Actress Tracey Ullman reflects on citizenship and equality at Monticello
July 4, 2010 4:28 PM MST
Tracey Ullman at Monticello, July 4, 2010
At the 48th annual Independence Day naturalization ceremony at Thomas Jefferson’s home at Monticello on July 4, the featured speaker was actress and comedienne Tracey Ullman, who has won seven Emmy Awards® for her work in television. Her self-named Fox-TV show of the 1980s introduced the world interstitially to The Simpsons.
Ullman is a dual British-American citizen. Born and raised in Slough, England, she has lived and worked in the United States for 25 years and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2006.
In her remarks to the 71 immigrants from more than two dozen countries (from Afghanistan and Armenia to Uzbekistan and Vietnam), Ullman emphasized how her early impressions of America were those of “confidence,” that the American attitude was one of “if you want it, come and get it.”
After the ceremony, Ullman sat down for a one-on-one interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, answering questions about citizenship, the American dream, and what she finds valuable in the American founding.
Subjects and Citizens
Noting that it was recently revealed that, in his draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote the word “subjects” and smudged it out so he could replace it with “citizens,” Ullman talked about the difference between “subject” and “citizen,” because she has been both.
She said she was pleased to learn about Jefferson’s editing, that “he changed it, that he moved on, that he made the change.”
“Yes,” she said, “I have been a subject and now a citizen and it’s interesting. I just think that we are equal. There’s no one better than us. We’re not paying people millions of pounds to be better than us,” as the British pay their royal family.
“I’ve never been a royalist,” Ullman explained, “and that [equality] is something that really appealed to me about America.”
Image of Confidence
When she was growing up as a girl in England, Ullman absorbed many images of America that she saw on television. What most impressed her, she said, “was the Olympics,” not only because American athletes won so many gold medals, but “it was the confidence,” they exhibited.
In addition, she said, “it was that ‘you can be anyone you want to be’” attitude and “kindness,” as well as “inspirational people like Lily Tomlin. I impersonated her at my school when I was like 10. I said, ‘I want to be Lily Tomlin. I want to be Gilda Radner.’”
Ullman joked that “our images of America were like Dallas, when I was a kid, like soap operas and things” but even so, when she first arrived in the United States at the age of 20, she was “very inspired.”
Citizenship Test
Since Ullman so recently went through the naturalization process, she spoke about the most surprising things she learned as she prepared for the citizenship test.
One was, she laughed, a question about two forms used by the immigration authorities, the N-200 and the N-400. That’s “a real question,” she said, and applicants had to know the difference between those forms. “I think they’ve dropped that one now, it’s a little obscure.”
She was most impressed, however, by the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence, which is why, she said, it is so inspiring “to be here, where Thomas Jefferson” lived. He was “so forward thinking,” for his time, Ullman remarked, and that is why she remembers “really being impressed with the words of the Founding Fathers, in particular Thomas Jefferson, who was just so enlightened and so brave and so incredible at that time and still holds up” today.
Publisher's note:This article was originally published on Examiner.com on July 4, 2010. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016. I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.
Publisher's note:This article was originally published on Examiner.com on July 6, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016. I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original. 'Republicans have learned a lesson' says GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie
In an interview following the annual Independence Day parade in Crozet in western Albemarle County on July 5, U.S. Senate candidate Ed Gillespie said that “Republicans have learned a lesson” after presiding over unprecedented growth in the size and scope of government from 2001 to 2007, when the party controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress.
“The difference between Republicans and Democrats,” he told the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner at Claudius Crozet Park, “is, I think, Republicans have learned a lesson.”
Continuing, he noted that “the fact is, I agree that when Republicans had the House, the Senate, and the White House that we spent too much money.”
That experience from the first decade of the 21st century, he added, “pales in comparison to what the Democrats did when they got control of all three – the House, the Senate, and the White House – but that's not enough.”
'Size and scope'
Republicans, he said, “understand that, if we're given the opportunity to govern again, and we get majorities in the House and the Senate and then, certainly, the White House, we need to reduce the size and scope of the federal government and get it in its proper size and scope.”
Gillespie said that “there are a number of functions that the federal government performs that would better be performed by individuals in the private sector and by the states. I think the federal government over the past five years, in particular, has encroached on state prerogatives.”
When asked to name three federal programs that he would like to see eliminated, however, the GOP Senate candidate would name only one, the Export-Import Bank, which is due to be reauthorized in September.
“One that I have said already that I believe should not be reauthorized and doesn't deserve to be continued in funding is the ExIm Bank,” Gillespie said, “but we'll roll out more details later as we go along.”
Gillespie, who served in the George W. Bush administration and has been chairman of both the Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Virginia, explained that his victory over incumbent Democrat Mark Warner in November will be a harbinger of a GOP majority in the U.S. Senate.
“Not only would Mark Warner become the former Senator from Virginia,” he said, “but Harry Reid will become the former Senate majority leader. That would have a major impact on the future of the country: an immediate, beneficial, positive impact on the direction of the United States.”
Reid (D-Nev.), he said, “has bottled up legislation not just bills that have come from the House which deserve a fair hearing in the Senate.”
'Vigorous agenda'
With a Republican majority in the Senate, Gillespie explained, “you will see a much more vigorous agenda” in the upper chamber “and we'd be able to work with a Republican House to get legislation to the President's desk.”
Asked whether a Republican-controlled Congress would repeal Bush-era laws that expanded the federal government, such as No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D, Gillespie expressed uncertainty.
“I don't know yet,” he said, “how much support there would be for that.”
Crozet's holiday parade was the fifth Gillespie had marched in so far this weekend. He said he was next heading to Virginia Beach to participate in festivities there.
SUGGESTED LINKS
GOP can regain control of Senate in 2014, says strategist Grover Norquist
GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie sees 'energized, excited' party activists
Virginia Senator Mark Warner assesses situation in Iraq and the Middle East
'Proselytizing for freedom,' Robert Sarvis bids for U.S. Senate in Virginia
Senator Mark Warner defends his record against GOP challenger Ed Gillespie
Publisher's note:This article was originally published on Examiner.com on July 3, 2011. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016. With the impending nomination of Senator Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) as the vice presidential running mate of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original. Tim Kaine argues for balancing individual liberties, communal responsibilities
Former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, who is also the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is currently a candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Senator Jim Webb.
On July 2, Kaine came to Crozet, in western Albemarle County, to celebrate Independence Day two days early: marching in a parade and speaking at a festival at Claudius Crozet Park sponsored by the local volunteer fire department. Kaine’s likely Republican opponent in the 2012 election, former Governor and Senator George Allen, was also present, and the two men described each other as “competitors and friends.”
Just before the formal program began, Kaine spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about current issues, including the impending congressional vote on raising the national debt ceiling, and what he hopes to bring from Virginia to the national stage.
Debt ceiling limit
“My assessment of the situation” with regard to the debt ceiling vote, Kaine said, “is I can’t believe they let it get as close as they have. You shouldn’t be playing brinksmanship with things like threatened government shutdowns or threatened default on debt payments.”
Even so, he added, “we’ve got to find a resolution. I think the resolution is one where we increase the debt ceiling limitation but in exchange we have to do a combination of significant cuts [and] finding more revenues.”
To get more revenues, he explained, will require “closing loopholes on certain businesses and individuals that don’t need them.”
That should be followed by making “more investments in transportation and education to grow the economy. That’s the best anti-deficit strategy of all.”
Getting libertarian votes
Asked how he would appeal to libertarian-minded voters in the coming election campaign, Kaine said that he would talk about his record.
“I am very much a supporter of individual liberties,” he explained, adding that “yet we’re in this mixture, where we have individual liberties -- and that’s the great thing about our country -- but we also have communal responsibilities. Just trying to find that right balance is important.”
Kaine noted that “we do pretty well on that in Virginia. My basic campaign message is, ‘America has challenges, Virginia has answers,’ so I’ll be talking about the way we do it here in Virginia.” From Virginia to D.C.
The former governor gave three specific ways that he plans to take lessons learned in Virginia to the national level.
George Allen and Tim Kaine, July 2, 2011
First, with regard to the “challenged economy,” he said, the way Virginia “went from low income to high income [was] by going from low education to high education. Education innovation is the best economic development and jobs strategy.”
The second lesson is “fiscal responsibility,” he said, explaining that “I had to make more cuts than anybody who’s ever been governor -- but there’s a right way and wrong way to do it. No across-the-boards, don’t shred the safety net, and don’t do the kind of gimmicks like default on the debt payment stuff. Just make hard decisions.”
The third thing he offered is that, in Virginia, “we have some balance and civility. We still listen to each other instead of just trying to out talk each other, and that’s what I want to take” to Washington.
Kaine may still face a primary challenge for the Democratic Senate nomination from Third District Representative Bobby Scott, who announced on July 1 that he is delaying his decision on whether to get into the race. Former Governor Allen also has several challengers for the GOP nomination, including Tim Donner, David McCormick, and Jamie Radtke.
Do you like this article? Do you want to see more like it? Be sure to click on the "subscribe" button at the top of the page.
If you would like to become an Examiner on Examiner.com, click here or on the "write for us" button on the upper right corner of this page.
Suggested Links
At his 17th Shad Planking, George Allen lays claim to a ‘libertarian streak’
Va. Senate candidate Jamie Radtke hopes her message resonates with libertarians
Virginia GOP Senate candidate David McCormick touts his business experience
Virginia Congressman Bobby Scott weighs in on budget’s ‘tough choices’
Senator Jim Webb talks about U.S.-Korea free trade and stability in Asia
With the demise of the Examiner.com publishing platform, the original URL for this article is no longer available.
A year before the Stonewall riots sparked what's become known as the modern gay-rights movement, pioneering advocates for gay equality -- sorry, "LGBT equality" -- marched in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia.
The day these pioneers chose was the Fourth of July, knowing that tourists would be celebrating the Independence Day holiday at the site where the Declaration of Independence was drafted, debated, and adopted in 1776. Their aim was to spread the word among middle Americans that in the phrase "all men are created equal," all means all.
One of the protesters for gay rights was Lilli Vincenz, who also brought along her own movie camera to record the event. Could she have known that, 46 years later, we would be celebrating gay equality rather than begging for it?
The Library of Congress has preserved Vincenz's film about that picket line (which includes an interview with the late Franklin Kameny, a well-known agitator who coined the phrase, "Gay Is Good."). Mike Mashon wrote on the Library's "Now See Hear!" blog on June 5:
The Library’s moving image collections are large (1.4 million film reels and videotapes with more arriving every day) and almost unimaginably diverse. We may not have every film or television show ever produced, but it’s a rare occurrence when Moving Image Research Center staff can’t help a patron find at least a little something related to their inquiry.
Every so often a precious jewel emerges from this mountain of content. I admit when I first heard that the Library was in the process of acquiring the collection of gay rights pioneer Lilli Vincenz I had no idea who she was. Not long before the official announcement, Dr. Vincenz’s representative Charles Francis—who was also instrumental in the Library’s acquisition of the Frank Kameny Papers in 2006—paid a visit to the Packard Campus and brought with him a copy of two of her films. The Second Largest Minority documents the “Reminder Day Picket” at Independence Hall, Philadelphia, on July 4, 1968, while Gay and Proud is about the first Christopher Street Liberation Day Parade held in New York City, June 28, 1970. We watched them together.
The films were revelatory.
Even apart from the subject matter, The Second Largest Minority is a tight little time capsule of life in the 1960s -- the clothes, the hairstyles, the manner with which people carried themselves.
Portions of this short, made by Lilli Vincenz on July 4, 1967, have been excerpted in other documentary films, such as Before Stonewall, but until recently only a few lucky people have seen the entire 7-minute record of this historic event.
The images are striking. First, there are the immaculately groomed, polite-but-persistent participants in the Philadelphia event. While a picket reading “Homosexuals Ask for Redress of Grievances” may not be the most soul-stirring call to arms, let’s also not forget the bravery of these pioneers, who faced much open hostility. Contrast this with the more defiantly celebratory attitude of the Christopher Street marchers just two years later. The Philadelphia pickets are still in evidence, but the operative word now is “pride.” It’s one thing to read about how the gay rights movement was catalyzed by the Stonewall Inn riots of June 1969, but quite another to see that tonal shift illustrated so vividly in these bookend films. Powerful movements can begin and be sustained in unlikely places, and how fortunate we are that Lilli Vincenz was there to record this one.
For my 2010 interview with Frank Kameny about the early days of the gay rights movement, see Part I here and Part II here. For his reminiscences of his military service in the Second World War and the movement to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," look here. For my look back at the Stonewall riots of 1969, check out these posts: "Four Decades After Stonewall" and "41 Years Ago Today, the Queers Fought Back."
The 12-minute film, Gay and Proud, which documents the first "gay pride" parade in New York City in 1970, can also be viewed on the Library of Congress' "Now See Hear!" blog.
Today is Flag Day, and thus an appropriate time to revisit an article I wrote almost 15 years ago about flag desecration.
The context that year was the approval in the U.S. House of Representatives of a proposed amendment to the Constitution that would have forbidden desecration of the American flag. This amendment would have carved out an exception to the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.
The amendment did not proceed any farther and debate and discussion of this issue has subsided. That does not mean it won't come up again, however.
My piece opposing the flag-burning amendment appeared in the Kansas City Star on Sunday, July 4, 1999. It was apparently part of a pro-con debate on the op-ed page. I have no idea who my opponent was that day, or what he said.
Does the flag merit special protection?
No: Flag-burning amendment desecrates the Constitution
On June 24, the House of Representatives approved an amendment to the Constitution saying: “The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.” Now it is up to the Senate to send it to the states for ratification, which requires approval by three-quarters of the state legislatures.
U.S. flag in Washington, D.C.
As we observe Independence Day, it is worth pondering whether such an amendment to the Constitution is good or necessary.
The simplicity of this proposed amendment is beguiling but pernicious. Its essence is to restrict our precious First Amendment freedoms of speech and expression. As repulsive as it may be for citizens to desecrate Old Glory, they have the right to do so in order to express dramatically their views about government policy, American culture or current events. The First Amendment was not designed to protect only popular speech - if it were, it would serve no purpose whatsoever.
In a free society, standards of public morality can be measured only by whether physical coercion -- violence against persons or property -- occurs. There is no right not to be offended by words, actions or symbols. The best response to offensive speech is not punishment by government but more and better speech by concerned citizens.
The restrictive nature of this proposed amendment can be seen in this illustration. Suppose the United States - God forbid - were at war against a foreign adversary. Under the terms of the proposed amendment, it would be acceptable for U.S. citizens to desecrate the flag of our enemy, “Outer Freedonia,” but illegal for citizens (perhaps descendants of Freedonian immigrants) to express their opposition to the war by desecrating the U.S. flag. The imbalance could not be clearer.
U.S. flag in New York
The assertion by proponents of this amendment that flag desecration constitutes “fighting words” -- or speech unprotected by the First Amendment -- leads us down a slippery slope of redefining acceptable political expression to suit the majority's wishes.
Under this amendment, it would be permissible to desecrate a Confederate battle flag, even though that flag is held in high regard by some U.S. citizens. And what about other symbols of our country and its values, such as the Statue of Liberty? Will the First Amendment apply if Lady Liberty is portrayed, say, in an obscene but satirical cartoon?
Some proponents of the amendment, which in fact alters the First Amendment guarantee that ``Congress shall make no law respecting freedom of speech,'' arguing that flag burning and other forms of flag desecration are not speech but actions.
Where is the line between speech and action? The Boston Tea Party was indeed an action: Patriots dumped tons of tea into Boston Harbor while dressed as Native Americans. It was intended and understood to be a powerful symbolic protest against an unwanted tax imposed by the British parliament.
Did American soldiers fight for the flag or for something more?
“The veterans I know didn't fight for the flag, they fought for the things for which the flag stands,” notes Gene Cisewski, chairman of the Liberty Council, which is based in Washington. “That includes freedom of expression.”
Rick Sincere flanked by Soviet and U.S. flags, c. 1984
In his inimitable style, Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, made a similar argument during the House debate on the amendment: “We think the danger of discriminatory and arbitrary interference with freedom of expression is so great we'd rather put up with the occasional obnoxious jerk than to empower the government to decide what is acceptable and what isn't.”
Thomas Walls, executive director of the Republican Liberty Caucus, has written: “The United States does not suffer from rampant flag burnings. People have enough respect for the flag to discourage this sort of behavior.” Instead of adopting a flag-burning amendment, Walls asserted, “what needs to be protected from desecration are the principles of freedom our Founders sacrificed so much to establish.”
The flag-desecration amendment apes the laws of countries that do not respect individual freedom or personal responsibility, where criticism of government leaders is a criminal offense. As Cisewski puts it, “This is the same thing Hitler did to protect his swastika. Burning a Nazi flag was a capital offense.”
The U.S. Constitution is far more sacred than any woven symbol of it or our country. We must not allow the Constitution itself to be desecrated by this proposed amendment.
Richard E. Sincere is a member of the national committee of the Republican Liberty Caucus, the organized movement of libertarians within the GOP.
Writing from Philadelphia to his wife Abigail in Massachusetts on the third day of July, 1776, John Adams, a member of the Continental Congress, said:
The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America.
I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.
You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. -- I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. -- Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Days Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not.
What's that he wrote? That "the Second Day of July" will be celebrated "as the great anniversary Festival"? Didn't he mean the "Fourth Day of July"?
Original resolution for American independence from July 2, 1776
True enough, the "succeeding Generations" that Adams foresaw have, since 1777, celebrated Independence Day as July 4th, which was the day that the Declaration of Independence (drafted by Charlottesville lawyer Thomas Jefferson) was approved by Congress. (It was not signed, contra the famous Trumbull painting and the Peter Stone-Sherman Edwards musical 1776, until August 2, almost as an afterthought.)
Adams's enthusiasm stemmed from the 12-0-1 vote (New York abstaining, "courteously") on July 2nd, approving a resolution proposed by another Virginian, Richard Henry Lee, which stated:
Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved. That it is expedient forthwith to take the most effectual measures for forming foreign Alliances. That a plan of confederation be prepared and transmitted to the respective Colonies for their consideration and approbation.
The first sentence is echoed in the Declaration of Independence, which made the case for why Lee's resolution should have been passed in the first place. The second sentence was realized after the Battle of Saratoga in 1777, which proved to the French government that allying with the American rebels might pay off politically. The third sentence was brought to life by the adoption of the Articles of Confederation, drafted that same year but not ratified until 1781 (and superseded, seven years later, by the U.S. Constitution).
Adams understood the act of independence to have been performed on July 2, 1776. The rest was merely decoration.
And still, our "Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations" will occur on the Fourth of July (unless you're in Crozet, where festivities are scheduled for Saturday, July the 6th).
Twenty-six years ago, during the twin celebrations of Independence Day and the re-dedication of the Statue of Liberty on the occasion of its centenary, President Ronald Reagan made a series of speeches about American history and American values.
On Saturday, July 5, 1986, in his pre-recorded weekly radio address, President Reagan mentioned two issues -- immigration and taxes -- that remain salient today (and one name that he probably could not have predicted would still be in the news nearly three decades later):
The immigrant story has been repeated millions of times, stories such as that of one man who passed through Ellis Island years ago. A 15-year-old Italian immigrant who spoke not a word of English. Little did he imagine that his son, Antonin Scalia, would be appointed to the highest court in the land, there to uphold and protect our Constitution, the guardian of all our freedoms. Just one of many stories that shows us that every time we swear in a new citizen, America is rededicating herself to the cause of human liberty.
In these last couple of weeks we have rededicated ourselves to liberty in other important ways, too. Recently, the Congress has passed two landmark pieces of legislation that I'm sure put a smile on the face of our Statue of Liberty. The first was our historic effort to reform our nation's tax code, to make it simpler and fairer, to bring tax rates down, and to give families a long-overdue break. Throughout human history, taxes have been one of the foremost ways that governments intrude on the rights of citizens. In fact, as we all learned in school, our democratic American Revolution began with a tax revolt. Our forefathers knew that if you bind up a man's economic life with taxes, tariffs, and regulations, you deprive him of some of his most basic civil rights. They have a wonderful phrase describing economic liberty in the Declaration of Independence. They call it "the pursuit of happiness." Well, with tax reform, we're going to make that pursuit a lot easier for all Americans.
The night before, speaking from the deck of the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy in New York Harbor on Independence Day, Reagan remembered two of his predecessors:
All through our history, our Presidents and leaders have spoken of national unity and warned us that the real obstacle to moving forward the boundaries of freedom, the only permanent danger to the hope that is America, comes from within. It's easy enough to dismiss this as a kind of familiar exhortation. Yet the truth is that even two of our greatest Founding Fathers, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, once learned this lesson late in life. They'd worked so closely together in Philadelphia for independence. But once that was gained and a government was formed, something called partisan politics began to get in the way. After a bitter and divisive campaign, Jefferson defeated Adams for the Presidency in 1800. And the night before Jefferson's inauguration, Adams slipped away to Boston, disappointed, brokenhearted, and bitter.
For years their estrangement lasted. But then when both had retired, Jefferson at 68 to Monticello and Adams at 76 to Quincy, they began through their letters to speak again to each other. Letters that discussed almost every conceivable subject: gardening, horseback riding, even sneezing as a cure for hiccups; but other subjects as well: the loss of loved ones, the mystery of grief and sorrow, the importance of religion, and of course the last thoughts, the final hopes of two old men, two great patriarchs, for the country that they had helped to found and loved so deeply. "It carries me back," Jefferson wrote about correspondence with his cosigner of the Declaration of Independence, "to the times when, beset with difficulties and dangers, we were fellow laborers in the same cause, struggling for what is most valuable to man, his right to self-government. Laboring always at the same oar, with some wave ever ahead threatening to overwhelm us and yet passing harmless . . . we rowed through the storm with heart and hand . . . ." It was their last gift to us, this lesson in brotherhood, in tolerance for each other, this insight into America's strength as a nation. And when both died on the same day within hours of each other, that date was July 4th, 50 years exactly after that first gift to us, the Declaration of Independence.
My fellow Americans, it falls to us to keep faith with them and all the great Americans of our past. Believe me, if there's one impression I carry with me after the privilege of holding for 5-1/2 years the office held by Adams and Jefferson and Lincoln, it is this: that the things that unite us -- America's past of which we're so proud, our hopes and aspirations for the future of the world and this much-loved country -- these things far outweigh what little divides us. And so tonight we reaffirm that Jew and gentile, we are one nation under God; that black and white, we are one nation indivisible; that Republican and Democrat, we are all Americans. Tonight, with heart and hand, through whatever trial and travail, we pledge ourselves to each other and to the cause of human freedom, the cause that has given light to this land and hope to the world.
That last sentence echoed the words of another president, John Quincy Adams, who as Secretary of State had addressed the U.S. House of Representatives on July 4, 1821. (It's hard to believe today, but Congress in those days did not go home for a district work period to mark Independence Day with their constituents.)
The second President Adams took this opportunity to define America's role in the world in words that should be taken to heart today. The United States, he said,
has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own.
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart.
Then he added these admonitions and warnings:
Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.
But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.
She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.
She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.
She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.
The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force....
She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit....
[America’s] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.
As we Americans celebrate our independence this week, we would do well to remember the words of Presidents Adams and Reagan.
Almost a year remains before Virginia Republican voters will choose their U.S. Senate candidate in a statewide primary. (Traditionally, Virginia has primary elections on the second Tuesday in June. This year, because of post-census redistricting, primary elections for state and local offices will be on August 23.) Former Governor and Senator George F. Allen is widely seen as the favorite to win the GOP nomination, although he has several rivals who are contesting the 2012 primary.
It is fairly certain that former Governor Tim Kaine will be the Democratic nominee, although there remains a possibility that Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA3) will enter the race. Scott had previously said that he would reveal his intentions by July 1, but on that day, he said he was delaying his decision about whether to run.
Since April, I have had several opportunities to interview the various candidates for the U.S. Senate from Virginia. They are seeking the seat being vacated by Senator Jim Webb (D), who chose to retire after one term.
Among the Republicans, I have not yet been able to interview Northern Virginia businessman Tim Donner or Bishop E. W. Jackson. At least one of those lacunae will be filled soon, however, because I am scheduled to meet with Mr. Donner in Charlottesville on July 19, and I may also have an opportunity to talk to him in Richmond this coming week.
Last weekend in Crozet, I was able to talk to both former Senator George Allen and former Governor Tim Kaine. The two rivals were there to march in the annual Independence Day parade sponsored by the Crozet Volunteer Fire Department. In Allen's case, he didn't so much march in the parade as ride in it -- he was on horseback throughout the route.
In remarks to the crowd at Claudius Crozet Park -- which, I might note, is a private park, not a government-owned park, something I find admirable -- both candidates acknowledged that they are "competitors and friends." It was clear from their interaction that Allen and Kaine genuinely like each other, even if they disagree on policy issues and are likely to be engaged in a mudslinging, highly-competitive Senate race next year, one that is widely acknowledged by political analysts to be the most closely-contested campaign in the country and consequently one of the most expensive, too.
Before speaking, Allen and Kaine led the revelers in patriotic songs. (Kaine's voice, especially, is clearly heard over the PA system in the video below.) They sang one verse each of "America (My Country 'Tis of Thee)," "America the Beautiful," and "The Star Spangled Banner." The songs are introduced by WCHV radio host Joe Thomas, who acted as emcee.
In a flurry of restraint atypical of political candidates, Allen and Kaine -- introduced alphabetically -- limited their remarks to about two minutes each, focusing on the values celebrated by Americans during the Fourth of July holiday weekend. (Video follows.)
I spoke to Kaine just before the program began. We chatted briefly about our shared admiration of composer-lyricist Stephen Sondheim. (Both of us were in the audience about two years ago in Richmond, when Sondheim was interviewed by former New York Times drama critic Frank Rich.) Then I asked him about some policy issues, posing the question I try to ask every candidate: How will you earn the votes of libertarian voters? His response, like all of these interviews, was first published on Examiner.com.
Asked how he would appeal to libertarian-minded voters in the coming election campaign, Kaine said that he would talk about his record.
“I am very much a supporter of individual liberties,” he explained, adding that “yet we’re in this mixture, where we have individual liberties -- and that’s the great thing about our country -- but we also have communal responsibilities. Just trying to find that right balance is important.”
Kaine noted that “we do pretty well on that in Virginia. My basic campaign message is, ‘America has challenges, Virginia has answers,’ so I’ll be talking about the way we do it here in Virginia.”
For his part, George Allen had answered my libertarian voters question at Shad Planking in April (see below), so I asked him a different set of questions in Crozet.
Replying to a question from the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about the pending debt-ceiling vote in Congress, Allen offered his assessment of the situation.
“What I’ve been advocating for many years,” he said, is “that is there needs to be a balanced budget requirement in the federal Constitution, [the] same as we have here in Virginia. I think the President should have line-item veto authority and there should be taxpayer protection.”
A balanced budget amendment “narrowly failed back in the 1990s by one vote,” he explained.
“Can you think of how much better our country could be if that had passed back then?” he asked.
“If I were in the U.S. Senate, I’d be advocating for spending cuts, for curtailing the amount of spending, and putting in real reforms to have ironclad reductions in reforming the way that Washington does business,” Allen said.
My other interviews with Senate candidates took place at the 63rd annual Shad Planking in Wakefield, long seen as the start of the political season in Virginia. In Wakefield, I was able to interview Republican candidates David McCormick, Jamie Radtke, and George Allen, as well as potential Democratic Senate candidate Bobby Scott and current U.S. Senator Mark Warner.
Asked how he would appeal to libertarian voters, McCormick replied in general terms.
“I’m a very good case for a libertarian or an independent or a conservative,” he said. “They’ll salute the fact that for 29 years I’ve worked with [the] middle class and working class of America. I have such strong independent roots, even though I’m a strong Republican, very conservative on fiscal policy.”
He pointed out that he has “every policy, every solution on my web site” and suggested that “libertarians would love and support my candidacy.”
First-time candidate Jamie Radtke developed a statewide reputation as a leader of the Virginia Tea Party movement. She also answered my question about libertarian voters.
“Our message is right in line with the libertarian vote,” Radtke said, especially “as far as the spending and the debt and getting the fiscal house in order. The PATRIOT Act is another one that really irritates the libertarian people. Infringing on civil rights is an issue with me, as well. All those things are important.”
She said that when talking about the budget, “you’ve got to look at entitlements” and, from a libertarian point of view, entitlements “should be consumer-driven. People should have skin in the game.”
Things like that, Radtke explained, “resonate with people in the Libertarian Party.”
Even defense spending should be on the table, she said.
“The priority, the absolute priority, 100 percent should be our military and our veterans,” she said, “but the size of the Defense budget is so astronomical that even the Department of Defense is talking about places where there can be savings” without adversely impacting current troops or veterans.
“All of those things,” she concluded, “are things that we have in common” with libertarian voters.
Asked how he plans to earn the votes of libertarian-minded Virginians as he seeks the GOP Senate nomination, Allen called himself a “commonsense, Jeffersonian conservative” with “a good libertarian streak in me.”
“I trust free people and free enterprise,” Allen said, “and so long as someone’s not harming someone else, leave them free.”
He added: “I don’t like limits and restrictions. That’s borne out by my views on requiring a balanced budget in the Constitution” and a line-item veto to restrain the federal government.
“I like lower taxes,” Allen said, noting he has “always been one for lower taxes on business owners and individuals and families.”
While his colleague Jim Webb was not present, Virginia's junior senator, Mark Warner, was at Shad Planking this year. Warner talked about the budget and answered my question about libertarian voters.
Warner also addressed a political question: How can Democratic candidates earn the votes of libertarian-minded voters?
“That’s a challenge,” he conceded, though “it depends on, in a certain way, how ‘libertarian’?”
That is, he continued, “if you believe that there is no role for government in virtually anything, it may be a struggle.”
Warner noted, however, “on the other hand, I think Democrats generally believe on social issues there should be less government involvement. Oftentimes Republicans believe in more government involvement on the social issues and less on the government side. I think there is a balance there.”
Pausing briefly, Warner then suggested an approach that voters could take in choosing which candidates to support.
“I actually think,” he said, “whether a libertarian or anyone else, my advice to people is try to find candidates who can (1) actually read a balance sheet and (2) who are rational.”
Finally, Congressman Bobby Scott -- still a potential (and undeclared) candidate for the Democratic Party's U.S. Senate nomination -- answered a few questions.
Democratic candidates can attract the votes of libertarian-minded voters, Scott said, “if we stand up for the principles that we usually stand up for, that is, investments in our future, education, scientific research, making sure young people can go to college, mak[ing] sure the elderly are cared for [and that] children get off on the right track so that they have opportunities.”
Scott pointed out that not only was the federal budget balanced during the Clinton administration, but the country was on track to pay off the national debt, a situation that has changed severely in the past decade.
“So what do we need to be doing to attract votes?” he asked.
Democrats must “do what we traditionally did,” Scott answered. “We’re fiscally responsible, we want to invest in education and the future of America, and, hopefully, people will respond to that message.”
As a point of information, excerpts of my interview with Senator Jim Webb at Piedmont Virginia Community College earlier this year can be seen at "Jim Webb Visits PVCC" on this blog.
In the first, Donner said that he had a long libertarian pedigree:
“My libertarian roots go pretty deep,” Donner said, “back to when my father was heavily involved in the founding of National Review magazine.”
Joseph Donner, he explained, was “a good friend of William F. Buckley and I grew up around William F. Buckley and his family. Buckley often called himself a libertarian, even though he’s known more as a conservative.” (The title of one of Buckley’s books is Happy Days Were Here Again: Reflections of a Libertarian Journalist.)
“As the years go by,” Donner continued, “I’ve become more and more libertarian.”
In the second article, Donner discussed some policy issues, including the impending debt-ceiling vote in Congress (with a Damoclean deadline of August 2) and a comparison of the flat tax and the Fair Tax:
Donner also weighed the pros and cons of two popular proposals for federal tax reform, the Flat Tax (the centerpiece of Steve Forbes’ 1996 presidential campaign) and the Fair Tax (popularized by radio talk-show host Neal Boortz).
“The pros of a Flat Tax,” he explained, “are that it will simplify an overly complex tax system. It will broaden the tax base because more people will pay income tax. More people will therefore have ‘skin in the game,’ so to speak.”
These new taxpayers, he said, will “have a stake in the system and therefore be more interested and involved in what their government is doing -- and more informed and educated citizens is always a good thing.”
I expect to have more opportunities over the next year or so as these candidates hit the campaign trail and make public appearances as they hustle for votes and money.
It may be eleven days after the fact, but it is not too late to report on the Charlottesville Tea Party that took place on Independence Day in Jackson Park.
Organized by the Jefferson Area Tea Party group, under the leadership of Bill Hay and others, the Fourth of July gathering was a follow-up to the Tax Day Tea Parties that were held on April 15.
The Fourth of July became a really big deal in the 1790s when, believe it or not, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and other so-called Republicans were mobilizing against the Federalist administrations of George Washington.
Later in the show,, contrasting the "civic celebrations" of the 1870s with their counterparts in the early part of the 19th century, Onuf explained:
Earlier Fourth of July celebrations tended to be very contentious… The idea of the Declaration and of Jefferson as its author was a partisan thing in the 1790s and early 1800s. That is, it was Jefferson against the Federalists, that is, the administration.
And then later in the party system that emerged in the 1830s and ‘40s, there were a lot of counterdemonstrations of Democrats and Whigs having alternative celebrations trying to win over popular favor, and so forth.
The Tea Party Movement, such as it is, is diffuse. Lacking a central organizer, local Tea Parties have popped up here and there, sometimes in synchronicity with other groups around the country (as happened on April 15) and sometimes on odd days and hours.
Reporting on the Fourth of July Tea Parties, veteran political correspondent Donald Lambro explained in the Washington Timesearly the next morning:
Whether the turnout would match or exceed the hundreds of April 15 Tea Party protests remained to be seen, though a survey of dozens of publicized events from Maine to California suggested the grass-roots movement had not lost its energy and support.
The April 15 demonstrations drew an estimated 600,000 people to more than 600 events throughout the country, organizers said. Since then, the movement has remained localized, resisting efforts to turn itself into a national organization, and spawning hundreds of local, citizen-led groups that shun professional politicians at their meetings and public events.
While little media attention has been paid to the movement since then and some have suggested that its numbers were eroding, Tea Party leaders who have been monitoring the groups and this weekend's activities dispute that.
"I don't think this movement's eroding," said Adam Bitely, director of new media at Americans for Limited Government.
"When the president's cap-and-trade energy bill came up in the House, a lot of the Tea Party groups were doing local work, calling members of Congress to urge them to vote against the bill," said Mr. Bitely, whose NetRight Nation Web site tracks Tea Party activities.
"Most of these people don't want to be connected to any one group. They are trying to run their own local political organizations and don't need one national organization to do that," he said.
Another example was when the Taxpayer Alliances of Chesapeake, Portsmouth and Virginia Beach jointly participated in a "Defend and Declare Tea Party" event on June 26 in the Chesapeake City Park.
Over 1,000 people participated in the Charlottesville Tea Party on the Fourth of July. Some participants got their knickers in a bunch because the Daily Progress and other mainstream media outlets failed to cover the event.
I can understand their disappointment, but it was a holiday, after all, and the local news media was probably short-staffed. The Daily Progress didn't cover Congressman Perriello's remarks that day at Monticello, either. (He was the guest speaker at the annual naturalization ceremony for new citizens. Last year's featured speaker was President George W. Bush.)
Saturday over one thousand people from the Jefferson Area Tea Party rallied in Charlottesville. The holiday gathering in Jackson Park is the latest effort by the group to send a message to leaders in Washington that tax dollars need to be spent more wisely. While the rally had political overtones, it was also a celebration designed for families.
The participants shared a common distaste for what's happening in Washington.
"We have a bunch of usurpers in government," said Charlottesville resident, Michael Del Rosso. "People that don't care about their oath of office. We need to organize to defeat them in the next election and we need to make them accountable every turn they take that is unconstitutional."
I was able to capture video highlights of the Jefferson Area Tea Party on Independence Day. Here are a few of them.
(Those unfamiliar with the Fair Tax concept can learn a lot about it by reading The Fair Tax Book, by Congressman John Linder and radio talk-show host Neal Boortz. There is also a sequel, in which Linder and Boortz answer their critics.)
Delegate Rob Bell (R-58) was one of two elected officials who spoke at the Tea Party. (Elected officials, as a class, are highly disdained by Tea Partiers.) He introduced the other elected official on the program, state Senator Ken Cuccinelli (R-37).
Senator Cuccinelli, who is also running for Virginia Attorney General, barely mentioned his campaign in his remarks, which focused largely on property rights:
This final video clip is somewhat out of (chronological) order. It's a random collection of scenes from the Jefferson Area Tea Party on July 4th, featuring some of the interstitial comments by compere Joe Thomas, talk show host on WCHV-AM in Charlottesville, who dressed up as Samuel Adams for the occasion. There is also an excerpt from local Arby's restaurant owner Tom Slonaker's reading of the entire Declaration of Independence.
There will be little rest for the Jefferson Area Tea Partiers. Not even two weeks after the Independence Day Tea Party, they plan another peaceable assembly to petition their government for the redress of grievances -- in this case, to express their opinions on health care legislation pending before Congress -- on July 17 (the same day and time as similar protest demonstrations around the country. As announced on the Jefferson Area Tea Party blog,
On Friday July 17th we will once again be meeting at Congressman Tom Perriello’s Charlottesville office at 313 2nd Street SE. We will gather at 4 PM to express to the Congressman our desire for him to vote against the Democrat sponsored Health Care Bill that will soon be coming to the House Floor....
We had a great turn out for the 4th and this is a good opportunity to keep up the momentum. I am contacting Mr. Perriello’s office to let them know that we will be there that afternoon and are requesting the Congressman’s presence. At the very least maybe we can get Mr. Perriello to promise to read this bill before voting on it.
This event will be a great way to promote our July 20th Health Care Forum. The public needs to be aware of how Nationalized Health Care will affect their lives. It is only through education that we are able to make the correct decisions in regard to voting for our representatives and understanding their stances on issues.
The Tea Parties deserve a lot of credit for mobilizing citizens to become more engaged in politics and policymaking. Our system of representative government relies on persistent participation by the people, not only in public protests (which admittedly can be fun and entertaining as well as substantive) but also through phone calls, faxes, and emails to our Representatives and Senators in Washington, as well as legislators in Richmond and other state capitals, and elected officials at the local level, too.
"One of the smarter blogs is the libertarian-leaning collection of Charlottesville posts put up by Rick Sincere..." -- Bob Gibson, The Daily Progress, May 8, 2005
A year before the Stonewall riots sparked what's become known as the modern gay-rights movement, pioneering advocates for gay equality -- sorry, "LGBT equality" -- marched in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia.
, by Congressman John Linder and radio talk-show host Neal Boortz. There is also a 
, in which Linder and Boortz answer their critics.)
