A Shocking Executive Order

Washington, D.C.
October 3, 1863

By the President of the United States of America.

A Proclamation.

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consiousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the Unites States the Eighty-eighth.

By the President: Abraham Lincoln

William H. Seward,
Secretary of State

The First Franksgiving

The Party of No, a/k/a the Party of Big Business, is seldom interested in helping business if it means going along with a Democratic President's plan.

From Wikipedia:

Abraham Lincoln's successors as president followed his example of annually declaring the final Thursday in November to be Thanksgiving.

But in 1939, President Franklin D. Roosevelt broke with this tradition. November had five Thursdays that year (instead of the more-common four), and Roosevelt declared the fourth Thursday as Thanksgiving rather than the fifth one. Although many popular histories state otherwise, he made clear that his plan was to establish the holiday on the next-to-last Thursday in the month instead of the last one. With the country still in the midst of The Great Depression, Roosevelt thought an earlier Thanksgiving would give merchants a longer period to sell goods before Christmas. Increasing profits and spending during this period, Roosevelt hoped, would help bring the country out of the Depression.

At the time, advertising goods for Christmas before Thanksgiving was considered inappropriate. Fred Lazarus, Jr., founder of the Federated Department Stores (later Macy's), is credited with convincing Roosevelt to push Thanksgiving to a week earlier to expand the shopping season, and within two years the change passed through Congress into law.

Republicans decried the change, calling it an affront to the memory of Lincoln. People began referring to November 30 as the 'Republican Thanksgiving' and November 23 as the 'Democratic Thanksgiving' or 'Franksgiving'. Regardless of the politics, many localities had made a tradition of celebrating on the last Thursday, and many football teams had a tradition of playing their final games of the season on Thanksgiving; with their schedules set well in advance, they could not change. Since a presidential declaration of Thanksgiving Day was not legally binding, Roosevelt's change was widely disregarded. Twenty-three states went along with Roosevelt's recommendation, 22 did not, and some, like Texas, could not decide and took both days as government holidays.

Footnotes omitted.

Thanksgiving Day 2014

Internal links, defunct video & photo removed.

CW: I'm experiencing weather-related brief power outages. So if there's no more Commentariat, blame it on Mother Nature.

Steve Benen: Rich Lowry, the editor of the National Review, told the New York Times, "If I were John Boehner, I'd say to the president:'Send us your State of the Union in writing. You're not welcome in our chamber" "Lowry ... isn't the only one publicly pushing the idea. Politico reported yesterday that congressional Republicans are weighing a variety of tactics to 'address' their disgust over Obama's immigration policy, and 'GOP aides and lawmakers' are considering the idea of 'refusing to invite the president to give his State of the Union address.' Late last week, Breitbart News also ran a piece of its own on the subject: 'Congress should indicate President Obama that his presence is not welcome on Capitol Hill as long as his "executive amnesty" remains in place. The gesture would, no doubt, be perceived as rude, but it is appropriate.'"

Amanda Marcotte in Slate: "Thanksgiving is becoming impossible for low-wage working women."

Gail Collins: "This year, in a break from tradition, I am giving thanks for the House Intelligence Committee's final report on Benghazi."

That Bird Outside Your Window Is Not a Turkey. Nick Wingfield of the New York Times: "As the price of drones has fallen and sales have risen, the machines have emerged as central characters in stunts from the puckish to the criminal. In recent months, drone pilots have tried to smuggle contraband into prisons and disrupt sporting events at stadiums. Animal rights groups have turned to drones to stalk hunters as the hunters stalk wildlife. And in France, more than a dozen illegal flights over nuclear power plants have unnerved the authorities." ...

... Nick Wingfield: "After requests by news organizations..., the Federal Aviation Administration released a report on Wednesday that compiles data on drone incidents reported to it this year through air traffic control facilities around the country. The list isn't comprehensive since some drone incidents are reported to local law enforcement agencies, or not at all." ...

... Craig Whitlock of the Washington Post: "Pilots around the United States have reported a surge in near-collisions and other dangerous encounters with small drones in the past six months at a time when the Federal Aviation Administration is gradually opening the nation's skies to remotely controlled aircraft, according to FAA records."

** Judd Legum of Think Progress: Justice Antonin "Scalia explains what was wrong with the Ferguson grand jury.... Scalia, in the 1992 Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, explained what the role of a grand jury has been for hundreds of years.

It is the grand jury's function not 'to enquire ... upon what foundation [the charge may be] denied,' or otherwise to try the suspect's defenses, but only to examine 'upon what foundation [the charge] is made'; by the prosecutor. Respublica v. Shaffer, 1 Dall. 236 (O. T. Phila. 1788); see also F. Wharton, Criminal Pleading and Practice § 360, pp. 248-249 (8th ed. 1880). As a consequence, neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify or to have exculpatory evidence presented. [Emphasis added.] ...

... Leada Gore of AL.com: "The nation's largest group of African-American attorneys and judges is calling for federal charges to the filed against the police officer cleared in the shooting of an unarmed black teenager. The National Bar Association released a statement questioning the lack of an indictment against Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson. A 12-member grand jury declined to indict Wilson, and some groups are pressing the White House to move forward with a Civil Rights investigation." ...

... Scott Kaufman of the Raw Story: "The National Bar Association released a statement 'questioning how the Grand Jury, considering the evidence before them could reach the conclusion that Darren Wilson should not be indicted and tried for the shooting death of Michael Brown.' 'The National Bar Association also questions the makeup of the gran jury that consisted of nine Whites and only three African-Americans in a town comprised of sixty-seven percent African-Americans,' the group wrote in a related statement." ...

... The original National Bar Association statement is here. ...

... Caroline Bankoff of New York: "In the latest installment of his interview with George Stephanopoulos, Darren Wilson revealed that his wife, fellow cop Barbara Spradling, is pregnant. (That probably explains why the couple decided to marry last month, despite the fact that Wilson was still in hiding and facing the possibility of indictment.)" That portion of the interview is here. ...

... Catherine Thompson of TPM: "Conservative media outlets were outraged that the New York Times published the name of the street where Ferguson, Mo. police Officer Darren Wilson and his new wife live outside of St. Louis. The Times revealed Monday that Wilson quietly married fellow officer Barbara Spradling last month. The story identified the town and the street where Wilson and Spradling own a home, but did not specify an exact address. A photograph of the couple's marriage certificate also appeared in the article.... The Times has not removed the street name from its article (TPM also originally republished the photo of Wilson's marriage license. It has been removed). It did remove the photograph of Wilson's marriage certificate, however, and appended the following editor's note on Tuesday: 'An earlier version of this post included a photograph that contained information that should not have been made public. The image has been removed.'"

Emma Fitzsimmons of the New York Times: "A police officer who shot and killed a 12-year-old boy outside a Cleveland recreation center fired within two seconds after the patrol car he was riding in pulled up next to the boy, a video released on Wednesday by the Cleveland police showed." Includes video.

Benjamin Mueller of the New York Times: New York City "police said that [in 2005] Leonel Disla, 19, had waved a long kitchen knife at two police officers before he was shot [by police]. A six-person jury in Bronx Supreme Court on Tuesday found the city and Sgt. Robert Barnett liable in Mr. Disla's death, casting doubt on whether the teenager had wielded a knife at all."

Todd Richmond of the AP: "A man who got arrested after he posted Facebook comments calling a southwestern Wisconsin police department racist has filed a federal lawsuit alleging one of the agency's officers violated his constitutional rights." CW: Read the whole report; the reporter appears to have gleaned the facts in his story from the plaintiff's lawsuit, so you should read them in that light. However, it seems unlikely his attorney would have invented the basic events, since there must be a chain of evidence demonstrating that the guy was arrested, jailed, convicted, sentenced & later exonerated (on appeal) on First Amendment grounds. I don't know what the plaintiff actually wrote in his Facebook comment, but unless the language can be construed as threatening, surely he has a First-Amendment right to call public officials racists, whether "true or not.

Emily Atkin of Think Progress: The usual suspects -- business groups & the GOP -- "are freaking out" over the new EPA draft proposal for ground-level ozone pollution rules. "... both industry groups and Republicans have been overestimating the cost of regulations like this since the EPA first began issuing regulation of this kind. In addition, the EPA has historically underestimated the benefits."