her and a man who invests
in her,
A man who views her as property and a man who views
her properly,
A man who lusts after her and a man who loves her,
A man who believes he's a gift to women, and a man
who believes she's a gift to him,
And then we need to teach our sons to be that kind of man.
I posted this piece on my Facebook page as soon as I saw
it. If all parents did this for their children, our families,
our communities, our society, and our country would be
so much less contentious and so much more civil, loving,
respectful, caring, kind, warm, and joyful.
Don't you think?
MEM
Thursday, June 19, 2014
Roadblocks on the Information Superhighway?
My friends, your troubled Peasant has recently learned
about a plan by President Obama to give away control
of the Internet to a United Nations committee. As he
believes that the United States should not be in any
position of authority, responsibility, or leadership of
any sort in the world, this is not at all surprising.
But the ramifications of this terrible idea are truly
frightening.
Throughout the entire time that Obama has occupied
the White House, he and his regime have been vexed
by the level of opposition to his ideas on governance
voiced online, especially by conservative bloggers
such as your humble Peasant. Obama and his
cabinet, his "czars", and his advisers have hatched
several ideas for reining in the online opposition,
and this idea does two things that Team Obama favors:
It gives up American oversight and protection of
the Internet to the UN, a body that isn't known for its
admiration of and support for the U.S. in the realm
of world affairs. And two of its more influential
members, Russia and China, have long gritted their
teeth at the long-standing arrangement in which our
country has watched over and guarded online traffic
through a company known as ICANN; you see, the
Russians and the Chinese want more power to
regulate and censor the Internet, especially concerning
their own dissidents. And if they can crack down on
what Americans may say on the high-tech highway
concerning their governments' treatment of their people,
their threatening behavior toward their neighboring
countries, or their intentions toward the United States,
then that would be a feather in each of their caps.
Couple this with Obama, Democrat legislators in
Congress, and their left-wing allies here at home
doing same to opposing voices and you will have
a totalitarian nightmare worthy of a George Orwell
novel.
On April 23, the "Global Multistakeholder Meeting on
the Future of Internet Governance" took place in Brazil
for the purpose of initiating the transfer of control over
the Internet. Your gravely concerned Peasant does not
yet know exactly how far this process has gotten toward
fruition, but I do know that there is growing opposition
to this horror among the American citizenry, especially
by the Tea Party. I pray that our combined efforts are
not too little too late. Here are the consequences of UN
control of the information superhighway:
*Every oppressive government in the world will have
the power to censor and restrict what their countries'
people can see and transmit on the World Wide Web.
Tinpot dictators, runamok royalty, military martinets
and the like will be able to tighten their control over
their subjects all the more, preventing them from
sending and receiving ideas that would counter the
prevailing party lines and whatall being rammed down
their throats.
*The UN would be free to tax each and every transaction
that you would make on the Internet. You can expect to
be taxed for every purchase of any kind, every time you
send an e-mail to anyone, every time you would visit a
web site!
* You would be taxed by the UN just for regitering a
domain.
*UN officials and despots would also be able to spy on
you. Oh, yes, and they would do it in a nanosecond!
And none of this troubles our wayward president. ICANN
would be swallowed up by the UN and become an arm of
the organization. And the European Union will want a piece
of the action; they too will want to grab some of this
revenue booty from the U.S. and other countries. The UN
and other globalist organizations will waste no time in
scrubbing the Internet of all content critical of their agenda
and anything else that they and thier elitist pals, such as
currency trader and international meddler George Soros
would find troubling.
Your faithful Peasant shall comment further on this and
related news concerning the future of the Inernet and
the battle for control of it in the weeks and months to come.
These events will not only have an impact on bloggers
like myself, but on everyone who goes online for any
purpose at any time --- and these days that's just about
everyone.
Let us be vigilant.
MEM
about a plan by President Obama to give away control
of the Internet to a United Nations committee. As he
believes that the United States should not be in any
position of authority, responsibility, or leadership of
any sort in the world, this is not at all surprising.
But the ramifications of this terrible idea are truly
frightening.
Throughout the entire time that Obama has occupied
the White House, he and his regime have been vexed
by the level of opposition to his ideas on governance
voiced online, especially by conservative bloggers
such as your humble Peasant. Obama and his
cabinet, his "czars", and his advisers have hatched
several ideas for reining in the online opposition,
and this idea does two things that Team Obama favors:
It gives up American oversight and protection of
the Internet to the UN, a body that isn't known for its
admiration of and support for the U.S. in the realm
of world affairs. And two of its more influential
members, Russia and China, have long gritted their
teeth at the long-standing arrangement in which our
country has watched over and guarded online traffic
through a company known as ICANN; you see, the
Russians and the Chinese want more power to
regulate and censor the Internet, especially concerning
their own dissidents. And if they can crack down on
what Americans may say on the high-tech highway
concerning their governments' treatment of their people,
their threatening behavior toward their neighboring
countries, or their intentions toward the United States,
then that would be a feather in each of their caps.
Couple this with Obama, Democrat legislators in
Congress, and their left-wing allies here at home
doing same to opposing voices and you will have
a totalitarian nightmare worthy of a George Orwell
novel.
On April 23, the "Global Multistakeholder Meeting on
the Future of Internet Governance" took place in Brazil
for the purpose of initiating the transfer of control over
the Internet. Your gravely concerned Peasant does not
yet know exactly how far this process has gotten toward
fruition, but I do know that there is growing opposition
to this horror among the American citizenry, especially
by the Tea Party. I pray that our combined efforts are
not too little too late. Here are the consequences of UN
control of the information superhighway:
*Every oppressive government in the world will have
the power to censor and restrict what their countries'
people can see and transmit on the World Wide Web.
Tinpot dictators, runamok royalty, military martinets
and the like will be able to tighten their control over
their subjects all the more, preventing them from
sending and receiving ideas that would counter the
prevailing party lines and whatall being rammed down
their throats.
*The UN would be free to tax each and every transaction
that you would make on the Internet. You can expect to
be taxed for every purchase of any kind, every time you
send an e-mail to anyone, every time you would visit a
web site!
* You would be taxed by the UN just for regitering a
domain.
*UN officials and despots would also be able to spy on
you. Oh, yes, and they would do it in a nanosecond!
And none of this troubles our wayward president. ICANN
would be swallowed up by the UN and become an arm of
the organization. And the European Union will want a piece
of the action; they too will want to grab some of this
revenue booty from the U.S. and other countries. The UN
and other globalist organizations will waste no time in
scrubbing the Internet of all content critical of their agenda
and anything else that they and thier elitist pals, such as
currency trader and international meddler George Soros
would find troubling.
Your faithful Peasant shall comment further on this and
related news concerning the future of the Inernet and
the battle for control of it in the weeks and months to come.
These events will not only have an impact on bloggers
like myself, but on everyone who goes online for any
purpose at any time --- and these days that's just about
everyone.
Let us be vigilant.
MEM
Thursday, June 12, 2014
We Move Closer to the Truth About Benghazi
My friends, thanks to the House of Representatives
having created a panel to investigate the tragedy in
Benghazi, Libya where our Ambassador, Christopher
Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and CIA
operatives Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were
killed, we may at last be able to unravel the entire
story about what happened that fateful night.
We can get long elusive answers to important
questions such as:
*Why was there no military response to the events
on that night?
*Why was Ambassador Stevens' repeated requests
for military backup ignored?
*How many American personnel were injured in the
attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi?
*Was there an order, or multiple orders, for our
military personnel in the area to stand down, and
if so, who gave the order(s) and why?
*Were any military assets available to support the
ambassador and other personnel there when they
were under attack?
*Who authroized a $500 million arms transfer to
Al Qaeda?
These and other related questions require truthful
answers from all persons at all levels whose respon-
sibility it was to advise the President and the Secre-
tary of Defense during this avodable tragedy. But
to date, there have been stonewalling, ducking, and
very likely suppression of evidence by the Obama
regime, along with the exhibit of cavalier indiffer-
ence to the violent fates of the aforementioned four
Americans and the attempts to ascertain what exactly
happened that lead to their deaths. The process will
be not unlike pulling teeth, but The Peasant commends
the House for taking on the task. It's just a crying shame
that we have a president and administration that has
such a scandallously callous attitude toward our
personnel at our dipolmatic posts, even toward one
of our ambassadors!
Meanwhile, my grand readers, let your members of
the House know that you support the House panel
and their efforts to get to the bottom of the Benghazi
scandal. Call, write, e-mail, and if possible, stop by
their offices to show your support! And keep all of
this in mind if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
decides to run for the presidency; she was the person
whom Ambassador Stevens called to request assistance
when danger was imminent. Hold her, President Obama,
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, and the rest of this
motley crew responsible for this horror. Make them
own it!
If we keep up the pressure, we will get the truth.
We require it, and our four deceased fellow Americans
deserve it, for we all need justice to be served.
MEM
having created a panel to investigate the tragedy in
Benghazi, Libya where our Ambassador, Christopher
Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and CIA
operatives Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were
killed, we may at last be able to unravel the entire
story about what happened that fateful night.
We can get long elusive answers to important
questions such as:
*Why was there no military response to the events
on that night?
*Why was Ambassador Stevens' repeated requests
for military backup ignored?
*How many American personnel were injured in the
attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi?
*Was there an order, or multiple orders, for our
military personnel in the area to stand down, and
if so, who gave the order(s) and why?
*Were any military assets available to support the
ambassador and other personnel there when they
were under attack?
*Who authroized a $500 million arms transfer to
Al Qaeda?
These and other related questions require truthful
answers from all persons at all levels whose respon-
sibility it was to advise the President and the Secre-
tary of Defense during this avodable tragedy. But
to date, there have been stonewalling, ducking, and
very likely suppression of evidence by the Obama
regime, along with the exhibit of cavalier indiffer-
ence to the violent fates of the aforementioned four
Americans and the attempts to ascertain what exactly
happened that lead to their deaths. The process will
be not unlike pulling teeth, but The Peasant commends
the House for taking on the task. It's just a crying shame
that we have a president and administration that has
such a scandallously callous attitude toward our
personnel at our dipolmatic posts, even toward one
of our ambassadors!
Meanwhile, my grand readers, let your members of
the House know that you support the House panel
and their efforts to get to the bottom of the Benghazi
scandal. Call, write, e-mail, and if possible, stop by
their offices to show your support! And keep all of
this in mind if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
decides to run for the presidency; she was the person
whom Ambassador Stevens called to request assistance
when danger was imminent. Hold her, President Obama,
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, and the rest of this
motley crew responsible for this horror. Make them
own it!
If we keep up the pressure, we will get the truth.
We require it, and our four deceased fellow Americans
deserve it, for we all need justice to be served.
MEM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
