And The Beat(ing) Goes On Part 29-- Obama's Address to Congress

Did any one feel the need for "barf bags"  tonight while listening to Obama's Campaign speechyfying?
Here is a take on what he said and what he meant. Hope that you will take time to read it all.

The main theme once again was RAISING TAXES which has been his only plan from day one. His use of Warren Buffet as an example of those paying less taxes was not a good one since Buffet has failed to even pay his taxes while all the while calling for more taxation. Not a bad plan when you don't pay your taxes but expect others to do so. But then again Obama's own Sec. of Treasury is a tax evader as well. Nothing surprising here.
Raising capital gains taxes will do nothing but kill job creation but Obama insists that this must be done.

Taxing those who can produce jobs will not create jobs and will not solve the problem.
He said tax cuts for those people and tax cuts for what he calls middle class, you can't have both. so he intends to raise taxes on the very ones who produce jobs and reward those who don't produce anything other than perhaps children that they can't afford. 

Cutting the corporate tax rate which he referred to as being the highest was thrown in but then he disputed the idea by asking why big oil corporations should get a break when the low income worker didn't  and he said you can't have both. So much being serious
on reducing corporate taxes . It's time to reduce the corporate tax.

He said the plan would build schools.

"The American Jobs Act will repair and modernize at least 35,000 schools. It will put people to work right now fixing roofs and windows; installing science labs and high-speed Internet in classrooms all across this country. It will rehabilitate homes and businesses in communities hit hardest by foreclosures."

 Sorry but it is not the job of the government to build schools, that is for the States. Now if he wants to cut spending and see that States are the beneficiaries of these cuts the well and good.  Nothing else in this part of his plan will create jobs now or in the future.

"...we'll set up an independent fund to attract private dollars and issue loans based on two criteria: how badly a construction project is needed and how much good it would do for the economy.

This idea came from a bill written by a Texas Republican and a Massachusetts Democrat. The idea for a big boost in construction is supported by America's largest business organization and America's largest labor organization. It's the kind of proposal that's been supported in the past by Democrats and Republicans alike. You should pass it right away."

It is not the job of Government to control job projects and award them to  who they "deem" to be right for the job.  However it is a nice payback to UNIONS.   I remind all that one of the biggest boondoggles in our history was created by a Texas politician by the name of Bush and a Massachusetts Democrat by the name of Ted Kennedy. It is known as NCLB.

"Pass this jobs bill, and thousands of teachers in every state will go back to work. These are the men and women charged with preparing our children for a world where the competition has never been tougher. But while they're adding teachers in places like South Korea, we're laying them off in droves. It's unfair to our kids. It undermines their future and ours. And it has to stop. Pass this jobs bill, and put our teachers back in the classroom where they belong."

It is not the job of government to put teachers to work. It is a nice payback for teachers unions however. Again that is the duty of the States and should be funded by the states. One way is to eliminate the NCLB and all the regulations that it entails and takes money from the States in order to comply with NCLB rules.

Tax cuts for business hiring is not a job creator. Cutting their taxes and the number of regulations they have to comply with is.  His mention of this was to brag that he had found 500 regulations that would be cut but then said no regulation that was deemed a harm would be cut. The very regulations he refers too are the ones that killed job creation in this country and sent them overseas.
Tax cuts for hiring returning Vets  falls into the same category and fails to create jobs. Vets already have a 10 point preference in hiring but that has not created jobs now has it?

"Pass this bill, and hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged young people will have the hope and dignity of a summer job next year."
Since when did the government get into the business of making summer jobs for kids?  It is not a job creator but a detriment to hiring those who are out of work .

$4000 bonus for companies who hire those unemployed more than six months is nothing more than another boondoggle akin to his failed stimulus or cash for clunkers. It will only cost the tax payers money.  The average time of those unemployed is now over 32 weeks in duration. This number also includes all unemployeed from age 16 and up. So once again we see another attempt at a failed stimulus plan.

Building infrastructure, roads and bridges was the only idea which is Constitutional. The constitution says that the Congress can approve moneys for building of "post roads".  Of course this idea was replaced somewhat by building of "national defense roads" during the Eisenhower administration.  So yes this part of his plan may have some credence but it will take months to get this off the ground and do little for immediate job creation. Of course Obama says that he knows of a company that is ready to go to work next week on building a bridge in Kentucky. Well, Kentucky should be funding this bridge in the present and leave the long term to be figured out.  

Extension of Unemployment is not a Stimulus but Obama seems to not understand this. Cutting those off who have been laying around for over two  years would do more to stimulate these people than giving them more money not to work.  Obama doesn't get it.
The Democrats don't get it but it plays well in an election year.

"Pass this jobs bill, and the typical working family will get a fifteen hundred dollar tax cut next year. Fifteen hundred dollars that would have been taken out of your paycheck will go right into your pocket. This expands on the tax cut that Democrats and Republicans already passed for this year. If we allow that tax cut to expire — if we refuse to act — middle-class families will get hit with a tax increase at the worst possible time."
If this idea was so good why has it not done anything that was promised. Just a re-run of a failed plan which proves that Obama still doesn't have a NEW plan . The so called tax cut actually cost the average family more since they had to pay income taxes on this fiasco. The same thing will happen again since the IRS has yet to change the policy on this.

" the trillion dollars of spending cuts I've already signed into law, it's a balanced plan that would reduce the deficit by making additional spending cuts;" 

Fact is it does nothing to reduce the deficit in the long run and actually will add to the debt. They raised the debt ceiling 2.4 trillion which they will spend over the next 18 months while they cut expenses 2.4 trillion to take place over the next 10 years. If you belive this will stick then I have beach property in North Dallas to sell you. So in fact this plan is only paid for through smoke and mirrors and Leftist Math.

He failed to say how he wanted to change Medicare. The best way would be to say, I will repeal my Obamacare . That would help Medicare and create jobs. Companies do not hire because of the uncertainty of what faces them in Obamacare. So far there are over 1 million words in the regulations in effect in Obamacare so far with more to come. This does nothing to encourage expansion of business or hiring of more employees. 
Time for Obama to admit his Obamacare is a big part of the problem and then repeal it.

"...to help responsible homeowners, we're going to work with Federal housing agencies to help more people refinance their mortgages at interest rates that are now near 4 percent — a step that can put more than $2,000 a year in a family's pocket, and give a lift to an economy still burdened by the drop in housing prices." 

What makes Obama think that more government interference in the housing market will create jobs or stimulate the economy?  Many of the people in that situation could not afford the houses to begin with but thanks to another failed government boondoggle created by Carter and perpetuated by Clinton called the Community Reinvestment Act . Congress controll by the democrats refused to hear the warnings of the Bush Administration and insisted that Mac and Mae were in good shape thanks to Barney Franks and Dodd.Now Obama thinks more of the same will create a different result. That is insanity or stupidity depending on how you define such action.

"Now it's time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements that would make it easier for American companies to sell their products in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea — while also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by global competition."

Then why has Obama been sitting on these agreements since he took office. They were created under Bush in his last term but yet Obama has refused to act on them. Why? because they didn't give Unions the advantage that he wanted so they have been tweeked to do just that and now it is urgent to get them passed, just in time for election and paybacks to UNIONS.  They will do little to nothing to create immediate jobs.

"We should have no more regulation than the health, safety, and security of the American people require. Every rule should meet that common sense test.But what we can't do — what I won't do — is let this economic crisis be used as an excuse to wipe out the basic protections that Americans have counted on for decades. "

Then he need to immediately repeal Obamacare which was  pointed out earlier will create over a thousand new regulations that will strangle job creation.  He need to rid the country of the EPA which has made laws without consent of Congress that has done more to kill jobs and the economy than anything else in the history of this country.  It is evident that he is not serious about removing regulations that will hinder his agenda and cause higher taxes and higher cost for Americans.

Obama's use of Lincoln and building railroads was disingenuous at best. The government did provide dollars but not the way Obama wishes to provide them. Each [ railroad] was required to build only 50 miles (80 km) in the first year; after that, only 50 miles (80 km) more were required each year. Each railroad received $16,000 per mile ($9,940/km) built over an easy grade, $32,000 per mile ($19,880/km) in the high plains, and $48,000 per mile ($29,830/km) in the mountains. This payment was in the form of government bonds that the companies could resell. To allow the railroads to raise additional money Congress provided additional assistance to the railroad companies in the form of land grants of federal lands.
Land Grant colleges were just that. Congress allowed them to be founded but not paid for by the government.  The States were responsible for paying for them and building them. Many of the schools received money from business men such as Carnegie and others, not the government. This is not Obama's plan. To him the government should foot the bill. Well folks we are the government and it is We The People who will foot the bill on yet another fiasco put forth by one who has no clue about the economy, job creation but understands only one thing, getting relected and appearing as the good guy. Narcissism at it's worst.

Furthermore he was less than honest when he said this:

"and listen to every good proposal, no matter which party comes up with it."

Actually he just plain lied because Harry Reid has been holding up a whole list of job and economic plans submitted by Republicans months ago. here is the list:

The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act (H.R. 872), which would halt duplicative federal regulations on farmers and small business owners that are impeding job creation.

The Energy Tax Prevention Act (H.R. 910), which would stop the federal bureaucracy from imposing a job-destroying national energy tax.

The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act (H.R. 2018), which would restrict the federal government’s ability to second-guess or delay a state’s permitting and water quality certification decisions under the Clean Water Act once the EPA has already approved a state’s program, preventing approval process delays that cost jobs and leave businesses hampered by uncertainty.

The Consumer Financial Protection & Soundness Improvement Act (H.R. 1315), which would increase consumer protection and government accountability by eliminating the ability of Dodd-Frank’s unelected Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director to unilaterally carry out regulations that hurt job growth.

The Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act (H.R. 1230), which would help to address high gas prices and support the creation of new American jobs by increasing offshore energy production.

The Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act (H.R. 1229) and the Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act (H.R. 1231), which would help to put thousands of Americans back to work by ending the de facto moratorium on American energy production in the Gulf of Mexico in a safe, responsible and transparent manner by setting firm timelines for considering permits to drill

.

The Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011 (H.R. 2021), which would streamline the permit process for American energy production to help lower prices and create tens of thousands of new jobs.

The North American-Made Energy Security Act (H.R. 1938), which would require the federal government to make a determination by a date certain on whether or not it will allow the Keystone XL pipeline expansion, which is projected to directly create 20,000 jobs and support the creation of thousands more, to move forward.

A Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 (H.Con.Res. 34).  With Washington’s failure to control spending hurting job creation in America, the House has passed its budget, while the Senate has not yet considered a budget of its own.

So the question is-- Was Obama serious in his call for bipartisanship or just an exercise in politics as usual, my way or the highway, to get his way with an agenda which for the most part has proved a failure?

 Obama said You should pass it or language of that sort over 19 times. Sounds like my way or no way to me. 

 

And The Beat(ing) Goes On Part 28-- Union Thugs Riot in Washington State

After the Jimmy Hoffa speech calling for Unions to take out Tea Party and Republicans with no rebuff from the White House, we now see the agenda for the coming months and during the election time. Longshoreman's Union Thugs rioted today because a new terminal was going to be built some miles away but was not going to be operated by Longshorman Union Thugs. Still no word from the administration on the riots.  Be sure that Holder and the DOJ will do nothing to hold the Union Thugs accountable. In all probability they will find a way to stop the new terminal from being built ala Boeing's move to "right to work" State of South Carolina which would have created more than 2000 immediate jobs. Meanwhile this job creating project by PRIVATE ENTERPRISE has been put on hold.

LONGVIEW, Wash. (AP) — Hundreds of Longshoremen stormed the Port of Longview early Thursday, overpowered and held security guards, damaged railroad cars, and dumped grain that is the center of a labor dispute, said Longview Police Chief Jim Duscha.


Six guards were held hostage for a couple of hours after 500 or more Longshoremen broke down gates about 4:30 a.m. and smashed windows in the guard shack, he said.
No one was hurt, and nobody has been arrested. Most of the protesters returned to their union hall after cutting brake lines and spilling grain from car at the EGT terminal, Duscha said. (Why were no arrest made as this was an act of pure terrorism. Oh but wait, they aren't Tea Party terrorist, they are UNION THUGS, part of Obama's "ARMY".)

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union believes it has the right to work at the facility, but the company has hired a contractor that’s staffing a workforce of other union laborers.

Thursday’s violence was first reported by Kelso radio station KLOG.

Police from several agencies in southwest Washington, the Washington State Patrol and Burlington Northern Santa Fe responded to the violence to secure the scene that followed a demonstration Wednesday.

“We’re not surprised,” Duscha said. “A lot of the protesters were telling us this in only the start.” (You can bet on that!  It's a warm up as part of the well paid "army" which supports Obama. )
 
One sergeant was threatened with baseball bats and retreated, Duscha said. “One officer with hundreds of Longshoremen? He used the better part of discretion.”

Not a peep from the LSM on this outrageous disregard of the law.  But then remember these are part of the ARMY, ready to march for Obama according to another Union Thug named Hoffa. 

And The Beat(ing) Goes On Part 27-- But it Ain't Yours to Give-- Plus We're Broke!

I posted this piece a few years back (February 2009) I don't know if this actually occurred but in all likelihood it it could have very well happened for in those days we had men of character elected to represent us a things which appears to be lacking in these times.

In the coming weeks we will be hearing about the billions of dollars needed to rebuild after the floods and the earthquake. Much of this money will go to rebuild homes that have been rebuilt before and to replace roofs that insurance should cover, to clean basements and repair water damage which also should be covered by insurance. Unfortunately people have become too accustom in waiting for the "government" to take responsibility that was by all rights theirs to take. 

To stand on the floor of the Congress today and give a speech such as the one you are about to read would take courage, something lacking in todays representatives from what I have seen. It also would mean that the wrath of the people accustomed to waiting on the "government" and from the liberals who feel that the government "owes" it somehow to the people who don't take responsibility.
 
Take time to read this once again in case you have forgotten it and while you are at it you might remind those who represent you of just what the Constitution, the one they swore to uphold, has to say on such matters. If once again you disagree then do nothing until some future date when once again you may read these words and discover that truth has been spoken and still have great meaning.

Not Yours to Give

I recommend that you read carefully the words set forth here today and then I ask that you do two things. One , I ask that you think about those words and ask yourself if they are as true today as they were when spoken. If you agree that they are true then I ask that you forward these words to all those you are acquainted with as well as to those who represent you in the Congress and Senate of this country. If you disagree, then I ask that you do nothing until some future date when you may once again read these words and having done so discover that they were true and meaningful.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not Yours to Give

Col. Davy Crockett
1884

From The Life of Colonel David Crockett
Member of the U.S. Congress 1827-31 & 1832-35

Compiled from The Life of Colonel David Crockett
by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)

One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker --- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this house, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him."

APPROPRIATE: To set apart for, or assign for a particular use, in exclusion of all other uses; as, a spot of ground is appropriated for a garden. [Webster?s 1828]

MONEY: 1) Coin; stamped metal; any piece of metal, usually gold, silver or copper, stamped by public authority, and used as the medium of commerce. 2) Bank notes or bills of credit issued by authority, and exchangeable for coin or redeemable, are also called money; as such notes in modern times represent coin, and are used as a substitute for it.If a man pays in hand for goods in bank notes which are current, he is said to pay in ready money. [Webster?s 1828]

CHARITY: Liberality to the poor, consisting in almsgiving or benefactions (Alms - Any thing given gratuitously to relive the poor, as money, food, or clothing, otherwise called charity), or gratuitous services to relieve them in distress. [Webster?s 1828]

"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and, if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

AUTHORITY: Legal power or a right to command or act; as the authority of a prince over subjects, and of parents over children.? Power; rule; sway. [Webster?s 1828]

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt it would but for that speech, it received but few votes and of course, was lost.

Later when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that I should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.

I began, 'Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and-'

'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett, I have seen you once before and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering right now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'

This was a sockdolager, I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

'Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you.

I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it, is the more dangerous the more honest he is.'

'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional questions.'

'No, Colonel, there is no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings in Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?'

'Well, my friend, I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant amount of $20,000 to relive its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.'

'It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of, it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be and the poorer he is, the more he pays in proportion to his means.

What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000.

If you had the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.

Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought to appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.

The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports to be true, some of them spend not very credibly; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation and a violation of the Constitution.

So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger for the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned and you see that I cannot vote for you.'

'I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him and I said to him:

Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it and thought I had studied it fully. I have head many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law, I wish I may be shot.'

He haughtingly replied: 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'

'If I don't, I said, I wish I may be shot, and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbeque and I will pay for it.'

No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbeque and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days and we can afford a day for a barbeque. This is Thursday. I will see to getting up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday and we will go together and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.'

'Well, I will be there. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name.'

'My name is Bunce.'

'Not Horatio Bunce?'

'Yes.'

'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'

It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and have been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before. Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the world - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

But, to return to my story. The next morning I went to the barbeque and to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me. In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened by speech by saying:

Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to see your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.

I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error. It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so. He came upon the stand and said:

'Fellow citizens, it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised to you today.'

He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before. I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress."

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday."