Yeah! They can’t possibly be Ruff Ryders because DMX would fuckin’ smoke they ass. Or maybe they’re members of the 1st United States Volunteer Cavalry from the Spanish-American war, because that’s what rough riders are! And what’s all this about being filled with Christ’s love? Are they having Christ’s baby? Did he shoot them with his Jesus load?

I should explain what I’m writing about. Remember that stupid fake hugging trend? You know, the one in which kids were spending so much time hugging they were all late for class and soccer practice?

Proving there’s nothing so absurd Jesus can’t make more absurd, a buncha slick gangsta foos wrote some rhymes and shit about how the side hug — hip to hip contact, yo — is all cool with the Lord God Jesus Christ and frontal hugs is all evil and shit. You know, cuz frontal hugs leads to babies and shit because you be all touchin’ yo privates together and whatnot. Damn! Video after the jump!

You’ll have to forgive the totally stupid, ass-backward, retarded fake gangsta prose with which I’m writing dis shit today, yo, but I gots all inspired by these white kids who are rappin’ and bustin’ rhymes about how foos be front huggin’ which Jesus don’t be appreciatin’ son! Seriously, I hope the ghost of ODB haunts these kids for the rest of their lives because there’s nothing that white God-fearing kids fear more than black guys, which makes their weird outdated gangsta jingle — complete with gunshots and sirens because they apparently thought up these mad beatz in reform school — even more trite than it already seems.

No bigger a national teen mom figure than Bristol “I had a white trash baby” Palin has said abstinence doesn’t work (and then reversed her position — ha! position — because she’s moved to La La Land). And everyone else agrees, too. Know why? Because private parts are fun, kids! As Eddie Murphy once said, go and get each other pregnant and play Space Invaders.

Anyway, we made our point. Abstinence education: not education. Kids: Stupid hormone factories. ODB: Dead (RIP, word). This video: Awesome in its awe-inspiring dumbness.

[h/t Eric S.]

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.   ~Theodore Roosevelt

Today was a “rest day” in my marathon training schedule.  But it wasn’t restful at all.  And I’m glad.

We spent the greater part of this day screaming our lungs out at our local high school, where our team, the Danville Vikings, were in the 6A state semi-finals.  An hour and a half before the game, the stands were packed.  Packed.

Not so long ago, our local program was in the cellar of the state.  Then native son, BJ Luke came home and accepted the head coaching position.  The team began to win and Viking Fever was epidemic.  The entire community embraced the team and rallied around these players.  Their hard work, their passion, their toughness, their fight, their refusal to quit was contagious.  The entire community has a shared pride in these valiant young men, whose efforts went way beyond football and caused hope to burn bright in our little corner of the world. 

I pass this house on most of my training runs. Funny thing. After seeing this sign, I don't give slowing down or stopping a second thought.

You would have thought they’d won.  Sadly, the Vikings were defeated in today’s game.  After the clock wound down and the season was over, the crowd grew still and…didn’t leave.  The crowd waited quietly until the Viking players had respectfully choked back their personal heartbreak and congratulated their opponents.  Then as the team turned to run back to their locker room, the crowd erupted in a roar of pride and encouragement. 

This team had given our town so much hope and passion and vision.  This undefeated season had been a win for the entire community.  Written-off, and yet, coming back and winning.  Again and again and again.  Underestimated, and yet, giving it all.  Again and again and again.  These young men reminded us all that it is possible to overcome obstacles and be victorious.  They reminded us what it means to be valiant. 

And for the next days, weeks and months, we’re going to have a whole lot of valiant people in this community.  Valiant teachers.  Valiant runners.  Valiant parents.  Valiant secretaries.  Valiant waitresses.  Valiant students.  Working hard.  Giving it all.  Refusing to quit.  Exceeding expectations.  Setting new standards.  Working and playing with heart. 

For that, this community owes Coach Luke, his staff, and especially each member of the DHS Vikings a debt of gratitude.

We all know how the federal system works. Although the president is not a tyrannical ruler with an overwhelming amount of power, he (thus far) has a whole lot of power, and a large degree of influence on the citizens of the United States, as well as some others around the world.

Last year, during the presidential campaign, I remember reading about how the Obama family bought a new Ford Escape Hybrid. He did this under pressure, a presidential candidate with an slight emphasis on environmental issues couldn’t drive something dirty. He had to lead to pack in fuel-efficient, low polluting technology. I have not seen the numbers, but I assume that sales went up for this car after Obama bought one. If he is buying it, it must be a good choice, and a smart one for the future.

The thing to note, is that this is a symbolic gesture. In a modern presidential campaign, a candidate travels effortlessly around the country with a huge staff. It a very mobile operation. That means jets, cars, trains to the max. If Obama drove his new Ford Escape Hybrid for the rest of his life instead of something less clean; it would not adverse effect on the pollution from his trips on a 747 in the span of two weeks. Nevertheless, by changing perspective and remembering that Obama is a leader and therefore trendsetter, everyone who follows him in buying a hybrid SUV may offset that. If not, they are on the right path.

In office, Obama has been making smart choices too. The first one hundred days of a presidency–the presidential honeymoon–are a time for a president to get a lot done without a lot of hassle. Obama got a lot done for the environment. For example: tax credits for clean vehicles and home energy usage, the symbolic (but trendsetting) planting of a vegatable garden; the declaration of greenhouse gases as dangerous and the reducation of pollution.

Good work. Obama is placing himself among the green ranks of Jefferson, T. Roosevelt and Carter; while distinguishing himself from such dirty presidents as McKinley, Jackson and Hoover.
It is important to have a president that cares about the environment. Whether we like it or not, the president gets work done, legislation signed and put into effect. In addition, a president can broadcast a green message to the people. The president is someone to follow and learn from; if he goes green, we go green.

While environmental concerns may not be as in-our-faces as the economy of health care, it is in dire need of our attention. If Obama is lucky with those two problems, his next step would be a comprehensive energy program. Carter tried in ‘77 and failed miserably. But I say, ‘Yes We Can.’

…this is now at the top of my Google Books reading list:

Theodore Roosevelt: An Autobiography.

“No man needs sympathy because he has to work… far and away the best prize life offers is the chance to work hard at a work worth doing”

Theodore Roosevelt

Image from Wiki

A commenter asked if I had a source that listed Jim Dahlman as one of Seth Bullock’s Cowboy Brigade, that attended Teddy Roosevelt’s inauguration. I did some searching over the weekend, and found one source, which is noted in the post. NOTE: They incorrectly listed his given name as Bill, rather than Jim.

***

ROUGH RIDERS AND COWBOYS THERE

National Capitol Filled by Throngs for the Inauguration.

QUITE COSMOPOLITAN CROWD

Governors and Staffs in Gold Braided Uniforms, Indians in Blankets and Filipinos Mingle With the Gathering of the Plain People.
[excerpt]

Seth Bullock’s cowboys, fifty-one strong, arrived yesterday afternoon, very tired and thirsty after a thirty-hour ride. The rangers were attired in the conventional cowboy costume. Those in the crowd who expected them to carry six-shooters were not disappointed. Each of Seth’s boys wore a leather bolster, in which was a formidable looking, long barrel gun. Buckskin trousers, gayly decorated shirts and broad-rimmed sombreros composed the uniform in which they were attired.

Cowboys Have a Frolic.

When the contingent got to the nearby hotel, at which they were corraled, all hands washed up and then scattered in twos or threes to see the town. Three of them found the stable where their mounts are being cared for, and getting astride of their horses, started out for a frolic on Pennsylvania avenue. For the edification of the crowd they did a little rope throwing, each man tossing his noose over the head of one of his companions. But this became tiresome after a while and a few exhibition throws were given to the delight of the crowds and the alarm of the diminutive negroes who were invariably the targets.

Last night most of the cowboy company called on Captain Seth at the Shor?ham hotel. They liked the looks of the place and some of them spent the evening there.

The cowboys will be the guest of Senator Kittredge of South Dakota at 9 o’clock breakfast Sunday and in the afternoon will be taken around the city in automobiles. No set programme has been arranged in the meantime, but the whole town is anxious to do them honor and everything is free whenever the cowboys appear in cafes.

The Syracuse Herald (Syracuse, New York) Mar 3, 1905

I saved this picture above, but forgot to note the source, and now I can’t find it again. This lists 40 of the 60 cowboys, and the picture appears to be cut off on the sides, so maybe the rest of them (including Jim Dahlman, who is NOT listed) were off to the side.

By Seth Bullock.

First Sheriff of Deadwood, S.D., Chief of the Black Hills Forest Rangers, Commanding the Cowboy Brigade in the Inaugural Procession.

Washington, Friday — Looking at it from the top of a cayuse, this inauguration appears mighty significant to me. President Roosevelt has already put his mark on the country. Al the end of another four years the Roosevelt brand will be so clear it won’t wear off for many moons.

The crowds in Washington today show the Roosevelt spirit. The people are mostly bright and energetic, typical of the President. It’s just like it is on the range. IF the owner of a ranch is an active, honest, hard-working man, you can tell his cowboys as far as you can see the outfit, by the vigorous way they work. If the owner is dissolute, dishonest or lazy, the cowboys are likely to be the same way.

Now, long before most of us in Dakota knew Roosevelt we used to hear about him.

Cowboys riding down to our country from 150 miles away used to say:

“That fellow Roosevelt up there on the Little Missouri is dead square. He don’t maverick anybody else’s calves. He don’t ask a man to ride a horse he don’t ride, and he don’t make any man stand a watch on the roundup that he ain’t ready to stand himself.”

That is the kind of reputation Roosevelt had in the cattle country, where the things a man does and not what he talks about makes his reputation. He’s no fair weather sailor, and our boys out West know it. That’s the reason sixty boys have come down here with me. Nearly all of them have ridden on the range, and a good many of them used to know Theodore, and they are all strong for him. They have to sell their ponies to get back, all because they wanted to see one of their own people, or rather, a man who had lived with them, and is as much or more a Westerner than Easterner, inaugurated as President.

With Roosevelt in the White House this talk of sectionalism is going to be stamped out. The way this inauguration has brought together Westerners and Easterners and

Northerners and Southerners means a lot to the future of this country.
It looks to me like the people who were coming to this inauguration were the kind who like the man who does real stunts and don’t delay. That’s the reason the cowpunchers like him.

We haven’t any fear of him being too impetuous. You don’t hear any of that talk about him on the range. The boys there just say he has keen and accurate instinct.

The sixty boys with me are not Rough Riders; they are not Black Hills rangers; they are not dime novel heroes or stage robbers. They are cowboys, and as such are the real article, and the reason they are here is because this is the first inauguration of a man who knows them and whom they know as square in the White House as he was on the range.

One of the boys rode 120 miles in twenty-four hours to get his horse on the train before it left Deadwood. We have all ages in the company.

Henry Roberts, who is fifteen, was born on the range, and as good a rider as any one. There are men who have been cowboys for thirty years. Two of the boys belong to the Black Hills Forest Rangers, whose business it is to protect the trees in the Black Hills forest reserve. Most of the rest are from South Dakota and Wyoming.

Theodore has asked the boys to come back to the White House after the procession has passed the reviewing stand. They will ride up to the steps under the porte cochere, where he will stand and shake hands with each man.

Now, that is a mighty nice thing, for some of the boys are bashful and would be lost if the President invited them to the reception. But they are never bashful in the saddle. Every one of them appreciates the chance to shake Theodore’s hand.

I’m willing to bet he will remember each man that he knew when he lived in Dakota. His memory for faces and the names that go with them is certainly wonderful. Blaine’s memory for faces, some persons say, was largely bluff, but it is straight goods with the President.

I remember when he made his last Western trip the boys on the South Dakota range rode to meet him whenever the train stopped at the water tank. OUt of crowds he would single out men whom he had not laid eyes on for twenty years. He would remember exactly where he had last seen them. On that trip he would alwys go out to see the cowboys who rode to meet the train.

“Why,” said he, “those boys have never seen a President of the United States. They have ridden a long way to this train. It’s my duty to go out and speak to them.”

There is a horse with a Maltese cross brand running on the range now, and I tried to get one of the boys to bring it down here, but it could not be arranged. The Roosevelt brand was a Maltese cross., and he branded that horse.

We from out West don’t know all the full made over the questions or precedence. It was necessary for me to go to Mr. Warner’s headquarters today. He is the head of the civic division, and talking to him was a man wearing a uniform that looked like the morning after the Fourth of July. Honest, it would make a cowboy jump over the monument. He was making a great row because his marching club, which had been in every inauguration since the Lord knows when, had been given a place behind the Roosevelt Club of Minneapolis, which had never marched at any inauguration.

“I’ll see what I can do about it,” siad Mr. Warner.

Then I took the uniformed man by the arm. “Don’t kick,” I told him. ‘If you try to change your position, every one else will want to change theirs, and the whole parade will go to smash. We are going to ride wherever we are placed. Anyway, wherever the cowboys are, that is the head of the procession for us. Don’t kick.”

Here is our official poem, by the official poet, Bob Carr:

Us punchers sling no haughty style,
Nor go we much on manners;
We look on dudelets out this way
As only fit for “canners;”
And that is why you hear us cry
We’re always glad and ready
To throw our hats and let a yell
In honor of our Teddy.

The boys are having a first-rate time in Washington. We have no rules except these.

Rule 1. Don’t kick.
Rule 2. Don’t knock.
Rule 3. Neither kick nor knock.
***

Seth Bullock and Teddy Roosevelt

Washington — Say, we found ourselves among a lot of friendly Indians today. The boys like the way the crowd, all the way from Capitol Butte to by White Ranch House, put out their hand.

Not one is sorry he came, especially after the way Theodore met us after we had ranged up past the reviewing stand. He had the boys ride up to the door of the ranch house and shook hands with each, and remembered every one he knew nineteen years ago on the Little Missouri, when he had the Maltese Cross outfit.

Every cowboy in the brigade was mightily impressed with the ceremony today. A lot of them have never been east of the Missouri River, and, although they are as keen as can be found anywhere, this visit to Washington is just the thing they needed to show them what a great country this is.

As far as that goes, I think no one can come to Washington from any part of the United States without being struck by the almighty bigness of the Government. They get an idea, too, what their Representatives are doing for them, and it is a lot. Neither of our Senators from South Dakota nor our Representatives can make his expenses out of his salary.

There is a lot of patriotism in this country, and it certainly stuck out all over this town today.

I saw millionaires waving flags and yelling themselves hoarse for the President, and when we cowboys came along there in front of his reviewing stand we got the glad hand from the President more than any one else we saw.

Compared with the noise made by the plug-hat-and-boiled-shirt political clubs, the cowboy brigade was Quakerish and decorous. To the President it made no difference where a club came from, or whether or not it represented a lot of cash. If the people in the organization were good, clean-cut, likely appearing Americans the President would lean over the rail and wave his hat to them.

Every man in the thirty thousand marching today ought to know, unless he is plumb locoed, that the boy who is now in the White House is game, and will do just what he says — give a square deal to every man. That is the reason the cowboys who are with me came down here. They want to show their appreciation of having one of their own kind of men in the saddle ready to brand every proposition according to his merits, and to rope any job that comes its way, and not ask any man to do anything he isn’t willing to do himself.

A man who is big enough to build the Panama Canal and put irrigation ditches all through the West and make it blossom like a rose and insist on a navy large enough to keep the door open in China is the man for us.

The cowboys in this brigade are a clean cut, sober, industrious lot, and when you find sixty such men who are agreed that the President is O.K. you can just mark it down that their verdict is straight goods.

It meant a lot to us to see those hundreds of thousands of people rounded up in Washington to watch Theodore become President on his own responsibility. It is all right to talk about the splendor of the durbars in India, but they are not to be compared with this. The durbar is an outfit of people who ride and do other stunts because they are ordered to. The people who attend the inaugural do it because they want to. Of course, some of the army and navy are ordered to Washington, but if they were not they would like to come independently.

I am a great believer in the flag and the effect it has on gatherings like these. The best thing for this country would be for every man and woman to get a chance to come to Washington and rub up against people from other ranges.

Some of the boys are pretty much impressed with the number of white people in the East.

They put us pretty well back in the procession, but we did not care, for our rules are, “Don’t kick, don’t knock; neither kick nor knock.”

We were formed down near the Capitol and the critters stood the waiting pretty well. They are used to brilliant Western sunsets, but that was the only thing that saved them from bolting when these gold lace Governors’ staffs went loping by.

We are going to have an auction on Monday, and all the cayuses will be knocked down to the highest bidder. They will make mighty good polo ponies, although their past work has been mostly chasing wayward, stray cattle, instead of a little white ball. They have to be sold so the boys will have enough money to get home on. Then some of them want a little cash to blow in over in New York, where they are going before they start back to the range.

These boys can go some if necessary, but there are not likely to be any fireworks from them in New York. They just want to learn the difference between the taste of salt water and prairie hay.

We will all be gone from Washington pretty soon. It has been a great round-up — about the most successful ever held, I guess. Theodore certainly did make good medicine.

The Galveston Daily News (Galveston, Texas) Mar 8, 1905

Alexander O. Brodie (Image from www.arlingtoncemetery.net)

BRODIE AND BULLOCK

Fine Types of the American Western Frontiersman.

BOTH FRIENDS OF PRESIDENT.

Brodie Has Been Regular Army Officer, Indian Fighter, Civil Engineer, Rough Rider, and Territorial Governor — Seth Bullock, Sheriff, Cowpuncher, and an All-around “Good ‘Bad Man.’”

A notable figure in the escort accompanying President Roosevelt from the White House to the Capitol yesterday and again in the grand parade which later swept up the Avenue was that of Col. Alexander O. Brodie at the head of the Rough Riders, President Roosevelt’s old Spanish war regiment. Col. Brodie and his men were recognized at every point along the route and greeted with generous applause.

Col. Brodie is a typical frontiersman, but he is much more than that. He has been cadet at West Point, officer in the regular army, Indian fighter, civil and mining engineer, major and lieutenant in the Rough Riders under Col. Roosevelt, and until recently governor of the Territory of Arizona. He came to Washington about ten days ago and was sworn in as major in the regular army and was assigned to be assistant to the military secretary, United States army.

Col. Brodie was graduated from West Point in 1870 and assigned immediately to the First United States Cavalry. With that regiment he saw stirring service on the frontier for seven years’ fighting Indians all over the Western border. He was in the hard campaign against the White Mountain Indians in 1871, with Gen. Brooke in all of that gallant officer’s fights in 1872 and 1873, and in the fierce Nez Perce campaign of 1877. Then he resigned from the army, and for twenty years practiced civil and mining engineering in the West.

When the Rough Rider regiment was organized at the beginning of the Spanish war in 1898, Brodie jumped to the front, and was commissioned major, and upon the promotion of Col. Wood and Lieut. Col. Roosevelt, he was advanced to the position of second in command, an office he held when the regiment was mustered out at the close of the war.

Col. Brodie enjoys the personal friendship of President Roosevelt. They were very “chummy” during the campaign in Cuba. It is not strange that President Roosevelt should have desired that a detachment of his old command should have a position of honor in the inaugural parade, nor that he should have selected Col. Brodie to lead it.

Seth Bullock’s Cowboys.

Another feature of the parade was Seth Bullock’s cowboys,, seventy-five in number mounted on their Western bronchos and headed by the redoubtable Seth himself. Sheriff Bullock is the sheriff of Deadwood, S.D., and he is what might be termed “a good ‘bad man.’” He is the idol of all the South Dakota cow-punchers and has the reputation of having “rounded up” more truly “bad men” than any other official in all the wild West. Like Col. Brodie, he enjoys the personal friendship of President Roosevelt. In line with Seth Bullock’s “bunch” were cow-punchers of no less renown than “Deadwood Dick” Clarke, the once famous scout, bandit, hunter, and leader of the shotgun men who guarded the old Wells-Fargo treasure coaches from Deadwood to civilization more than a quarter of a century ago. “Tex” Burgess, the king of the cowboys on the big Hyannis range in Nebraska, was another prominent figure in the unique organization. Seth Bullock, “Deadwood Dick,” Clarke and “Tex” Burgess are all men of types that with the advance of civilization are fast disappearing from the Western plains and will soon have passed away altogether. The once famous “Deadwood Dick,” the hero of the dime novels of twenty-five years ago, and the man who in pioneer days was the terror of evildoers in Dakota, and performed miraculous feats of daring, is now a workman in plain blue overalls in the railway yards at Lead, a town not far from Deadwood.

Richard Clarke (aka Deadwood Dick)

Lots of great pictures at FARWEST.IT, which is where I found the  above picture. The website is in Spanish.

“Deadwood Dick” Praises President.

When “Deadwood Dick” was asked by Seth Bullock to come along to Washington to help inaugurate President Roosevelt he wrote back, saying:

“Sure, I’ll go down to Washington to see Teddy inaugurated. We old Westerners feel that he is one of us and shall be glad to help give him a send-off. I reckon the cowpunchers will cut quite a figure when they get down there, but they will be no novelty to the President, for he used to be one of them himself, you know. But a good many other folks will look on ‘em with a good deal of interest and curiosity. I think he is doin’ the right thing in invitin’ the boys to take part in the show. It tickles ‘em nearly to death to know that he wants ‘em to ride their cayuses in the parade. Some of the boys used to know ‘Teddy’ when he was a rancher out West, and they all have a mighty warm spot in their hearts for him.”

Tex Burgess

The above picture (I cropped it) can be found in the book, The Overland Monthly (Google Books,) which contains the essay/article, A Cowboy Carnival: A Veracious Chronicle of a Stirring Incident by Ella Thorngate; pgs 50-60. The article includes other names, such as Doc Middleton, who is also in the uncropped picture.

Texas Burgess’ Comments.

“Tex” Burgess, who rode his pony all the way from Hyannis, Neb., to Belle Fourche, S.D., to join the cowboys on the trip to Washington, said, when he was invited to join the expedition:

“You just bet I’m goin’. I wouldn’t miss it for $1,000. We all want to go, but Capt. Bullock says he can’t accommodate all of us, so some of us will have to stay at home. Most of those who are goin’ are from the Black Hills. Only a few will come from the Hyannis and other ranges in Nebraska. I wished to go, and Capt. Bullock has promised to take me. ‘Billy’ Binder and ‘Doc’ Williams, and some of the others of the more noted riders in this region want to go, too, but I don’t know whether they will. We are mighty pleased at the invitation to take part in the show.”

Washington Post, The (Washington, D.C.) Mar 5, 1905

Image from http://4simpsons.files.wordpress.com

**This is the article mentioned at the beginning of the post, which names Dahlman as one of the “cowboys” who attended the inauguration. **Note: They got his first name wrong.

WASHINGTON, AFLUTTER, DONNING GALA ATTIRE

Imposing Court of Honor in Pennsylvania Avenue.

INAUGURATION GAYETY BEGUN

Glee Clubs Parade and Serenade and Cowboys Make Things Lively —

Scenes in the Streets.

Special to The New York Times. [excerpt]

Seth Bullock’s cowboys have started in on the time of their lives. They are sixty strong, and have brought two carloads of the best bronchos and cayuse ponies they could find in Nebraska and the Black Hills.

It would be absolutely impossible to pick a matched pair in the lot. Every color known in the Western cowboy horse stock is represented. They are dun, gray, calico, mouse-colored, bay, black, white, chestnut, piebald, and even the much loved blue bronco type is there. The blue bronco is the toughest horse ever made. The cowboys brought numerous saddles and abundance of trappings.
Cowboys “Feel of” the Asphalt.

To-day they geared up and went out to “feel of” the asphalt, of which they had been warned. It has happened at inaugurations that cavorting horses have slipped and thrown their riders. On one occasion an officer suffered a broken leg. On another Gen. Miles fell with his horse in the plaza in front of the Capitol Hotel.

The negro stableboys have been struck with wonder at the antics of the Westerners. The fun began when Bill [Jim] Dahlman, the boon friend of William J. Bryan, whirled out into the street from the corral where the cowboys keep their ponies, and with a yell said “Good-bye.”

The next moment there was another yell, this time from a colored boy standing by, who had been swiftly roped by Dahlman.

From that time on it was touch and go with a score or two of cowboys and the negroes standing around. The cowboys, some of whom are bankers, State officials, and lawyers who have at some time or other followed the range, wore their chaps and spurs and their tailor-made coats and overcoats and derby hats. This they will do when riding for practice or to get the hang of the town, but they have come with their full regalia, including lariats, quirts, chaps, ladigoes, twenty-ounce hats, and big red neckerchiefs, and will wear the whole outfit on Saturday, and when they get down to business of paying their respects to the town.

They had a job to-day shoeing their ponies. Thirty of them had never been shod and were unused to the etiquette of Mike McCormick’s blacksmith shop, where the operation was performed. They boys stayed by and it was a jolly scene. Some of the ponies had to be thrown, and with two men sitting on them Mike went ahead with the work as best he could.

A squad of cowboys during the afternoon rode the length of Pennsylvania Avenue, cutting in and out between street cars and passing vehicles with wonderful skill and at high speed. They roped colored boys again, and now and then a peanut vendor or a dog, and wound up by roping each other and getting all tied up in a bunch, in which manner they rode home and disentangled and unsaddled for the night.

Monday they will put the whole lot of horses up at auction for polo ponies, hoping to get what they cost and possibly the expense of transportation out of them.

The New York Times, Mar 3, 1905

Link to the actual news article is HERE. (PDF)

BULLOCK’S BOYS SELL PONIES.

Cow Punchers’ Exhibition Takes on a Commercial Aspect.

Capt. Seth Bullock’s cowboys sold their wild Western broncos at the Seventh street baseball park yesterday afternoon, but because of the rain and the soft condit on the ground the “stunts” which a large crowd of people went out to see were postponed until to-day at the same hour. No steers were tied — there were no steers — and there were no races. As it was, the ponies cut up the diamond and the outfield with their hoofs while the cowboys were showing off their points and a steam roller will probably be in demand before the ball season opens.

The spectators in spite of the cold rain were enthusiastic. They stood ankle deep in mud and slush and were spattered with mud with good grace while watching the little riding which the bronco busters performed in order to show how gentle their horses were. The ponies brought from $45 to $90, but only five were sold. One or two of the best animals were held at $100 by their owners, and the cowboys expect to dispose of these before they go to their homes in the West.

Capt. Bullock directed the sale and under his supervision the boys put their ponies through the paces, ran them and walked them past the buyers while the cowboys themselves alternated as auctioneers and knocked the beasts down to the highest bidders. Some of the purchasers looked at their newly-acquired horses with misgiving, looked them in the teeth, so to speak. Most of the horses were stripped of them cowboy saddles and sent off to livery stables to be clipped and Easternized. A few of the bolder buyers tried their ponies out on the spot and the cowboys had a lot of fun seeing the city chaps in derbys and overcoats scampering across the park range, clinging to the pommels, and scattering lead pencils and other belongings at every jump.

The exhibition postponed from yesterday will be given to day, rain or shine. It is the special wish of those in charge of the inauguration exercises that the cowboys receive the hearty co-operation of the citizens, as they came a long distance and have added so much to the entertainment of the people, as well as showing the type of man who spends his life on the plains of the far West.

Capt. Bullock took great care in selecting this company of men and each is a splendid specimen of manhood and all are adept in some particular accomplishment, which will add to the enjoyment of the exhibit. The programme is replete with thrilling and amusing events, and will positively take place to day at 2:30 p.m.

Washington Post, The (Washington, D.C.) Mar 8, 1905

Dear President Obama,

At one point in your speech to the United Nations General Assembly from this past September, you quoted your predecessor Franklin Roosevelt, saying: “The structure of world peace cannot be the work of one man, one party, or one nation…. It cannot be a peace of large nations—or of small nations. It must be a peace which rests on the cooperative effort of the whole world.” “The choice is ours,” you said over and over to representatives of the gathered nations of the world. “We can be remembered as a generation that chose to drag the arguments of the 20th century into the 21st; that put off hard choices, refused to look ahead, failed to keep pace because we defined ourselves by what we were against instead of what we were for. Or we can be a generation that chooses to see the shoreline beyond the rough waters ahead; that comes together to serve the common interests of human beings….”

I hear this, and I can’t help but feel inspired. It’s the poem from your inauguration, where poet Elizabeth Alexander says,

What if the mightiest word is love?
Love beyond marital, filial, national,
love that casts a widening pool of light….

What if? We ask this as well, as Unitarian Universalists. What if more people affirmed the interdependent web of all existence, which applies as much to international affairs as to the natural world? What if more people affirmed the goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all? Love, casting a widening pool of light. These are values of my own religious tradition that I am hearing in you, and I am inspired.

That’s why I’m celebrating the message you’ve been bringing to the world in the past eleven months. You remind me of one of our Unitarian Universalist ancestors: Adlai Stevenson, Ambassador to the United Nations during the JFK administration and also candidate for President of the United States in 1952 and 1956. (As a brief aside, it’s said that when the Unitarian Universalist Association was formed in 1961, Stevenson wrote to the Rev. Dana McLean Greeley, its first president, “Congratulations on your election as president. I know from hearsay how satisfying that can be.”) Despite not winning the Presidency, he was a great visionary who said that “It is no longer possible—if it ever was—for local communities to be more secure than the surrounding world. Our ultimate security therefore lies in making the world more and more into a community.” That’s what Adlai Stevenson said, and it’s your message too, over and over again. The mightiest word of love. Not unilateralism and militarism as a first resort, but multilateralism and diplomacy. Interdependence in world community.

Thank you for spreading values we Unitarian Universalists affirm. It’s why I think that Unitarian Universalists everywhere (whatever their party affiliations might be, whether Democratic or Republican or Independent) will have something to cheer when, on December 10th, you are in Oslo, Norway, receiving the prize—a prize which you have said you will accept as a call to all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. Warm congratulations to you!

I laughed when I heard about what happened right after you received the news. Your daughter Malia walked in and said, “Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it’s Bo’s birthday!” And then your other daughter Sasha added, “Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up.” Kids, helping keep things in perspective. Although it sounds like you are doing fine with this on your own. “To be honest,” you said to reporters, “I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who’ve been honored by the prize.” This is what you said.

Of course, the Nobel Committee disagrees. In announcing that you are the recipient, it said, “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.” “The question we have to ask,” said Nobel committee chair Thorbjorn Jagland, “is who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world. And who has done more than Barack Obama?”

It’s a controversial question—whether you have accomplished enough. Already, you have plunged into the rough waters of multiple tough issues: prohibiting the use of torture by the United States; ordering the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed; working on finding effective ways of rooting out al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan; stopping terrorism at its roots by promoting human rights, economic opportunity, and security in countries that are hurting; partnering with Russia to substantially reduce nuclear warheads and launchers; advancing the cause of two states—Israel and Palestine—living side by side in peace and security so that justice for all in the Middle East can become a reality; moving America from a bystander to a leader in international climate change negotiations; helping coordinate an international response of over $2 trillion in stimulus to bring the global economy back from the brink; and re-engaging the United Nations, joining the Human Rights Council, bringing America back to the world table. To the United Nations, in September, you said, “I have been in office for just nine months—though some days it seems a lot longer.” I wonder why. Definitely, you are not putting off any of the hard choices required to create a better world. You are plunging right in.

But I do understand why you still think you don’t deserve the award. It is only the beginning. You have only just begun. The world is still in the midst of rough waters. The shoreline is still far off. And yet, perhaps the award was given not so much to honor past accomplishment as future promise. Perhaps, as Stanford University scholar Clarence B. Jones suggests, the award is about strengthening your resolve as you go forward, encouraging you to see your vision through all the way to the very end. He saw this with Martin Luther King Jr., when he received the Peace Prize. MLK Jr. had been struggling with what to say about the Vietnam War—this man who had already fought extraordinary fights for justice and peace—and the Peace Prize convicted his conscience, pressed him to break his silence and speak out. “Just knowing that hunk of metal was in his bureau drawer,” says Clarence B. Jones, “forced someone as strong as Martin Luther King Jr. to publicly comment in a way he might otherwise not.” I think the world wants you to continue making the hard choices that need to be made. I think it wants you to stay strong, and to finish this ironman race you’ve started. As the New York Times put it, “Americans elected Mr. Obama because they wanted him to restore American values and leadership—and because they believed he could. The Nobel Prize … shows how many people around the world want the same thing.”

But this is not the first time that the Nobel Peace Prize Committee has acted contrary to popular expectations. I was fascinated to learn that an early Peace Prize controversy had to do with whether non-governmental peace activists only should receive the prize, rather than heads of state and politicians. Before 1905, only private peace activists had received the award. And then came 1906. The recipient was none other than American President Theodore Roosevelt, for his efforts in helping to negotiate an end to the war between Russia and Japan. People around the world screamed. What’s this? What’s this? they cried. Yet the Nobel Committee was ahead of the curve. It saw, after the turn of the century, how governments were increasingly promoting peaceful solutions for international disputes, and it wanted to encourage this even more. Private peace activists no longer owned the work exclusively. To ensure relevance for its prize, the committee risked changing with the times, together with the resulting wrath.

Today’s committee, I believe, took a similar risk. Said committee chair Thorbjorn Jagland, “Some people say—and I understand it—‘Isn’t it premature? Too early?’ Well, I’d say … that it could be too late to respond three years from now. It is now that we have the opportunity to respond—all of us.” American multilateralism and diplomacy can’t wait. America modeling the kind of leadership that needs to happen in every country around the world can’t wait. Hope can’t wait. The mightiest word of love has to happen now.

Clearly, honest confusion has surrounded this year’s award. But there’s been some real ugliness as well. I mean, it seems to me that when someone gets an amazing award like a Nobel Peace Prize, a reasonable response is delight. Good for you, President Obama! Good for you, America! Delight, even if people might not be sure exactly why you got the award. The not-knowing then becomes transformed into a positive curiosity to find out why—to discover just exactly what it is you have been saying and doing on the international scene that would merit such an award. Yet from some quarters you’ve seen the absolute opposite of curiosity and delight. New York Times columnist David Brooks, calling it a joke, saying, “Nobody cares what five Norwegian guys think”—demonstrating, regrettably, an arrogant disdain for the rest of the world that is part and parcel of ugly Americanism and cowboy diplomacy. Those five Norwegians (not all guys, by the way) see how you’ve single-handedly set a new tone throughout the world, and David Brooks thinks that this is a joke?

Reminds me of something I read in U. S. News and World Report a while back. An interview with Cullen Murphy, about his book entitled Are We Rome? The Fall of an Empire and the Fate of America. For a time, comparisons with Rome had been positive ones: the Pax Romana living anew in the Pax Americana, providing worldwide cultural benefits and worldwide security. But now the dominant view worries about America’s decline and compares symptoms of this to what people saw in Rome’s decline. And so the interviewer at one point says to Cullen Murphy, “You say there was an almost fatal parochialism among the Romans. Are we in danger of duplicating it?” Here’s Murphy’s reply: “I was looking the other day at one of the new Pew Center polls about ‘what Americans know.’ Americans in general aren’t that interested in, or aware of, the outside world, and increasingly even our elites don’t seem to put much stock in that kind of knowledge either. We don’t have [enough] Arabic speakers; the number of foreign correspondents continues to shrink. Compared with the Greeks, the Romans were not passionately interested in the outside world. And they were often taken by surprise. The great disaster suffered by Varus in Germany in A.D. 9, when three entire Roman legions were annihilated, stemmed partly from ignorance about the tribes they were up against.”

It’s been called “Omphalos syndrome”: the misguided belief that one’s nation and way of life is at the center (or navel) of the world. Rome had it, and suffered for it. America has it too, and we are suffering. We need to start caring about what five Norwegians think. We really do.

Ugly Americanism has come up in connection with your receiving the Peace Prize, and so has an all-consuming ugly cynicism. Writer H. L. Mencken once said, “A cynic is a man who, when he smells flowers, looks around for a coffin.” This is definitely what some people have been doing around your award. Looking around for that coffin. Some of it is just blatantly racist—the presumption that the Peace Prize committee gave you the award just because you are the first African American president. And then there’s the cynicism summed up in something that Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele said: you won because of “star power.” The world has a crush on you. Things are just in the honeymoon phase. It’s all illusion, smoke and mirrors.

Now, my congregation is listening in on this letter, so I say this to them as much as to you: that our Unitarian Universalist values transcend political parties. We are doing the best we can to stand on the side of love, that mightiest word, and part of our job is bringing prophetic critique to the public sphere when necessary, whether that sphere is Democratic or Republican, because our Unitarian Universalist values demand it. To be faithful to our religious call, there must be independence from political parties; we must be able to speak from out of a higher point of view of shared values. Today I bring warm congratulations to you, but when your policies and actions go contrary to our values, expect a different kind of letter. And if ever doing this becomes not OK in a Unitarian Universalist congregation—when my religion becomes a mere adjunct of the Democratic Party, and there’s absolutely no room for Republicans, or others, then I am out of here.

So when I call what Michael Steele is saying as cynical, I’m not trying to win one for the Democrats. I’m doing the best I can to speak up for that love which is

beyond marital, filial, national,
love that casts a widening pool of light….

But the “star power” comment takes the love you are trying to spread and tries to make it an unworthy thing. He’s trying to rebuild his political party, while you are trying to lead America into a new chapter of international cooperation. He says it’s just all words, but, first of all, words are a kind of action too—words change things. As a preacher, I have to believe this. Second, you know very we’ll that words alone are not enough. That’s why, over and over again, you say that “the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words,” that “the magnitude of our challenges has yet to be met by the measure of our actions.”

On the other hand, maybe some star power is exactly what we need right now. But here, I’m talking about power to forge international consensus and move the world’s conscience. It was something we saw lacking in the previous presidential administration—how President Bush squandered the world’s goodwill after 9/11. He started a war of choice with Iraq. On such critical global issues as arms control, torture, and climate change, he stepped back from the world table, disengaged, thumbed his nose at everyone. Unilateralism, cowboy diplomacy, Omphalos syndrome. But then came the genocide in Darfur, hundreds of thousands dead and millions displaced in waves of violence that showed no signs of abating. President Bush spoke movingly to this in 2007, at the U. S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. “It is evil we are now seeing in Sudan—and we’re not going to back down.” He was exactly right. Yet his call went nowhere. Multilateralism and diplomacy was what solving the problem in Darfur required and continues to require—yet this had not been the established practice of the Bush administration. It was like singing a completely different tune. And then there was the accumulated skepticism and distrust of the world that drowned him out, made it impossible for his absolutely worthy message to be heard.

But it’s a different time now. How you’ve turning things around, in just eleven months, is why you’ve been awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. The Committee wants you to see things through, this long journey you started. Your vision of four pillars, which are “fundamental to the future that we want for our children:” stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, pursuing peace, meeting the challenge of climate change, and the creation of a global economy that advances opportunity for all. “Now is the time,” you are saying, “for all of us to take our share of the responsibility for a global response to global challenges. […]The time has come to realize that the old habits, the old arguments, are irrelevant to the challenges faced by our people. They lead nations to act in opposition to the very goals that they claim to pursue…. They build up walls between us and the future that our people seek, and the time has come for those walls to come down.” The time has come. The choice is ours.

beyond marital, filial, national,
love casting a widening pool of light….

President Obama, I thank you for your inspired service, and I’ll be there with you in spirit when, on December 10th, you’re in Oslo receiving the prize. Thanks for asking What if? What if the mightiest word is love?

Sincerely,

Rev. Anthony David, Senior Minister
The Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Atlanta

Did Steve Austin have more than just bionic limbs?

Bionic Limb Technology Is Here And Now We Have the "Bionic Bottom"

Do you remember Colonel Steve Austin in The Six Million Dollar Man?   He was a test pilot that was maimed in a wreck and the government spent $6 million to give him nuclear powered limbs.  I think he also had a bionic eye.  Science fiction?  It was then, just like the communicators in Star Trek were in the late 60’s and now we have cell phones that look a whole lot like the gizmo that Captain Kirk used to say ”Scotty, beam me up.”  Since the time of the TV show starring Lee Majors, bionic limbs have become a reality.   Butt, you know that we’ve truly moved into the space age because in England, doctor’s gave a man a “bionic bottom.”   The poor guy had gotten in a car accident and suffered internal injuries.  Apparently, he suffered great muscle loss on his backside and that made it impossible to maintain control.  He had been fitted with a colostomy bag, which is a pain in the ass, to say the least.  Now, with his bionic backside, all he has to do is flip a switch, just like using a garage door opener.  Kinda funny but also amazing, if you think about it.

Original Teddy Bear With a Bow

On This Date in History: President Theodore Roosevelt was an avid outdoorsman. He lived and traveled in the west and also established the national park system when he designated five areas as national parks. He later signed the Antiquities Act of 1906 that allowed he and his successors to claim certain sites, landmarks, prehistoric structures and other items as federal monuments. While he was a great advocate of conservation, he also was an avid hunter. On this date in 1902, he was on a hunting expedition in the Mississippi Delta. Having lived in Greenville, MS for a time, I’m familiar with the area and have seen the historic marker that marks what happened. He was on a bear hunt I guess the locals wanted to make sure that the president bagged some game. Some poor bear got chased by a bunch of hounds. Roosevelt came to find the bear, knocked unconscious and tied to a tree. He was expected to shoot it. He refused.

Here is another version. He was in Mississippi to settle a border dispute and decided to do a little hunting. A bear had killed a hunting dog and it was chased down. The animal was wounded when Roosevelt came upon it and ordered it killed for mercy. Still another story says that a small bear cub was brought to Roosevelt and he refused to kill it. When I lived in Louisiana they claimed that the bear was in that state…that may harken back to the border dispute.

Michtom's Original Teddy Bear in Smithsonian

Whatever…the story made the rounds along with a drawing. I’ve never heard the one about him ordering the mercy killing…I’ve alway heard the one where he let the bear live and the drawing supports that version. Entrepreneurs decided to take advantage. Brooklyn store owners Rose and Morris Michtom asked Roosevelt for permission in using his name for their marketing of a stuffed cute bear. Roosevelt agreed and the Teddy Bear was born. Another version of the story is that Margarette Steiff in Germany made a cute bear that was an instant international hit.

Here’s the bottom line. The Teddy Bear was inspired by some story about the 26th President of the United States and a bear. Between 1903 and 1911, millions were sold and the classic tradition continues to this day.

7 AM Monday (I bet this changes)

Weather Bottom Line:  First off, the bottom line is that we should be fine on Sunday and Monday with highs still pleasant each afternoon toward 70.  Then come the question marks.  I’ve seen the official forecast and it calls for the best rain chances on Tuesday.  But, that seems at odds with the model runs as both the GFS and NAM look pretty similar.  A couple of days ago I talked about a big fat low getting cut off in the Southern Plains.  Well, that is still indicated by both models and both have this guy lurk around Missouri for a couple of days as another shortwave behind it comes along and keeps it from moving too much.  It then lifts almost due north and then the next guy comes through the Ohio Valley by the end of the week. The second feature looks more formidable as far as we are concerned given its track.  The NAM throws out about 2/3 of an inch of rain and the GFS something more like 1/5 of an inch; both advertise the rain though from Tuesday evening through Wednesday, which is at odd with the official forecast.  I kinda like that scenario.  It seems to me that the cut off guy will be held up and a slow poke in response to the next one behind it.  Either way, Sunday and Monday look very nice.

Progressives Don’t Understand Progressivism

Wednesday, November 11. “They’re making fun of you again, Beck,” says The Factor host Bill O’Reilly, on air, to conservatism’s hottest commodity these days, Glenn Beck. He is referring to another skit on Saturday Night Live, or The Daily Show, or whatever other bastion of liberal humor is trying to poke fun at the crew-cutted commentator this particular week. Beck’s eyes gloss over—surely he suffers temporary blindness for the gold visions that illuminate his mind. (Liberals entertain visions of dollars, lots of ‘em, preferably still wet off the printing press, but Beck eschews the plummeting U.S. currency in favor of precious metals!) Beck realizes each parody of his show brings more viewers to his already-a-hit show on Fox News, as well as listeners to his radio show, attendees to his road shows, and buyers to his books.

Beck’s battleship has arrived simultaneously in every port in the United States, ready to fire at Marxists, Czars, and anything else with even a fleck of Commie Red in it, all the while making a healthy free-marketed, capitalistic, fat, all-American profit.

Speaking of that ship, picture the liberals who hate Beck as jittery sailors at sea when they see enemy Beck’s dreadnought approaching. Their eyes, bulging with rage, are playing tricks on them, so that the red, white, and blue flag of patriotism that flies above Beck’s ship, is, in their view, dripping in very conservative colors—say, black, with bone-white skull and crossbones. Before Beck gets close enough for them to see his true colors, the liberal fleet puts great amounts of their treasure into a dinghy, and sets it afloat toward Beck’s ship.

That’s what SNL is doing for Beck every time they poke fun at him. That’s what the girls on The View do every time they back bite Beck. That’s what MSNBC does every time it decries Beck’s methods. Beck should give them all commissions. Someday we’ll discover that Keith “Obama-man” is actually Beck’s brilliant press agent!

Scientists say the appendix is useless to modern man–not Beck’s. His acted up and Jon Stewart used the occasion to add more wealth to Beck’s growing portfolio. Stewart did a hilarious impersonation of the conservative culprit, lecturing at great length about Beck’s appendicitis. Fans of Beck will laugh with Stewart because he cleverly lampoons Beck’s mannerisms, tears, and methods of persuasion. Liberals will laugh at Beck in a na na na naaah na mockery. No matter—to Beck, any sort of laughter just means more money.

In watching the Stewart segment on Beck, you’ll want to pay close attention from 1:00 to 1:26, because it reveals a flaw in the thinking of liberals who think they are “progressives,” which in their innocence, means “you know, we’re progressing, getting better—that sort of thing.”

Of course. Who doesn’t want progress?

Progress such as in the 1850s, in order to get from Pittsburg to San Francisco, you needed horses. By the 1880s, trains were faster. By the early 1900s, you might use an automobile, and by the 1930s, you could fly in a commercial airplane. That sort of progress. That’s Progressivism—right? Go forward. Westward Ho. Move on. (Moveon.org, Baby!) See how it all works?

Stewart, impersonating Beck, says, “I’ve been reading a lot of books lately, books on anatomy that aren’t now taught in your ‘so-called’ medical schools anymore. Apparently the medicine that was good enough for our founding fathers is now considered ‘politically or medically incorrect.’”

However funny on the surface, this statement reveals that most Americans, even self-proclaimed progressives, don’t understand what Progressivism is. If they did, many of them would flee from this menace of actual progress. Stewart asserts through humor that Beck’s adherence to principles established by the founding fathers is “anti-progress,” which is erroneous because it assumes that Progressivism is just plain progress, which is the same mistake misinformed liberals make in their beliefs about Progressivism.

Both a real progressive (that is, one of the few that really understand what it means to be one), and a pseudo progressive (one who claims the movement in ignorance of what it really is) would argue that since medical science has progressed markedly through the ages, and is thus better in almost every facet, then politics must progress as well, because, like medicine, it needs to move forward. Stewart is of course referring to this in his derision of Beck. Specifically for American politics, true progressives believe this also means improving or even doing away with an antiquated constitution.

However, the U.S. Constitution is arguably the best legal political document ever written. It has been the bedrock for the longest-surviving government in the world, and has been instrumental in catapulting the United States as its undisputed leader. Its system of checks and balances is unprecedented and unparalled. Without the constitution, American would never have enjoyed the freedom to create a strong nation that has prospered as no other nation in history.

Most changes to American government since the days of the founding fathers that have been detrimental to the country have either gone against the constitution, or have been unwise changes to the document. Many of these changes occurred during the “Progressive Age,” consisting of the first 40 or so years of the 1900s. One of those changes was the Seventeenth Amendment, ratified under President Woodrow Wilson, a progressive kingpin. Before its passage, U.S. senators were selected by their respective state legislatures. Progressives who wanted to update and improve the constitution felt that there was too much chicanery and politics involved in the selection process and wanted to put the decision in the hands of voters. While this might seem good on the surface, what has ensued is far worse.

One of the delicate factors in the checks and balances system is that of states’ rights vs. central government. The framers of the country knew states needed more power to create a lasting and equitable relationship with the federal government. In fact, this partial power assignment to states was what convinced many of the colonies to unite into a larger country. However, since the inception of the Seventeenth Amendment, senators pay less attention to their states’ needs because they now receive donations for their election campaigns from all over the country. A senator like Christopher Dodd (D), from the relatively small state of Connecticut, gets much of his donations from out-of-state interests, and is beholden to those nationally based companies. This is not good for Connecticut, but great for Dodd, and for big firms with deep pockets. Americans now routinely complain that elections are bought, not earned. Much of the voice of the people was silenced with that constitutional change in 1913.

Progressivism as a movement began in the late 1800s, and became the fork in the road that led large a segment of classical liberals away from the roots that were elemental in the formation of the country. Most of the patriots were liberals, but in the old definition, coming from the word “liberty”—they wanted small government, and it was built into the constitution.

Wilson was one of Progressivism’s most ardent advocates, as was President Theodore Roosevelt. They, along with a whole slew of progressives such as Charles Beard, Arthur Bullard, Nicholas Murray Butler, Herbert Croly (author of the landmark progressive work, The Promise of American Life, and founding editor of the New Republic), W.E.B. DuBois, Richard Ely, Walter Lippmann, Walter Weyl, and William Allen White, were strong voices in the early 1900s for evolving away from the constitution.

Are you a progressive yourself? Perhaps you’re saying, ‘Hmm—I haven’t heard of most of these guys.” Well, if you’re not familiar with these intellectuals, writers, opinion shapers, and with their views, then you don’t know Progressivism. If you’re going to espouse a movement, you need to know about it. Let’s take a closer look at just one of these influencers: Wilson.

According to historian Jonah Goldberg, in his book, Liberal Fascism (2009), “Wilson’s writings are chockablock with demands that the ‘artificial’ barriers established in our ‘antiquated’ eighteenth-century system of checks and balances be smashed. He mocked the ‘Fourth of July sentiments’ of those who still invoked the founding fathers as a source for constitutional guidance” (p. 88).

Goldberg goes on to explain that, “On the campaign trail in 1912, Wilson explained that ‘living political constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice’” (p. 88).

What Wilson and his ilk were saying was that the old constitution was dead, and what was needed was a living one. This is still at the heart of American Progressivism. Other progressives, such as Otto von Bismarck, Benito Mussolini, and Adolph Hitler, were not so much concerned with the American constitution, although they had similar core beliefs and methods to grow Progressivism. These European leaders were also quite influential to American progressives who viewed their ostensible early Twentieth Century success with envy—even admiration.

Under Wilson, Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” began turning into an iron fist. Wilson quickly double-crossed the record number of blacks who turned away from their favored Republican Party to vote for him. In short order, he passed laws that allowed segregation in government, including requiring photos on government job applications in order to know the race of an applicant. He also saw to it that blacks could not sit with whites in Washington D.C. streetcars, and he made interracial marriage illegal in D.C.

That doesn’t sound very liberal, does it?

Wilson and his administration quelled Americans’ and the press’ ability to voice dissent against him. According to Goldberg, “Wilson’s Sedition Act banned ‘uttering, printing, writing, or publishing any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the United States government or the military.’ The postmaster general was given authority to deny mailing privileges to any publication he saw fit” (p. 112). Thousands of Americans were imprisoned under this act.

Liberals would not like that either—they could get imprisoned for saying something negative about President George W. Bush! Yet, we still see underpinnings of Progressivism when President Barack Obama attempts to silence the voices of the Tea Party, or of conservative talk radio, or of right wing websites.

Progressivism is not that far-removed from its ugly past.

The list of Wilson’s egregious acts, all under the name of Progressivism, goes on and on. Suffice it here to say that after Progressivism lost its savor with its failures in Italy under Mussolini, Germany under Hitler, and Russia under Stalin. It began to revive in the 1960s, and really gained its current steam under the Clintons. Most readers are aware that during the Democratic debates in 2008, Hillary Clinton referred to the early Twentieth Century progressives as her model.

So-called progressives should enjoy a hearty guffaw at talented funnyman Stewart’s take on Beck. However, they are wise to not take their serious political cues from Comedy Central.

–CB

See Jon Stewart’s Hilarious Take on Beck:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091123/dailyshow_video

Teddy bears have been around since the conception of President Theodore Roosevelt decided not to shoot a bear tied to tree in 1902, deeming it unsportsmanlike. 

What one really has to do with the other, I don’t know, but keeping that in mind, it sort of paves the way for these future misappropriations of cute widdle fuzzy teddy bears by popular culture, whether it’s…

• The Jetsons Movie creating a Teddy-2 in an attempt to mine cash from later-generation youngsters (did I mention Teddy-2’s father works in a mine?)
• George Lucas force-ing “primitives” to battle inept clones (must watch this vid)
• Snuggle promoting a bear that giggles in ecstasy when cuddling warm towels (or tries to kill housewives)
• Steven Spielberg allowing a toy to be sentimental (or creeeepy)
• a company putting out a toy to enslave the classes (of students)
• Family Guy featuring a sexually confused infant further confused by fantasies involving his “plaything” Rupert
• a low-budget 90’s film using fuzzy buddies as weapons
• or a low-budget 00’s film that… that… just watch this preview.

Even though it may be fuzzy wuzzy, it’s still an AWFUL BATTLE… GO!

Why is it that public officials are so utterly scared of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)?   Is it the money represented?  Or the votes?  That a pro-Israel lobby should have such power in the U.S. (i.e., another country) is perhaps too little questioned.    

Barak Obama and his secretary of state were opposed to the further expansion of settlements in Israel.  However, when the Israeli prime minister said he would not stop the construction on settlements already slated to be done, the American “leaders” backed down.  What were they so afraid of?  I believe that the US gives Israel $18 billion a year.  Whatever the figure, we have never put our money where our mouth is.  I suspect the reason is that our representatives are more concerned with getting reelected than in making real change.  I’m convinced that if the US Government withheld the “aid,” we would find peace negotiations begin in earnest, and a deal quickly reached.  If I’m right, this would also cut down on the anti-American sentiment around the world (esp. in the Middle East) that is related to the plight of the Palestinians.  

I would much rather see Barak Obama take on the banks too big to fail and the AIPAC and be out in four years, than “four more years” of comfortable incramentalism.   I suspect that if he did take on the sacred cows that have been causing problems, he would find more support among the actual voters in 2012, though there would be a risk as powerful interests would be looking for retribution.  Still, four years can be much better than eight.   Whether Andrew Jackson taking on the national bank, Abe Lincoln staying the course in the war in spite of the polls in the North, or Teddy Roosevelt in taking on the trusts, a real leader is sorely needed to solve systemic problems that have been rendered intractable by the powers that be on account of their vested interests that they not be solved.   Instead, real change all too often becomes accommodation and incrementalism.

For more, pls see: http://twitter.com/euandus

Mark Twain

But let’s also appreciate other one-liners such as these:

While on his deathbed, Andrew Jackson observed, “The only thing I regret is that I didn’t shoot Clay and hang Calhoun.”

“Speak softly and carry a big stick.” Theodore Roosevelt

“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Franklin D. Roosevelt

“Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.” John F. Kennedy

“I’m not too worried about the deficit. It’s big enough to take care of itself.” Ronald Reagan

The prolific Twain inserted hundreds of one-liners throughout his writings and began several with one, as in one of my favorite short stories, A Dog’s Tale: “My father was a St. Bernard, my mother was a collie, but I am a Presbyterian.” Here are some others among my favorite Twain one-liners:

“Truth is the most valuable thing we have. Let us economize it.”

“Man is the Only Animal that blushes. Or needs to.”

“Familiarity breeds contempt…and children.”

“Cauliflower is nothing but cabbage with a college education.”

And when Twain’s obituary appeared in a New York newspaper, “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.”

* * *

What are your favorite one-liners? Please share.

We continue our serialization of A Marvelous Hundred Square Miles: Black Hills Tourism, 1880-1941 by Suzanne Julin this morning. This teasing tantalizer does not have long left so enjoy these last few chunks, and then you’ll have to buy the book to read the rest!

The presence of the national forests in the Black Hills offered residents and tourists opportunities to enjoy the scenery and to camp, fish, and hunt. Some people built cabins under the leasing law of 1915, which allowed the public to lease lots for recreational structures as well as for hotels, stores, and other services that catered to tourists. The Forest Service made little effort to promote the establishment of such services, however, emphasizing timber and land management, not public access. The Antiquities Act of 1906 allowed the president to establish national monuments to protect natural and built features of historic, prehistoric, and scientific value located on public lands and gave various federal agencies, including the Forest Service, responsibility for monuments created on lands under their control. This charge did not necessarily extend to supervision or development, and often the only protection accorded monuments were signs posted at the sites to warn the public against collecting and vandalism. The presence of vast tracts of public lands meant most of the earliest designated monuments were in the West, and as automobile tourism increased, the existence of the monuments helped pull motorists in that direction.

To the United States Forest Service, then, fell the supervision of Jewel Cave in the southern Black Hills. The development of this cave, located about twelve miles west of Custer, South Dakota, had repeated the pattern started at Wind Cave of conflicts between early developers and local citizens concerned with degradation of resources. At the turn of the century, Frank and Albert Michaud, two brothers who had recently settled in the Custer area, discovered a cave entrance so small that neither of them could enter it. They enlarged the opening, explored the cavern, and decided the crystals within had no value as minerals but could be a lure for tourists and a source of revenue as specimens. The Michauds took on a partner, Charles Busche, and filed a mining claim on the property, calling it Jewel Lode, in September 1900. The Michauds subsequently filed other mineral claims in the same area, and another partner, Bertha Cain, acquired an interest in these properties.

Over the next several years, Busche and the Michauds explored the cave, established passages in it, built a wagon road to the site, and constructed a two-story log building there. The building, probably designed as a hotel and dining room for tourists, featured a rustic but imposing two-story front porch with round arches and decorative detail suggestive of the Stick-style architecture popular in the late 1800s. The men promoted the structure as the site of the “Jewel Cave Dancing Club” in 1902. Despite these efforts, as well as some local advertising, the cave failed to draw enough people to make the enterprise worthwhile. The site was difficult to reach, and Wind Cave was better known and more easily accessible. Subsequently, Busche sold his interest in the cave to Frank Michaud in 1905, and at some point, the brothers apparently devised a new scheme to increase the attractions of the site: the development of a game preserve.

The Michaud brothers garnered some political support for the idea, proposing the withdrawal of an area of sixty square miles from the Black Hills National Forest, including over sixteen thousand acres of timber. Local residents, however, were not enthusiastic about such a withdrawal, suggesting that opportunities for general development in that area of the Black Hills were better served if timber sales and grazing continued. A report produced at the time of the proposal stated that the cave was not scientifically significant because the same variety of specimens were available in Yellowstone National Park. It further concluded that the proposed area was not large enough for a viable game refuge and recommended that the area be designated a national monument instead. Unfortunately for the Michauds, the interest generated by the game-preserve proposal, which threatened the interests of other local residents, undermined their attempts to develop a profitable tourist attraction. As a national monument, the cave and its environs would remain under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service, and its grazing and timber resources would still be available to the larger public. President Theodore Roosevelt signed a proclamation citing Jewel Cave’s “scientific interest” and designating it a national monument on 8 February 1908.

Immediately, the Michaud brothers and a partner Bertha Cain began asking for compensation for the loss of their claims as well as for the improvements they had made to the property. The Forest Service questioned the legality of the claims, citing a decision in the Wind Cave litigation that held that land claimed because of the presence of a cave and which yielded minerals which could be sold only as “curiosities” did not meet the definition of mineral land in mining law. Although the Antiquities Act said monuments created under the law were subject to valid claims, the validity of the Michaud claims could be questioned because of the family’s use of the property.

Point Reyes oysters are as famed an institution as the verdant peninsula’s happy cows and incongruous elk, but the succulent bivalves might soon become a thing of legend, at least as far as human palates are concerned. The question is raised: are National Parks meant to prevent the imprint of humans on choice bits of nature or is the goal one of harmonious interaction? The debate, of course, is nothing new; , there has been a sharp divide between the conservationists and the preservationists – those that would see nature safeguarded and efficiently used and those that would see it entirely free from the print of humanity – since the first federal act safeguarded a small patch of wilderness.

These are the issues which pit the spiritual mountain girl against the foodie within me. But, in the end, I think I come down the side of the conservationists – Teddy, I’m with ya. Perhaps this is purely species-ist of me; I might just be siding with my kind. But, if I’m honest, it’s because the places that I find truly beautiful are those that are impossible to use for any sane human purpose. The top of Mt. Dana isn’t suitable for human industry, neither is the plain of jumbo rocks in the heart of Joshua Tree. In the end, if conservation was the universal watchword and sustainable methods of farming, irrigation, ranching, and slaughter were used, there would be more open, untouched land to go around. And the land used for industry wouldn’t look – or be – too bad either.

Republican President Theodore Roosevelt once described what it is like to stick your neck out in the brutal world of political communications:

“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

(Our guy T-Roos was a tad melodramatic, dontcha think?)

Well starting today, congressional Republicans will now find out what it is like to be “in the arena” when it comes to the biggest legislative cage match of our lifetime, the debate over national health care reform. Today, Republicans have offered their long-awaited alterative, that reportedly has (drum roll please):

SECURITY. No ban on corporations rejecting people with pre-existing ailments.

AFFORDABILITY. No option to buy into an insurance exchange to make insurance more affordable.

UNIVERSAL COVERAGE. No requirement to buy insurance, and therefore nothing moving us to universal coverage.

COST CONTROL. No option to buy into a Medicare-like program.

The Republican alternative does include malpractice limitations, a provision to allow sale of insurance across state lines and a ban on caring for illegal aliens, which reportedly is written into the bill in all CAPS with three exclamation points.

It hasn’t been easy for congressional Democrats to stick their neck out on this issue. Now Republicans, at least for a short time, get to find out what it’s like to be “in the arena.”

- Loveland

The AP has a nice article on what is a consistent trend throughout voter history — the rise of third parties at times when voters are unhappy. The article discusses Governor’s race in NJ between Democratic Incumbent Jon Corzine, Republican candidate Chris Christie, and Independent Chris Daggett. In NY’s 23rd District, the GOP candidate (Dede Scozzafava) was forced out of the race by surging Conservative Party candidate, Doug Hoffman. Scozzafava then endorsed her former Democratic opponent, Bill Owens.

Does this mean America is headed for a new era, the end of the two party stranglehold on political power? Sadly, I’ll have to say no.

Now, I’m not saying no because I hate third parties — quite the opposite. If my young voting record is any indication (and my independent party affiliation), I advocate third parties aggressively. However, I’m a realist above all, and while I believe that a few third party candidates may make inroads here or there, this will not be a permanent phenomenon.

Historically, third parties have been strongest when there is discontent in the nation. Look at Teddy Roosevelt, who harnessed the power of the Progressive movement into his Bull-Moose party, fighting with former friend and Republican candidate William Howard Taft, paving the way for a Wilson presidency (Wilson won with only 41.8% of the popular vote).

George C. Wallace took 46 electoral votes in 1968, playing at divisions in the electorate over de-segregation (Wallace opposed de-segregation). Nixon would win that election with 301 electoral votes, but, interestingly, only little more than half of the popular vote (he got 31,710,470 votes whereas Vice President and Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey got 30,898,055, and George Wallace got 9,906,473). An incredibly close race with a third party siphoning votes by playing to the divisive issue of the time.

Looking back to 1948, Strom Thurmond won 39 electoral votes as the segregationist, socially conservative Dixiecrat, again taking advantage of the racially divisive time period. Thurmond carried Southern states, most likely taking votes from Democratic candidate Harry S Truman (back when the South was solidly Democratic, pre-LBJ days) who still clinched a narrow victory over Thomas Dewey.

More recently, in 1992, Ross Perot gained about 19% of the popular vote, but no electoral votes. Perot’s focus on the economy, during a recession and after 12 years of Reagan-Bush, gained him a large amount of votes, even after he withdrew and then re-entered the race. However, and this is instructive as to the lot of third parties in America, Perot’s 1996 run for the Presidency was decidedly less successful. Why? Because Clinton absorbed many of the Perot voters with his economic agenda. Perot was the answer to growing discontent with both parties (the Republicans in power — Reagan and Bush — had more than tripled the national debt and the economy was in recession, and the Democrats were also saddled with a reputation of big government and larger spending), but once Clinton took office as a “New Democrat” and began the process of balancing the budget and leading the way out of recession, many voters who were discontented with the two main parties then supported Clinton. In effect, he neutralized the Perot voters, and brought them over to his side for the 1996 election.

This is the historic role of third parties in America — the answer to discontent with both the two major parties. They run, they siphon off enough votes to make the major parties recognize the growing movement in America, and then the major parties absorb their views to neutralize them and pacify the electorate. When was the last time you saw someone running on the Bull-Moose or Dixiecrat or Know-Nothing ticket? These movements don’t often survive past a few elections at the most, because their views have been taken on by one of the major parties (Perot) or their views become out of step or fall out of favor (such as the racist Dixiecrat and Know-Nothing parties). Or because people are frightened to vote third party.

Which leads us to the 2000 election. Discontent spread over various things (the Monica Lewinsky affair and Gore’s subsequent attempts to disassociate himself with Clinton, the false image of Gore perpetuated by opponents (for instance, he never said he invented the internet), and the conservative bend of the Clinton-Gore “New Democrats’” on various economic issues like deregulation and free trade), which lead to an extremely tight race in which Gore won the popular vote of the American people, but lost the election after the Supreme Court decided Bush won Florida. Ralph Nader, running as a Green Party candidate, was the answer to much of this dissatisfaction. He posed a progressive alternative to the Gore “New Democrat” and the “Reagan Conservative” Bush, and won 2.74% of the popular vote.

Viewed as the spoiler that caused Gore to lose (though Gore actually won the popular vote, as noted above), Nader would have no substantial effect in later elections. Essentially, I believe, the thought process became “a third party cannot win and can only hurt my second choice candidate, so I have to vote for one of the two major parties”. Also, the 2000 did not have the extremely large issues that dominate politics today (terrorism and the economy — the 2000 election was pre-9/11 and the economy was not in a recession). The stakes may seem higher now than they did in 2000.

Finally, as Ralph Nader has noted before (I’ll search for the link to the interview), it is extremely difficult to unify a third party, which (like any other party) boasts an intellectual diversity of members. Splintered into various segments, often on a state level instead of a national level, a party may be successful in gaining some elected seats here or there, but without a unifying force it probably won’t translate to a broader single movement that will redefine the political spectrum.

Looking at what has occurred before as a guide, these third party candidates may have scattered success as voters become disillusioned with the Obama Administration but are stilling unwilling to vote for the contemporary Republican Party (dominated as it is by its radical elements — think Limbaugh, Palin, ‘birthers’, and ‘death panelists’), but they will most likely not change the political landscape in the long-term. If the economy picks up, and things start looking better (or if the Republican Party retains its extremist views), these voters may return to the Democratic fold. If the Republican Party recreates itself into a party of intellectual conservatism and jettisons its fringe elements and evangelical base that frighten away moderate voters, then it will likely gain these independent-voters.

From the new guys:

Obsidian says it’s much easier for women to get laid.

Double-Minded Man muses on his former life as a nice guy.

Sonic Charmer notes the correlation between progressivism and whiteness.

Genius comments on Israeli girls’ lack of femininity, pens a guide to men’s room etiquette, and shares my taste in sexytime music.

Gerard O’Neill writes on the consequences of a potential “grey flight” from Ireland.

Indomitable Thoughts revels in kicking women off of the pedestal.

And the rest:

Cless Alvein coins a new term for our sexual dystopia.

Prime relates what Dr. James Watson has taught him.

Chuck writes on the feminist conspiracy to destroy organized sports.

Dave from Hawaii shares his thoughts on the death of femininity.

Novaseeker reports on two related cases of feminist kvetching.

Roissy takes those who doubt the power of game to task.

The Elusive Wapiti argues against government marriage.

Zdeno pens another guest post at 2 Blowhards on fixing the university system.

Al Fin reports on Europe’s demographic future.

Alpha Dominance details how women misrepresent themselves in order to get men to commit.

11minutes explains why sluts are shamed and studs are saluted.

Anakin Niceguy says there is no such thing as involuntary celibacy.

Alex Birch tells guys to man up and inveighs against Randism.

Frank Azzurro reviews Total Recall.

Φ gives his thoughts on the biopic Notorious.

Fabius Maximus analyzes the collapse of the Old Media.

FeministX tells us why she hates sports.

Fishersville Mike compares Doug Hoffman to Barack Obama.

Three posts from Girl Game: Aoefe talks about kissing, Bhetti writes on temperateness and tempestuousness in relationships, and LovelySexyBeauty analyzes the bitch shield.

Trumwill argues against following your dreams.

Khankrumthebulgar muses on Gore Vidal calling Roman Polanski’s victim a “hooker” and other issues.

Dennis Mangan presents evolution as a asset for reactionaries.

HVanDerMerwe explains why you shouldn’t marry women over 25.

OneSTDV writes on left-wing pessimism.

Rake analyzes a day game approach.

Pons Seclorum criticizes Glenn Beck’s characterization of Theodore Roosevelt as a progressive.

Roosh outlines eighteen reasons why guys don’t get laid.

Talleyrand retells two conversations he had with two different older men.

Alkibiades explains why there is a sexual double standard.

Ben Leonard writes on how sterilization is driving us towards an androgenous world.

Chip Smith questions the facts of the Bill Sparkman murder.

J critiques Kevin MacDonald’s analysis of the Frankfurt School.

Assanova calls it quits.

Hugh MacIntyre posits the possibility of a Scottish independence referendum next year.

Slumlord talks about the limits of game.

Dylan Sauders lists the mistakes guys make on Halloween.

Eric Disco explains how to get women to chase you.

G Manifesto distinguishes between “pure game” and “tricking.”

Guy White rolls out a myth-smashing four-part series on Jewish power in the U.S.

The Audacious Epigone presents more evidence that women don’t care about non-biological science.

Tucker Max speculates on why I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell bombed at the box office.

Andromeda argues for the legalization of prostitution.

Archivist writes on how feminist beliefs enable rape.

Robert Franklin reports on the effects of fatherlessness on animal brain development.

Marc Rudov says why the GOP should try to appeal to men.

Agnostic gives a perfectly rational reason why straight guys should hate gay men.

Robert Greene releases an free e-book summarizing his newest release, The 50th Law.

Cassandra Goldman shows how laws designed to protect adolescents end up hurting them.

Emach states why China will not become a superpower and takes down the feminist absurdity of hyphenated names.

Larry Arnhart writes on Darwinism and human rights.

Silas Reinagel details how women are responsible for the current divorce epidemic.

John Robb gives advice to inquisitive youngsters.

Half Sigma opines on Judaism.

Joe Bageant contrasts the American and Mexican work ethics.

Karen De Coster blogs on the Gardasil and Cervarix scam.

Robert Higgs reports on the problems with democracy.

Mark Richardson states that feminists focusing on sex liberation are fighting a losing battle.

Will Grigg writes on how Obama is wrecking America.

John Dolan trashes Thomas Friedman’s The Lexus and the Olive Tree.

Did you know . . . that Teddy Bears were named after Theodore (“Teddy”) Roosevelt, our 26th President?  (Yes, I did.)

Did you know  . . . that there is a word for those who “love” or collect teddy bears?   (No, I did not, but I do now.)

arctophile

[ahrk-tuh-fahyl] –noun

1.  A person who is very fond of and is usually a collector of teddy bears.

From the combination of two Greek words that mean “bear” and “love.”

21st Century Mt. Rushmore

            “Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience and rebellion that progress has been made”, says Oscar Wilde. Referencing the history of the United States of America, Mt. Rushmore depicts four of the most daring, disobedient minds and leaders of the country who forever altered the course of progress and history in the country. Sculpted in granite near Keystone, South Dakota sit the faces of past presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt. The first was a revolutionary war hero determined to fight for independence from the mother country of Great Britain; the second crafted the Declaration of Independence and ultimately shaped the ideals upon which America was founded. Abraham Lincoln – a great orator and motivator – led our nation through the greatest civil struggle in its history, and Theodore Roosevelt guided the nation out of a depression by increasing the power and influence of government. All of these men – presidents of arguably the most powerful country in the world – were not only disobedient in some regard, but intently honed their skills and followed their intuitions regardless of public opinion. Because of their influence, a monument now stands in their honor, reminding the country of the people and ideals that have shaped its history.

            While the figures represented at today’s Mt. Rushmore represent approximately 150 years of American history, a more eclectic mix of people could be placed in lieu as representatives of American culture, politics, and achievement in the 21^st century. Of course, the nation’s first African-American president, Barack Obama, would be depicted, in addition to his wife, Michelle Obama, entrepreneur Magic Johnson, and journalist Oprah Winfrey. While President Obama’s historic victory ushered in a more liberal cultural era, it is not the culmination of his successes or work as a leader of the free world. During his term as president, he has already altered the climate of the financial services industry and is well on his way to forever changing the landscape of healthcare in the United States. His wife, Michelle Obama, adequately represents the image of a strong woman – compassionate, independent, industrious, and self-aware. Much like Jackie Kennedy in the 1960’s, Mrs. Obama’s style and grace allow her to serve as a role model to mature women and young girls alike. The impact her presence in the White House has on this country is already immensely felt and will not doubt contribute greatly to the cultures present in the 21^st century. Also on the mountain, Ervin “Magic” Johnson would be included for his work as a socially responsible entrepreneur – making money while adding wealth and opportunity in minority communities; and Oprah Winfrey would be included for her oftentimes uncanny influence over the affairs and attitudes of American citizens.

The Changing Face of History

            Indeed, the 21^st century Mt. Rushmore reflects the markedly altered demographic and cultural changes of America since President Roosevelt’s terms in office. The faces added to the mountain would be those of color, emphasizing the strong influence of minorities over the cultural and economic affairs of the country. Changed also would be the professions of the honorees, because leaders are no longer just presidents and war heroes, but entertainers, businessmen, and community affairs liaisons. Neither will the monument show the country’s movers and shakers as all-male, but will reflect the increased role of women in American politics and culture. The culture of change, progress, and ultimately disobedience is one of great importance and revere in America. Winston Churchill stated that “History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.” America’s diversity of people of thoughts give room to make that statement a reality for each citizen, and the 21^st century Mt. Rushmore will surely depict the strength of character in America’s people.

The Stanley Hotel in Estes Park, Colorado

 

The Stanley Hotel is a 138-room Georgian hotel in Estes Park, Colorado. Located within sight of the Rocky Mountain National Park, the Stanley offers panoramic views of the Rockies. It was built by Freelan O. Stanley of Stanley Steamer fame and opened on July 4, 1909, catering to the rich and famous. The hotel and its surrounding lands are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

The Stanley has hosted many famous guests, including the Titanic survivor Margaret Brown, John Philip Sousa, Theodore Roosevelt, the Emperor and Empress of Japan, and a variety of Hollywood personalities. The Stanley Hotel also hosted Stephen King, inspiring him to write The Shining. Contrary to information sometimes published King was living in Boulder at the time and did not actually write the novel at the hotel. Parts of the mini-series version of The Shining were filmed there, although it was not used for Stanley Kubrick’s cinematic version.

The Shining on Blu-ray Disc

The Stanley Hotel shows the uncut R-rated version of Kubrick’s The Shining on a continuous loop on Channel 42 on guest room televisions.

Buy this title Only $9.98

Many believe The Stanley Hotel is haunted, having reported a number of cases. Staff who work in the kitchen next to the ballroom after hours say they have heard a party going on when the room was empty. In one guest room people claim to have seen a man standing over the bed then running into the cupboard. It is further claimed that this same apparition is responsible for stealing jewelery, watches and luggage that has gone missing. Some others reported that they have seen ghosts in their rooms in the middle of the night, just standing in their room then disappearing. Sometimes, people in the lobby can hear the piano playing from the ballroom. When workers check to see whats going on, there would be nobody sitting in front of the piano. Workers think its Freelan O. Stanley’s wife playing it, who used to be a piano player. The television show Ghost Hunters was invited to investigate the hotel, the manager showed them the various places where these accusations occurred. Ghost Hunters discovered some reasons for the various phenomena, including wind and pipes but could not decipher the ballroom incident. Ghost Hunters also claimed to experience some occurrences such as seeing people in hallways then hiding and hearing children running and playing on the floor above them. The biggest occurrence claimed was that during changing of the film in the camera, a table jumped two feet in the air. Ghost Hunter Jason stayed the night in the room with the “ghost thief”, Jason stated that the bed moved, the cupboard doors unlocked and opened and his thick glass by the bed cracked open on the inside.

Stephen King got the idea for The Shining after staying in the almost empty hotel on the night before it closed for an extended period.

The neoclassical hotel was the inspiration for the fictional Overlook Hotel in Stephen King’s novel The Shining. While he and his wife were staying at the Stanley, King conceived the basic idea for the novel. The 1997 television miniseries version of The Shining was filmed at the Stanley, and it has been used as a location site for other films as well, most notably as the “Hotel Danbury” in Dumb and Dumber.

In May 2006, investigators with The Atlantic Paranormal Society (TAPS) investigated the hotel for the SciFi program Ghost Hunters. TAPS returned to the hotel on October 31, 2006 for a live, six hour follow-up investigation. In November 2008, UK channel LIVING broadcast Most Haunted’s investigation of the hotel.

The official website:
http://www.stanleyhotel.com/

I am wet, and cold, and wet, and cold. This is how it is if you go to see Niagara Falls and the Erie Canal on a drizzling late October day in western New York. Those of you who have visited Niagara Falls know you can’t stay dry anyway. I am lucky it wasn’t ice and snow, so I bundled up in the hoodie I bought in Seattle, my downy winter coat, gloves, and hit the road.

I found the falls right away. The last time I saw them was from the Canadian side. I was in Toronto for a conference during my Shell Oil Company years (my former travel agent). We drove down to see the falls on some official excursion that included some quaint villages along the way. I remember very little outside this sketch. I do remember thinking it was the most amazing natural wonder in the United States, second only to the Grand Canyon; and it is.

Most people consider the Canadian side the better view, and I expect it is; you can see both the American Bridal Veil Falls and the Horseshoe Falls in one take. On the American side you have to walk around to experience them individually; and it is a side view, not a panorama unless you take a ride up the observation tower. What you do experience is a powerful rush of water rumbling down the river, over the rocks, and suddenly, right beside you, it drops over the edge with a roar. Here is the advantage to the American side; you can almost reach out and touch. I may have forgotten my Canadian view, but I won’t forget the roar of the river and falls within arm’s reach.

From the falls I headed northeast to Lockport. This is the location of the famous “flight of five” locks on the Erie Canal. I was enamored with the idea of seeing the canal; it was something I remember from history class. The “Grand Old Erie Canal,” built in 1825, runs 363 miles and connects the Hudson River and the Atlantic Ocean, which are at sea level, to the Great Lakes at 570 feet above sea level. The locks raise and lower boats to overcome the change in elevation. Originally there were 83 locks. The “flight of five” were double locks that allowed boats to go up one side and down the other at the same time. There are two remaining. The canal was rock cut, dug by hand, and blasted out of solid stone with powder left over from the war of 1812. I crossed over the canal again and again, frustrated at not finding the locks. It is off season, so all the tourist help was boarded up. I finally found someone to point me in the right direction.

I was disappointed not to get into see more of Buffalo itself. By the time I made it back to Buffalo from the locks, it was raining and nearing rush hour. All I wanted was a warm hotel room. It is a shame because I did some research and find this city fascinating. The city apparently has a grand mix of amazing architecture, ranging from Romanesque, to Art Deco, to Queen Anne Victorian, with multiple contributions by Frank Lloyd Wright and other famous architects. It was also one of the last stops on the Underground Railroad, where runaway slaves sought freedom on the Canadian side of the Niagara River. Buffalo was home to two American Presidents, Millard Fillmore and Grover Cleveland. Theodore Roosevelt made his inaugural speech here after the assassination of William McKinley.

Cool stuff.

Prior to this visit I had a single impression of Buffalo. Several years ago, while I lived in Houston, national sports commentators voted on the worst places to cover football. Buffalo tied with Houston. Buffalo was, according to the commentators, miserably cold. Houston, they said, was miserably hot.

For now I am glad I didn’t experience the miserable cold. I don’t think today’s 49 degrees with scattered showers was the weather that earned Buffalo that top spot. I will just count myself lucky and curl up in my warm blankets.

Today we continue to serialize A Marvelous Hundred Square Miles: Black Hills Tourism, 1880-1941 by Suzanne Julin and published by the South Dakota State Historical Society Press.

The conflict over the ownership of Wind Cave may have given impetus to its becoming a national park. In 1896, the Hot Springs Star noted that as long as the McDonald family continued to operate the cave, it could not reach its potential of drawing tourists. S. E. Wilson, a Hot Springs attorney, and Eben W. Martin, a congressman from Deadwood who owned property in Hot Springs, exerted political pressure on the federal government to take the cave out of private hands. At one point, Martin suggested that the area be incorporated into the newly designated national forest. Later, Martin supported the establishment of a national park and complimented the secretary of the interior’s office for saving the property from the “individuals and companies” who were trying to gain title to it.

In January 1900, the secretary of the interior authorized the temporary withdrawal of Wind Cave-area lands from settlement, pending a decision to make the site a national park. Additional withdrawals were made over the following two years. Early in 1902, Senator Robert Gamble of South Dakota and Representative John F. Lacey of Iowa introduced bills to establish Wind Cave National Park, making it one of the earliest national parks. Gamble’s bill passed the Senate and the House with little discussion, and Theodore Roosevelt signed the law early in 1903. Perceived scientific values of the cave strengthened arguments for creating a national park, but its importance as a tourist attraction also played a role. The legislation authorized the secretary of the interior to lease the cave and surface areas of land for development of tourist amenities, with the funds from such leases supporting park maintenance and improvements.

Those improvements were slow in coming to Wind Cave National Park. Congress, the Department of the Interior, and the National Park Service took few steps to further the development of the site during its first quarter century of existence. Congressional appropriations were small, although in 1912 that body provided funds for the establishment of a game reserve at Wind Cave, to be administered by the newly created United States Biological Survey. The park’s first superintendent, William Rankin, reported that Wind Cave’s facilities included a log house at the entrance to the cave, a ramshackle hotel, and a few outbuildings for livestock. Poor roads and four unsafe bridges completed the park’s infrastructure. Perhaps to supplement his salary, Rankin gave his wife a permit to sell lunches to tourists, and she used the otherwise abandoned hotel as a dining room and shelter. Rankin directed some further exploration of the cave, erected fences, made minor repairs, and, in 1905, constructed a superintendent’s residence. The dearth of financial support precluded more than these minimal improvements, and local controversies about services and facilities at the cave continued to simmer.

The Chicago firm of Kurz & Allison (1880-1899) was well known for its production of commemorative prints of American historical scenes.