Claims of Teaparty Death by Dying Media

Jerry Mort — On a Sidewalk to Nowhere.

He Never Met a Tax He Didn't Like

When one reads the article about the Fiscal Court which appeared in the Boone Community Recorder about “an easement” in the purchase of a property, one wonders why we should send Gary Moore to Washington? If he was not perspicacious enough to know that you need some kind of an access to property before you buy one, how in the world would we trust him in the Congress?

 It looks like Gary Moore is not taking in consideration what the people he represents have been telling him : Reduce our taxes. We do not need all the frivolous things that the Library Board, the Conservatory board, the board of Education , and so on, want. Gary Moore is the one who approves all these tax increases.

We do not want another foolish congressman  in Washington, there are enough of them already, both democrats and “rinos”. Thomas Massie is the antidote of Gary Moore. He became a Judge Executive  to help cut or lower taxes in his county!  He eliminated wasteful government spending in his first nine months in office!  He will do the same when he gets to Washington. Gary Moore has not seen a tax hike or a grant that he does not like.

Avi Avido
"Out to Save the World from Stupidity!"

H. L. Mencken on the Constitution

The Constitution

A constitution is a standing limitation upon the power of the government. So far you may go, but no farther. No matter what the excuse or provocation, you may not invade certain rights, or pass certain kinds of laws. The lives and property of the people are at you disposition, but only up to a plainly indicated point. If you go beyond it, you become a public criminal, and may be proceeded against, at least in theory, like any other criminal. The government thus ceases to be sovereign, and becomes a creature of sharply defined and delimited powers. There are things it may not do.

This device is probably the greatest invention that man has made since the dawn of civilization. it lies at the bottom of most of his progress. It was responsible for the rise of free government in the Greek city states, and it has been responsible for the growth of nearly all the great nations of modern times. Wherever it has passed out of use there has been decay and retrogression. Every right that anyone has today is based on the doctrine that government is a creature of limited powers, and that the men constituting it become criminals if they venture to exceed those powers.

Naturally enough, this makes life uncomfortable for politicians, and especially for the more impudent and unconscionable variety of them. Once they get into office they like to exercise their power, for power and its ketchup, glory, are the victuals they feed and fatten upon. Thus it always annoys them when they collide with a constitutional prohibition. It not only interferes with their practice of the nefarious trade—to wit the trade of hoodwinking and exploiting the people: it is also a gross affront to the high mightiness. Am I not Diego Valdez, Lord Admiral of Spain? Why, then, should I be bound by rules and regulations? Why should I be said nay when I am bursting with altruism, and have in mind only the safety and felicity of all you poor fish, my vassals and retainers?

But when politicians talk thus, or act thus without talking, it is precisely the time to watch them most carefully. Their usual plan is to invade the constitution stealthily, and then wait to see what happens. If nothing happens they go on more boldly; if there is a protest they reply hotly that the constitution is wornout and absurd, and that progress is impossible under the dead hand. This is the time to watch them especially. They are up to no good to anyone save themselves. They are trying to whittle away the common rights of the rest of us. Their one and only object, now and always, is to get more power into their hands that it may be used freely for their advantage, and to the damage of everyone else. Beware of all politicians at all times, but beware of them most sharply when they talk of reforming and improving the constitution.

from "The Constitution", The Impossible H. L. Mencken, ed. M. E. Rodgers. (Anchor Doubleday, 1991), p. 69-70.

Carl Sandburg on Government

GOVERNMENT

The Government—I heard about the Government and
I went out to find it. I said I would look closely at
it when I saw it.
Then I saw a policeman dragging a drunken man to
the callaboose. It was the Government in action.
I saw a ward alderman slip into an office one morning
and talk with a judge. Later in the day the judge
dismissed a case against a pickpocket who was a
live ward worker for the alderman. Again I saw
this was the Government, doing things.
I saw militiamen level their rifles at a crowd of
workingmen who were trying to get other workingmen
to stay away from a shop where there was a strike
on. Government in action.

Everywhere I saw that Government is a thing made of
men, that Government has blood and bones, it is
many mouths whispering into many ears, sending
telegrams, aiming rifles, writing orders, saying
"yes" and "no."

Government dies as the men who form it die and are laid
away in their graves and the new Government that
comes after is human, made of heartbeats of blood,
ambitions, lusts, and money running through it all,
money paid and money taken, and money covered
up and spoken of with hushed voices.
A Government is just as secret and mysterious and sensitive
as any human sinner carrying a load of germs,
traditions and corpuscles handed down from
fathers and mothers away back.

Carl Sandburg
Chicago

Teaparty History

Or,

“We Always Meant to Govern Ourselves”

James Duvall, M. A.

Big Bone University

In December 1773 John Adams was living in Boston. Though he hated mob action of any kind, he was, according to historian David McCullough, “exuberant over the event.” (1) Why did the future president believe that Americans had every right to determine their own destiny, even in the face of warnings of those who, like his friend Jonathan Sewall, believed that Britain was irresistible, and would destroy all who stood in the way? Before he sailed back to London, Attorney General Sewall wrote: “I have faith . . . that rebellion will shrink back to its native hell, and that Great Britain will rise superior to all the gasconades of the little, wicked American politicians.” (2)

I wonder what he would say about the ones we have today?

Soon after Sewall sailed away, never to return, John Adams was writing a series of letters to the Boston Globe, under an assumed name, which argued that if America did not take action at once, the country would end up like the Irish, living on potatoes and water! (3)

The Teaparty took the High Ground

One cold winter night in Boston, 5 March 1770, six people were killed by British soldiers, the famous Boston Massacre. “The Fruits of Arbitrary Power”, Paul Revere called the engraving he published of the affair. After this, the patriots gained so much moral support that the “irresistible” British government was obliged to retreat, and literally withdraw its troops from the town.

The leaders of the Revolution took the high moral ground, and ensured that the soldiers involved in the massacre got fair trials; and Paul Revere himself helped supply evidence to assist them at their trials. Historian David H. Fischer points out that Revere and his fellow revolutionists did not hesitate to use violence, but they did so in a very careful way! They used every opportunity to enlist the support and sympathy of their fellow citizens, which would not have been possible were they responsible for lawlessness and gratuitous violence.

When the army was withdrawn from Boston, and the various odious taxes were repealed, a tax — a mere symbol of Britain's right to tax — was placed on tea. It was so small a tax the government, and everyone else, thought that even unruly Boston would accept it.

“It was a fatal miscalculation,” remarks Fischer. Instead there was an explosion of anger throughout the colonies. Other towns reacted earlier, and more violently, but none with such flair, or with such confident campaign strategy as Boston. Fischer calls it “a brilliant piece of political theater.” (4) It was done, as you know, by “Indians” — then as now, a potent symbol of American freedom — and they were organized in a highly sophisticated way: Like a Teaparty! In fact, they were the first organizers of the Teaparty!

The men involved were formed into groups, and only their section commanders knew their names. This is the classic example of cellular organization, and it would be used many times to good effect throughout the Revolution. They threw the tea into Boston harbor; but, to demonstrate they were not opposed to law and order, they replaced the lock which had to be broken to remove the tea. A man who stole a small amount of tea for his own use was made to run the gauntlet, and his coat nailed to the whipping post. The British leaders paid no attention to these small, but significant, symbolic acts, and they branded the Teaparty a subversive organization!

A Grass-roots Organization

What is the lesson for us? I think Dr. Fischer's summary has some useful observations:

“There were no controlling figures in Boston's revolutionary movement, which was an open alliance of many different groups. Here was the source of Paul Revere's importance. He knew everyone and moved in many different circles. In Boston this great joiner helped to link one group to another, and was supremely good at getting things done . . . . The revolutionary movement in Boston was not small, tightly controlled, and hierarchical. It was large, open, diverse, complex and pluralistic, a world of many circles.” (5)

It was, we should say, an American movement, organized in a typical American way, that is, as a movement, not an organization.

We had Always Governed ourselves, and Always Meant to

When Mellen Chamberlain, who died in 1900, was a young whipper snapper of 21 back in 1843, when he undertook to interview old Captain Levi Preston, a Revolutionary veteran, then 91 years of age. Chamberlain later became a judge, and was considered an antiquarian of good veracity, and he knew what kind of answers he wanted from the old man:

“Captain Preston, what made you go to the Concord fight?”

“What did I go for?”

“. . . Were you oppressed by the Stamp Act?”

But the old man didn't fall for it:

“I never say any stamps, and I always understood that none were ever sold.”

“Well, what about the tea tax?”

“Tea tax? I never drank a drop of the stuff, the boys threw it all overboard.”

“But I suppose you had been reading Harrington, Sidney, and Locke about the eternal principle of liberty?”

“I never heard of these men. The only books we had were the Bible, the catechism, Watt's psalms and hymns, and the almanacs.”

“Well, then, what was the problem?”

“Young man, what we meant in going for those Redcoats was this: We always had governed ourselves, and we always meant to. They didn't mean that we should.” (6)

James Duvall, M. A.

Big Bone University: A Think Tank, Research Institute, & Public Policy Center

Big Bone, Kentucky

Nec ossa solum, sed etiam sanguinem.

Read to the Grass-roots Teaparty of Boone County 3 Jan 2011; Typed and slightly revised 6 Jan 2011.

David McCullough. John Adams. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001.

David H. Fischer. Paul Revere's Ride. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Footnotes

(1) McCullough, p. 70.

(2) Ibid., 71-72.

(3) Ibid.

(4) Fischer, p. 25.

(5) Ibid., 27.

(6) Ibid., 163-164.

Additional Note

The modern Teaparty does not approve the use of any violence. In our case violence is unnecessary — the enemy is us, or at least people who claim to speak for us! For example, one of our local officials argues that we must take Federal money for projects so “we can get our (read “your”) tax money back!” Tax on tea? Such people would gladly pay a tax on Gunpowder! Let's stand up to our “irresistible” Government, and refuse to beg for, and be bought off with, our own tax dollars!

On a Sidewalk to Nowhere

or,

An Essay in Honour of the Teaparty's Grass-roots Triumph
Election Day, 2010
with a reminder that the Grass-roots Victory is Incomplete

James Duvall, M. A.
Director of Political Research and Analysis
Big Bone University

It is amazing how much things change, given a little time.  I saw an article in the Boone County Recorder just a few days after the election “Boone to Build Sidewalk near School” (BCR, 4 Nov 2010, p. A-10.), which brought to mind another sidewalk, also built to a school in Burlington almost one hundred years ago.  The contrast in the two sidewalks and the means of financing them could not be greater.  It was quite different in those long ago days when difficult things were accomplished at the grass-roots level.

Burlington, today, is the only unincorporated county seat in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.  This is interesting because it is, in fact, one of the oldest towns in the State.  It was established, according to law, in 1800, as our county seat, and has had a continuous existence since then.  After the Civil War, during which the locals were browbeaten by the Yankees, interest in maintaining the town government was not sufficient to keep the enterprise going, and the town ceased to elect trustees to form a city council.  In 1876 the town was reincorporated by the Kentucky General Assembly, but again, some years later, interest waned, and the charter was allowed to lapse.  It is of interest that this charter was revived again, much later, for the sole purpose of building sidewalks.

Burlington always had too many streets for the size of the town.  Hogs were allowed to run freely; but this was also true in Cincinnati back then.  The streets were pure mud whenever it rained, and it seems the only relatively dry place to walk was in the middle of the street between the two pairs of ruts made by the passing horses and wagons.

J. A. Caywood became principal of the Boone County High School in Burlington in 1914 .  His first assignment was to level the ground around the schoolhouse, and to build a sidewalk to the school, so that the students could walk to school safely, rather than in the mud; walking in the middle of the street included the danger of being run over by horses.  Superintendent Edgar C. Riley, who gave the assignment, suggested that a walk extending from Col. R. S. Crisler's blacksmith's shop, about 300 yards away, would result in much better conditions.

The Parent's Association of the school, under the leadership of Mr. Caywood, organized a bazaar and raised the money necessary to do the grading, and to buy the lumber necessary to build the sidewalk.  The shop class, taught by R. H. Carter, a local minster and teacher, built the “boardwalk” between the school and the blacksmith's shop.  This is remarkable in itself, but everyone involved was aware that this was not a permanent solution.  The Burlington Literary Society, a notable organization in the town, agreed to raise money for more permanent walks by staging plays in Burlington, Belleview, Petersburg, and Florence. There seems to have been no limit to the public-spiritedness of the citizens.

At this point Superintendent Riley, himself a minister, a lawyer, and a director of the Burlington Bank, pointed out to Caywood that this method would never raise sufficient money to complete the project.  He suggested that the town charter be reactivated to raise funds for the purpose.  Judge Perry Cason agreed to appoint five members to act as a Board of Trustees for the town.  The Board then appointed committees, and agreed to levy a tax to build the desired sidewalks.  Note that the project was expanded to include sidewalks for the entire town.  The incorporation and the necessary publicity was done with a great deal of enthusiasm, and but little opposition. 

The sidewalks were completed about 1916.  However, soon afterwards interest in the town government decreased noticeably, and it was difficult to get together the quorum necessary for business.  The reactivated charter was allowed to lapse, and no election was ever held again for a new Board.

The sidewalk, like the current project, was for the safety of the students, but, unlike today, the students worked to get their sidewalk.  (To think of it!)  This is a moving tribute to the power of citizens to take the initiative in solving their own problems.  This early civics lesson taught the students, and the community, the value of personal and political action, the power of community involvement, the strength of organization, and the place of hard work.

Today our Federal government is paying $250,000 to build a sidewalk here in Boone County.  This is the third time for such a sidewalk to be built here under the program.  It is my opinion that the Federal government should have better things to do than spend $750,000 on sidewalks in Boone County.  I am not proud that our current Fiscal Court voted 4-0 to accept the grant. (If we don't take the money someone else will get it!  Let them have it!  The madness must stop somewhere!  Why not here!)  Have we forgotten how to do things ourselves?  I suppose it must be a good thing to build sidewalks so little feet will be safe.  It was a good thing in 1914, and there is no reason it shouldn't be so in 2010.   However, what a difference in what the children whose feet will take that sidewalk will think (if they bother to think at all) about the role of government in providing that walk.  Some people think that if we object to the Federal government doing something, that we object to it being done at all. 

That is certainly not what I think.  It is my opinion that all such projects should originate, and be paid for at the local level.  Americans of that generation certainly thought so, and I can't help thinking that the students and their parents who were involved appreciated the sidewalk more since they had built, and raise the money themselves.  It is true that in the end the sidewalks were paid for with tax money.  But consider how much more efficiency, and how much more involvement there was in the decision, and how little governmental growth was necessary to accomplish the desired end. 

The citizens created just enough government for the purpose.  When the sidewalks, many of which are still in use today, were completed, they neglected the instrument they had brought back to life, and let it atrophy, and disappear, contradicting the often held idea that government always grows bigger on its own.  That they were right in their feeling that more government was unnecessary, once it had accomplished its appointed task, is proved by the fact that, from that day to this, Burlington has never been incorporated, and apparently has never felt the need to bring this vanished ghost back into being.

How should we pay for sidewalks today?  If you think the government should be about decision and policy, rather than about sidewalk building, perhaps you should consider joining the Grass-roots Teaparty of Boone County.  I would like to know how much it costs to administer $750,000 in sidewalk funds.  My research indicates that the figure is probably about $250,000 plus the inconvenience of a “standing army” of bureaucrats who will build sidewalks to anywhere to keep such programs going.  The Teaparty meets every Monday at 6:00 p.m. at SubStation II on Dream Street in Florence. 

It is my belief that building sidewalks is a good thing, but once you start down the Big Government route to building them you are on a long sidewalk to nowhere.

James Duvall, M. A.
Director of Projects and Excavations
Big Bone University
Nec ossa solum, sed etiam sanguinem.

7 Nov 2010.

Information for this article was drawn from my massive and unpublished manuscript: 
Burlington Encyclopedia:  The First 200 Years, 1800-2000.
(To be published by Big Bone University Press within the next 200 years.)

Note:  This essay may not be used in any form, either in whole or in part, by the Boone County Public Library, Burlington, nor be retained in their files.