War of 1812 : Fort McHenry

art credit: star spangled music

From the Inbox: Mr. Speaker (Newt) emailed his Fox News article on the National Anthem; I suspect many pro football players do not know any of this.

Respecting the National Anthem

As the controversy over athletes boycotting the National Anthem continues, I would like to share some historical perspective.

“The Star-Spangled Banner” became part of our sports traditions for a good reason: It brought people together in times of grave national turmoil. For this reason alone, it is a tradition worth respecting.

According to MLB.com, “The Star-Spangled Banner” was first performed at a baseball game on May 15, 1862. Given baseball’s lengthy history in America, this is likely the first time it was played at a major U.S. sporting event.

The timing was significant. In 1862, the nation was embroiled in the Civil War. America was as divided as it had ever been. People were fighting and lives were being lost in battle. It was a dark time for our still young country.

So, William Cammeyer, a businessman who was opening Union Grounds park in Brooklyn, decided to do something that would bring the nearly 3,000 people in attendance at the first game together and unify them as Americans. The band played “The Star-Spangled Banner.” It wasn’t officially the National Anthem at the time, but it was still respected as a deeply patriotic, uniquely American song.

Fifty-six years later, America entered World War I, and the nation was once again thrown into turmoil. Major League Baseball had cut the season short because players had been drafted or enlisted to go fight the Great War overseas – and teams were expected to sacrifice and contribute to the war effort.

During the seventh inning stretch of the first game of the 1918 World Series between the Boston Red Sox and the Chicago Cubs, “The Star-Spangled Banner” was performed.

The song had a profound impact on both the crowd and the players, as The New York Times reported September 6, 1918:

“The yawn was checked and the heads were bared as the ball players turned quickly about and faced the music. Jackie Fred Thomas of the U.S. Navy [the Red Sox’s third baseman] was at attention, as he stood erect, with his eyes set on the flag fluttering at the top of the lofty pole in right field. First the song was taken up by a few, then others joined, and when the final notes came, a great volume of melody rolled across the field. It was at the very end that the onlookers exploded into thunderous applause and rent the air with a cheer that marked the highest point of the day’s enthusiasm.”

This 100-year-old story by the Times perfectly captures why we respect Francis Scott Key’s battle hymn for the War of 1812 – and why beginning in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson ordered it to be played during military and naval occasions, and why later it was officially confirmed as our National Anthem by an Act of Congress in 1931.

Historically, “The Star-Spangled Banner” has been part of the shared story of all Americans – a strand of common thread that stitches our nation together. In times of danger, times of pain, and times of triumph, we come together, stand, and sing, because despite our differences, we are all Americans.

But day-by-day, the Left tries to undermine and destroy the things that have historically unified this country. The NFL National Anthem controversy is just the latest example of this.

My fear is that the NFL will succumb to pressure and try to side-step the problem by no longer performing the National Anthem before games. This would be the worst path to take.

As a nation, we need to have a serious debate: Will we renew our patriotism and respect our shared history, or will we allow our American institutions to decay? Are we going to ignore our traditions out of fear of ridicule from the Left, or are we going to proudly continue to be “the land of the free and the home of the brave?”

Francis Scott Key wrote “The Star-Spangled Banner” in 1814 for an America that was worth fighting for and defending.

It still is. We need to defend it.

# # # 

Alejandro Villanueva throws himself under the bus

In my blog earlier today, I wrote:

It’s a sad day when Steelers player Alejandro Villanueva makes headlines for standing for our Anthem, the coach deplores his decision (while inadvertently exhibiting his support for lockstep groupthink) while the rest of the Steelers hide in the locker room

Now, this lousy development (h/t Conservative Treehouse):

 # # #

NFL takes a knee

Cleveland Browns just before the game

photo credit : The Telegraph

UPDATE at 7:04 (see next blog here). 

There’s tons of commentary on the NFL’s growing disrespect for our National Anthem and flag, and by extension, the American people. The essay by Daniel John Sobieski at American Thinker struck me as one of the best. Here’s a short extract:

Those who take a knee were indeed given that right by many who no longer have knees and are privileged to take a knee in a sport paid for by millions of fans who may disagree with them and who paid to see a game, not a protest. Players who take a knee think they are being patriotic, when they are merely being self-indulgent and selfish. Go rent out a stadium and invite people to pay just to see you take a knee and see if anybody shows up. 

The rest is here. Chris Buskirk at American Greatness has another worthwhile take:

Intoxicated with their own sense of self-righteousness today’s athlete-protesters look more like rich drunks spouting nonsense than responsible citizens seeking redress. And in doing so they have popped the sports bubble and reminded us that we should stop idolizing overprivileged millionaire Millennials who disrespect this country, her people, and her history. Millions of Americans have recoiled at the divisiveness brought into sports by people like Kaepernick and Curry. And for this we can thank them.

The rest of Buskirk’s essay is here. 

It’s a sad day when Steelers player Alejandro Villanueva makes headlines for standing for our Anthem; then the coach deplores Villanuevo's decision (while inadvertently exhibiting his support for lockstep groupthink); the rest of the Steelers hide in the locker room; and the Browns lose again -- in more ways than one. 

# # #

How to help Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria

photo credits: Sky News / Wall Street Journal

Hat tip to cleveland.com for highlighting a near west side organization that is collecting cartons of contribution for Puerto Rico – slammed by Hurricane Maria and now without power, utility services, etc. Here is the link to the San Lorenzo Club’s FB page. I had not heard of this organization before. They are accepting cartons (according to one of the posters) “until Sunday”:

we are collecting for PR until Sunday 12 noon to 8pm. 

Located at 3121 W.33rd Street in Cleveland, 44109. They are accepting canned goods, baby food, clothing, water, non-perishable items, diapers, pet supplies, everything but cash.

Google map is here.

# # #

Issue 2 on Ohio ballots: pharmaceuticals (what IS this issue?)

image credit: MyDaytonDailyNews.com

Cleveland.com reported on the panel forum in Bay Village yesterday that presented pro and the con views of Issue 2, which will be on the ballot state-wide this November. The report was not all that illuminating, so here’s the actual language that voters will see on the ballot (via the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections):

Issue 2 To require state agencies to not pay more for prescription drugs than the federal Department of Veterans Affairs and require state payment of attorney fees and expenses to specific individuals for defense of the law Proposed Law Proposed by Initiative Petition To enact Chapter 194 of the Ohio Revised Code A majority yes vote is necessary for the law to pass. 

To enact Chapter 194 of the Ohio Revised Code, which would: 

• Require the State of Ohio, including its state departments, agencies and entities, to not pay more for prescription drugs than the price paid by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. 

• Establish that the individual petitioners responsible for proposing the law have a direct and personal stake in defending the law; require the State to pay petitioners’ reasonable attorney fees and other expenses; require the petitioners to pay $10,000 to the State if the law is held by a court to be unenforceable and limit petitioners’ personal liability to that amount; and require the Attorney General to defend the law if challenged in court. 

SHALL THE PROPOSED LAW BE ADOPTED?

An Ohio doctor, Dr. Mike Sevilla, posted his page on Issue 2, and it’s a resource to start with, with several links to proponents and opponents of the Issue. And here’s the take posted by the Ohio Pharmacists organization. For what it is worth, a few months ago, Bernie Sanders endorsed Issue 2.

# # #

Update: teaching our history in Ohio schools

 art credit: Mr. Donn's American History

Some Cleveland Tea Party readers will have called members of the Ohio School Board to keep our Founding Documents (Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Federalist Papers) in school curricula. Here’s the Update by Patrick O’Donnell from cleveland.com:

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Don't shortchange America's "founding documents," the state school board was told Tuesday, by trying to axe tests that make sure students learn them.

School board members have been under pressure from across the state to cut how many standardized tests students have to take. Some members have sought to cut any tests not required by the federal government, which would eliminate some math, English and science tests.

It would also wipe out the American History and American Government tests that all high school students must take.

That didn't sit well with some legislators and activists who fought to require these documents to be taught -- and included on state tests -- in 2012. That's when Senate Bill 165, called the "Founding Fathers Act" or the "Founding Documents Act" by some, mandated them.

That means the board can't cut them on its own, but can only ask the legislature to do so.

Don't bother, Senate President Larry Obhoff, a Medina Republican, told the board through an aide Tuesday. He said the legislature won't change the law, regardless of any recommendation from the board.

. . .

Despite more than 90 minutes of debate, most of which centered on procedural issues with motions and amendments, the board took no action on any tests. It delayed any vote until later this year.

Those calls and messages made a difference.

# # #

Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor would end Medicaid expansion in Ohio

image credit: the bull elephant

Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor would end Medicaid expansion 

in Ohio if elected Governor

ICYMI, Cleveland.com reports:

Republican Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor said Monday she would end the Medicaid expansion in Ohio if she is elected governor - a clean break from the man she has served alongside for the last seven years,  Gov. John Kasich. 

As part of her run to succeed Kasich, Taylor unveiled her plan to alter the health care system in Ohio on Monday in Cleveland. She said she would end the Medicaid expansion that resulted in 725,000 more Ohioans receiving health coverage, calling the program unsustainable in the long term.

"Medicaid expansion is fiscally unsustainable and will be ended under a Taylor administration," Taylor said. "I believe that we must identify new, innovative, market-based reforms to address the issues Medicaid currently addresses today. I want to return Medicaid to its original mission of serving the people who need it while incentivizing work and ensuring opportunities for long-term success for those who are able."

. . .

"If Obamacare is not repealed, then I will work very hard with President Trump and Congress to get Obamacare repealed or get the flexibility Ohio needs in a waiver or block grant - call it whatever you want - give us the flexibility to I can implement my plan," Taylor said.

"Call it whatever you want?" How about the Health Care Compact?! Read the rest of the report here.

# # #