Friends, the story today is the potentially record-setting winter
weather that most of the country is being socked with. Tomorrow
the middle third of our country will be facing daytime temperatures
in double-digits below zero, with wind chills as low as -60 degrees
in some locations.
Everyone here stay indoors; if you absolutely do not have to go out
tomorrow, be it to work, to school, whatever, then DON'T. Your
health is more important than anything you may have scheduled
for this frozen day! Your favorite Peasant will be ensconced in my
warm and comfy New Berlin, Wisconsin apartment with my books,
my radio, my CDs and CD player, and lots of good food, coffee, and
tea. And I'll be putting together my next post, which I can promise
you, my fantastic readers will be a barn-burner! Well, one must have
something to keep oneself warm in this suddenly viciously cold
winter.
So, I'll have everything ready for you very soon. Meanwhile, please
heed my advice. You'll be so glad and grateful you did!
MEM
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
School Discipline Makes a Comeback
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is working hard to
bring back common sense and local control regarding
school discipline. Toward the end of 2018 the Education
and Justice Departments officially rolled back the
Obama Administration's guidance on school discipline.
What this means is that the measure, supposedly intended
to address the "schools-to-prison pipeline" for minority
students, i.e. school districts employing suspensions a
wee bit too often, especially when it's black students
getting the timeouts. Suspensions, the Obama regime
figured, do long-term harm to the suspendees, therefore
schools must limit them along with other traditional
discipline measures in favor of "restorative" means
which stress dialogue over punishment (think
restorative justice; yes, that great crime-mitigating
--- HA! --- idea of the lefties).
The upshot of the Obama initiative was that schools were
incentivised to be lax on discipline problems, including
not reporting dangerous students to the police. This all
made for classroom environments hostile, rather than
conducive to learning for students who want to avail
themselves of educational opportunities at their local
public schools to pave the way for college and good
careers rather than lives of crime. But left-wing critics
of Devos' idea claim that it "would make it easier for
schools to discriminate against children." Utter nonsense.
Secretary DeVos is merely eliminating a horrible policy
that has used race to impose a "one size fits all" mandate
on schools across the country with a wide range of both
students and problems.
Schools should have options other than suspensions and
expulsions to handle troublemaking students, but they
should come from the local schools' teachers and principals,
and the parents as well, not from far-removed bureaucrats
who cannot see what is happening at the local level and
don't care about the consequences of their policies.
MEM
bring back common sense and local control regarding
school discipline. Toward the end of 2018 the Education
and Justice Departments officially rolled back the
Obama Administration's guidance on school discipline.
What this means is that the measure, supposedly intended
to address the "schools-to-prison pipeline" for minority
students, i.e. school districts employing suspensions a
wee bit too often, especially when it's black students
getting the timeouts. Suspensions, the Obama regime
figured, do long-term harm to the suspendees, therefore
schools must limit them along with other traditional
discipline measures in favor of "restorative" means
which stress dialogue over punishment (think
restorative justice; yes, that great crime-mitigating
--- HA! --- idea of the lefties).
The upshot of the Obama initiative was that schools were
incentivised to be lax on discipline problems, including
not reporting dangerous students to the police. This all
made for classroom environments hostile, rather than
conducive to learning for students who want to avail
themselves of educational opportunities at their local
public schools to pave the way for college and good
careers rather than lives of crime. But left-wing critics
of Devos' idea claim that it "would make it easier for
schools to discriminate against children." Utter nonsense.
Secretary DeVos is merely eliminating a horrible policy
that has used race to impose a "one size fits all" mandate
on schools across the country with a wide range of both
students and problems.
Schools should have options other than suspensions and
expulsions to handle troublemaking students, but they
should come from the local schools' teachers and principals,
and the parents as well, not from far-removed bureaucrats
who cannot see what is happening at the local level and
don't care about the consequences of their policies.
MEM
Wednesday, January 16, 2019
Taking a Wayward Conservative to Task
When your faithful Peasant began this blog nearly ten years ago,
one of my purposes was to identify and condemn misbehavior by
elected officials from not just the Democrats but the Republicans
as well. While I have come to expect little, if anything better, from
the former, I do expect and in fact demand better from the latter,
even though I have left them over a decade ago. They still are, in
spite of their glaring imperfections, the last best chance that we who
want to preserve our liberty, our prosperity, and our constitutional
form of law and governance have. The Peasant will still vote for
a Republican over a Democrat much more often than not. For
those times whenever I find neither candidate from the Big Two
to be worthy of my vote, I shall look for an acceptable third-party
candidate or shall write in someone. In some elections, mainly
in races for local offices, I have even written myself in. Yes,
you can do that; it's not at all illegal to cast a write-in vote for
yourself in an election.
That being said, your discerning Peasant would have an awfully
tough time voting for this current Republican member of Congress
if I lived in his state and district. U.S. Rep. Steven King from Iowa,
who apparently has a history of uttering racially intemperate
statements, has recently outdone himself. In a recent interview,
Rep. King asked "White nationalist, white supremacist, Western
civilization --- how did that language become offensive?" and
followed it up with a second question: "Why did I sit in classes
teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?"
Well, I of course have no idea as to what the content of the courses
was that the nine-term House member took during his school days,
but my courses on our nation and its history did not promote any
racial superiority of any race, white or otherwise, nor any
nationalist establishment of a national government or society
based on said dominance. As for Western civilization, my classes
about same did not include any of this influence in their contents.
I would venture to say that the same could be said for the education
of many of my fellow Americans.
King defended himself and his remarks on the House floor, stating
he was advocating for Western civilization, not racism, in his
interview with the New York Times. But the folks in his home state
know that this is far from the first time that King has spoken such
discomforting words. The Des Moines Register stated in an editorial
that while King had made such statements over the years, causing
more than a little embarrassment for Iowa, his latest remarks should
be "career-ending". U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, a Republican senator from
Iowa, publicly called out King for his spoutings. Although King had
actually voted IN FAVOR of a measure of official disapproval
by that body, saying that white supremacy "never shows up in his head"
and that he believes "that all men and now all women are created
equal (did he once believe that women were not created equal, either
to each other or to men?), he didn't win much sympathy from his
House colleagues on the day. So much for his attempt to head off
any further opprobrium and to diffuse the situation.
The Republican Party has had a major role in fighting for the civil
rights and equal treatment under the law for black people ever since
its founding in 1854. Established to advocate for the abolition of
slavery, the GOP was the first political party in the United States
to nominate and elect black candidates to the United States Senate;
elected the first female member of Congress (U.S. Rep. Jeannette
Rankin); fought to abolish the Jim Crow laws of the late 19th and
early 20th centuries; also provided the crucial votes in the House and
the senate to pass the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as well as
all of the other civil rights legislation of that era). One Republican
senator --- Everett Dirksen, a staunch conservative from Illinois
--- led the Senate GOP in providing the votes to secure passage
of that bill. While true that conservative Sen. Barry Goldwater
from Arizona, later the Republican nominee for the presidency,
voted against act he did so due to constitutional concerns; he voted,
though, all of the other civil rights measures of that time. These acts
likely would not have been passed at all, especially the 1964 act,
had it not been for the Republicans in Congress. Furthermore, it was
Republicans who were largely responsible for the desegregation
of public schools in the southern states. President Dwight D.
Eisenhower put the Arkansas National Guard under
federal control and ordered them and the 101st Airborne Division
to escort and protect nine black students' entry to heretofore all-
white Rock Central High School when Democrat Governor Orval
Faubus refused to obey a federal court order to integrate his state's
public schools. Evidently, Rep. King either was not taught these
historical facts during his time in school or if he was, he either
never learned the lessons or he had forgotten them.
Now, although the parties calling for either disciplinary action
or for Rep. King to resign from Congress are largely Democrats or
at least politically left-wing, i.e. the Times and the Register, as well as
U.S. Reps. James Clybourn (D-SC), who sponsored the resolution,
and Bobby Rush (D-IL), who is holding out for stronger disciplinary
action, namely censure, there are many House Republicans who are
desiring some action must be taken. The aforementioned resolution
passed by a vote of 424-1 with Rush voting against it. And we all know
about the long-standing double standard of the Democrats and the Left
regarding racial propriety and conduct, among other things. While true
that these people are largely duplicitous, hypocritical slime,
the Republicans and the Right have and comport themselves to a
higher standard on this and all other matters of societal importance.
They should do no less regarding Rep. King. For the good of the GOP,
for the credibility of conservatives and conservatism, and for the
maintenance of the contrast between them and those on the other side
of the political divide, they must publicly decry and disavow Rep.
King's words and let him know that they won't tolerate any further
such utterances. This will send a strong, unmistakable message to
Rep. King and to any other party members, especially those holding or
seeking office, who may also harbor such sentiments that they speak
them at their own political peril, or even better, that they should
either reform their horrid views or simply leave the party altogether
--- taking their intractable, divisive notions with them.
MEM
one of my purposes was to identify and condemn misbehavior by
elected officials from not just the Democrats but the Republicans
as well. While I have come to expect little, if anything better, from
the former, I do expect and in fact demand better from the latter,
even though I have left them over a decade ago. They still are, in
spite of their glaring imperfections, the last best chance that we who
want to preserve our liberty, our prosperity, and our constitutional
form of law and governance have. The Peasant will still vote for
a Republican over a Democrat much more often than not. For
those times whenever I find neither candidate from the Big Two
to be worthy of my vote, I shall look for an acceptable third-party
candidate or shall write in someone. In some elections, mainly
in races for local offices, I have even written myself in. Yes,
you can do that; it's not at all illegal to cast a write-in vote for
yourself in an election.
That being said, your discerning Peasant would have an awfully
tough time voting for this current Republican member of Congress
if I lived in his state and district. U.S. Rep. Steven King from Iowa,
who apparently has a history of uttering racially intemperate
statements, has recently outdone himself. In a recent interview,
Rep. King asked "White nationalist, white supremacist, Western
civilization --- how did that language become offensive?" and
followed it up with a second question: "Why did I sit in classes
teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?"
Well, I of course have no idea as to what the content of the courses
was that the nine-term House member took during his school days,
but my courses on our nation and its history did not promote any
racial superiority of any race, white or otherwise, nor any
nationalist establishment of a national government or society
based on said dominance. As for Western civilization, my classes
about same did not include any of this influence in their contents.
I would venture to say that the same could be said for the education
of many of my fellow Americans.
King defended himself and his remarks on the House floor, stating
he was advocating for Western civilization, not racism, in his
interview with the New York Times. But the folks in his home state
know that this is far from the first time that King has spoken such
discomforting words. The Des Moines Register stated in an editorial
that while King had made such statements over the years, causing
more than a little embarrassment for Iowa, his latest remarks should
be "career-ending". U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, a Republican senator from
Iowa, publicly called out King for his spoutings. Although King had
actually voted IN FAVOR of a measure of official disapproval
by that body, saying that white supremacy "never shows up in his head"
and that he believes "that all men and now all women are created
equal (did he once believe that women were not created equal, either
to each other or to men?), he didn't win much sympathy from his
House colleagues on the day. So much for his attempt to head off
any further opprobrium and to diffuse the situation.
The Republican Party has had a major role in fighting for the civil
rights and equal treatment under the law for black people ever since
its founding in 1854. Established to advocate for the abolition of
slavery, the GOP was the first political party in the United States
to nominate and elect black candidates to the United States Senate;
elected the first female member of Congress (U.S. Rep. Jeannette
Rankin); fought to abolish the Jim Crow laws of the late 19th and
early 20th centuries; also provided the crucial votes in the House and
the senate to pass the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as well as
all of the other civil rights legislation of that era). One Republican
senator --- Everett Dirksen, a staunch conservative from Illinois
--- led the Senate GOP in providing the votes to secure passage
of that bill. While true that conservative Sen. Barry Goldwater
from Arizona, later the Republican nominee for the presidency,
voted against act he did so due to constitutional concerns; he voted,
though, all of the other civil rights measures of that time. These acts
likely would not have been passed at all, especially the 1964 act,
had it not been for the Republicans in Congress. Furthermore, it was
Republicans who were largely responsible for the desegregation
of public schools in the southern states. President Dwight D.
Eisenhower put the Arkansas National Guard under
federal control and ordered them and the 101st Airborne Division
to escort and protect nine black students' entry to heretofore all-
white Rock Central High School when Democrat Governor Orval
Faubus refused to obey a federal court order to integrate his state's
public schools. Evidently, Rep. King either was not taught these
historical facts during his time in school or if he was, he either
never learned the lessons or he had forgotten them.
Now, although the parties calling for either disciplinary action
or for Rep. King to resign from Congress are largely Democrats or
at least politically left-wing, i.e. the Times and the Register, as well as
U.S. Reps. James Clybourn (D-SC), who sponsored the resolution,
and Bobby Rush (D-IL), who is holding out for stronger disciplinary
action, namely censure, there are many House Republicans who are
desiring some action must be taken. The aforementioned resolution
passed by a vote of 424-1 with Rush voting against it. And we all know
about the long-standing double standard of the Democrats and the Left
regarding racial propriety and conduct, among other things. While true
that these people are largely duplicitous, hypocritical slime,
the Republicans and the Right have and comport themselves to a
higher standard on this and all other matters of societal importance.
They should do no less regarding Rep. King. For the good of the GOP,
for the credibility of conservatives and conservatism, and for the
maintenance of the contrast between them and those on the other side
of the political divide, they must publicly decry and disavow Rep.
King's words and let him know that they won't tolerate any further
such utterances. This will send a strong, unmistakable message to
Rep. King and to any other party members, especially those holding or
seeking office, who may also harbor such sentiments that they speak
them at their own political peril, or even better, that they should
either reform their horrid views or simply leave the party altogether
--- taking their intractable, divisive notions with them.
MEM
Thursday, January 10, 2019
A Judge in Texas Takes Down ObamaCare
Recently, a judge in the state of Texas issued a decision that
essentially strikes down former President Obama's Affordable
Healthcare Act, a/k/a ObamaCare. Yes, the horror that Obama
and the Democrats unleashed upon us is still around, although
it has been defanged with congressional Republicans' having
eliminated its individual mandate, which made it the law for
all Americans to purchase health insurance.
U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor ruled that Obama's health
coverage program, since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the
mandate to be unconstitutional in NFIB v. Sebelius in 2012,
and also held that the mandate is not severable from Obama-
Care, should therefore be struck down as law. Three key
questions regarding the Severability Doctrine helped show
that the law deserved to be struck down: One, would severing
the unconstitutional provision result in this law render it
greatly different than from what Congress intended? Two,
Is it evident that Congress would have enacted those provisions
which are within its power independently of those which
are not? Three, would the law remain fully operational
without the invalid provisions? The respective answers to
these questions are yes, no and no, all pointing to
unseverability. This was the basis for Judge O'Connor's
ruling. Severability, in legal lingo, means a provision in
a contract which states that if parts of a contract are held
to be illegal or otherwise unenforceable, then the rest of
the contract should still be valid and therefore still apply.
But in the case of ObamaCare, this does not hold true.
With the individual mandate being the glue which held
ObamaCare together, Judge O'Connor was constitutionally
bound to follow precedent and strike down Obamacare
altogether. May this terrible law face the same fate in the
other 49 states and the District of Columbia. This judge
looked socialism right in the eye, and made it blink.
Thank you, your Honor. We need more jurists with your
intellect and integrity.
MEM
essentially strikes down former President Obama's Affordable
Healthcare Act, a/k/a ObamaCare. Yes, the horror that Obama
and the Democrats unleashed upon us is still around, although
it has been defanged with congressional Republicans' having
eliminated its individual mandate, which made it the law for
all Americans to purchase health insurance.
U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor ruled that Obama's health
coverage program, since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the
mandate to be unconstitutional in NFIB v. Sebelius in 2012,
and also held that the mandate is not severable from Obama-
Care, should therefore be struck down as law. Three key
questions regarding the Severability Doctrine helped show
that the law deserved to be struck down: One, would severing
the unconstitutional provision result in this law render it
greatly different than from what Congress intended? Two,
Is it evident that Congress would have enacted those provisions
which are within its power independently of those which
are not? Three, would the law remain fully operational
without the invalid provisions? The respective answers to
these questions are yes, no and no, all pointing to
unseverability. This was the basis for Judge O'Connor's
ruling. Severability, in legal lingo, means a provision in
a contract which states that if parts of a contract are held
to be illegal or otherwise unenforceable, then the rest of
the contract should still be valid and therefore still apply.
But in the case of ObamaCare, this does not hold true.
With the individual mandate being the glue which held
ObamaCare together, Judge O'Connor was constitutionally
bound to follow precedent and strike down Obamacare
altogether. May this terrible law face the same fate in the
other 49 states and the District of Columbia. This judge
looked socialism right in the eye, and made it blink.
Thank you, your Honor. We need more jurists with your
intellect and integrity.
MEM
Thursday, January 3, 2019
I Need Just a Little More Time ...
Friends, your faithful Peasant needs just a few days
to take care of some personal and professional matters
(not to worry, everything is good!) before returning to
you. I'll have some more political news for us to pore
over, and some exciting news on another front as well!
Thank you all for your understanding and indulgence!
I'll make it worth your while!
Happy 2019!
MEM
to take care of some personal and professional matters
(not to worry, everything is good!) before returning to
you. I'll have some more political news for us to pore
over, and some exciting news on another front as well!
Thank you all for your understanding and indulgence!
I'll make it worth your while!
Happy 2019!
MEM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
