Remembering the March King

“Love your neighbor as yourself and your country more than yourself.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Jefferson Smith — 1825

It is certainly appropriate and fitting to remember those who sacrificed their life and limb in the service of the United States from Valley Forge and Gettysburg to Iwo Jima and Helmand Province. It is also fitting to remember those patriots who gave much to our culture and heritage on this Memorial Day weekend.

I have posted two previous blogs honoring our fallen heroes; The Meaning of Memorial Day and how to make the perfect burger and Another Memorial Day. This Memorial Day I would like to allow the TV networks to run their specials and old and tired war movies while I remember John Philip Sousa in words and his music.

John Philip Sousa was born in 1854 in Washington, D.C. and died in 1932. He worked as a theater musician and conducted the U.S. Marine Band before starting his own civilian band in 1892. Sousa toured with his band for 40 years and was indisputably the most famous musical act in the world. He composed 136 marches, 15 operettas, 70 songs and many other pieces

Sousa was born in Washington, D.C., on November 6, 1854, to John Antonio Sousa, who was of Portuguese ancestry, and Maria Elisabeth Trinkhaus, who was of Bavarian ancestry. Sousa started his music education by playing the violin as a pupil of John Esputa and George Felix Benkert for harmony and musical composition at the age of six. He was found to have absolute pitch. During his childhood, Sousa studied voice, violin, piano, flute, cornet, baritone horn, trombone and alto horn. At the age of 13, his father, a trombonist in the Marine Band, enlisted Sousa in the United States Marine Corps as an apprentice to keep him from joining a circus band.

On December 30, 1879, Sousa married Jane van Middlesworth Bellis (1862–1944) a wife he would remain with until his death. They had three children: John Philip, Jr. (April 1, 1881 – May 18, 1937), Jane Priscilla (August 7, 1882 – October 28, 1958), and Helen (January 21, 1887 – October 14, 1975). All were buried in the John Philip Sousa plot in the Congressional Cemetery.

Several years after serving his apprenticeship, Sousa joined a theatrical (pit) orchestra where he learned to conduct. He returned to the U.S. Marine Band as its head in 1880 and remained as its conductor until 1892. Sousa led "The President's Own" band under five presidents from Rutherford B. Hayes to Benjamin Harrison. Sousa's band played at two Inaugural Balls, those of James A. Garfield in 1881, and Benjamin Harrison in 1889. The marching brass bass, or sousaphone, a modified helicon, was created by J. W. Pepper – a Philadelphia instrument maker who created the instrument in 1893 at Sousa’s request using several of his suggestions in its design. He wanted a tuba that could sound upward and over the band whether its player was seated or marching. The sousaphone was re-created in 1898 by C.G. Conn and this was the model that Sousa preferred to use.

He organized The Sousa Band the year he left the Marine Band. The Sousa Band toured from 1892–1931, performing at 15,623 concerts. In Paris, the Sousa Band marched through the streets including the Champs-Élysées to the Arc de Triomphe – one of only eight parades the band marched in over its forty years. The band played for sold-out crowds both in America and around the world, including at the World Exposition in Paris, France.

The Timeline for Sousa’s life:

1854: Born Washington, DC, Nov. 6. John Philip was 3rd of 10 children of John Antonio Sousa (born in Spain of Portuguese parents) and Maria Elisabeth Trinkhaus (born in Bavaria). John Philip's father, Antonio, played trombone in the U.S. Marine band. He grew up around military band music.

1860: Began musical study around age six, studying voice, violin, piano, flute, cornet, baritone, trombone and alto horn.

1867: His father enlisted him in the Marines at age 13 as an apprentice after he attempted to run away to join a circus band.

1872: Published first composition, "Moonlight on the Potomac Waltzes".

1875: Discharged from Marines. Began performing (on violin), touring and eventually conducting theater orchestras. Conducted Gilbert & Sullivan's H.M.S. Pinafore on Broadway.

1879: In February, met Jane van Middlesworth Bellis during Pinafore rehearsals; they were married December 30, 1879.

1880: Returned to Washington in September to assume leadership of the US Marine Band.

1880-1892: Conducted "The President's Own", serving under presidents Hayes, Garfield, Cleveland, Arthur and Harrison. After two successful but limited tours with the Marine Band in 1891 and 1892, promoter David Blakely convinced Sousa to resign and organize a civilian concert band.

1892: The first Sousa Band concert was performed September 26 at Stillman Music Hall in Plainfield, New Jersey. Two days earlier, bandleader Patrick Gilmore had died in St. Louis. Nineteen of Gilmore's former musicians eventually joined Sousa's band, including Herbert L. Clarke (cornet) and E. A. Lefebre (saxophone). The original name of the band was "Sousa's New Marine Band", but criticism from Washington forced the withdrawal of the name.

1895: Sousa's first successful operetta, El Capitan, debuts.

1896: Sousa's promoter David Blakely dies while Sousa and his wife are on vacation in Europe. On the return voyage, Sousa receives the inspiration for The Stars and Stripes Forever.

1900: The Sousa Band tours Europe.

1901: Second European tour.

1905: Third European tour.

1910: World Tour: New York, Great Britain, Canary Islands, South-Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji Islands, Hawaii, Canada.

1917: During World War I, Sousa joins the US Naval Reserve at age 62. He is assigned the rank of lieutenant and paid a salary of $1 per month.

1919-1932: After the war, Sousa continued to tour with his band. He championed the cause of music education, received several honorary degrees and fought for composers' rights, testifying before Congress in 1927 and 1928.

1932: Sousa dies at age 77 on March 6th, after conducting a rehearsal of the Ringgold Band in Reading, Pennsylvania. The last piece he conducted was "The Stars and Stripes Forever".

Sousa is not so much remembered for his life but for the patriotic marches he gave us. He wrote 136 marches, published by the Sam Fox Publishing Company beginning in 1917 and continuing until his death. Some of his notable ones are:

• The Gladiator March, (1866) Sousa's first hit.
• "King Cotton", a 1895 Sousa military march.
• "The Gallant Seventh", was in the 1920s and is distinguished as his only march with two breakstrains.
• Sousa's The Thunderer (1889), performed in 1896 by the United States Marine Band
• Sousa's Fairest of the Fair (1908), performed by the United States Navy Band
• "Semper Fidelis" (1888) (Official March of the United States Marine Corps)
• "The Washington Post" (1889)
• "The Thunderer" (1889)
• "High School Cadets" (1890)
• "The Liberty Bell" (1893) (later used as credits theme for Monty Python's Flying Circus TV series)
• "Manhattan Beach March" (1893)
• "Stars and Stripes Forever" (1896) (The National March of the United States)
• "El Capitan" (1896)
• "Hands Across the Sea" (dedicated to the band of the Virginia Tech Corps of Cadets – the Highty-Tighties) (1899)
• "Hail to the Spirit of Liberty" March (1900)
• "Invincible Eagle" (1901) (Dedicated to Pan-American Buffalo Exposition)
• "Fairest of the Fair" (1908)
• "Glory of the Yankee Navy" (1909)
• "U.S. Field Artillery" (1917) (Modified version The Army Goes Rolling Along is the official song of the U.S. Army)
• "Who's Who in Navy Blue" (1920) (Composed at the request of the United States Naval Academy class of 1920 and dedicated to Tecumseh, a bronze reproduction of the figurehead of the U.S.S. Delaware that occupies a key place at the Academy)
• "The Gallant Seventh" (1922)
• "Nobles of the Mystic Shrine" (1923)
• "The Black Horse Troop" (1924) (Written in honor of Troop A, 107th Cavalry, Ohio National Guard.
• "Pride of the Wolverines" (1926)
• "Minnesota March" (1927)
• "New Mexico March" (1928)
• "Salvation Army March" (1930) (dedicated to The Salvation Army's 50th anniversary in the USA)

Sousa wrote marches for several American universities, including University of Illinois, University of Nebraska, Kansas State University, and Marquette University.

A few notes of Sousa’s more famous marches:

In his autobiography, Marching Along, Sousa wrote that he composed the march on Christmas Day, 1896. He was on an ocean liner on his way home from a vacation with his wife in Europe and had just learned of the recent death of David Blakely, the manager of the Sousa Band. He composed the march in his head and committed the notes to paper on arrival in the United States. It was first performed at Willow Grove Park, just outside Philadelphia, on May 14, 1897, and was immediately greeted with enthusiasm. It was first performed in Augusta, Maine on May 1, 1897 at the New City Hall.

”The Stars and Stripes Forever" follows the standard American military march form. The march begins with a four-bar introduction, which is followed by a dotted, playful melody. Its trio is the most famous part of the march. Most bands adopt the Sousa Band practice of having one or three (never two piccolo players play the famous obbligato in the first repeat of the trio (the one after the breakstrain). In the final repeat of the trio (grandioso), the low brass joins the piccolo players with a prominent countermelody. The official version, as played by the United States Marine Band, is performed in the key of E-flat.

"Semper Fidelis", which was written in 1888 by John Philip Sousa, is regarded as the official march of the United States Marine Corps. This piece was one of two composed in response to a request from United States President Chester Arthur for a new piece to be associated with the United States President. The words Semper Fidelis are Latin for "Always Faithful."

In an October 1927 interview published in the Independent (Nebraska), Sousa claimed "I wrote "Semper Fidelis" one night while in tears after my comrades of the Marine Corps had sung their famous Hymn at Quantico.

"The Washington Post" is a march composed by John Philip Sousa in 1889. Since then, it has remained as one of his most popular marches throughout the United States and many countries abroad.

In 1889 the owners of The Washington Post newspaper requested that John Philip Sousa, the leader of the United States Marine Corps Band, compose a march for the newspaper's essay contest awards ceremony. Sousa obliged; "The Washington Post March" was introduced at the ceremony on June 15, 1889, and it became quite popular. It led to a British journalist dubbing Sousa "The March King". Sousa is honored in The Washington Post building for his contribution to the newspaper and his country.

The composition is now in the public domain in the US, as its copyright has expired

This recognizable march is written in standard form: IAABBCCDCDC. Written in 2/4 meter, it is suited as an accompaniment to the two-step, a new dance introduced in its time.

The first strain of the march (above) is famous and familiar to many. The march is played in a stately march tempo (110-120 beats/m; rarely over).

March enthusiasts have argued that the trio section's mellow and moving phrases are amongst Sousa's most musical. Six sudden eighth notes move the melody along, and its unusually calm breakstrain is a simple adaptation of the trio melody. It then moves on to the first trio repeat, where the low brass begins an even more mellow countermelody.

In 1952 Hollywood released a somewhat corny, but very entraining biopic about the life of John Phillip Sousa called “Stars and Stripes Forever.” The film is a biography of the composer John Philip Sousa, from his early days in the Marine Corps Band through the Spanish-American War in 1898. It stars Clifton Webb as Sousa and Ruth Hussey as his wife Jennie (Jane).

A few of the reviewers give the film very high marks, not so much for the acting but for the music:

“Clifton Webb does a fine work as the great band-master and composer of memorable marches who, on the 1890's, when he leaves the Marines Corps., forms his own concert band and travels around the world.

With the sensitive and beautiful Debra Paget as the singer-dancer, and the sympathetic and good-looking Robert Wagner as the horn player, the loving couple shares a real and firm part of the 'imagined' tale.

The great highlights of the picture are when a black choir is singing "The Battle Hymn Of The Republic," and the outstanding performance of "Dixie," played by Philip Sousa and his Orchestra as they enter the Cotton States Exposit John Philip Sousa was not only America's "March King," he was a skilled organizer and entertainer who also composed much music now thoroughly unknown to most Americans (and fans elsewhere). His life spanned the era of an optimistic, brash America where live music was the only music to the burgeoning and eventually triumphant victory of an insatiable technology that even in Sousa's lifetime was employed to record almost everything. Sousa benefited from the new world of recording and he can be heard on compact disc in his later years conducting his famed quasi-military band.

20th Century Fox enlisted a cadre of fine performers for a seamlessly entertaining biopic of John Philip Sousa with a nice, anachronistically innocent, fictional romance interwoven with the band leader/composer's story.

As Sousa Clifton Webb brings to life a character who was, as in reality, ambitious and driven to succeed. Sousa left the Marine Corps, where he led The President's Own, to start his hand-picked band. In uniforms which the leader designed, the outfit mirrored great military bands (of which the U.S., as opposed to England, had a clear shortage during Sousa's life). Sousa understood the importance of touring and he was light years ahead of the twentieth century's pops ensembles in making his musicians - and his music — as ubiquitous as travel of his day allowed. ion in Atlanta.”

I have seen this film several times with the latest last year on Turner Classic Movies. I found in very enjoyable — especially the music. It harkens me back to a time when people believed that this country was a place where you could make of yourself what you could out for the effort for.

On December 24, 1910, the Sousa Band embarked on a world tour. Although not the first group to travel around the world, the publicity generated was immense (although the financial rewards were only modest). Sousa's reputation, marches and recordings preceded him; he and the band were welcomed as conquering heroes at every port.

Sousa was in poor health at the beginning of the tour, having contracted malaria during hunting trip in the fall of 1910. After spending two weeks in the hospital, he met the band in mid-tour in Montreal and finished a series of "farewell" concerts before sailing from New York on December 24.

Here is a summary of their itinerary (for a complete list of tour stops, consult Paul Bierley's The Incredible Band of John Philip Sousa):

• Jan 9-Mar 3 1911: England, Ireland
• Mar 24-Apr 21: South Africa
• May 12-Aug 23: Tasmania, Australia, New Zealand
• Sep 10-Oct 15: Hawaii, Western Canada & U.S.
• Oct 23-Dec 1: Midwestern U.S. (TX, OK, KS, MO, NE, IA, WI, MN, MI, IL, OH)
• Dec 4-Dec 10: NY

In 1985 my wife and I traveled with my daughter’s high school band to Europe. One of the stops on the tour was in Lugano, Switzerland. Lugano is in the Italian speaking part of the Swiss Confederation. The band gave a concert on the Piazza della Riforma in the center of the town. It was a beautiful June evening and the cafes lining the Piazza were filled with patrons sipping their coffees or campari and listening to the concert. For their final number the band played Sousa’s Stars and Stripes. It took no time for the crowd to break out in rhythmic clapping to the beat of the march. I can still remember one of the band’s flute players who doubled on the piccolo flawlessly playing the famous trio. After the march was concluded the assembled crowd rose to their feet in a standing ovation. It’s difficult to say if it was the band’s performance or he familiarity of the tune. Perhaps it was a little of both.

Sousa, the child of immigrant parents gave this country a heritage of march music that will live as long of the stars and stripes fly above our capitol For this he should be remembered as a child of America and true patriot.

Celebrating The Fourth Of July

“I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding generations, as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.” — John Adams in a letter to his wife Abigail after the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776.

Tomorrow we will celebrate this Republic’s 236^th birthday. (I am writing this on the eve of the Fourth of July). No doubt many of you will partake in family get-togethers, BBQs, time at the beach or pool, lazing about and enjoying time off from work, and of course watching one of the numerous fireworks displays. All off this was recommended by John Adams, one of the authors of the Deceleration, to his wife Abigail after the Declaration was signed.

America’s Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson said, was the product of “the American mind.” Our Constitution was made with the same purpose as the Declaration—to establish a regime where the people are sovereign, and the government protects the rights granted to them by their Creator.

The word “constitution” means “to ordain and establish something.” It also means “to set a firm thing strongly in place.” It is linked to two other words: statute and statue. All three words—constitution, statute, and statue—connote a similar idea of establishing something lasting and beautiful.

The Constitution, then, is a work of art. It gives America its form. To fully know the “cause,” or purpose, of America, one must know the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson, its author, mentioned four thinkers for their contribution to molding “the American mind”: Aristotle, Cicero, Algernon Sidney, and John Locke.

It is important to recognize the profound influence Locke’s Second Treatise had on the Founders, especially Jefferson. Locke writes:

“The constitution of the legislative is the first and fundamental act of society, whereby provision is made for the continuation of their union, under the direction of persons, and bonds of laws, made by persons authorized thereunto, by the consent and appointment of the people, without which no one man, or number of men, amongst them, can have authority of making laws that shall be binding to the rest. When any one, or more, shall take upon them to make laws, whom the people have not appointed so to do, they make laws without authority, which the people are not therefore bound to obey; by which means they come again to be out of subjection, and may constitute to themselves a new legislative, as they think best, being in full liberty to resist the force of those, who without authority would impose any thing upon them.”

Locke is not only underscoring his earlier point about man’s right to resist the illegitimate, arbitrary power of government, particularly to his property rights; he is going further — that is, no government, including one established by the consent of the governed, has the authority to violate man’s inalienable rights.

Locke explains that he laws of nature exist above all else, and all men are required to obey it, including those who hold public office “Thus the law of Nature stands as an eternal rule to all men, legislators as well as others. The rules that they make for other men’s actions, must, as well as their own be comfortable to the law of Nature, i.e., to the will of God, of which that is a declaration, and fundamental law of nature being the preservation of mankind, no human sanction can be good, or valid against it.”

The first sentence of the Declaration encapsulates Locke’s view of the preeminence of natural law and the right to disobey and, indeed, throw off a government that abuses its power. It states:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Celebrating the Fourth of July is one of the best parts about summer. You get to barbecue with your family, watch fireworks, go to a parade—take part in all the fun summer activities.

But another reason why July 4th is so special is because it’s Independence Day, a holiday celebrating the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. In 1776, founding father and soon-to-be president, Thomas Jefferson wrote what is now the United States’ most famous and cherished document to give a list of grievances against King George III of England. It was written to justify the colonies breaking away from the mother country and becoming an independent nation. Revised by Benjamin Franklin and John Adams, the Declaration of Independence was signed by our founding fathers and accepted by Congress on July 4, 1776.

But the spirit of Independence Day is not only about the United States officially becoming a country. It’s about celebrating the values that the country was founded upon. The Declaration of Independence was written with the theory that every person has inherent rights, called “self-evident truths” in the official document. It reads: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Abraham Lincoln deemed the Deceleration as an “Apple of Gold set in the silver frame of the Constitution.” He believed the Declaration was the most important document ever written by the hand of man and the very foundation of this Republic.

The soul of the American founding is located in the universal political principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The meaning of equality and liberty in the Declaration is decisively different than the definition given to those principles by modern Progressivism.

Liberty is the right to be free from the coercive interference of other people. It is derived from nature itself, and is a natural right—something possessed simply because one is a human being,

Equality means no one is by nature the ruler of any other person. Each human being is equal in his right to life, liberty, and property, which the Declaration calls “the pursuit of happiness.”

Equality, liberty, and natural rights require a certain form of government: republicanism, based on consent of the governed. Legitimate government, based on the consent of the governed, must accomplish three things: the establishment of civil laws that protect man’s natural rights; the punishment of those who infringe on others’ natural rights; and the protection of natural rights through a strong national defense.

The people themselves also play a vital role in protecting their rights. They must be educated in “religion, morality, and knowledge, as expressed in the Northwest Ordinance passed enacted in by Congress on July 13, 1787. Article III of the Ordinance states:

“Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. The utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their consent; and in their property, rights, and liberty they never shall be invaded or disturbed unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity shall, from time to time, be made, for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace and friendship with them.”

Modern liberalism uses the same language of “liberty” and “equality” as the Declaration of Independence. Yet modern liberals mean something other than what the Founders meant by those words. For the Progressives, “equality” means equal access to resources and wealth, while “liberty” means the ability to utilize a right, rather than the right in itself. Both of these ideas necessitate government programs that help mankind liberate itself from its “natural limitations.”

The Declaration of Independence and modern Progressivism are fundamentally opposed to each other. The modern misunderstanding of “equality” and “liberty” threatens not just the Declaration of Independence, but the whole of the American constitutional and moral order.

In a letter to Henry Lee Thomas Jefferson wrote on May 8, 1825, a little more than a year before he died, answering a query about the Declaration of Independence, explaining that it drew upon a long political and philosophical tradition and reflected principles widely understood by Americans of the founding era. In the letter Jefferson said:

“....But with respect to our rights, and the acts of the British government contravening those rights, there was but one opinion on this side of the water. All American whigs thought alike on these subjects. When forced, therefore, to resort to arms for redress, an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, etc....”

As victory in the Second World War looked more and more likely, President Roosevelt turned his attention to postwar America. In this speech he proposes a “second Bill of Rights.” In his annual speech to Congress on January 11, 1944 Roosevelt proclaimed:

“As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

• The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

• The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

• The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

• The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

• The right of every family to a decent home;

• The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

• The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

• · The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.”

Roosevelt’s proposal was antithetical to the thinking of Jefferson and our founders in 1776. His was an expression of the new progressive thinking that was sweeping the country, a thinking that would lead us down the path to the coercive government and the increasing class warfare we live with today.

On the other hand on Independence Day of 1986 Ronald Reagan gave a short address to the people of the United States from an aircraft carrier in New York Harbor. The video of that speech is shown below.

When you are enjoying your burgers and hot dogs, a day at the beach, and watching the fireworks displays take a few moments to reflect on the words of Ronaldo Reagan and the words of our Declaration of Independence adopted 236 years ago.

The Declaration of Independence

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, 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; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Hodgepodge

"The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse." — James Madison

The Media

This weekend, we saw Palin-palooza in Washington, D.C. when Sarah Palin spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and Linsanity across the nation when Jeremy Lin, on the grandest basketball stage, scored 38 points against the Los Angeles nation and got the sports world in a buzz.

Though Palin showed this weekend that she could generate the enthusiasm the other presidential candidates could not and proved again that nobody captures the heart of Republicans more than she does, there was chatter among some in the GOP establishment — even those who saw the speech and the crowd reaction with their own eyes — that Palin did not do any better or any worse than the other candidates.

This is demonstrably false.

Such silly-talk would be the equivalent of sportswriters writing that Lin performed poorly last week in New York and the Knicks won despite his poor performance.

The difference between sports and politics is that nobody in sports can write such nonsense because everyone watches the same game. And if someone did write such nonsense, they would be resoundingly mocked and run out of the profession — that is in and of itself enough of a deterrent to keep sportswriters honest

Furthermore, sportswriters can hate or love teams or players but they still have to objectively write about what happened on the field of play. Again, because everyone is watching the same game.

But in politics, the chattering class and many of those who write about it have the gall to try to convince people that “x” happened when “y” occurred.

In a more interconnected world — made more possible by the proliferation of social media — this will be harder to do.

I wish politics had a deterrent or check similar to that in sports, in which writers and commentators would not dare to pen something that went against what everyone saw.

In any event, one thing was clear this weekend: LIN Nation was out in full force, and anyone who tells you otherwise is not being honest.

Notre Dame Reverses Course on Obama

Twenty-five Notre Dame faculty members--led by the university’s top ethics expert, and including some of the school’s most eminent scholars--have signed a statement declaring that President Barack Obama’s latest version of his administration’s mandate that all health insurance plans in the United States must cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions, is “a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand."

The statement—put out on the letterhead of the University of Notre Dame Law School--is also signed by leading scholars from other major American colleges and universities, including Princeton, Harvard, Stanford, Georgetown, Brigham Young, Yeshiva and Wheaton College.

“The Obama administration has offered what it has styled as an “accommodation” for religious institutions in the dispute over the HHS mandate for coverage (without cost sharing) of abortion inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception. The administration will now require that all insurance plans cover (“cost free”) these same products and services. Once a religiously affiliated (or believing individual) employer purchases insurance (as it must, by law), the insurance company will then contact the insured employees to advise them that the terms of the policy include coverage for these objectionable things.

This so-called “accommodation” changes nothing of moral substance and fails to remove the assault on religious liberty and the rights of conscience which gave rise to the controversy. It is certainly no compromise. The reason for the original bipartisan uproar was the administration’s insistence that religious employers, be they institutions or individuals, provide insurance that covered services they regard as gravely immoral and unjust. Under the new rule, the government still coerces religious institutions and individuals to purchase insurance policies that include the very same services.

It is no answer to respond that the religious employers are not “paying” for this aspect of the insurance coverage. For one thing, it is unrealistic to suggest that insurance companies will not pass the costs of these additional services on to the purchasers. More importantly, abortion drugs, sterilizations, and contraceptives are a necessary feature of the policy purchased by the religious institution or believing individual. They will only be made available to those who are insured under such policy, by virtue of the terms of the policy.

It is morally obtuse for the administration to suggest (as it does) that this is a meaningful accommodation of religious liberty because the insurance company will be the one to inform the employee that she is entitled to the embryo-destroying “five day after pill” pursuant to the insurance contract purchased by the religious employer. It does not matter who explains the terms of the policy purchased by the religiously affiliated or observant employer. What matters is what services the policy covers.

The simple fact is that the Obama administration is compelling religious people and institutions who are employers to purchase a health insurance contract that provides abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization. This is a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand. It is an insult to the intelligence of Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other people of faith and conscience to imagine that they will accept an assault on their religious liberty if only it is covered up by a cheap accounting trick.

Finally, it bears noting that by sustaining the original narrow exemptions for churches, auxiliaries, and religious orders, the administration has effectively admitted that the new policy (like the old one) amounts to a grave infringement on religious liberty. The administration still fails to understand that institutions that employ and serve others of different or no faith are still engaged in a religious mission and, as such, enjoy the protections of the First Amendment.”

Prof. Carter Snead, a professor of law at Notre Dame, was one of the lead organizers of the statement, which was published on his official law school letterhead. Notre Dame's top ethics expert, Snead serves as director of the university's Center for Ethics and Culture, a position to which he was appointed by Father John Jenkins, the president of Notre Dame.

In 2009, Father Jenkins awarded President Barack Obama an honorary Notre Dame Law degree.

Some of the other distinguished Notre Dame faculty who signed the statement condemning Obama’s mandate are Prof. Patrick Griffin, chairman of Notre Dame's History Department; Prof. Richard Garnett, an associate dean; John Cavadini, director of Notre Dame’s Institute for Church Life; Christian Smith, director of Notre Dame’s Center for the Study of Religion and Society; Prof. Paolo Carozza, director of Notre Dame’s Center for Civil and Human Rights; Prof. Philip Bess, Notre Dame’s Director of Graduate Studies; and Father Wilson Miscamble, a professor of history.

Other leading organizers of the letter included Prof. Robert George of Princeton and Prof. Mary Ann Glendon of Harvard Law School.

When Obama received his honorary degree at Notre Dame's May 17, 2009, commencement, he vowed to respect the conscience rights of those who believe abortion is wrong.

“Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women,” said Obama. “Those are things we can do.”

Many Catholic bishops and lay leaders had criticized Notre Dame's decision to grant Obama an honorary degree — pointing to his long-standing position in favor of legalized abortion on demand, which included going so far as to oppose a law in the Illinois state senate that would have simply said that a baby born alive in that state was entitled to the same rights under the U.S. Constitution as any other born "person."

In their statement released late Friday, the 25 Notre Dame faculty members and the many other prominent scholars from other institutions who joined them said that Obama’s sterilization-contraception-abortifacient mandate--even with Obama’s proposed adjustments on Friday--remains an “assault on religious liberty and rights of conscience.”

“The administration will now require that all insurance plans cover (‘cost free’) these same products and services,” said the scholars. “Once a religiously-affiliated (or believing individual) employer purchases insurance (as it must, by law), the insurance company will then contact the insured employees to advise them that the terms of the policy include coverage for these objectionable things.

“This so-called ‘accommodation’ changes nothing of moral substance and fails to remove the assault on religious liberty and the rights of conscience which gave rise to the controversy,” they said. “It is certainly no compromise. The reason for the original bipartisan uproar was the administration’s insistence that religious employers, be they institutions or individuals, provide insurance that covered services they regard as gravely immoral and unjust. Under the new rule, the government still coerces religious institutions and individuals to purchase insurance policies that include the very same services.”

The statement also said that Obama’s latest iteration of the regulation is “an insult to the intelligence of Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews and Muslims” and “cannot stand.”

“The simple fact is that the Obama administration is compelling religious people and institutions who are employers to purchase a health insurance contract that provides abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization,” the scholars said. “This is a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand. It is an insult to the intelligence of Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other people of faith and conscience to imagine that they will accept an assault on their religious liberty if only it is covered up by a cheap accounting trick.”

My confidence in the moral values of the College of Our Lady is being restored.

The Obama Administration and Media Maters.

According to The Daily Caller an internal Media Matters For America memo obtained by The Daily Caller reveals that the left-wing media watchdog group employs an “opposition research team” to target its political enemies. Included in the list of targets are right-leaning websites, conservative think tanks, prominent financiers and donors, and more than a dozen specific Fox News Channel and News Corporation employees.

“We will conduct extensive public records searches and compile opposition books on individuals,” declares the memo, likely written in late 2009. Investigations, it says, “will focus on the backgrounds, connections, operations and political and financial activities of the individuals.” (RELATED: Media Matters sources, memos reveal erratic behavior, close coordination with White House and news organizations)

One of those singled out for scrutiny in the memo is PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, a self-described libertarian. Thiel “directly funded, through a small government group, prior racist attack videos by James O’Keefe, the right-wing operative who staged the recent ACORN video sting,” states the memo. “Thiel’s role in funding such attacks has gone completely unremarked and largely uninvestigated.”

“An opposition research team will serve to hold Thiel and others like him accountable.”

In addition to Thiel, the memo contains this list of “preliminary targets”:

News Corp

• Fox News Channel
• Fox Business Network
• Fox News’ websites

Conservative news sites

• WorldNetDaily
• BigHollywood.com
• NewsMax
• BigGovernment.com

Conservative think thanks

• The Heritage Foundation
• American Enterprise Institute
• Cato Institute

News Corp executives

• Rupert Murdoch
• Chase Carey
• David DeVoe
• Lawrence Jacobs
• James Murdoch

Conservative donors

• Peter Thiel
• Richard Mellon Scaife
• Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
• John M. Olin Foundation
• Koch Family Foundations

Fox News executives

• CEO Roger Ailes
• Senior vice president Michael Clemente
• Vice president of news Sean Smith
• Vice president of new editorial product Jay Wallace
• ·Fox Business Network executive vice president Kevin Magee

Fox personalities

• Glenn Beck
• Sean Hannity
• Bill O’Reilly

Fox senior production and corporation staff

• Hannity executive producer John Finley
• On the Record executive producer Meade Cooper
• O’Reilly Factor senior executive producer David Tabacoff
• Fox & Friends executive producer Lauren Petterson

Political figures

• Carly Fiorina
• David Vitter
• Eric Cantor
• John Boehner
• Mitch McConnell
• Michele Bachmann
• ·Steve King

“In all likelihood,” the memo concludes, “we will produce volumes of useful data week after week.”

The FBI Targets Constitutionalist

The FBI held a press conference last week on a terrorist alert bulletin, which it sent to every federal, state and local law enforcement agency across the country. Unfortunately, that bulletin continued a trend of "terrorist profiles" issued since Barack Hussein Obama has been in office. This particular alert identified such broad ideological characteristics that it can be construed to include the activities of tens of millions of law-abiding Americans.

The FBI counterterrorism division report concluded that those who believe that our government has exceeded its constitutional limits or are protesting for restoration of constitutional integrity might pose a threat. By that definition, anyone associated with the "Tea Party movement" is suspect, and that's the problem with this sweeping and politically motivated "bureaucrap."

Make no mistake: There are some deadly anti-government socialist and fascist radicals in America. For example, consider the man who launched someone's political career in 1994 -- Obama mentor William Ayers, who was previously the leader of the Weathermen, a murderous group of radical "useful idiots." They bombed the U.S. Capitol twice, the Pentagon, the Department of State, several federal courthouses, plus state and local government buildings -- with intent to kill. Unfortunately, the FBI never assembled sufficient evidence to convict Ayers. (Lucky break for Obama's career!)

Or how about Obama's radical, racist, hate-spewing pastor, Jeremiah Wright? This is the man who married the Obamas and baptized their children; the same man who regularly sermonized about "the US-KKK-A" with assertions that "The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color;" the man who said that the U.S. government "gives [black people] drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strikes law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, g-d d--- America!"

Does that constitute a threat to the government?

The aforementioned FBI alert focused on the so-called "sovereign citizen" movement, which the FBI believes may have more than 500,000 members -- though it has no leaders, no membership roster, no organization at all. There is a "sovereign citizens" website which notes boldly, "We do NOT endorse non-payment of taxes or violence to achieve these changes. We do NOT endorse giving up a social security number and we do NOT endorse violence against the police or the government."

According to the FBI, some of those associated with this movement are engaged in crimes like underpaying taxes and other fraud, none of which should be classified as terrorism. According to a Reuters report on the press release, "Legal convictions of such extremists, mostly for white-collar crimes such as fraud, have increased from 10 in 2009 to 18 in 2011, FBI agents said."

I did the math, and that's an increase of eight convictions.

Meanwhile, more than 5,200 of Obama's Occupy movement radicals were arrested in 2011, many for violent offenses, and some of those directed at police.

This is not to say that the FBI didn't have reason to warn law enforcement agencies. In May of 2010, two sociopaths, one of whom had mentioned "sovereign citizen" on a website, murdered two Arkansas police officers. But there are much more significant threats to uniformed officers.

I can assure you that most federal, state and local law enforcement personnel abide by their oath to "support and defend the Constitution" and are steadfastly accountable to that oath. In other words, they understand that broadly labeling as "terrorists" those who support constitutional limits on government is offensive to that oath.

However, we now have an established Obama-era pattern of applying such broad labels, which began in 2009 when the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis issued a report on "Right-Wing Extremism." It claimed that those who use terms including "patriot" or "constitutionalist," and "link their beliefs to those commonly associated with the American Revolution," are a threat. It even went so far as to identify returning war veterans as "potential threats."

That report was so repulsive that it received a prompt rebuke from liberal Democrat Bennie Thompson, then chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, and Republican Peter King, its ranking member. Thompson wrote, "This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans. Freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans.. I am disappointed that the Department would allow this report to be disseminated to its State and local partners. ... I am dumbfounded that I&A released this report."

Thompson protested that the DHS report "blurred the line" between legal and illegal activity.

At the time, DHS spokesperson Amy Kudwa claimed the report was not finished and had been recalled: "This product is not, nor was it ever, in operational use." That notwithstanding, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report and insisted, "We do not — nor will we ever — monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people." (Trust her, she's from the government!)

However, such monitoring is not the contiguous prerogative of DHS, but that of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. This is why the latest national alert issued by the FBI should raise many red flags with overseers in the House and Senate.

So, given the current FBI profile, if these "terrorists" are members of an organization with no leaders, no membership and, in fact, no organization, how exactly are they to be distinguished from law-abiding political activists who believe our government has exceeded its constitutional authority? How are they to be distinguished from patriotic Americans who advocate for the restoration of constitutional integrity and proper limits on the role of government? There are plenty of us who, in the course of our objections to the erosion of the Rule of Law, might make "references to the Bible, The Constitution of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, or treaties with foreign governments."

What purpose does this FBI memo really serve?

In October 2011, DHS attempted to make amends by publishing a training guide for "Countering Violent Extremism." In that directive, Section 2 notes, "Training should be sensitive to constitutional values," and it asserts, "training should support the protection of civil rights and civil liberties as part of national security. Don't use training that equates religious expression, protests, or other constitutionally protected activity with criminal activity."

Perhaps Obama's executive appointees to the FBI should adopt a similar policy and — unlike his appointees at DHS — abide by it. In the meantime, we are waiting for objections from oversight committee Republicans concerning Obama's latest attack on Bible-citing, Constitution-abiding Patriots.

Watch out the despot Obama is rising and he is using every power of the federal government to support his program of radical transformation.

What The Fourth Of July Means To Me

“On what rests the hope of the republic? One country, one language, one flag!” — Alexander Henry

I was born five days short of the Fourth of July which means that my birthday is celebrated of along with the birth of our Republic on July 4^th. My family has been doing this for years so I am used to sharing my birthday with the United States of America, the land that I love.

I was blessed. I came of age in the 50s, a time when people were not embarrassed to fly the flag on the Fourth, say the Pledge of Allegiance or stand for the National Anthem. A time when you knew if you played by the rules and worked hard you could be anything you wanted to be, including a bum. I graduated from a public high school in 1954, a school with a curriculum that would challenge most state colleges today. I will always remember my final exam in 11th grade U.S. history. The teacher walked through the class with his hat filled with little slips of paper and on each slip was a topic. You were required, in 45 minutes, to write an essay on the topic you were lucky enough to draw. I drew the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. How about that, a 16 year kid writing an essay on such a complicated subject. Try that today and you would have the ACLU all over the school board. How about the teacher grading 30 plus essays? The teachers unions would cry foul. Oh by the way, I finished the class with an “A”, something else that they do not do today. Satisfactory is good enough.

I never went to college. You see there were no student loans in those days and my folks did not have much money. Do I regret this? Not one bit. I had a paper route until I graduated from high school and had to give it up for full time work as a surveyor’s assistant. The paper route taught me how to run a small business as I had to pay for the papers and it was up to me to collect the money from my 75 customers. No stimulus packages or subsidies then. I earned enough to buy a $135 Kodak Pont 35mm camera, Admiral Phonograph and a Hallicrafter short wave radio. What a great time. No iPods or iPhones. We had a black dial phone and a phonograph that played 78 rpm and eventually 33-1/3 rpm LP records, mostly classical music. I will always remember that great recording of Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture by Antal Doráti and the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra with the live canons. Boom, boom, my cousin John and I used to blast out the house with this one.

Speaking of blasting, once I was old enough to buy them we always had fireworks on the 4th or we went to lakefront to watch the spectacular displays over Lake Eire. One year my cousin and drove to Toledo, where you could buy the big stuff, you know cherry bombs, M-80, skyrockets, roman candles and those big tall tubular ones that launched a M-80 about 50 feet in the air and when it went off it would rattle the windows of the neighbors houses. Fortunately the neighbors were all watching our fireworks displays. Once the Parma police came by and watched for a while and then told us to keep it down after 10:00 pm. No arrests, no fines, just common sense.

When we were launching the skyrockets the guidance system on one of the rockets was faulty and it went off course like a cruise missile into the open garage of our neighbor as he was just driving into his garage right over the top of his car. It hit the back wall of the garage and exploded in a shower of sparks and noise. The neighbor was cool about it he came over and cautioned us to use more care in the launch parameters and enjoyed the remainder of the display. My dad thought we would all go to jail.

The Fourth of July is not about fireworks, hot dogs and hamburgers, it’s about freedom, the freedom to be the best or to fail. I mentioned that I did not go to college. I did go to night school for advanced classes in mathematics, physics and language. For my surveying and civil engineering career I took a two year International Correspondence School course after I was married and living in California. ICS was the forerunner of the University of Phoenix and other online universities in its day. After completing the ICS course I became licensed as a Land Surveyor in California and 5 additional western states finally owning my own civil engineering and land surveying business. Eventually I sold the business to a larger civil engineering firm where I became part owner and vice president. I had the opportunity to travel and work all over the world, something I dreamed of as a youngster. You see freedom is great, but to be free you have to work and be responsible. This was taught to me at an early age by my parents and mentors. Yes, mentors, not the government or its programs.

I married my beautiful bride in 1960 and have remained so for 49 years. Our three children have all grown to successful, responsible adults and I now have two wonderful granddaughters. I have had a great life so far and I will continue to work hard to keep it that way. You may think this is a sentimental view of history and perhaps it is. After traveling the globe I know that I could not had such a great life in any other country in the world. Our Founding Fathers gave us a nation that allows you to rise or fall in freedom, the most precious of all man’s processions. For without freedom you have nothing the sovereign or state will not grant you. They decide what you will be and how you will live. Where you can travel and to what level of success you can achieve. The nanny state may provide creature comforts and security, but without freedom you are reduced to the level of your pet dog.

Lately, we as a nation have been forgetting what the Fourth of July is all about. Many schools no longer say the Pledge of Allegiance and he National Anthem has been banned on college campuses. Time magazine and pundits on TV are saying the Constitution is no longer needed and we need a nation ruled from Washington and devoted to “social justice.” We have 93,000 spectators ate the Rose Bowl, Pasadena rooting for Mexico and acting disgracefully to the playing of the National Anthem. Sousa and Kate Smith have been replaced with Bruce Springsteen and Lady Gaga. Yankee Doodle has been replaced with “God Damn America.”

This is not the country I grew up in and it makes me sad that my grandchildren will never experience that feeling of being an American. We will all be citizens of the world. How sad.

According to a report in USA Today on a Harvard study stating “Fourth of July parades and celebrations are “right-wing:”

Democratic political candidates can skip this weekend's July 4th parades. A new Harvard University study finds that July 4th parades energize only Republicans, turn kids into Republicans, and help to boost the GOP turnout of adults on Election Day.

"Fourth of July celebrations in the United States shape the nation's political landscape by forming beliefs and increasing participation, primarily in favor of the Republican Party," said the report from Harvard.

"The political right has been more successful in appropriating American patriotism and its symbols during the 20th century. Survey evidence also confirms that Republicans consider themselves more patriotic than Democrats. According to this interpretation, there is a political congruence between the patriotism promoted on Fourth of July and the values associated with the Republican party. Fourth of July celebrations in Republican dominated counties may thus be more politically biased events that socialize children into Republicans," write Harvard Kennedy School Assistant Professor David Yanagizawa-Drott and Bocconi University Assistant Professor Andreas Madestam

Their findings also suggest that Democrats gain nothing from July 4th parades, likely a shocking result for all the Democratic politicians who march in them.”

So I guess, according to Harvard Democrats are not patriotic.

As I said earlier the Fourth of July is not about fireworks, Sousa marches and hamburgers, although our founding fathers did tell us to celebrate this day with song and illuminations. The true meaning, however, is about the bravery, wisdom and tenacity of our founding fathers who pledged to each other “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

On July 4, 1776, after months of heated debate, representatives of the Continental Congress voted unanimously that “these United Colonies are and of right ought to be Free and Independent States.”

Thirteen colonies voted to become something new: the United States of America. All they had to do was to win their independence from a government that would consider them traitors.

Fifty-six men bravely affixed their signatures to the Declaration of Independence. What sort of men were they? And what became of them?

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists, 11 were merchants, nine were farmers or plantation owners. They were well-educated men of means. All of them had a great deal to lose when they voted to defy what was then the most powerful nation on Earth.

One of the signers was Richard Stockton, a distinguished jurist from New Jersey. At the conclusion of the meetings, he proudly affixed his signature to the Declaration, joining 55 other delegates. Each of them willingly risked everything when they pledged to each other “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Sadly, the revolution was to cost Judge Stockton the first two. But he would never surrender the third.

As he returned from Philadelphia to his home in New Jersey, Judge Stockton was warned that British troops were coming to arrest him. He fled to a neighbor’s house with his wife and children. But a Loyalist, a supporter of the British cause, betrayed the family’s hiding place. Here is what happened next, as described in a called They Signed For Us:

“The judge was dragged from bed and beaten, then thrown into prison. This distinguished jurist, who had worn the handsome robes of a colonial court, now shivered in a common jail, abused and all but starved.

A shocked Congress arranged for his parole. Invalided by the harsh treatment he had received, he returned to (his home at) Morven to find his furniture and clothing burned, his fine horses stolen, and his library — one of the finest private collections in the country — completely destroyed. The hiding place of exquisite family silver, hastily buried, had been betrayed by a servant.

The Stocktons were so destitute that they had to accept charity. For the judge’s fortune was gone, too. He had pledged it and his life to his country. He lost both. He did not live to see the Revolution won.”

That account comes from a wonderful little book called They Signed For Us. It was written half a century ago by Merle Sinclair and Annabel Douglas McArthur, two patriotic ladies who wanted to help others learn more about the remarkable men who signed the Declaration of Independence.

At the end of today’s column, you’ll find a link that will take you to a copy of the book. You may read it online or download it and print your own copy. The file also includes a list of all of the signers and the States they represented, plus the complete text of the Declaration of Independence.

To whet your appetite a bit more, here’s another excerpt from They Signed For Us.

“SUDDENLY THE BIG BELL in the State House steeple pealed joyously. The appointed signal! Cheers rose from the waiting crowds.

“Proclaim liberty throughout the land’

Cannon boomed, drums rolled. Church bells rang, sounding the death knell of British domination!

News of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence spread like wildfire. Ready messengers leaped into their saddles to ride and spread the word. The Declaration had been ordered printed on a single large sheet, ‘45.5 x 37.5 cm.,’ or approximately eighteen by fifteen inches. These broadsides were distributed with all possible speed, to be read in the provincial assemblies, pulpits, market places, and army camps.”

The story continues:

“On July 8, the Liberty Bell summoned citizens of Philadelphia to the State House yard for a public reading of the document. Colonel John Nixon mounted a high platform and spoke the noble lines in a strong, clear voice. The crowd, now hushed, listened intently throughout.

‘…for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.’

It was almost a month later that the Declaration was engrossed on parchment and ready for signing by the delegates to the Continental Congress. Members gathered on Aug. 2 for the ceremony.

The only person who had signed the Declaration on July 4, 1776 was John Hancock, a delegate from Boston who had been elected president of the Continental Congress. He wrote his signature in large, bold letters and as he did, in a reference to the near-sightedness of the British king, he declared, “There! John Bull can read my name without spectacles and may now double his reward of £500 for my head. That is my defiance.”

As the delegates gathered around a desk to sign the Declaration, William Emery, one of the representatives from Rhode Island, moved as close as he could. “I was determined to see how they all looked as they signed what might be their death warrants,” he later wrote. “I placed myself beside the secretary, Charles Thomson, and eyed each closely as he affixed his name to the document. Undaunted resolution was displayed on every countenance.”

Contrasting with Hancock’s confident signature was the shaky scratch of Stephen Hopkins from Rhode Island. Hopkins, the second-oldest signer, suffered from palsy. As he handed the quill to the next person, he valiantly proclaimed, “My hand trembles, but my heart does not!”

As one or two delegates hung back, seemingly reluctant to add their signatures to such a momentous declaration, John Hancock encouraged them. “We must be unanimous,” he said. “There must be no pulling different ways. We must all hang together.”

Legend has it that Benjamin Franklin replied, “Yes, we must all hang together. Or most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”

Happily, none of the signers was hanged by the British. But all of them were considered traitors to the Crown. And many of them suffered terribly for the cause they so ardently supported.

John Morton, a delegate from Pennsylvania, was the first of the signers to die. His last words for his family, before his death in April 1777 (just eight months after he signed the Declaration), were, “…tell them that they will live to see the hour when they shall acknowledge it to have been the most glorious service I ever rendered to my country.”

The following month, Button Gwinnett, the commander in chief of Georgia’s militia, was badly wounded in a duel with a political opponent. He died a few days later — the second signer to die.

But by and large, the signers of the Declaration of Independence were a hardy bunch. Three of them lived until their 90s — a remarkable accomplishment in a time when most men did not see their 50th birthday.

Only two of the signers were bachelors. Sixteen of them married twice. Records indicate that at least two, and perhaps as many as six, were childless. But the other 50 signers were a prolific lot, having a total of 325 children between them. William Ellery of Rhode Island had 17 children; Roger Sherman of Connecticut had 15.

Fifty years after the united colonies declared their independence from Britain, plans were made for jubilant celebrations on July 4, 1826. Only three of the original signers were still alive: Charles Carroll, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Here is how Sinclair and McArthur describe what occurred that day:

“In a dramatic climax that even their agile minds would not have contemplated, these two principals in the struggle for Independence left the nation awestricken and touched, by dying hours apart on the Fourth of July. Jefferson died at one o’clock in the afternoon, Adams toward evening.”

Ten days earlier, Jefferson had written the mayor of Washington, expressing his regret that ill health prevented him from coming to the nation’s new Capitol to join the festivities.

“I should, indeed, with peculiar delight, have met … with the small band, the remnant of that host of worthies, who joined with us on that day, in the bold and doubtful election we were to make for our country, between the submission or the sword.”

He concluded by writing, “Let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollection of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them.”

You can obtain a copy of They Signed For Us by clicking here for it.

One last thing I will do over this Fourth of July weekend besides having our traditional barbeque is to watch a few patriotic films. One of my favorite Fourth of July films is Yankee Doodle Dandy staring James Cagney as George M. Cohan. It’s a real barn burner with Cagney singing and dancing to the music of George M. Cohan. The film was made in 1942 at the onset of World War II and features songs like Yankee Doodle Dandy, Its A Grand Old Flag and Over There, And if you’re an Irishman there’s a great rendition of Harrigan featuring a duet with Cagney and Jeanne Cagney. It’s a great “feel good” movie for the Fourth of July. Of course there are many other patriotic films you can watch. Just pick your favorite and enjoy the burgers and fireworks. It’s what the founders wanted. Click here for a video of Yankee Doodle as performed by James Cagney.

One last note on Cagney and Kate Smith they were both awarded the Medal of Freedom by Ronald Reagan.

Please remember on this Fourth of July to say a prayer for all of the men and women who have sacrificed their treasure, blood and lives so we may remain a free people who can live our dreams and weep over our failings. Trust in God and remember freedom is not free.

Happy Fourth of July and God bless and keep this Republic that so many have given so much for.