Thursday, October 03, 2013

Pew study finds Virginia absentee ballot rejections declined

Virginia-Pew-truncatedThe Pew Charitable Trusts elections initiative has been crunching the numbers across all 50 states to compare statistics on voter registration rates, voter turnout, and the numbers of absentee and provisional ballots that are accepted or rejected.

In its snapshot of Virginia (published September 19), Pew focused on the change in absentee ballot acceptance rates between 2008 and 2012:

The number of domestic absentee ballots rejected in Virginia declined from 2008 to 2012. Of the approximately 423,000 absentee ballots cast in 2012, 2,278, or 0.5 percent, were rejected. In 2008, the rejection rate among the nearly 550,000 absentee ballots cast was 1.3 percent.
What this suggests is that voters are being more conscientious when filling out their absentee ballots -- making sure that there is a witness signature, for instance, and providing a proper and current address -- and election officials are being more conscientious about examining ballot envelopes when they arrive.

By comparison, the 2012 absentee ballot rejection rate in West Virginia was 0.2 percent (26 out of 13,792 ballots); in Pennsylvania, it was 0.7 percent (1,845 out of 248,561); in North Carolina, it was 1.1 percent (2,237 out of 205,078); and in Michigan, it was 0.6 percent (8,049 out of 1,259,902 absentee ballots returned).

Pew's infographic of Virginia's 2012 voting statistics is here: Virginia-PewSnapshot

(This article was originally posted on Virginia Politics on Demand on October 1, 2013.)






Wednesday, October 02, 2013

Author Interview: Jesse Walker on 'The United States of Paranoia'

Reason magazine books editor Jesse Walker is author of the recent book, The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory (HarperCollins, $25.99), which reaches back to the earliest days of American history to examine how conspiracy theories take hold and what kind of influence they have on politics when they fail to fizzle out.

Acknowledging that his new book draws partial inspiration from and is partially a reply to Richard Hofstadter's famous monograph, The Paranoid Style in American Politics, Walker explained in an interview with me last month at the Cato Institute that The United States of Paranoia “grew out of a lot of things.”

'Folklore of conspiracy thinking'
He had “been writing stories that touched on these issues for many years. At one point in the book, I quote from interviews I did way back in 1995 for a magazine article.”

In particular, Walker said, he “wanted to explore the folklore of conspiracy thinking in America and just what we can learn from these stories – even the ones that aren't true [and] hat they say about the anxieties and the experiences of the people who believe them.”

Walker acknowledged that conspiracy theories and urban legends “overlap,” but they are not the same thing.

“The two big differences are that sometimes a conspiracy theory is true and, by definition, no urban legend is true,” while “not all urban legends involve conspiracies, but many do.”

He pointed out that “one rich source of material in the book was just looking at the works by the sociologists and anthropologists who collect urban legends and that sort of folklore.”

Anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism
Similarly, while some conspiracy theories have anti-Catholic or anti-Semitic roots, not all do.

“There are a lot of anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, which is not to say that anyone who believes in a conspiracy theory shares those bigotries,” Walker explained.

“Of those conspiracy theories that involve scapegoating a group, the three that seem to have the most potent influence in American history were those involving Catholics, blacks, or Indians. Obviously, there are also ones involving Jews, gays, liberals, conservatives, and others, but those were the big three.”

On the other hand, he said, “if I were writing a history of European paranoia, anti-Semitism would be much closer to the core,” adding that there are “a number of anti-Semites in the book,” which focuses on American history.

Even little-known and generally forgotten conspiracy theories can re-emerge unexpectedly, Walker said.

Some of them “will continue to be around and mutate and find new forms. I never would have guessed in the 1980s,” for instance, “that there would be all sorts of rap lyrics about the Illuminati” two decades later.

At my prompting, Walker commented on some well-known conspiracy theories involving President Barack Obama, the AIDS virus, and the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Birtherism
One common conspiracy theory of the past few years has been based on the claim that President Obama was not born in the United States. This has earned the sobriquet “birtherism,” and includes such elements that Obama was born in Kenya and his official birth certificate from Hawaii is a fake.

Jesse Walker
“There's a lot to unpack there,” Walker said about that theory.

In the book, he said, he gives three reasons for why “birtherism has taken hold and even has believers now, even though it's pretty hard to make the case for it being true at this point.”

The first is a “desire for a magic bullet, something that can win you a political victory without the pain of political persuasion. It's worth noting,” Walker explained, “that birtherism initially caught on among the diehard supporters of Hillary Clinton during the primaries in 2008 before it migrated to the right.”

A second reason “is the fear of the foreign.”

If someone is “afraid of foreign Muslims and [doesn't] like the president, it's easy to be attracted to the idea of the president being foreign and/or a Muslim.”

In general, he continued, “if people who are uncomfortable with the idea of America as a multicultural nation, to them, the President is metaphorically foreign for all sorts of reasons and a conspiracy theory is very good at making the metaphoric into the concrete.”

The third reason, Walker said, is that birtherism is “a way to maintain your respect for the presidency while rejecting a president. If you can say, 'he's a usurper, pretender to the throne' – you actually see these sort of royalist metaphors in a lot of birther literature” – the birther can claim respect for the office if not for the man.

Walker added that he is “not saying that every birther subscribes to all three of those. Those groups overlap.” There are people for whom none of those reasons fit, “but those are three themes that often come up in the birther literature.”

AIDS created by U.S. government?
Another conspiracy that emerged relatively recently was the idea that the U.S. government created the AIDS virus.

There a lot of different AIDS theories, Walker said, but the one he addresses in his book “is the idea that white doctors were injecting black babies with AIDS. You might remember that rumor in the '80s.”

That story is “obviously not true,” he noted, but still “it's easy to see how it could catch on among people who have experienced a long history of high-handed or abusive treatment from the white medical establishment, including some genuine conspiracies, like the Tuskegee Experiment. That sort of lays the ground work for believing other conspiracy theories.”

9/11 truthers
Those who refuse to believe that Islamic-extremist hijackers destroyed the World Trade Center by crashing jet planes into the Twin Towers are known as “9/11 truthers.” They often say that the U.S. government engineered the collapse of the buildings in order to trigger a war and reduce Americans' civil liberties.

The question of 9/11 trutherism is “one that has people have adopted that for so many reasons, I really hate to reduce it to any one or two.”

Sometimes, Walker pointed out, “people say that trutherism is a paralyzing idea because everything is stacked against you. The flip side is that you just have to worry about what's happening in Washington not trying to disentangle what's going on in foreign lands.”

That is not, however, “the only reason that trutherism catches on,” and he addresses some of those other possibilities in his book.

As it happens, Jesse Walker was also a guest of Coy Barefoot on WCHV-FM's “Inside Charlottesville” on August 27, talking about The United States of Paranoia.

(This article is based on two previously published pieces on Examiner.com.)

Note: Cross-posted from Book Reviews by Rick Sincere.



Tuesday, October 01, 2013

Charlottesville City Council Candidates Appear at JATP Forum

Last Thursday evening, the four candidates seeking election to the Charlottesville City Council this year appeared together at a forum sponsored by the Jefferson Area Tea Party (JATP). The event was held in Lane Auditorium at the Albemarle County office building.

Incumbent Democrat Kristen Szakos, her running mate Bob Fenwick, and Republican challengers Mike Farruggio and Charles "Buddy" Weber all participated in a fast-paced, hour-long question-and-answer session moderated by JATP member Terry Cooper.

Here is video of the event, beginning with the four candidates' opening statements:

The centerpiece of the evening was the Q&A, which lasted about half an hour:

The forum ended with each candidate presenting a closing statement:
After the exchange of views ended, the candidates posed together for a friendly photograph.
Buddy Weber, Bob Fenwick, Mike Farruggio, and Kristen Szakos on September 26.



Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com! - See more at: http://ricksincerethoughts.blogspot.com/#sthash.GlcEe9Ke.dpuf

Thursday, August 29, 2013

116 Members of Congress Insist POTUS Get Approval Before Bombing Syria

U.S. Representative Scott Rigell (R-VA2)
Led by Representative Scott Rigell (R-Virginia), 116 Members of Congress (98 Republicans and 18 Democrats) have sent a letter to President Barack Obama insisting that he seek and receive congressional authorization before going to war in Syria.

The list of signatories includes several other Virginia congressmen (Randy Forbes, Morgan Griffith, Robert Hurt, Robert Wittman, and Frank Wolf, in addition to Rigell). Also prominent among the signers are libertarian-leaning Republicans Justin Amash of Michigan, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, and Raul Labrador of Idaho, as well as Democrats Zoe Lofgren (California), Peter DeFazio (Oregon), Rush Holt (New Jersey), and Jim McDermott (Washington).

The text of the letter, addressed directly to the President, says:
We strongly urge you to consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria. Your responsibility to do so is prescribed in the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

While the Founders wisely gave the Office of the President the authority to act in emergencies, they foresaw the need to ensure public debate – and the active engagement of Congress – prior to committing U.S. military assets. Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution.

Mr. President, in the case of military operations in Libya you stated that authorization from Congress was not required because our military was not engaged in “hostilities.” In addition, an April 1, 2011, memorandum to you from your Office of Legal Counsel concluded:

“…President Obama could rely on his constitutional power to safeguard the national interest by directing the anticipated military operations in Libya—which were limited in their nature, scope, and duration—without prior congressional authorization.”

We view the precedent this opinion sets, where “national interest” is enough to engage in hostilities without congressional authorization, as unconstitutional. If the use of 221 Tomahawk cruise missiles, 704 Joint Direct Attack Munitions, and 42 Predator Hellfire missiles expended in Libya does not constitute “hostilities,” what does?

If you deem that military action in Syria is necessary, Congress can reconvene at your request. We stand ready to come back into session, consider the facts before us, and share the burden of decisions made regarding U.S. involvement in the quickly escalating Syrian conflict.
Over the decades, Congress slowly ceded to the Executive Branch its constitutional authority for deciding when and if the United States. With the emergence of a more constitutionally-minded faction (including, but not limited to, libertarians like Rand Paul and Justin Amash), Members of Congress are beginning to reassert their rightful authority against usurpations by the White House.

Rigell's letter is not legislation that limits presidential action putting U.S. interests and service members at risk, but it's nonetheless a positive step forward.





Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

My Op-Ed About GOP Lt. Gov. Candidate E.W. Jackson

Google Alerts failed me.

For readers unfamiliar with Google Alerts, Wikipedia provides a succinct definition:

Google Alerts is a content change detection and notification service, offered by the search engine company Google, that automatically notifies users when new content from news, web, blogs, video and/or discussion groups matches a set of search terms selected by the user and stored by the Google Alerts service. The results are delivered as an email digest to a gmail account. The service is available to the general public as an open beta release.
I use Google Alerts to track a couple of dozen topics, including iterations on my name and an organization to which I belong, Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty (GLIL).

A few weeks ago, I wrote an article that included a reference to GLIL and, of course, included my name in the byline. I submitted it to the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star but never received a reply from the editor.

It came as a surprise to me when, on Sunday, I discovered by chance that the Free Lance-Star had published the piece on Sunday, July 21. In the intervening three weeks, Google Alerts never let me know about it. (Neither, for that matter, did the Free Lance-Star itself.)

E.W. Jackson and Rick Sincere
The article was about the Republican nominee for lieutenant governor of Virginia, E.W. Jackson. Two days before the GOP state convention on May 18, I predicted on Coy Barefoot's radio show in Charlottesville that, of the seven candidates for lieutenant governor, two would lose on the first ballot and be dropped out of the competition: state Senator Steve Martin and E.W. Jackson.

I was half-right.

Jackson took the convention by storm and eventually got the nomination on the fourth ballot, after a good portion of delegates had left the Richmond Coliseum to go home. Nobody I know -- outside of Jackson's own group of supporters -- predicted, or could have predicted, his victory. Not even his opponents took him seriously as a rival.

That may be why some of the more eccentric statements by Jackson made prior to the convention never made it into general circulation until after he secured the nomination.

One of these instances was an interview with Peter LaBarbera on AmericansforTruth.com. Immediately after the nominating convention, people -- primarily liberal Democrats, but not exclusively so -- glommed onto his statements about gay people, such as:
Their minds are perverted, they’re frankly very sick people psychologically, mentally and emotionally and they see everything through the lens of homosexuality. When they talk about love they’re not talking about love, they’re talking about homosexual sex.
That's social-conservative boilerplate, and therefore not very interesting.

What did interest me, as a non-liberal, non-progressive gay activist, were his remarks that gay men and lesbians are universally and uniformly "authoritarian" and "totalitarian":
Chesapeake clergyman E.W. Jackson said that gay men and lesbians have "an authoritarian, totalitarian spirit that has decided they know what's best for everyone."

Jackson repeated the characterization when he said: "I used two words to describe what they're trying to do: 'authoritarian' and 'totalitarian,' and I believe that. I believe that they are of a mindset that says we want to destroy, in any way we need to, anyone who dares oppose this agenda. That's a very, very dangerous approach."
Had Jackson said that "some" or even "most" gay people have these characteristics, I might have cut him some slack. I, myself, have been assailed by leftists because I'm not a liberal Democrat. One radio host even accused me, on the air, of not being gay because I didn't adhere to a liberal agenda (in that particular case, with regard to the Boy Scouts of America's pending freedom-of-association case before the U.S. Supreme Court). I retorted that both of his listeners would have reason to disagree -- but that was a long time ago.

My purpose in writing the article that appeared in the Free Lance-Star was to point out that gay men and lesbians are not monolithic in their political views and that many of us even share the basic values that Jackson claims to hold. I noted:
While there are radicals within any political movement, whether right or left, the totalitarian impulse is rare and exists only on the fringes.

Indeed, Jackson's words are at odds with the attitudes and activities of a large number of gay and lesbian Americans whose core beliefs are keenly attuned to the values of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" that Jackson claims animate his own political agenda.
In the article, I mentioned three organizations that mitigate against Jackson's blinkered view: Log Cabin Republicans, Pink Pistols, and Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty. Were it not for space considerations, I could also have pointed out the existence of GOProud and Outright Libertarians, or even the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians (PLAGAL, an anti-abortion group).

It irritates me when politicians -- or anyone, for that matter -- make blanket statements about groups of individuals without having the evidence to back them up. To assert that all gay men and all lesbians are "authoritarian" or "totalitarian" is not only baseless, it's slanderous.

I concluded my Free Lance-Star article:
Whether E.W. Jackson was the right choice for the Republican Party's lieutenant governor nominee is a broader topic best left to other days and other commentators.

One thing is clear, however: His blanket condemnation of gay citizens as wanting to oppress other Americans through "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" methods lacks factual foundation. He should withdraw that accusation and acknowledge that there are many gay men and lesbians who share his fundamental desire for strong families, free markets, and smaller, less intrusive government.
The Republican party and the conservative movement are "big tents" that are, essentially, part of a broader "leave us alone" coalition. People with different backgrounds and different personal characteristics come together to elect public officials who share basic goals but who might disagree about certain issues. That's what coalition politics is all about. To exclude anyone from potential membership in that coalition is bad politics. As former Virginia Congressman Tom Davis likes to say, "politics is a game of addition, not subtraction."



Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Thursday, August 01, 2013

Victoria's Secret Elementary School

Year after year, as Virginia's annual "tax free" back-to-school shopping weekend rolls around, I find a reason to take aim at the program and set phasers to mock.

In 2011, for example, I pointed out on Examiner.com how the tax-free holiday is "more complicated than necessary":

Whatever its merits, the sales-tax holiday’s framework is far more complicated than it needs to be. The Virginia Department of Taxation provides a lengthy list of those items that are eligible and others that are ineligible for the sales tax exemption through the weekend. It would have been much simpler for the General Assembly to decree that all consumer items priced at $100 or less would be tax-exempt for the 72-hour period of the tax holiday.

Instead, the list offers a higgledy-piggledy mix of inconsistencies, in which “athletic supporters” are eligible items, but “cleated or spiked athletic shoes” are not. Computers and computer peripherals (like printers) are ineligible, but “all calculators, including those with printing capabilities” are eligible for the exemption.

Some eligible items have little or no relation to school supplies: choir and altar clothing; diapers, children and adult, including disposable diapers; and wedding apparel, including veils, to name a few.
That led to an interview with the Newsplex in Charlottesville in which I noted:
"We have these weird combinations where an athletic supporter is tax exempted but athletic shoes with cleats are not."
My solution?
"Simplify it, simplify it, simplify it."

Sincere suggests tax breaks for anything $100 or less across the board, not just school.

"Easy to understand, much easier for our retailers who have to program their computers."
As far back as 2006, on the occasion of the first such sales-tax holiday in Virginia, I made the same recommendation:
The easiest, most logical, most consumer- and business-friendly thing to do for the tax holiday would simply have been to decree that on this particular three-day weekend, all items with a retail price of $100 or less would be tax-exempt. That would be simple to program into stores' computers, and it would be simple for the average customer -- that is, taxpayer -- to understand.
Then in 2008, I asked:
How about this idea? A tax-free year. Is that too much to hope for?
These reminiscences are prompted by a report by Watchdog.org's Virginia bureau, which points out another ridiculous anomaly in the list of acceptably tax-free items:

Planning on buying your daughter some sexy lingerie for her first day back to school this fall?

Well, now you can — free from Virginia state sales tax, thanks to this weekend’s back-to-school clothing and supplies tax holiday.

But, if you’re planning on purchasing some new shin guards for your same soccer superstar daughter who plays on her school’s team, forget it.

That isn’t exempt from the state sales tax during the Friday-through Sunday tax holiday, because state officials decided that doesn’t fall under the category of “clothing.”
Watchdog.org also points to a compelling "top ten list" of reasons that explain why sales-tax holidays are a flawed idea, if not actually counterproductive, courtesy of the Tax Foundation. It's a PDF but well worth the read.

This year's back-to-school sales-tax holiday begins Friday, August 2, and extends through Barack Obama's birthday on Sunday, August 4.




Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!


Thursday, July 04, 2013

'America Could Use a Good Dose of Calvin Coolidge' Revisited

Three years ago today, the Richmond Times-Dispatch published an opinion piece I wrote and headlined it "America Could Use a Good Dose of Calvin Coolidge."

Somehow that entire day's newspaper failed to be preserved on the Times-Dispatch web site. (Try it: you'll get a 404.)

A few paragraphs of the article made their way into a blog post later that day, but the whole thing has been unavailable (except in print, or perhaps on microfilm) since July 4, 2010.

I thought it might be worthwhile to revisit "America Could Use a Good Dose of Calvin Coolidge" today, given the Coolidge revival that I reference in a piece I published on Examiner.com early this morning.

In that piece, based upon an interview with the Heritage Foundation's director of American studies, Matthew Spalding, I note that a number of scholars have lately begun focusing their research and writing on the man from Plymouth Notch, Vermont:

Several books on Coolidge have been published recently, including Amity Shlaes' best-selling biography, Coolidge; Charles C. Johnson's Why Coolidge Matters: Leadership Lessons from America's Most Underrated President; the National Notary Association's similarly titled Why Coolidge Matters: How Civility in Politics Can Bring a Nation Together; and Calvin Coolidge: A Documentary Biography, by David Pietrusza.
If anything, the mood of the country in 2013 makes the headline even more relevant now than it was in 2010.

So here is my Times-Dispatch op-ed piece on Calvin Coolidge, now accessible through a Google search.

Most Americans know that two of our country’s Founders – John Adams and Thomas Jefferson – died within hours of each other on the Fourth of July in 1826, the 50th anniversary of American independence.

Fewer might be aware that, five years later, the fifth President, James Monroe, also passed away on the same date.

Fewer still know that Calvin Coolidge, our 30th President, was born on the Fourth of July in 1872.

The much underrated Coolidge is a unique American success story. First elected to public office as a member of the city council of Northhampton, Massachusetts, Coolidge climbed the ladder of government service to clerk of courts, state representative, mayor, state senator, lieutenant governor, governor, vice president, and President of the United States. No other president, before or since, has had such an extensive and varied career in elective office.

In his 2008 book, The Cult of the Presidency, the Cato Institute’s Gene Healy wrote that Coolidge is remembered “mostly for his reticence and for fiscal policies that combined Yankee parsimony with generous tax cuts.”

That “Yankee parsimony” is on display in a short film that is thought to be the first time a U.S. president appeared in a “talkie” – a movie with sound. In this four-minute clip (viewable on YouTube), Coolidge says that he wants to “cut down public expense. I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. This is the chief meaning of freedom. Until we can reestablish a condition under which the earnings of the people can be kept by the people, we are bound to suffer a very severe and distinct curtailment of our liberty.”

“Liberty” is a theme that appears again and again in Coolidge’s speeches and essays. In 1924, Coolidge published a volume of his writings, called The Price of Freedom. For a man known as “Silent Cal,” Coolidge was unexpectedly loquacious and sage.

In his short (437-word) inaugural address as vice president, Coolidge, referring to the responsibilities of the United States Senate, said that body’s “greatest function of all, too little mentioned and too little understood … is the preservation of liberty. Not merely the rights of the majority, they little need protection, but the rights of the minority, from whatever source they may be assailed.”

Coolidge took his oath of office seriously. He believed that, under the Constitution, the authority and reach of the federal government were severely limited and that the rights of the people were expansive. And he ran a tight ship: The entire White House staff under Coolidge consisted of fewer than 40 people; the Obama White House has more than 60 working in the press office alone.

Addressing the American Bar Association in 1922, Coolidge remarked:

“So long as the National Government confined itself to providing those fundamentals of liberty, order, and justice for which it was primarily established, its course was reasonably clear and plain. No large amount of revenue was required. No great swarms of public employees were necessary. There was little clash of special interests or different sections, and what there was of this nature consisted not of petty details but of broad principles... What the government undertook to do it could perform with a fair degree of accuracy and precision.”

Then came the big “but”, as Coolidge lamented the growing size and scope of government in the previous two decades:

“But this has all been changed by embarking on a policy of a general exercise of police powers, by the public control of much private enterprise and private conduct, and of furnishing a public supply for much private need.”

After 88 years, these words could have been written yesterday.

Perhaps being “born on the Fourth of July” imbued Coolidge with a predilection to take the Founders at their word when they said they were creating a republican government of limited and specified powers. Perhaps his views simply reflected his sober, thrifty New England upbringing. Perhaps he was just unusually intelligent.

Whatever the case, we could use a solid dose of “Silent Cal” in the 21st century.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Richard Sincere is the author of Sowing the Seeds of Free Enterprise and The Politics of Sentiment. He blogs about politics and culture at www.RickSincere.com.
For further reference, check out my report on Amity Shlaes' lecture at the Heritage Foundation in February; my audio interview with her at CPAC; and my Virginia Politics on Demand post on Coolidge and civility.




Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

So You Think You Know the Declaration of Independence?

Try this quiz, courtesy of the Heartland Institute:



It's harder than it looks. I only scored 110.
Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Tuesday, July 02, 2013

The Glorious Second of July

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).


Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com! 

Thursday, April 25, 2013

When Squirt Guns Are Outlawed ...


You know our society's threshold for panic has sunk to new low levels when a local police department sends out a warning to citizens about teenagers playing with squirt guns.

This sort of warning was, in fact, distributed by Montgomery Township (New Jersey) police in an email dated April 23. The web version of the email says, in part (telephone number redacted to reduce the number of justifiable crank calls):

A portion of Montgomery High School seniors are participating in a Township wide game known as "senior assassin." The game is not supported nor condoned by the School District. The game involves teams of students seeking out each other and squirting them with water guns. The activity causes both residents and law enforcement alarm due to the devices and methods used by the participants. Citizens may notice an increase in both vehicular and pedestrian traffic involving groups of high school youths. Motorists are asked to use extra caution especially during evening and early morning hours. Parents of participating students are asked to caution their children on the dangers of possessing realistic looking weapons, careless driving, and overall risky behavior. Residents should not attribute suspicious activity to the game and contact Montgomery Police at (908)xxx-xxxx or 9-1-1 in case of an emergency.
The game in question -- here called "senior assassin" but which goes by other names such as "Gotcha, Assassins, KAOS (Killing as organized sport), Juggernaut, Battle Royal, Paranoia, Killer, Elimination, or Circle of Death" -- is not a new phenomenon. I remember playing a version of it in my college dorm in 1980 (I was eliminated in the first round) and the game is a principal plot element in the 1985 Cold War comedy thriller, Gotcha!, starring Anthony Edwards when he still had a full head of hair.

It has been years since commercially-available squirt guns have borne any resemblance to actual firearms, so the police department's stated caution about "possessing realistic looking weapons" is a bit disingenuous.

Maybe New Jerseyans have a different temperament than Virginians, but what really disturbs me is how this innocent game "causes both residents and law enforcement alarm."

As I recall from The Sopranos, therapists are available in New Jersey. Anyone who is "alarmed" by squirt gun fights among teenagers really needs to be under the care of a licensed psychologist.

The last sentence of the missive offers me some comfort, however, and a suspicion that even the communications staff at police HQ in Belle Mead, New Jersey, are rolling their eyes in disbelief at what they are compelled to do. If you read it grammatically, the last sentence says: "Residents should not ... contact Montgomery Police..."

(Cross-posted from Bearing Drift.)


Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com! 

Thursday, April 04, 2013

2013 Ronald Reagan Dinner Has Exciting Silent Auction Items Ready for Bid

Only a few days remain until the 2013 Ronald Reagan Dinner sponsored by the Charlottesville Republican Committee. The dinner will take place the evening of Sunday, April 7, at the Omni Hotel in downtown Charlottesville. (Last-minute tickets are still available for purchase at www.CharlottesvilleGOP.com -- just follow the links to the secure payment page.)

In addition to speeches by former U.S. Secretary of Transportation James Burnley and former White House advisor Karl Rove, this year's dinner offers a range of interesting and intriguing personalized items donated by conservative celebrities and Republican VIPs.

For instance, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback is offering a Kansas state flag, flown over the capitol building in Topeka, with the winning bidder choosing the date for the flag to fly.

Similarly, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval has contributed a commemorative state coin and Iowa Governor Terry Branstad has sent a coffee-table book about his state, with his autograph attached, called Iowa: Simply Beautiful II.

Former President George H.W. Bush has sent us a limited-edition lithograph portraying his presidential library in Texas, signed and numbered by the artist and autographed by the President himself.

Here are some of the other items that will be available for bidding during the cocktail reception at the Omni, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Be sure to bring a checkbook to pay for your purchase, or you'll risk losing it to the second-place bidder! (All of these items have been autographed or otherwise personalized by the donor.)


From former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr

From former UN Ambassador John Bolton

From former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and coauthor Clint Bolick

From House Majority Leader Eric Cantor

From Lynne V. Cheney

From former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani

From Fox News host Sean Hannity

From 1994 U.S. Senate candidate Oliver North

From Karl Rove

From House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan
An autographed 2012 Christmas card

From CSI:NY actor Gary Sinise
Signed photo and autographed DVD, High Flight: A Voyage to the Edge of Infinity

From Virginia Congressman Rob Wittman

In addition to featured speakers Burnley and Rove, the dinner program will include remarks by Albemarle County Board of Supervisors member Ken Boyd and Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors Chairman Shaun Kenney, as well as a special presentation by the GOP candidates for Attorney General of Virginia, Delegate Rob Bell and state Senator Mark Obenshain.

There may be additional surprises in store, but people will have to wait until April 7 to find out what they are.

(Cross-posted from the Charlottesville Republicans Blog.)

Saturday, March 23, 2013

It's Human Achievement Hour!

Turn on the lights. Vacuum your carpets. Wash and dry your clothes in a washer and dryer, and clean your kitchen utensils in a dishwasher.

Celebrate the ingenuity that brought you the conveniences of modern life. It's Human Achievement Hour!

As explained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which launched Human Achievement Hour as an alternative to the pessimistic and -- literally -- dark Earth Hour,

Human Achievement Hour (HAH) is a celebration of individual freedom and appreciation of the achievements and innovations that people have used to improve their lives throughout history. To celebrate Human Achievement Hour, participants need only to spend the hour from 8:30 pm to 9:30 pm on March 23 enjoying the benefits of capitalism and human innovation: Gather with friends in the warmth of a heated home, watch television, take a hot shower, drink a beer, call a loved one on the phone, or listen to music.
Take time this evening to go on Twitter and Facebook to offer words of gratitude to Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Isaac Singer, Christopher Latham Sholes, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs.

Human achievement is something to appreciate, not condemn.


Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com! 

March 23, 1983 - Ronald Reagan Launches the Strategic Defense Initiative

It is hard to believe it has been three decades since President Ronald Reagan introduced the Strategic Defense Initiative, which quickly earned the dismissive sobriquet "Star Wars" (after the George Lucas films of the same name).

Reagan's introduction was modest and unexpected, coming at the end of a televised address to the nation on the general theme of national security and the defense budget then being considered by Congress.

The Strategic Defense Initiative (or SDI) was not without precedent, however. Winston Churchill had called for defensive weapons systems as early as the 1930s, in the run-up to World War II. One result of the strategic defense debate and subsequent research in that era was radar, which probably saved Britain from total destruction by the Luftwaffe.

There had also been talk about strategic defense from the beginning of the Atomic Age, with pro- and anti- sides alternating pre-eminence from time to time.

In the 1960s, defensive strategic systems were debated and set aside as destabilizing to the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). As I wrote in the 1986 book, Promise or Peril: The Strategic Defense Initiative (coedited with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Marin Strmecki, and Peter Wehner) U.S. Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara

also rejected a U.S. strategic defense system because it would be easily countered by Moscow. The Soviet Union would be forced to respond with an offensive buildup, which would mean that "the risk of a Soviet nuclear attack would not be further decreased" and, if deterrence failed, "the damage to the United States from a Soviet nuclear attack would not be reduced in any meaningful sense."
To those following strategic issues in the early 1980s, the substance of Reagan's "Star Wars speech" was not so surprising, even if the timing of it was. Reagan himself was urged by Edward Teller, known as the "father of the hydrogen bomb," to promote and initiate defensive systems as part of the overall U.S. national security strategy. Retired General Daniel O. Graham had been pushing a concept he called "High Frontier," which used off-the-shelf, kinetic technology to knock incoming missiles out of the sky.

In summarizing and introducing an excerpt from Reagan's SDI speech in Promise or Peril, I wrote:
With President Reagan's address to the nation on March 23, 1983, the Strategic Defense Initiative became the focus of the U.S. debate over strategic policy. Although much of the speech was devoted to resisting uts in his defense budget, in his conclusion the President offered an alternative to traditional U.S. nuclear strategy. "Wouldn't it be better to save lives than to avenge them?" he asked. Although "deterrence of aggression through the promise of retaliation" had worked well, Reagan rejected the idea of indefinitely basing U.S. policy on the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction.

In calling for this shift, he advocated, not simply a limited defense of U.S. strategic forces, but a total population defense so that "free people could live secure in the knowledge that ... we could intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own soil or that of our allies." The President challenged the scientific community, "those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete."

The rhetoric of Reagan's speech echoes that of Winston Churchill ... during the British air defense debate of the 1930s.
Thirty years on, for both his domestic and foreign policies, Ronald Reagan is remembered by local Republican parties through annual celebratory dinners. The next one coming up in Virginia is in Charlottesville on April 7, just two weeks after the anniversary of what is known not just derisively but also affectionately as the "Star Wars speech."