Your sorrowful Peasant is reflecting today on the
fatal shooting of nine members of a historic black
church in Charleston, South Carolina. It has been
on my mind for quite some time, and I pray for the
church, its members --- the slain and the living,
the city, and the state often.
As you, my very aware readers know, a 21-year-old
white racist wanted to start a race war, and he felt
the best way to do it was to plan and execute an attack
on a prominent black church, Emanuel AME Church.
Armed with a .45-caliber handgun and an evil agenda,
this evil individual walked into this church, took part
in a Bible study meeting with some of the congregants
(to blend in, and not raise any suspicion), and at its
conclusion opened fire, killing six women and three
men. One of the victims was the pastor of the church,
as well as also being a state legislator.
But the murderous slime didn't get the result that he
had hoped for. Quite the contrary. Instead of inciting
even a fistfight. let alone a war, the congregants of
this church --- those that were witness to the shocking
event, and the others who soon learned of it --- came
together in prayer and forgave the shooter. They did as
their heavenly Father bade them to do in the face of
injustice, of maltreatment, of evil, and forgave the
hateful malefactor his hideous crime.
It's not that they thought it was okay for the killer to do
what he did. It's not that they didn't want justice to be
served. It's not that they were being weak and wimpy.
They actually showed incredible strength, the strength
of their faith in their practice of it under the most
harrowing circumstances, that which try our souls and
test our mettle. They forgave a fiend for the slaughter of
their friends, their relations, their fellow congregants.
They did what Christianity teaches us to do, one of the
hardest --- if not the hardest --- things a practitioner of
the faith will ever be called upon to do. And it's not
a thing that many people, regardless of their faith, can
ever do, your humble Peasant included. I still have
trouble forgiving people in my past who have wronged
me in some way or another, including an abusive father.
Your awed Peasant salutes and commends these aggrieved
congregants of the church!
And the people of Charleston, and the state of South Carolina,
came together to pray for and show solidarity and moral
support with these hearty folks --- black, white, young,
old, conservative, liberal, moderate, any and all categories
of people all stood with the members of this church.
South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, a staunch conservative
Republican (sorry lefties, here goes one of your treasured
narratives!), gave a statement of heartfelt sympathy and moral
support. Out of this terrible tragedy, a beautiful union of many
making an outpouring of love and solidarity. The triumph of
love and care over racism and divisiveness. The triumph of the
human spirit over the forces of darkness.
It all makes your moved Peasant proud to be a Christian and
an American.
MEM
Thursday, July 23, 2015
Thursday, July 16, 2015
When a Liberal Company Cheats a Little Guy or Gal
From the realm of pop music comes a morality tale
which says a lot about the values of liberals in big
business. Pop sensation Taylor Swift won a big battle
with Apple Music over whether she (and ultimately
rising artists) will be paid by the division of the
computer/software company that gave us the iMac
the iPad, and the iPhone, for music they recorded for
Apple's new streaming service which they are letting
people sample with a free trial period. Problem was,
for Swift and some other artists, Apple Music wanted
to mitigate the costs of this by not paying Swift and
the rest who created the music during the free trial
time.
Well, this didn't sit well with Swift. Not being paid
for her music which a company with a market
capitalization of $729 billion was, in her mind, both
an insult and a ripoff. She wrote an open letter to Apple
on Tumblr, one of the many social media sties online,
saying that she "finds it to be shocking, disappointing,
and completely unlike this historically progressive and
generous company." Please note, Apple is progressive
not only in terms of its renown innovation in communi-
cation technology but in its politics; Steve Jobs, the late
founder of Apple, supported President Obama with both
endorsement and campaign contributions. The firm still
supports left-wing candidates and causes. And here
Apple was trying to stiff musicians and singers, most
of them just on the way up, at least one having reached
prominence --- Taylor Swift.
Swift called for Apple to change its policy, stating "We
don't ask you for free iPhones. Please don't ask us to provide
you with our music for no compensation." A valid point.
She further threatened to withhold from Apple Muisc her
chart-storming album "1989" --- no idle threat, for she
earlier did similar by withholding her entire catalog of
songs from Spotify, another music-streaming service,
also over compensation disagreements. Apple quickly
turned around, announcing that they would after all pay
Swift, and the other affected artists, for the music used
in the free trial period for the new streaming service.
A classic case of a "little gal" standing up to a huge,
money-laden corporation taking unfair advantage,
and winning. And the corporation controlled by
liberals, the self-proclaimed champions of said
"little gals and guys". A bit like the film "Norma
Rae", with a "little gal" winning a great battle
against a big employer in which many others like
her benefit. And this film was quite popular with
the left-of-center set!
Irony sure is delicious, isn't it?
MEM
which says a lot about the values of liberals in big
business. Pop sensation Taylor Swift won a big battle
with Apple Music over whether she (and ultimately
rising artists) will be paid by the division of the
computer/software company that gave us the iMac
the iPad, and the iPhone, for music they recorded for
Apple's new streaming service which they are letting
people sample with a free trial period. Problem was,
for Swift and some other artists, Apple Music wanted
to mitigate the costs of this by not paying Swift and
the rest who created the music during the free trial
time.
Well, this didn't sit well with Swift. Not being paid
for her music which a company with a market
capitalization of $729 billion was, in her mind, both
an insult and a ripoff. She wrote an open letter to Apple
on Tumblr, one of the many social media sties online,
saying that she "finds it to be shocking, disappointing,
and completely unlike this historically progressive and
generous company." Please note, Apple is progressive
not only in terms of its renown innovation in communi-
cation technology but in its politics; Steve Jobs, the late
founder of Apple, supported President Obama with both
endorsement and campaign contributions. The firm still
supports left-wing candidates and causes. And here
Apple was trying to stiff musicians and singers, most
of them just on the way up, at least one having reached
prominence --- Taylor Swift.
Swift called for Apple to change its policy, stating "We
don't ask you for free iPhones. Please don't ask us to provide
you with our music for no compensation." A valid point.
She further threatened to withhold from Apple Muisc her
chart-storming album "1989" --- no idle threat, for she
earlier did similar by withholding her entire catalog of
songs from Spotify, another music-streaming service,
also over compensation disagreements. Apple quickly
turned around, announcing that they would after all pay
Swift, and the other affected artists, for the music used
in the free trial period for the new streaming service.
A classic case of a "little gal" standing up to a huge,
money-laden corporation taking unfair advantage,
and winning. And the corporation controlled by
liberals, the self-proclaimed champions of said
"little gals and guys". A bit like the film "Norma
Rae", with a "little gal" winning a great battle
against a big employer in which many others like
her benefit. And this film was quite popular with
the left-of-center set!
Irony sure is delicious, isn't it?
MEM
Thursday, July 9, 2015
The NSA Gets Taken to the Woodshed
A federal appeals court recently ruled that a
National Security Agency (NSA) program that
collects telephone records on millions of Americans
is illegal. The Second U.S. Court of Appeals issued
a 97-page ruling to this effect, and rightfully so.
Although the judges on the appellate court didn't
address the constitutional ramifications of the NSA
program re: privacy rights, they did find the PATRIOT
act language used to justify such mass data collecting
was not meant for doing that.
"The statutes to which the government points have never
been interpreted to authorize anything approaching the
breadth of the sweeping surveillance at issue here ...
The sheer volume of information sought is staggering."
opined the judges. And they are spot on! The controversial
program gathers metadata; the number called, the time and
duration of the call, but not the content of the conversation
(your skeptical Peasant is not at all sure of the veracity of
this last point!) --- the idea being to look for possible
contacts among terror suspects. But with the millions of
calls so monitored, the NSA has been getting information
on many calls not made nor received by such suspects,
nor having anything remotely to do with terrorism.
And with the harassment of Tea Party groups and other
conservative organizations by the IRS, who's to say that
other governmental agencies have not joined in the
unconstitutional persecution of political activists,
individuals or groups, who dare to exercise their
First Amendment rights to speak out in dissent of the
current administration and/or any other part of the
country's government? Or that of Christians and their
churches who disagree with Obama over gay marriage
or abortion? Or any other citizens, individually or in
groups who have views which the Obama regime does
not approve of?
The judges undercut the main legal basis the government
has long cited for its records collection en masse. Lawyers
for the government have claimed that they are allowed to
collect extensive records because --- while such data aren't
necessarily connected to any terror suspects --- they all are
"inherently relevant to terrorism probes" and that "law
enforcement may need to search said records to find
connections between suspects". This, my grand readers, is
how totalitarianism takes root. Fabricate a reason to spy on
the citizenry in order to get "evidence" of treasonous or
seditious activity, then persecute, prosecute, and punish
the so-called offenders. It seems to your curious Peasant
that the Obamunists in government are more than a little
paranoid!
The court's ruling was in response to an American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU) lawsuit, in which it agreed that the
data collection should be ended because it violates privacy
rights. A lower court judge ruled in favor of the NSA and
its program, stating that it is in fact constitutional, and the
ACLU promptly appealed, leading to the May 7 decision.
This is one of the very few times that your faithful Peasant
is in agreement with the ACLU, and I want to commend them
for the actions that they have taken in opposing the NSA's
broad-scoped snooping activities. They can do something
good and helpful on occasion after all.
The phone data roundup program began in 2001, at the start of
the George W. Bush administration. Five years later Bush
placed it under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court, which approved and re-approved it in
secret meetings. That figures! And the saddest thing of it is that
this began under a Republican president. All the more reason
to end this terrible assault on out privacy, and to hold both
parties' feet to the fire to make them never to do this to us
again.
This episode illustrates the disrespect, the disdain, and the contempt
that both the Democrats and the Republicans have for we, the
citizens of our country. Also, the PATRIOT act should be scrapped,
and new national security legislation should be created that would
preserve our protections under the Fourth Amendment while
providing steps for the protection of our country.
MEM
National Security Agency (NSA) program that
collects telephone records on millions of Americans
is illegal. The Second U.S. Court of Appeals issued
a 97-page ruling to this effect, and rightfully so.
Although the judges on the appellate court didn't
address the constitutional ramifications of the NSA
program re: privacy rights, they did find the PATRIOT
act language used to justify such mass data collecting
was not meant for doing that.
"The statutes to which the government points have never
been interpreted to authorize anything approaching the
breadth of the sweeping surveillance at issue here ...
The sheer volume of information sought is staggering."
opined the judges. And they are spot on! The controversial
program gathers metadata; the number called, the time and
duration of the call, but not the content of the conversation
(your skeptical Peasant is not at all sure of the veracity of
this last point!) --- the idea being to look for possible
contacts among terror suspects. But with the millions of
calls so monitored, the NSA has been getting information
on many calls not made nor received by such suspects,
nor having anything remotely to do with terrorism.
And with the harassment of Tea Party groups and other
conservative organizations by the IRS, who's to say that
other governmental agencies have not joined in the
unconstitutional persecution of political activists,
individuals or groups, who dare to exercise their
First Amendment rights to speak out in dissent of the
current administration and/or any other part of the
country's government? Or that of Christians and their
churches who disagree with Obama over gay marriage
or abortion? Or any other citizens, individually or in
groups who have views which the Obama regime does
not approve of?
The judges undercut the main legal basis the government
has long cited for its records collection en masse. Lawyers
for the government have claimed that they are allowed to
collect extensive records because --- while such data aren't
necessarily connected to any terror suspects --- they all are
"inherently relevant to terrorism probes" and that "law
enforcement may need to search said records to find
connections between suspects". This, my grand readers, is
how totalitarianism takes root. Fabricate a reason to spy on
the citizenry in order to get "evidence" of treasonous or
seditious activity, then persecute, prosecute, and punish
the so-called offenders. It seems to your curious Peasant
that the Obamunists in government are more than a little
paranoid!
The court's ruling was in response to an American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU) lawsuit, in which it agreed that the
data collection should be ended because it violates privacy
rights. A lower court judge ruled in favor of the NSA and
its program, stating that it is in fact constitutional, and the
ACLU promptly appealed, leading to the May 7 decision.
This is one of the very few times that your faithful Peasant
is in agreement with the ACLU, and I want to commend them
for the actions that they have taken in opposing the NSA's
broad-scoped snooping activities. They can do something
good and helpful on occasion after all.
The phone data roundup program began in 2001, at the start of
the George W. Bush administration. Five years later Bush
placed it under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court, which approved and re-approved it in
secret meetings. That figures! And the saddest thing of it is that
this began under a Republican president. All the more reason
to end this terrible assault on out privacy, and to hold both
parties' feet to the fire to make them never to do this to us
again.
This episode illustrates the disrespect, the disdain, and the contempt
that both the Democrats and the Republicans have for we, the
citizens of our country. Also, the PATRIOT act should be scrapped,
and new national security legislation should be created that would
preserve our protections under the Fourth Amendment while
providing steps for the protection of our country.
MEM
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Thoughts on the Fourth
Your favorite Peasant wishes you, my grand and
wonderful readers, a wonderful, happy, and safe
Fourth of July, Independence Day, and while
enjoying your cookouts, your visits to the beach
or to a nearby park, or to the homes of friends and
family, and wonderful fireworks shows, give a
thought and a prayer to our great country and
the people down through the years who made both
this day and our country possible. Let us be thankful
for our freedom and our free time to enjoy, among
so many wonderful things that we Americans enjoy,
on this our great nation's birthday!
God bless you all, and God bless America!
MEM
wonderful readers, a wonderful, happy, and safe
Fourth of July, Independence Day, and while
enjoying your cookouts, your visits to the beach
or to a nearby park, or to the homes of friends and
family, and wonderful fireworks shows, give a
thought and a prayer to our great country and
the people down through the years who made both
this day and our country possible. Let us be thankful
for our freedom and our free time to enjoy, among
so many wonderful things that we Americans enjoy,
on this our great nation's birthday!
God bless you all, and God bless America!
MEM
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Whither Donald Trump?
Donald Trump, multi-billionaire real estate mogul,
reality TV show star/host, and political gadfly is
running for president. Trump is seeking the GOP
nomination, and plans to stir the pot --- not just for
republicans, but for everyone as well.
Now keep in mind, friends, that Trump has toyed with
the idea in times past; in 2010 he publicly expressed
interest in campaigning for the presidency, but the next
year decided against doing so. He has been known to
do things that generate a lot of publicity, which he has
a constant thirst for. His TV show, "The Apprentice"
is one example. A riveting show, to be sure; your beloved
Peasant has watched it several times and enjoyed it quite
a lot, especially his "Celebrity Apprentice" edition.
But with a personal fortune of over $9 billion, business
interests galore, the Miss USA Pageant, golf games
for charity and other charitable activities, you'd think that
Trump would have enough to keep him self busy, too much
so to even consider engaging in what would be a grueling
run for the highest elected office in the land. Yet as
much as Donald Trump loves to make money (and who can
blame him for this?) Trump loves the limelight every
bit as much. Many believe, including your skeptical
Peasant, that Trump's first run for the big diadem was just
a ploy for the attention, simply an ego feast.
Trump announced his candidacy just a few days ago, saying
that he would spend some of his fortune to conduct his campaign.
In what was described as a rambling, boastful speech in
New York, his home turf, Trump proclaimed "the American
dream is dead ... But if I get elected president, I will bring it
back bigger, and better than ever before and we will make
America great again." A laudable, if broadly general goal.
And Trump always states that he will do, create, build, or
deliver something "bigger and better" than whatever has come
before, be it from Trump or from anyone else. That's what
big-moneyed tycoons from New York like to say, don't you
know? It's all part of the razzmatazz, you see, a very important
part of a New York pronouncement, proclamation, or a
Broadway show. It's expected.
While Trump may, this time around, take his campaign seriously,
not many political analysts think he is a serious contender but
merfely a pretender --- and a potential headache for the Repub-
lican Party.
Nathan Gonzalez, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg & Gonzalez
Report, commented "Any time that he consumes on the debate
stage and in the media is time he's taking away from a legitimate
contender." Fox News, sponsor of the coming opening debate,
announced that only the top ten ranking contenders in the national
polls would be allowed to take part in said debate, set for August.
Donald Trump, according to RealClearPolitics' rolling average
of the national polls, is currently in the #9 position, so he will,
barring any last-minute slippage, squeak in to the festivities.
Trump, 69, will put his role of host of his TV show on hold, or
perhaps the show itself, while he is campaigning, due to
requirements that the network might by law have to give to
other GOP candidates.
Meantime, Trump is contrasting himself against the rest of the
Republican field, taking pot shots at a few of them. Your observant
Peasant would advise The Donald to be on the lookout for big
broadsides fired his way by those whom he is currently targeting.
Although Trump may have some good ideas for solving our
country's many problems, especially our economic ones, he must
prove to all that he is for real, that his commitment to the race
and the commitment he would bring to the White House if elected
would be real, rather than just a whimsical rich guy with lots of cash
and too much time on his hands.
MEM
reality TV show star/host, and political gadfly is
running for president. Trump is seeking the GOP
nomination, and plans to stir the pot --- not just for
republicans, but for everyone as well.
Now keep in mind, friends, that Trump has toyed with
the idea in times past; in 2010 he publicly expressed
interest in campaigning for the presidency, but the next
year decided against doing so. He has been known to
do things that generate a lot of publicity, which he has
a constant thirst for. His TV show, "The Apprentice"
is one example. A riveting show, to be sure; your beloved
Peasant has watched it several times and enjoyed it quite
a lot, especially his "Celebrity Apprentice" edition.
But with a personal fortune of over $9 billion, business
interests galore, the Miss USA Pageant, golf games
for charity and other charitable activities, you'd think that
Trump would have enough to keep him self busy, too much
so to even consider engaging in what would be a grueling
run for the highest elected office in the land. Yet as
much as Donald Trump loves to make money (and who can
blame him for this?) Trump loves the limelight every
bit as much. Many believe, including your skeptical
Peasant, that Trump's first run for the big diadem was just
a ploy for the attention, simply an ego feast.
Trump announced his candidacy just a few days ago, saying
that he would spend some of his fortune to conduct his campaign.
In what was described as a rambling, boastful speech in
New York, his home turf, Trump proclaimed "the American
dream is dead ... But if I get elected president, I will bring it
back bigger, and better than ever before and we will make
America great again." A laudable, if broadly general goal.
And Trump always states that he will do, create, build, or
deliver something "bigger and better" than whatever has come
before, be it from Trump or from anyone else. That's what
big-moneyed tycoons from New York like to say, don't you
know? It's all part of the razzmatazz, you see, a very important
part of a New York pronouncement, proclamation, or a
Broadway show. It's expected.
While Trump may, this time around, take his campaign seriously,
not many political analysts think he is a serious contender but
merfely a pretender --- and a potential headache for the Repub-
lican Party.
Nathan Gonzalez, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg & Gonzalez
Report, commented "Any time that he consumes on the debate
stage and in the media is time he's taking away from a legitimate
contender." Fox News, sponsor of the coming opening debate,
announced that only the top ten ranking contenders in the national
polls would be allowed to take part in said debate, set for August.
Donald Trump, according to RealClearPolitics' rolling average
of the national polls, is currently in the #9 position, so he will,
barring any last-minute slippage, squeak in to the festivities.
Trump, 69, will put his role of host of his TV show on hold, or
perhaps the show itself, while he is campaigning, due to
requirements that the network might by law have to give to
other GOP candidates.
Meantime, Trump is contrasting himself against the rest of the
Republican field, taking pot shots at a few of them. Your observant
Peasant would advise The Donald to be on the lookout for big
broadsides fired his way by those whom he is currently targeting.
Although Trump may have some good ideas for solving our
country's many problems, especially our economic ones, he must
prove to all that he is for real, that his commitment to the race
and the commitment he would bring to the White House if elected
would be real, rather than just a whimsical rich guy with lots of cash
and too much time on his hands.
MEM
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
Hillary Clinton's Nixonian Ploy
It appears that Hillary Clinton has taken a page
from Richard Nixon's playbook regarding the
e-mail brouhaha that she got herself caught up
in. The once and again presidential candidate,
as you have been following, used a private e-mail
account to receive and send sensitive information
instead of using a government e-mail account
which would have provided more security for
the e-mail in question. When this was discovered,
Clinton was subpoenaed for the e-mail on her
computer's hard drive; although she turned over
a few of the e-mails in question she had scrubbed
her hard drive of all the rest. Remember Nixon's
Watergate tapes, with the 18 1/2 minute gap?
And get this: Clinton's actions have made some
of her fellow Democrats jittery. Some party
bigwigs have averred that it would benefit their
party to have some other Democrats step into the
contest for their party's presidential nomination,
even though said nomination seemed to have
Clinton's name on it. Add to the mixture the worries
that some Dems have over the Clinton Foundation's
practice of accepting money from foreign govern-
ments coinciding with Hillary's getting ready to make
another run for the White House.The foundation is
a supposed charity established by Hillary and her
husband, the former president, but some would call its
stated purpose into question.
And the House committee investigating the 2012 attacks
on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya has issues new
subpoenas to attorneys for Mrs. Clinton and to the State
Department for communications related to Benghazi,
which may well have been on Clinton's hard drive.
Oh, my! The things ganging up on the former First Lady
and former Secretary of State! And in the midst of it all
she declared her candidacy for the White House.
Your curious Peasant does not know whether ol' Hill is
showing chutzpah or stupidity. The aforementioned
scandals will certainly reveal whether she has the teflon
coating that Bill had, keeping him from succumbing to
his own scandals. Stay tuned.
MEM
from Richard Nixon's playbook regarding the
e-mail brouhaha that she got herself caught up
in. The once and again presidential candidate,
as you have been following, used a private e-mail
account to receive and send sensitive information
instead of using a government e-mail account
which would have provided more security for
the e-mail in question. When this was discovered,
Clinton was subpoenaed for the e-mail on her
computer's hard drive; although she turned over
a few of the e-mails in question she had scrubbed
her hard drive of all the rest. Remember Nixon's
Watergate tapes, with the 18 1/2 minute gap?
And get this: Clinton's actions have made some
of her fellow Democrats jittery. Some party
bigwigs have averred that it would benefit their
party to have some other Democrats step into the
contest for their party's presidential nomination,
even though said nomination seemed to have
Clinton's name on it. Add to the mixture the worries
that some Dems have over the Clinton Foundation's
practice of accepting money from foreign govern-
ments coinciding with Hillary's getting ready to make
another run for the White House.The foundation is
a supposed charity established by Hillary and her
husband, the former president, but some would call its
stated purpose into question.
And the House committee investigating the 2012 attacks
on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya has issues new
subpoenas to attorneys for Mrs. Clinton and to the State
Department for communications related to Benghazi,
which may well have been on Clinton's hard drive.
Oh, my! The things ganging up on the former First Lady
and former Secretary of State! And in the midst of it all
she declared her candidacy for the White House.
Your curious Peasant does not know whether ol' Hill is
showing chutzpah or stupidity. The aforementioned
scandals will certainly reveal whether she has the teflon
coating that Bill had, keeping him from succumbing to
his own scandals. Stay tuned.
MEM
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
B.B. King, R.I.P.
The Blues is a genre of music which issued from the
southern United States, in predominately black
communities soon after the Civil War. It is a uniquely
American genre of music, and B.B. King was its
modern-day ambassador, interpreter, and indeed,
king. The king is dead, long live his legacy.
B.B. King passed away on May 14 after several
several years of declining health at the age of 89.
Named to the American Hall of Fame and to the
Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, King had made fans
and friends the world over in his long and storied
career. He was given the nickname "The King of the
Blues", and he traveled widely, performing often
through the years. King made an average of 200
concert appearances each year going into his 70s,
slowing down only a few years ago when his
health started to slide. In 1956, King was
reported to have made 342 such appearances
alone.
alone.
In 1990, King was awarded the National Medal
of Arts by President George H.W. Bush. He is
regarded by many as one of the most influential
blues guitarists of all time, playing his beloved
guitar Lucille in concert and in the recording studio,
inspiring many electric blues and blues rock
guitarists over the years as he went. B.B. King
was certainly a great favorite with your appreciative
Peasant. I miss him greatly, as do the many fans of
blues music throughout the world.
B.B. King was truly an American master. Rest in
peace, your musical majesty.
MEM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
