Farewell to the Chief

Last Wednesday, as the Fighting Illini Men’s basketball team defeated Michigan, it was not only the last game for senior players. The University of Illinois retired its eighty-one year old Indian mascot, Chief Illiniwek, after much controversy and debate (as a side issue, does the name “Fighting Illini” stereotype Native Americans as overly aggressive warlords?)

If you have been to an Illinois game, you know the halftime routine. A white student dressed in Native American regalia dances around as the crowd cheers wildly. He portrays the fictitious chief of a tribe that was actually a confederacy (Kaskaskia, Cahokia, Peoria, Tamaroa, Moingwena, and Michigamea).

In 2005, the NCAA deemed the mascot an offensive use of American Indian imagery, and barred the University from hosting post-season events. As the University began losing money and exposure from these sanctions, they began to cave.

Needless to say, most student and community members were outraged. The Chief, they believe, stands for power, integrity, and honor. Many Native Americans agree. In 2002, a Peter Harris Research Group poll of those who declared Native American ethnicity on a U.S. census showed that 81% of Native Americans support the use of Indian nicknames in high school and college sports.

Regardless, The University of Illinois is a pubic institution and a place of higher learning. Have taxpayers been supporting institutionalized racism? On the other hand, in an era where Native Americans are forgotten citizens, isn’t the University honoring and calling a great amount of attention to their roots?

Put yourself on the line and tell us where you stand on the Chief.

Truman's impact

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima., killing roughly 140,000 people. Three days later, a nuclear bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, killing roughly 74,000 people. Most of the dead were civilians. On August 15, Japan did something that they refused to do at Iwo Jima and Okinawa; they surrendered.

As Iran gets closer to developing nuclear technology, is the only country to ever use atomic bombs against an enemy in any position to lecture?

Once in a while, Patriot of 76 gets historical rather than political. Put yourself in the shoes of our 33rd President. Would you have done the same? Did Truman’s decision ultimately save lives, or did it forever undermine American credibility?

Officer Democracy

Institutions receive all of the attention. Far more time is spent in civics class studying the three branches of government than any other topic. Why do the first three articles of the Constitution get all of the love? Why do the Illinois standards of education place such an emphasis on judicial review and executive authority, but callously omit the importance of local governance?

What aspect of government, aside from public school, affects the lives of young people the most? Which governmental agency are students most likely to see? With which government officials will students most likely interact? The answer to these questions is the same as the answer to this question: “Bad boys Bad Boys-what’cha gonna do, what’cha gonna do when they come for you”?

The police!

James Madison argued that a democratic government must be able to control the governed and control itself. Industrial societies use police to control crime and contribute to public order. Police departments are subject to the rule of law (as opposed to at the behest of a powerful person or Party), have limited authority, and are accountable to the public. In a sense, in their most basic and honorable form, the police epitomize our view of democratic government.

Patriot of ’76 decided to learn more about this integral government agency by sitting in the passenger seat with Lincolnshire Police Officer T. Branick during his shift. Here are some highlights and observations:

1. Police Officers are human beings. There are no quotas for speeding tickets or mandates on DUI arrests. They have and use a tremendous amount of discretion when making a traffic stop. They truly and legitimately see it as their mission to keep the village safe. They give subjects the chance to explain their actions, and they believe that, sometimes, a warning is more effective than a traffic ticket.
2. The portable breath test is not admissible in court. It is, on the other hand, probable cause for an arrest. Once the subject is in booking, they are breath tested again. The second test is the one that is official. Also, drunk people are irrational.
3. Going 85 mph down Milwaukee Ave in pursuit of an unruly subject in the Wildfire parking lot was pretty exciting
4. Every singe police transmission made to dispatch or to other officers is taped, and can easily be subpoenaed (read: accountability).
5. Much to my surprise, we did not pull over or arrest any of my students

As Gary T. Marx noted, democratic societies experience a continual tension between the desire for order and the desire for liberty. Both are essential. While one can have the former without the latter, it is not possible to have a society with liberty, which does not also have a minimum degree of order.

And one more note to all of you potential law-breakers out there in the blogasphere- There will be other ride-alongs. Wherever trouble finds itself, we will be there to help.

Just one of those moments...

On this day in 1933, a missed opportunity in Miami almost changed the world as we know it.

Giuseppe Zangara was a deranged, unemployed bricklayer. A known anarchist, Zangara hatched a plan to assassinate America’s President-elect, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR was in the backseat of his touring car when Zangara fired six rounds in his direction. FDR was uninjured, but the mayor of Chicago, Anton Cermak, was hit in the stomach. The wound would eventually prove itself to be fatal.

As the story goes, Zangara intended to use his .32 caliber pistol that he had bought at a pawnshop to assassinate the man that he blamed for his hunger. Zangara, who was only five feet tall, planned to shoot FDR as his motorcade passed. However, due to Zangara’s size, he was unable get a good look at the President-elect. Zangara decided to stand on a wobbly chair to get a better angle.

Angered by Zangara for blocking her vision, a Miamian named W.F. Cross jostled his chair as he was firing at the motorcade. This made it impossible for Zangara to hit his target.

Had Cross not shook his metal chair, Zangara certainly would have assassinated FDR. The Vice President elect was a man named John Nance Garner (Truman was the VP until 1941). Garner, a Texan, was put on the ticket to balance FDR’s liberalism. Unlike FDR, he was not a firm believer in government regulation of business. Garner was an isolationist when it came to foreign policy, and conservative when it came to social welfare programs. Much like Herbert Hoover, Garner believed that volunteerism was the best way to stimulate the economy after the crash of 1929. In other words, he was the anti-FDR.

According to the newly ratified twentieth amendment, Garner would have become President if Zangara’s bullet hit FDR instead of Cermak. How would Garner have reacted to the Great Depression? How about Pearl Harbor?

Thanks to a women named W.F. Cross, we don’t know the answer to those questions.

Tough men, tough question..

As General George Washington took the oath of office in April of 1789, the fate of the newly formed United States was unclear. Washington’s popularity has never been matched (he still holds the distinction of being the only President elected unanimously by the electoral college- a feat he accomplished twice). The nation was bitterly divided, in tremendous debt, and was being held together by a remarkably weak Army and no real Navy. Washington had no precedents to follow, no judicial branch, and faced a looming conflict with various Indian tribes.

As Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office on March 4, 1861, America was far from a group of United States. South Carolina had seceded from the union, and, together with six other states, formed what became known to be The Confederate States of America. The nation was falling apart, ideologically and literally. Lincoln’s first executive decision was whether he should re-supply Fort Sumter, located along the Charleston Harbor. Doing so would be seen as an act of war. Avoiding the problem would be seen as granting legitimacy to the states in rebellion.

FDR took office in times of great peril as well. In 1933, the nation was in the heart of the Great Depression. Unemployment was astronomically high. As Banks closed, people lost their life savings, with farmers hit especially hard. In January of that year, a former WWI soldier named Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. The very system of democracy and capitalism were at stake, as socialists gained power throughout Europe.

These three men took office during the nations most tumultuous of all times. However, let’s not underestimate the dangers our 44^th president will face upon his or her inauguration in 2009. There are no signs that Iraq is improving, income gaps are at their highest since The Gilded Age, forty-six million Americans are uninsured, and (perhaps most importantly) Iran will be very close to having nuclear capabilities. Needless to say, a nuclear Iran would pose a tremendous, even unprecedented, threat against the US and our allies.

Is there a Washington, Lincoln, or FDR out there?

Do men make history, or does history make men? Which of these four presidents assumed the office at the most dangerous time? You can make a case for all four. Who gets your vote?

Showdown, 2008

“Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans”

-John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address

“It’s time to turn the page”

- Barack Obama’

Senator Obama’s speech announcing his candidacy was a perfect summation of what would surely be his campaign message-.the merging of Red and Blue America. Drawing on “purple” American values such as liberty, self-reliance, and government accountability, Obama seems genuinely interested and committed to using his experience as a community organizer and reaching out to both sides of the political spectrum. Obama’s message is one of hope. His promise is to reform government by empowering the middle class and reducing the power of special interests. Like Kennedy in the 60’s, Obama is ready to accept the torch for the new generation of post baby boomers.

Patriot of ’76 was at the announcement in chilly Springfield. The most intriguing part of the event had to have been the crowd in attendance. Illinois power brokers such as Lisa and Charles Madigan, Pat Quin, and Alex Gianolous walked through the audience completely unnoticed. Even Senator Dick Durbin had only a few people interested enough to speak with him. This crowd was completely apolitical. They were there for the moment. The few that I spoke with had never even voted. When I asked one man who the current Vice President was, his response was, “the white guy”. These people bared the elements to witness history.

If Obama opens up a political science textbook, he will discover that this demographic rarely votes. Many are unfamiliar with the registration process while others simply lose interest. They were in full force last Saturday, but will they still be as passionate, driven, and well mobilized in eighteen months?

A recent poll indicated that more than half of all surveyed knew very little about Obama, but found him “captivating” and “likeable”. He will be well funded, and has ample name recognition. However, these two traits are not in short supply at the Clinton Camp.

Obama vs. Clinton. Washington outsider vs. the epitome of backroom politics. Dove vs. Hawk.

It’s primary season, and Patriot of 76 wants your prediction.

What would Jefferson do?

“…that they are endowed by the creator with certain unalienable rights. Among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”

With these words, the American experiment was underway. Jefferson’s vision was simple: Any nation that calls itself free must accept the basic principle that rights come from God, not from men. Every person is entitled not just to freedom, but also to the opportunity for prosperity and the ability to live peacefully. These rights are unalienable. They are ours because we are humans.

More than two hundred years have elapsed since the publication of these words. Have we fulfilled the promise of our birth certificate? Would Jefferson be proud of the most prosperous nation in the world?

According to the 2005 U.S. Census Bureau, the number of Americans without health insurance has reached a staggering 46 million people. That is nearly 15 percent of the population. In 2005, the uninsured rate amongst children rose 11.5 percent to more than eight million. Many experts believe that the situation is worsening as children’s health insurance programs in 17 states face federal funding shortfalls totaling an estimated $800 million, equal to the cost of covering more than 500,000 low-income children. Congress has known about the shortfall since last year, when the Administration took note of it and proposed a measure to address it, but Congress has so far failed to act.

This raises an important question: Is health care an unalienable right? Does it fall under Jefferson’s guarantee of “life”? Perhaps the “pursuit of happiness”?

John Edwards certainly thinks so. On Sunday’s Meet the Press program, the Democratic hopeful from North Carolina proposed a 120 billon dollar per year program designed at covering all those that are uninsured.

How does he plan to pay for this program? Higher taxes for the wealthy. Edwards proposed rolling back President Bush’s tax cuts for families earning over two hundred thousand dollars per year.

It’s worth noting that as a First Lady, Hillary Clinton’s proposal of universal health care was seen as a calamitous growth of the federal government. It saddled the Democratic Party with a “raise your taxes” reputation, stunted President Clinton’s power as Chief Legislator, and led to the Gingrich led Republican Revolution/Contract with America in 1994. To say that plan backfired would be an understatement. It failed spectacularly.

Political experts say that in order to win primaries, candidates must appeal to the base. Democrats are mostly middle class Americans who care deeply about social issues such as the health care crisis. In a competitive Democratic field, could Edwards shock the world?

Patriot of 76 has a more overarching question: If all Americans are entitled to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, are they in turn entitled to health insurance paid for by the richest Americans? If your answer is no, what is your solution to our health care crisis?

Passing the Buck or Defeating Terror?

In a radio address to the nation, President Bush urged a major reduction in government spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. President Bush threatened with the possibility of major tax increases for future generations and immediate cuts in benefits. All in all, Mr. Bush wants the federal government to spend 70 Billion dollars less on these programs in the next fiscal year.

The President also asked Congress to pass a Line-item veto, which would allow the President to veto certain provisions of a spending bill. The Supreme Court has ruled this unconstitutional during the Clinton administration (Governors are still given this right).

President Bush seems determined to balance the federal budget, just as he promised in his State of the Union address. Fiscal responsibility is a tenet of the Republican Party, and President Bush feels a great responsibility to curb massive government spending (even if it comes at the expense of social programs).

The budget that President Bush is proposing also included 245 billion dollars for the next two years for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Add that to the 400 billion dollars that the wars have cost already.

If generation next is saddled with massive budget deficits, debt, and higher taxes, it won’t be because of entitlement programs. It will be because President Bush has made history by doing the unthinkable: fighting two wars and lowering taxes. The President has said repeatedly that he doesn’t spend time thinking about his legacy. If Iraq continues to cost hundreds of billions of dollars per year, entitlement programs may be sacrificed right when current high school students are looking in the mailbox for their Social Security checks.