Thanksgiving Proclamation

Below I reproduce George Washington's "Thanksgiving Proclamation" of 1789. Washington had just been elected first President of the newly formed United States of America following upon the adoption of the new Constitution by the States. *

I have read much about Washington and everything I have read indicates that he was a great man and a great American. He was regarded by his contemporaries in Europe as the greatest man of his age. His proclamation is a sign of his greatness.

Thanksgiving Proclamation
Issued by President George Washington, at the request of Congress, on October 3, 1789

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.
Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and—Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favor, able interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other trangressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally, to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.
Go. Washington

* Washington's proclamation did not make Thanksgiving an annual National holiday. That would only come with Abraham Lincoln after the terrible Civil War.

### 

Connecticut Election Post Mortem

 

Republican Bob Stefanowski’s campaign for Governor of Connecticut followed the same path that led other millionaire candidates like Linda McMahon and Tom Foley to flop on election day. Even though he garnered more votes than Foley, he lost the election because he could not overcome large Democrat majorities in cities like Bridgeport, Hartford, and New Haven in this year of record turnout.

Stefanowski’s campaign ignored the urban vote in the hope of overcoming it with majorities in suburban and rural areas. However, his proposal to eliminate or phase out the state income tax did not help him win many votes among suburbanites who believed that it was either impractical, or that it would only add to already high property taxes. Obviously, phasing out the income tax did not gain many votes in the inner cities whose residents, including college students, are largely exempt. 

Stefanowski could not even carry suburban Fairfield, a town of 75000 that he lost by a wider margin than the statewide percentage. As a Fairfield resident I was surprised that the Republican candidate did not even bother to campaign here. There were no visits or rallies and few lawn signs. There was no constant stream of mailing pieces. It appeared as if he had just written off not just Fairfield but all of prosperous Fairfield county.

In a recent op-ed in the Connecticut Post Tim Herbst, a Trumbull politician who was defeated by Stefanowski in the Republican primary, faulted Stefanowski and the Republicans for failing to muster a ground game to match the Democrat record setting numbers.


There was truth in Herbst’s assessment but no one was more responsible for the Republican defeat than Herbst himself. His refusal to accept the convention's nominee, and his decision to enter the primary did much to allow an inexperienced, wealthy outsider like Stefanowski to win the primary with only a small percentage of the vote.

If Herbst had thrown his support to Danbury mayor Mark Boughton, the convention's nominee, Boughton would likely have defeated Stefanowski in the primary. Even though Stefanowski garnered a record number of votes in the election, I believe that Boughton would have done better. He was an experienced Connecticut politician who would have gained more support from Republican leaders who still play a pivotal role in getting out the vote. He would probably have kept Danbury from favoring Lamont, and the full and active support of Herbst would certainly have helped in the Fairfield county suburbs

Stefanowski is a millionaire businessman, and he couldn’t help looking like a millionaire businessman even if he insisted on calling himself Bob. His desire to bring sound business practices to state government fell largely on deaf ears, especially since he failed to demonstrate how such reforms would benefit the average citizen.

No matter how sound your ideas may be, you must win the election to have any chance of implementing them. What’s the good of having good ideas, if you never get a chance to implement. Stefanowski’s Democrat opponent, the far-wealthier Ned Lamont from Greenwich, the wealthiest town in the state, does not look like a businessman. His strategy was to appeal to the Democrat base made up of public service unions, depressed cities, and suburban women upset about the supposed threat to women’s rights posed by the likes of Trump and Judge Kavanaugh. 

It's true that Stefanowski supported Trump but he had none of the President's charisma, moxie, and name recognition, essential equalities for a political outsider to win without the support of party regulars. This election should be a lesson to Republicans all over the country. Democrat Lamont was also uninspiring but he had a united party behind him.

###

Immigration and Compassion

                                       

The caravan of refugees and asylum seekers slowly winding its way through Mexico toward the United States has brought the immigration question to the forefront in the weeks preceding today’s mid-term elections. President Trump has seized upon the issue in his numerous campaign rallies and not only highlighted the need to keep borders secure, but also, has sent troops to the border to assist immigration officials.

On their part, Democrats have been adopting the position of their left-wing Progressive elements to oppose the President’s “nativist”, anti-immigration position. They are calling for “open” borders, unrestricted immigration, and the abolition of the Immigration Control Agency (ICE).  Democrats claim that they are the party of compassion, while their opponents, motivated as they are by racism and white supremacy, are totally lacking in compassion. 

Frankly, I fail to see compassion in those who exhort and encourage poor people from Central America to embark on a dangerous 1000-mile journey with their children in tow. It is dangerous enough for Mexicans to walk through their own country. I also suspect that these immigrants are being encouraged for motives that have little to do with their welfare. Consider how many Democrat candidates and their supporters in the media have been using the immigrants as a weapon in the campaigns. 

It is true that the President has used the immigrant issue to rally his supporters but I believe that when he asked the people in the caravans to turn around and go home, he was actually showing more compassion than his critics. Just today an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal described the crowding and confusion even at legal entry sites, as well as the diseases picked up by immigrants on the journey.

Actually, I think the President could have gone even further. He could have offered to fly immigrants and their families directly into the USA. All they would need is a sponsor who would agree to care for them and provide for their basic needs for a period of years. I would like to suggest that compassionate liberals, especially the very well-to-do ones living in wealthy blue states, take it upon themselves to adopt or take in families of immigrants. 

I am sure that compassionate liberals would jump at the opportunity to take care of the needy. People like Oprah Winfrey could certainly take in one than one family. Wealthy politicians like Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, and Connecticut millionaire politicians like Richard Blumenthal and Rosa DeLauro would also jump at the opportunity. They could even send the immigrant children to the private schools their own children attended. 

The President could even offer to fly the immigrants to sanctuary cities like San Francisco, New York, and New Haven in Connecticut. It would be less expensive than sending troops to the border, and take some of the pressure off the border states. There are certainly enough compassionate people in these ultra blue cities to take in, and care for caravans of immigrants. In New Haven, for example, the Yale Law school students who were able to take time off to travel to Washington to protest against the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh would certainly be willing to help.

I’m making the above suggestion with tongue in cheek but the more I think about it, the more I believe such a plan has roots in American history. When my grandparents came to the USA more than 100 years ago, the doors were open to immigrants, but there were some restrictions. Those with diseases were sent back at the expense of the shipping company that transported them over.

More importantly, on arrival, someone had to meet them and be willing to provide them with room and board as well as a job. Usually, it would be family members but sometimes potential employers had to provide jobs and housing for the immigrants.  It was not the role of government. There were problems, of course, but history shows that this private, voluntary system was a huge success.

Even before during the colonial period the system of indentured servitude worked very well in bringing needed immigrants into the country and assimilating them. Immigrants would sign an agreement or indenture whereby they would work for someone for seven years. In effect, they were servants whose basic needs would be supplied by their employer. They were not slaves since they were free to move on after the indenture period was over.

There is no doubt in my mind that we need immigrants today. Even with all the legal and illegal immigrants that have entered over the past few decades, we still have virtually full employment. There are many jobs that Americans can’t or won’t take. Just the other day, the man who repaired the chimney on my house was from Honduras. His employer is the grandson of an Italian immigrant who came to the USA about the same time as my grandparents. 

America is one of the few countries in the world that has an immigration problem. Most other countries have an emigration problem since their people are so willing to leave. If we work together, I believe that we could solve the problem but I don’t think it does any good to claim that those who disagree with your solution are lacking in compassion.

###