Wednesday, January 18, 2012

The Peasant Needs A Little Time Off

Hi everybody!

Your lovable Peasant needs to take next week
off, as I am going to be moving. Yes, I know, I
moved just a few months ago, but I've rethought
some of the aspects of my home, and I have
decided that although it has many charms and
comforts to be sure, I have come across another
place that will suit my needs even better, so I am
heading there at the end of this month. I am in
preparation for my move, and need all the time
possible to pick up, pack up, and head over.

I shall be with you, my loyal and wonderful
readers, right after my move. Look for PWAP
to resume in the first week of February. In the
meantime, stay warm! Thank you for your
understanding and your indulgence.


Monday, January 16, 2012

Campaign 2012: We Review John Huntsman

Once again, my terrific readers, your favorite Peasant is
caught short again by a republican presidential candidate
having dropped out of the party's race for its nomination
before I can analyze both the candidate and his candidacy.
Gov. Jon Huntsman of Utah, most recently President
Obama's expert on China, due to a lack of funds on hand
as well as forthcoming along with being unable to rise
up and out of the basement in the polls, has declared his
presidential candidacy to be over.

Utah's governor from 2005 to 2009, a businessman, and
one of the most knowledgeable people in or out of our
government on China (especially on matters of trade),
possessing great business and political savvy while
lacking in troublesome baggage (unlike some of the
other GOP hopefuls, i.e. Newt Gingrich's marital and
familial turbulence, Michele Bachmann's fast-and-loose
remarks, and Rick Perry's debating miscues to name a few)
has been perceived, wrongly and unfairly, to be insuf-
ficiently conservative by some party activists as well as
some Tea Party stalwarts. This, despite being pronounced
a solid conservative by the Utah House Speaker during
Huntsman's time as governor there; this legislator being
regarded as one of the most conservative elected officials
in the entire nation(!). And Utah is no bastion of left-wing
politics by any standard. Look at the people whom Utahans
elect to local, state, and national office for proof.

Some even criticize Gov. Huntsman for having held a position
of any kind in President Obama's administration, even though
he was the best appointee and a standout in terms of his
effectiveness in his duties and the resulting benefit to the
country. And since when is it an act of party or ideological
disloyalty to serve in an administration headed by someone
from a different party or ideology? This has happened
in Washington before, not to mention in many state capitals.
If someone has strong and unique qualifications to handle
a certain task, and as such surpasses the others in an
executive's own party but who can work with that executive
and vice-versa because they share a common goal, then
what's all the fuss about?

It is your beloved Peasant's hope that Jon Huntsman will be
offered a position of visibility and substance in the next GOP
administration in Washington, especially if it has anything to
do with relations with China. At least we as a nation can
continue to benefit from Gov. Huntsman's knowledge and
service in this manner, especially since he will not be the
Republican Party standard bearer in November's election.
In summation, while your loyal Peasant is adamant upon
electing a strong, principled conservative to replace the
radical Obama in the White House, let us not become so
purist in our quest that either we cannot find anyone to our
liking, or we settle upon someone who will fall short of
meeting our most important needs in pursuing a conser-
vative agenda. It is enough that we nominate and elect
someone who stands with us on the most critical issues
facing our country, job one being repairing our economy.
Besides, any of the remaining candidates are streaks
better than the current incumbent, wouldn't you agree?


Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Campaign 2012: We Review Michele Bachmann

Friends, as your studious Peasant was researching presidential
candidate Michele Bachmann to review her and her candidacy,
Bachmann had placed far down the line in the Iowa Republican
Caucus last week, the official beginning of the 2012 presidential
campaign. After initially holding front-runner status in the earliest
stages of the campaign season, Bachmann had lost ground and
has since been sliding away into polling oblivion until deciding to
call it a day and return home. This being so, I would still like to
offer my analysis of U.S. Rep. Bachmann, as she will still be a
player on Capitol Hill; Bachmann will run for re-election to
Congress instead of further pursuing the presidency. There are
some things that many conservatives should know about this
Tea Party favorite, and these things should be discussed in an
open and straightforward way; to put a finer point on it,
my analysis of Michele Bachmann will be served straight with
no chaser.

An Iowa native now living in Minnesota, representing that state's
6th Congressional District, Rep. Bachmann's conservatism is
rooted in her rural Lutheran upbringing. Originally a Democrat
(Bachmann and her husband, Marcus, worked on Jimmy Carter's
1976 presidential campaign in Iowa), the Bachmanns switched
to the Republican Party when they became disenchanted with the
policies of Carter and the Democrats, supporting Ronald Reagan
against Carter in 1980. Although a stout fiscal conservative, Rep.
Bachmann is a stronger social conservative in large part due to
her association with the Salem Lutheran Church in Stillwater,
a city in Bachmann's Minnesota district. This church is associated
with the Wisconsin Lutheran Synod, a substantially right-of-center
arm of the Lutheran Church which declares the Pope to be the
Anti-Christ. The Bachmanns ceased membership in the Salem
Lutheran Church on June 21, 2011, shortly before Rep. Bachmann
officially began her campaign for the presidency. A spokesman
for the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights stated that
the League "sees no evidence of any bigotry" in Michele Bachmann.

However, Bachmann cites evangelist theologian Francis Schaeffer
as a "profound influence" on her and her husband Marcus.
Schaeffer is known to have ties to the Dominionist Movement, the
fundamentalist Christian movement which has among its goals the
occupation of all branches of and all seats in government so as to
bring the country under the "Law of God". Now, your inquiring
Peasant is not accusing Michelle Bachmann of running for the
highest office in the land in order to secure it for the sole benefit
of the members of any particular religious faith. That is not my
intent. But I do raise the question of just how much influence
has this particular theologian on Rep. Bachmann, and does it
(or how likely is it that it) in turn influence her politics?
In my review of Gov. Rick Perry's candidacy I pointed out
his ties to an evangelical religious organization that has ties
to the Dominionist Movement, pointing at the potential danger.
All I'm saying is this: I don't want a government that would
force a particular religion or religious view upon our
country any more than I want a government that would, in
the name of separating church and state, would banish any
and all things even lightly pertaining to a religious informing
of one's politics and political behavior. Your concerned Peasant
does not want to break the grip of the church and state seper-
ation zealots on our government and our culture only to hand
everything over to religious zealots who would make us bow
down to them and their perceptions of God and our being
"One nation under God" --- perhaps I should say "One nation
under those who claim to represent God and His will for us".
Our freedom of religion clause in the Constitution is a safe-
guard against both of these fates; we should take care to pre-
serve this freedom by electing only candidates for office
whom we can trust to respect and protect this guarantee of 
religious freedom.

Furthermore, the Bachmanns own a Christian counseling
practice, Bachmann & Associates, which provides "conver-
sion therapy" for homosexuals in order to transform them
into heterosexuals. Although they claim to take a loving
and compassionate approach to their patients who choose
to undergo this treatment, while on the campaign trail Rep.
Bachmann and husband have publicly called gay people
"barbarians" for their sexual preferences. Let me tell you,
my fabulous readers, something: I have had, and have,
some gay friends. They each are wonderful people, loyal
friends, and people of good and gentle, amicable dispo-
sitions. One of them ---  God rest him, he's passed on ---
was a conservative, and called himself a republican,
although he was acutely aware of the animosity toward
gay people within the party, much of it from the socially
conservative, "religious right" types. My late friend
may well have become more involved in the GOP
but for this. He railed against the fundamentalist/
evangelical elements within the party who, while most
helpful in turning the GOP toward embracing protection
of unborn humans and other compassionate things in
its platform, have also stated their condemnation of
homosexuals and have opposed (and still oppose)
guaranteeing even the most modest basic rights for
them, rights that the rest of us take for granted.
Another such friend is a fellow whom I met and
have enjoyed an enduring friendship with since
our very first day of college. He has stuck with me
through the proverbial thick and thin. He used to be
a conservative republican until he became accepting
of his sexual orientation, and aware of the opprobrium
dished out by these elements in the Republican Party.
Moreover, there are many, many gay Americans
who have serious disagreements with liberals and their
main vehicle, the Democrat Party, who would love to
join the Republican Party in order to make common
cause with the GOP on the issues pertaining to
limited government and preservation of personal
liberty, including a free and unfettered marketplace
of goods, services, and ideas; they instead are joining
the Libertarian Party, a "third party" with no realistic
chance of gaining any considerable political clout,
or are independents, not belonging to any political
party, or they are Democrats by default, that is, they
believe that although they have sharp differences
of opinion with that party at least there they are not
chastised, ostracized, or condemned for being
what they are, and think that they can live with
being in the party of paternalism. The Republican
Party and the conservatives in general would only
stand to gain in tems of strength by embracing,
or at least not waging a sort of holy war, against
homosexuals. And besides, we have a nation to
save; we must take back our government from
Obama and the Democrats in order to have any
hope of repairing our weak and sickly economy,
let alone undo the damage done by these statists
to other areas of our society. We simply cannot
waste time, energy, and resources on railing
against a group of people just because we may
not be comfortable with whom and how they love.
Your doubtful Peasant is not sure that Michele
Bachmann understands this simple truth, nor would
have made the right priorities accordingly as our


Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

What The Peasant Has In Store

New Year's greetings to you, my discerning readers!
With the pivotal new year of 2012 here, your favorite
Peasant wants to give you all a "heads up" on what to
look for in the coming weeks to begin the year.

We shall continue with our review of each of the Repub-
lican presidential candidates, with our rigorous analysis
of their strengths and weaknesses. Then, we will examine
the latest with the ongoing battle for the political and eco-
nomic destiny of the state of Wisconsin, where the public
employee unions and their friends are trying to undo the
decision of the majority of the people from the 2010
election, a clear exercise in democracy, in order to
show everyone what they think democracy looks like.
We shall cover the Obamas and their latest vacation
getaways (all paid for by We the People through our
taxes, of course) and their constant admonition to us
to "sacrifice" for the economic good of our country.
Hey Barack & family, how about you all leading by
example? In addition, we shall view the latest actions
(and inaction) of Congress, as well as Obama's last-ditch
efforts to convince enough voters to vote him back in
for another term (he may as well try to scale a cliff!).
Plus, we'll give some time and attention to some
relevant bits of news from around the country.
Needless to say, we shall certainly be looking closely
at the results of the upcoming caucuses and primaries
in the presidential pickings.

Another item: your busy Peasant will still be posting
weekly for you, but will not always do so on Wednesdays
as has been the practice. My schedule is filling up with
professional and personal commitments which will
require some flexibility on my part to tend to everything
in a timely way. But don't worry, I won't be far away.
We'll still get together for our weekly visits to examine
the political and economic news of the day, and to
promote freedom over statism.

Finally, your intrepid Peasant shall be covering more
political stories from my own backyard, Milwaukee!
Many of you here who enjoy this blog have asked for
more attention to the exciting congressional races in
the vicinity, and I shall also have an endorsement for one
of the fantastic conservative candidates! There shall also
be stories on the Milwaukee scene to share with you!
In all, it shall be an action-packed year for us.

Let us enjoy the new year's offerings. Let the fun begin!

Enhanced by Zemanta