Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Looking Back in Time for the Right Candidate Today


Theodore Roosevelt was a statesman who desired to put his core beliefs on the front line of his public life, not on the back shelf. Looking back in time at his public life may help us make better decisions about whom we’ll choose to elect in our upcoming elections.

When Theodore Roosevelt was New York City's Police Commissioner, there was wide-spread corruption in the police department. He canceled the annual parade of the police, saying: “We will parade only when we have nothing to be ashamed of.”

When he was in the New York Legislature, he sought the impeachment of a corrupt judge. He kept the fight going for eight days: on the first day no other legislator would vote with him and against the Party bosses. On the eighth day, after Roosevelt had rallied the people and the press, the judge was impeached by a vote of 104 to 6.

After Theodore Roosevelt became president in 1901 upon the assassination of William McKinley by an anarchist's bullet, he continued to fight for what was straight, and good, and true—and he explained why he did so.

“After a week spent on perplexing problems”, Roosevelt said, “[I]t does so rest my soul to come into the house of the Lord and to sing and mean it, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty.’ My great joy and glory is that, in occupying an exalted position in the nation, I am enabled to preach the practical morality of the Bible to my fellow-countrymen and to hold up Christ as the hope and Savior of the world.”

In a speech given in Kansas City on May 1st, 1903, President Roosevelt presented his formula for how to continue our progress as a nation while addressing the turmoil caused by immigration, rapid growth, and social change: 
No device that the wit of man can produce, no form of law or of organization among ourselves can supply the lack of fundamental virtues the absence of which has meant the downfall of any nation since the world began. No smartness, no cleverness, unaccompanied by the sense of moral responsibility will ever supply the presence of fundamental precepts put forth in the Bible and put forth in the code of morals of every successful nation in the history of the world from antiquity to modern times.

... We are not going to make any new commandments at this stage of the world's progress that will take the place of the old ones. The truths that were spoken on Mount Sinai are truths today. The things that were true when the Golden Rule was promulgated are true now… [A]nd the man is no real friend of his country, no real friend of any set of people in the country, if he appeals to the people only from the standpoint of asking them to see that they get their full share and omits to ask them to do full justice to others also.

[T]here is no patent device for getting good citizenship. We need strong bodies; we need more than that; we need strong minds, and, more than that, we need character into which many elements enter, the principal ones being honesty in its widest and deepest sense, decency and morality.
Teddy Roosevelt gave a speech At the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia on June 16, 1903, which provided us with a good description of the type of people we need to look for today to be our elected officials:
In civil life we need decency, honesty and the spirit that makes the man a good husband, a good father, a good neighbor and a good man to work alongside of or to deal with. That makes a man, consequently, who does his duty by the State. The worst crime against this nation which can be committed by any man is the crime of dishonesty, whether in public life, or whether in private life, and we are not to be excused as a people if we ever condone such dishonesty, no matter what other qualities it may be associated with.
The pages upon which I read Theodore Roosevelt’s speeches were yellowed and brittle with age, but the force and truth of his central message is as true today as it was then.

Tuesday, November 1, 2005

The Magna Carta and Our Vote

“It’s just one vote.”

That’s not what King John thought when he was forced to sign the Magna Carta.

King John was the perfect picture of an absolute dictator and he had wanted it to stay that way.  John came into power by murdering the expected heir to the throne, his nephew Arthur – or so it was rumored.

King John promptly laid an oppressive level of taxation on his people. Anyone who complained was taken before the courts. As king he ruled the courts, and everyone who lost a case in his courts had to pay exorbitant fines to his appointed sheriffs and bailiffs in order to be released from his prisons. The king’s sheriffs and bailiffs were uniformly corrupt because he sold those royal positions for the best price he could get.

When the royal fines, levies and taxes were not enough, he forced his barons and their vassals into war to protect the lands he already had and to get even more. When a loyal baron died in battle, King John would sell to the highest bidder the right to marry the baron’s widow and thus take on all of the dead baron’s titles and feudal estates. If the widow objected, he would kidnap her children and put her into a dungeon until she either changed her mind or died.

Understandably, the barons wanted to kill King John and had begun a civil war with that intention. King John, of course, wanted to keep the power to do whatever he wanted, and the leading churchman, Stephen, Archbishop of Canterbury, wanted them all to follow God’s law, have a peaceable reconciliation, and provide an orderly form of government for their vassals.

After the barons succeeded in capturing London, they consented with Stephen to meet the king in the meadow at Runnymeade and, if King John agreed to their 63 demands --and especially their proposed mechanism for holding the king accountable to them-- they agreed they would end the civil war and once again swear loyalty to the king.

To encourage King John’s signature and to persuade him not to spring a trap of his own at Runnymeade, all around the edges of the bowl-shaped pasture rose the British fighting men, particularly the Scots, the brothers, fathers, sons, uncles, cousins and nephews of the women and children whom King John had consigned to the hell of his dungeons and the rapine of his mortgaged marriages.

King John was thus forced to sign the Magna Carta, written by Stephen, Archbishop of Canterbury, in June of the year 1215, and with his signature he made the royal family subject to the rule of law, and accountable to the people through the first-ever representative democracy. The longest and most important portion of the Great Charter was the "security clause" in clause 61, which established a committee, a parliament, of 25 Barons who could at any time meet and VOTE to over-rule the will of the King, by seizing his castles and possessions with force if needed. The interlocking concepts of servant leadership were abhorrent to King John and to every tyrant since him.

The Magna Carta may be eight centuries old but it is still the document our courts refer to when they discuss “the Law of the Land.” The U.S. Supreme Court has cited the Magna Carta in support of its rulings scores of times in the past half-century, most recently in Southern Union Co. v. United States, 567 U.S. ___ 1194 (June 21, 2012). The Supreme Court has continued to cite the Magna Carta so often, even in recent history, because: “we are heirs to a tradition given voice 800 years ago by Magna Carta, which, on the barons’ insistence, confined executive power by ‘the law of the land.’” Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 552 (2004)

We still have warriors who wield against the kings of our government the power created by the Magna Carta, the power of the ballot. You can be one of those warriors we now call “citizens” and “voters.”

It’s just one vote --- and it makes you more powerful than a king.

Wednesday, July 4, 2001

Faith of the Fathers

RELIGION AND MATTERS OF FAITH CONTAINED IN THE PRESIDENTS' INAUGURAL ADDRESSES FROM GEORGE WASHINGTON TO GEORGE W. BUSH

Edited with notes by J. Michael Sharman.

Price: $14.95
FREE SHIPPING




J. Michael Sharman Biography


J. Michael Sharman has served as an attorney and guardian ad litem for children over the past quarter-century.   

He frequently represents survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse both as a guardian ad litem and as a private civil attorney. On behalf of a 14 year-old sexual assault victim, Mike won the largest sexual assault jury verdict in Virginia’s history (at $50.25 million, it was also the largest jury verdict in Virginia for the year 2005). In 2012, he won a $15.4 million verdict on behalf of a 14 year-old sexual abuse victim who had been fondled by a man using false credentials to pose as a clinical psychologist.

As an appellate counsel, he has four published cases and nine unpublished ones, all of which were in the area of family or domestic relations law.

Since 2003, Mike and his wife, Nancy, have been Mandatory Parent Education presenters (using the Transparenting® curriculum) in Virginia’s 16th and 20th Judicial Districts.

Mike has a B.A. in International Relations from Mary Washington College, a J.D. from the University of Wyoming College of Law, and an LL.M. in International Taxation from Regent University.



Contact information: 

J. Michael Sharman
Commonwealth Law Offices, P.C.
246 E. Davis Street, Suite 200
Culpeper, Virginia 22701
Voice: (540) 727-1007
Facsimile: (540) 727-7917