Thursday, January 7, 2016

Professional Politicians and Media Don't Get It

By Terry McGahey
Associate Writer/ Historian

Politicians within the political establishment as well as many people associated with the media don't seem to grasp or understand why so many voters are standing behind Donald Trump and Ted Cruz rather than the old guard politicians like Jeb Bush and others.

The answer to this is very simple, people are sick and tired of politics as usual. We have had enough of the lip service and empty promises that these professional politicians spew out of their mouths in order to get elected. Then once they do get elected, their empty promises fall into the eternal vacuum of complacency which has become the standard operational procedure in Washington D.C.

Why is it that the old establishment politicians along with the mainstream media are saying everything against Trump and Cruz possible? Simple, the politicians do not want things to change, and why? Because they are completely happy with the power and wealth they have been able to accumulate over the years.

As far as the media goes, they don't want things to change either because most of the media outlets are owned by liberals, which have become socialists, who believe that we the people have to be controlled.

The Socialist media has provided the propaganda necessary in order for the liberal agenda to take hold in our country. Political Correctness, gun control, division of the people by race, ridiculing Christians, standing behind Muslim immigration from countries where radical terrorists can infiltrate, and these are just to name a few.

Then we have the Liberal Socialist agenda which has infiltrated our schools in order to brainwash our children which the media and Liberals, along with RINO Republicans, have done nothing to stop. To do nothing is the same thing as to agree with this agenda in my opinion.

I believe that these are just some of the reasons why the left, as well as the right, along with the media, are afraid of Trump and Cruz, neither one of them belong to the good old boy system which makes all three entities feel very un-easy.

Think about it, all three entities are basically stating that Trump and Cruz are radicals. Well, maybe what we need is someone who is a radical pro American president rather than a radical anti-American president. That's what it may take to put a stop to the socialist agenda of our current so called president. A man who would possibly bring our enemy into our gates and who has promoted the things I have listed above, and Hillary is no better.

Being neither a Democrat nor a Republican, and being a Constitutional Conservative, I have no crystal ball. I do not know if Trump or Cruz would make a great president or not, but I do know that we as a country cannot stay on the same course this ship has been sailing for these past many years. This is a ship with many holes in it that has only been patched and not repaired correctly, and if we don't take care of these repairs permanently, this ship is going to sink with all hands on board, and there will be no life boats available.

The only life boat we as a people have right now is the constitution, the law of the land, and if something isn't done, and done soon, they will figure out how to get around that also. The Socialists/Communists are doing their best every day to get rid of our Constitution, and if you open your eyes you will see that this is true.



Monday, January 4, 2016

We Need Obama Prominently Featured In American History Books


In an article on Breitbart.com, titled "Matthews: Angry White Guys Want To Erase Obama From the History Books" on December 22nd, Pam Key reported:

Monday night on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” host Chris Matthews warned there are some wanting to “erase” President Barack Obama from the history books.

Matthews said, “My theory Molly [Ball], and I’m not a person of color but I have a particular theory about this charge. I think the really angry guy out there, mostly guy, white guy, thinks if he can erase him from that picture of what we get as kids from the presidents, begins with George Washington through Lincoln and Roosevelt, and there is a president who is black, they want to make sure he is not there. Somehow that book has an asterisk. Pete rose didn’t really get in the hall of fame. Somehow he’s not there they keep picking at it. because they do. All the polls, 43% of Republicans say he’s a Muslim. Where do they get that from?”

The Atlantic’s Molly Ball said, “This is the sense which Donald Trump is pandering to a market need. There’s a number of people — I think the president’s analysis that this is a time of rapid social change, that he is a representative of and there are a lot of people who feel dislocated by that, who feel uncomfortable with that and it’s not only about this president, it’s about a lot of things happening in this country. It’s about these economic woes. Interestingly does not associate himself with. He doesn’t see himself as part of this scenario. He doesn’t think the troubles the country is going through have anything to do with him. He is talking like a sociology professor.”


For me, this is the sort of thing that confirms why MSNBC is failing miserably. It assaults one's sense of right and wrong, of what is truly racist and what is not. While the term racist is batted about these days way too easily, Chris Matthews is truly a racist because he makes excuses for America's first Black President.

Yes, Matthews is a true racist because he makes excuses for Obama lack of ability to lead by attacking those who demand leadership from President Obama.

Why? Because Obama is black. I truly believe MSNBC's talking head Chris Matthews makes excuses for Obama in a way that he would never do if Obama were indeed white -- and certainly not if he were a Republican. And yes, that is the proof of Matthews being the racist.

He and others at MSNBC conduct themselves more as racists than I or any other "white guy" who I know. While I have called President Obama's policies dangerous and spiteful. I remember saying the very same thing about Jimmy Carter's policies some 40 years ago.

I see Obama and Carter as kindred spirits because both have demonstrated a deep seated hatred for America. Yes, both wanted to change America at her foundation. In Obama's case, he wants to change this from the largest Christian nation on earth to a Muslim state through indoctrination and denial of the truth about Islam.

Obama refuses to admit that Islam is a shrinking religion, especially since the Koran's doctrine of hate and murder has been revealed to the world. As what takes place when television and the news shows the world Islamic insanity, the demands of a demented cult, are showing people what Islam is really about -- and more are leaving Islam than joining it.

In Carter's case, he wanted to institute changes that would push our nation closer to Socialism. Like Obama, he too tried stripping our military and using it as place to test social changes like women in combat. Yes, it was tried before and failed.

American Socialists like Carter, Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Nancy Pelosi and the like, are living to see a world embracing Capitalism and its power to empower instead of enslave.

Before I move on to the main point of this blog post, I need to ask how can I be a racist if I dislike both Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama the same? I wasn't unhappy with Jimmy Carter because he was from Georgia, and I certainly don't give a damn that Obama is black. So since one is white and the other is black, one from Georgia and the other from Chicago, how can I be a racist if its both of their policies that I haven't liked?

But don't try to convince Matthews that one can be unhappy with a president over his policies and be blind to where he is from or what the color of their skin is. Logic such as that evades Chris Matthews who sees all Whites as born Racists.

I assert that Chris Matthews is the real racist here because he cannot let go of the fact that our President is half-Black. And no. that is not a real surprise considering the Democrat Party's legacy of racism in America starting before the Civil War. 

While Matthews is enamored with Obama, he does not give the same respect to Black Conservatives and routinely flings racist slurs at them. But that is something that he will deny, yet it's true. He routinely says we Conservatives are thin skinned, but who likes being called something they are not? Does he? 

Now as for his assertion that the "really angry guy out there, mostly guy, white guy, thinks if he can erase him from that picture of what we get as kids from the presidents, begins with George Washington through Lincoln and Roosevelt, and there is a president who is black, they want to make sure he is not there."

You see, I suppose Matthews is talking about me when he says "the really angry guy out there, mostly guy, white guy, thinks if he can erase him from that picture of what we get as kids". But boy is he wrong! 

Sure, like others, I'm angry that I don't have representation. And no my anger at what's going on these days doesn't stop there.

My anger has to do with the majority being neglected while only minority views are respected. My anger is at those who give traitorous activity a pass. And yes, traitors like Hillary Clinton should be in prison for her breeches of national security.

Yes, my anger has to do with the double standard where the politically favored such as Democrats can break the law and go free -- all while Republicans and Christians are made to pay dearly for things like failing to bake a cake or associating with the Tea Party. My anger has to do with a government with such power that it can target innocent law abiding citizens such as the Conservatives that were targeted in the IRS scandal. 

My anger has to do with those who funneled thousands of guns illegally to Mexico at the cost of thousands of innocent lives, by have not been made to pay for what they've done. My anger is at those who do nothing about stopping the black market sales of illegal guns to criminals, yet they want to disarm Americans with more gun laws that criminals by definition will not observe.

My anger is at those who want to change everything good about America because it doesn't fit in their concept of Liberal Utopia -- no matter how much bad it does to this great nation.

Yes, I'm an angry American. And since there are Black Americans who are as angry as I am, what does skin color have to do with anything when it comes to recognizing tyranny? Any color of American can recognize it, especially these days with over-regulation and a Federal government out of control and in violation of the Constitution. 

Whether people want to admit it or not, it is a fact that our Constitution was designed to restrain our Federal government and stop it from becoming an all-powerful Central Government. Our founders fear Totalitarianism.

They knew that Totalitarianism is centralized control by an autocratic authority. It is the political concept that a citizen should be totally subject to an absolute state authority. Yes, totalitarianism means slavery! 

In our case, we are a Constitutional Republic. And yes, as such, we are a state where officials are elected as representatives by us. And yes, they must govern according to existing Constitutional Law which limits the government's power over American citizens.

The Constitution was written by men who knew that government needs to be controlled. They understood that an all-powerful government is more of a threat to our personal freedoms, that of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, than all of the foreign armies combined.  

But, am I so angry that I want Obama taken out of American History Books? Am I so disappointed in Obama that I want some sort of "an asterisk" put by his name as Matthews suggested? Not only no, but Hell No!

I Want Barack Hussein Obama In Every American History Book!

Let me be very clear on this. Yes, I 'm an angry American, but I really want ALL of Barack Hussein Obama's actions and lack of actions, his enemies list, his demeaning America, his callous discontent for our legislative process to be in every American History book ever printed from this day forward!

Yes, I want his ineptness and his divisiveness, his cowardice, his treasonous acts, his betrayal of the American people, his exorbitant spending, his Socialist policies, his anti-Capitalism stance, his radical Islamic sympathies, his attempts to become a dictator, yes, I want it all in our history books!   

As a man who studies history, I believe American History needs to be absolutely correct. We need to learn from failures like Obama. We need to learn just how he's made our nation weaker, more divided, fractured, unsafe, and less respected by our enemies and allies both. And don't kid yourself, that is his legacy. It is one that will show a nation down-graded and weakened, demoralized, and degraded on the world stage by Obama himself.

And frankly, history needs to be completely accurate with the biases of people like Chris Matthews taken out of the equation. Can you, any of you who read my blog, just imagine if the history of the Obama years is left to a man like Chris Matthews? Can you imagine the glowing review of what Obama has done to us? 

Can you imagine just how impartial some ultra-Liberal like Matthews would be when chronicling Obama's conduct in office? It's scary to think about what he would leave out and simply not include because it would not be seen as favorable to Obama's legacy.

No, Chris Matthews will never understand it. But frankly, I don't want Obama's conduct to be selectively put in the History Books, I want ALL of what Obama has done while in office in the History Books.

I don't want history re-written by Liberals to spin the truth. I want ALL of what Obama has done to America completely open to the public. I certainly do not want it buried. 

I want the truth of his actions and lack of actions. I want his desire to make excuses for Islamic Terrorism, his race-baiting bigotry, his want to divide our nation, his breaking the law, his by-passing the legislative process, his desire to represent a few while persecuting others, and of course his lies. Yes. I want it ALL in there! 

I want ALL of what Obama has done to America chronicled for future generation to examine and learn from. I want Obama to serve as a lesson of failure and ineptness in office. I want his desire for glory and fame on the world stage to be read over and over again. 

Oh yes, I want the Barack Obama Chapter of American History to serve as a model of what America does not need nor need in a President!

Frankly, because I believe that everything that Obama has done while in office can ultimately serve as a lesson, as a warning, for future generations of Americans as to just how bad it can get when the American people put a president in office who does not love his country. 

Chris Matthews is not only offensive in his racial overtones toward White, Asian, and Hispanic Americans while giving Obama a pass because he's Black. He is wrong and should apologize to us all for his ridicule of the American people.

Fact is American History needs to have the history of Barack Obama's conduct in office featured prominently in our history books. We should not bury what he has done or has attempted to do with his desire to "fundamentally change" America.

No, we need to have him front and center to serve as a warning to all in the future. Obama will be useful so that we can learn what not to allow again -- if we get through this.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa


Saturday, January 2, 2016

Let's Do Onto Others While Keeping Ourselves Armed And Ready

Dear Readers,

This is my first post of 2016. This post answers a question put to me by quite a few of you, "Should I arm myself to protect my family and myself, even if it means breaking the law?"

Before going to my answer, allow me to pass on some advice from our 26th President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt, who was a rancher, a cowboy, a statesman, author, explorer, soldier, naturalist, and a true reformer. Yes, one of my heroes.

In a speech in San Francisco, California, on May 13th, 1903, he said: "Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready." 

Since I have been a around a while, have done a few things, and have, like most of you, learned a few things over the years, I agree 100% with Theodore Roosevelt. Yes, we should live the Golden Rule while taking responsibility for our own safety is needed.

While Matthew 7:12 tells us "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law ...," common sense tells us we need to look after ourselves in all matters including our own security.

Knowing this, to answer your question, let's break it down into two parts. As for the first part of the question, "Should I arm myself to protect my family and myself"? My answer goes along with what Theodore Roosevelt said in that we should treat others with the Golden Rule in mind -- but take ownership of our own security.

My belief is that if you value your family's safety and security, you must take ownership for your family's safety and security -- and arm yourself. 

Because I believe that all of our lives matter, and that we need the ability to protect ourselves, our guns matter. We can arm ourselves legally because of our Right to Bear Arms. But because there are those wanting to take our rights away, take our right and ability to defend ourselves away from us, I believe that our vote matters more than ever.

Because of this, I believe to protect our families and ourselves, we must: 1) Arm ourselves, 2) Travel with others who are armed, 3) Vote for Gun Friendly representatives, 4) Be ready to use deadly force, and 5) Encourage others to do the same.

In 1982, Kennesaw, Georgia, passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to just 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole. Today, the violent crime rate in Kennesaw is still 85% lower than Georgia's or the national average.
In fact, across the nation, there has been an 89% drop in burglaries in places with mandatory gun laws. So yes, arm yourself and travel with others who are armed, because there is strength in numbers. Get training and be ready to use deadly force if need be. Register to vote and then vote for representatives who support your right to defend yourself and your family. And also, it is very important to spread the word to encourage others to do the same on all 5 points,

Our government will only improve when it enforces present gun laws, improves border security, and restrains criminals, both foreign and domestic, from roaming free. After all, we don't need new gun laws, or other new laws. We need to have the laws that we already have enforced.

200,000 times a year, that is the approximate number of times women use a gun to defend against sexual abuse.

We have to depend on ourselves to provide us security, and our ability to own guns as instruments to defend ourselves is an important right to ensure that. We have to vote in people who understand and respect our ability to fend for ourselves. Only getting off our backsides and buying guns and voting will make things better.

A recent study published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy concluded that there is a negative correlation between gun ownership and violent crime in countries internationally. Yes, more guns equals less crime.

In general, states with strict gun control laws have much higher murder rates than those who don't. And yes, that is the same with nations. In general, nations with strict gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates than those who do not. 

In fact, the nine European nations with the lowest gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate 3 times higher than that of the nine European nations with the highest gun ownership rate. And yes, for my readers who do not live in the United States, that leads me to answer the same question of "Should I arm myself to protect my family and myself"? 

For my readers who don't live in the United States, my advice is this: 1) Arm yourselves, 2) Travel with others who are armed, 3) Replace your Socialist anti-Gun governments with governments who will allow you to protect your family and yourself with arms, 4) Train and be ready to use deadly force, and 5) Encourage others to do the same.  

Sound familiar? Yes, it is the same advice I give to all. We have the God given right to defend and protect ourselves, and we need to exercise that right as human beings. Don't depend on others to do for you when you need to do it yourself! 

Yes, in other countries it's difficult to own or possess a firearm because governments there have convinced many that "guns are bad" and "people cannot be trusted to provide for their own security." But frankly, that asinine propaganda was designed to keep you under control, as dependent on government protection while being at the mercy of the armed criminal. 

Yes, along with that sort of "we'll take care of you" propaganda, politicians all over the world have used criminal and terrorist attacks, all tragedies in themselves, to get anti-gun bans instituted. All that this has accomplish is to strip away your ability to protect yourselves while outlaws remained armed. 

This is a situation that many governments have created. It is one where government officials live with armed security details, police are armed, criminals are armed, all while citizens remain unarmed and easy prey.

In the decade following the Great Britain's Labor party's election and the banning of handguns in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77% to 1.2 million in 2007. That means that they recorded more than 2 attacks every minute.
And yes, that was after they banned their people from having the ability to defend themselves with firearms. And sadly, here in the United States, we have politicians who want to create the same here. Politicians want to keep their armed security details, allow the police to be armed, but not attend to the real problem of armed criminals -- all while trying to disarm American citizens.

If I were living in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Australia, or the Netherlands, I would find a way to arm myself to protect my family and myself -- even if that meant obtaining guns and ammunition illegally.

I'd do that just the same as I would if I were living in anti-gun cities like Chicago, San Francisco, and New York where criminals and illegals aliens have guns but citizens have a hard time obtaining such protection legally.

Now, as for the second part of the question, "even if it means breaking the law?"

Do I advise breaking the law? No of course not. I've always believed in working within the law. But on the other hand, would I risk going to jail to protect my family? Yes, absolutely, because I love my family and would do whatever I need to do to keep them safe.

Would I rather be tried by a jury of my peers rather than place my family's security in the hands of the police or some other government agency who may be too overworked to attend to my family's moment of need? Yes, because I couldn't live with myself knowing that I didn't do something when the police were not available at the moment.

Would I use deadly force to save members of my family from rape or murder? Yes. I have been trained to do so and will. Would I use deadly force if my life or the life of another is in mortal danger? Yes, no doubt about it. 

Do I want those who would attack my family or me to know that I have the ability to use deadly force, and that I'm willing to use deadly force? Absolutely yes. I firmly believe that bad guys respect force and avoid contact with armed resistance.

Fact is, of the felons in prison who were polled, 3 out of 4 say they won't mess with armed citizens. They knew their victims were unarmed.

Like it or not, human nature like water flows with the path of least resistance. Criminals do not look at someone armed as a target of opportunity because they themselves may get killed. Criminals see un-armed citizens as targets of opportunity. People attack those who cannot fight back. 

We need to vote for Gun Friendly representatives if we value our safety and security. We need to vote for representatives who are for our right to Self Protection if we are to have laws that are favorable to us taking ownership of our own security needs.

We need to acknowledge that states with Right-to-Carry laws have lower violent crime rates, on average, compared to the rest of the country: total violent crime by 31 percent, murder, 39 percent; robbery, 55 percent; and aggravated assault, 19 percent. 

We need to understand that more than 80,000 Americans a year used guns in an effort to protect themselves or their property against crime, and that more than 2 million crimes are prevented each year by the presence of privately-owned firearms.

Ownership of our security needs means taking responsibility for our own safety is a big deal. It starts with our having the belief that there are good and bad folks out there, and living in the reality of today, and that we should be prepared to deal with both. 

Yes, let's live the Golden Rule as stated in Matthew 7:12 and do to others what you would have them do to you. Or as Theodore Roosevelt put it, "Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready."

We should welcome the good, and deter the bad. And frankly, if the bad are not deterred? Than make them wish they were!

Friends, that is the Cowboy way. That is the American way, It is a fact of life because we all matter.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

Saturday, December 26, 2015

John B. Stetson -- "Father Of The Cowboy Hat"

Since 2015 is the 150th Anniversary of the John B. Stetson Hat Company, we should all take a moment to recognize the creator of the cowboy hat, John Batterson Stetson.

Friends, while James Lock & Company of London is credited with the introduction of the Bowler hat in 1849, and Giuseppe Borsalino is credited with the Fedora in the early 1860s, there is no question that John B. Stetson is deserving of being called "The Father of the Cowboy Hat."

Yes, he is credited with inventing the classic cowboy hat. And because of his hats, I don't think there is a cowboy alive today who hasn't heard of Stetson.

And just to be fair, while there are other brands of hats, no other name brand carries with it such historical identification to America and the Old West as Stetson. Yes, and it's all due to the resilience of one man.

The man who became a legend was born John Batterson Stetson on May 5th, 1830, the 7th of 12 children, in New Jersey. Yes, the man who is responsible for inventing the "cowboy hat" was an Easterner. And shocking as that sounds, it's true.

Hats, and hatters, hat makers, were in the Stetson family as his father, Stephen Stetson, was a "hatter." Subsequently as a youth, young John Stetson learned hat making by working with his dad.

He did so up until his father's death, then John B. Stetson worked for his older brothers. As for that, well it's said that while he bought the raw materials, made hats, taught others the trade, and sold hats, his brothers took the profits. And yes, it was no surprise that after a while of this, John Stetson decided to go into the business for himself.

It was while he was just completing arrangements for opening his own hat business that he was diagnosed with tuberculosis (TB), what was called at the time "consumption" because it slowly consumed the afflicted patient enduring the hardship of the disease. Yes, for Old West fans, I suppose the most famous person to ever be afflicted with TB was the gambler John Henry "Doc" Holliday.

Since Stetson was diagnosed with tuberculosis and a doctor predicted he had only a short time to live, TB was a death sentence at the time, Stetson decided that his only chance for survival was to get away from the industrial East and head for the open spaces and clean air of the West.

During his travels, it is said that he met cattle drovers, bull-whackers, settlers, and of course day wage cowboys, all very hardy men and boys who worked in the heat of the day and snows of winter, weathering all seasons.

And frankly, while it might still baffle some how places Kansas and Missouri in the East can be referred to as the West, soon Stetson found himself in St. Joseph, Missouri, where he got a job making bricks.

It is said that even with fragile health that he was a hard worker. And through his hard work, he soon became manager and then a partner in the brickyard. But as in life, even when everything looks great, disaster can strike.

In his case, one day the Missouri River flooded and everything at the brickyard was lost. Yes, a half-million bricks, ready to be baked, melted into silt under the river’s advance and floated downstream, carrying Stetson’s job with them. After that disaster, Stetson looked around for something new to do. The Civil War was being fought, and he tried to enlist, but his physical disability of TB mean that he was rejected by the Union Army.

At the time, St. Joseph, Missouri, was a trading post where parties were outfitted for the long trek to Pike's Peak to the gold prospects in the Rocky Mountains. One of these parties actually invited Stetson to join them on their journey. And yes, it is said that with high hopes, he accepted the invitation.

OK, so as with most stories of great men and women, there are those moments that occur to enlighten them as to what they should be doing in life. The trek up Pike's Peak was his.

Friends, remember, he has TB and subsequently his lungs are in a horrid condition. But in late spring, 1862, with the weather mild enough for sleeping under the stars, John B. Stetson took the challenge of heading for the gold fields.

Occasionally a storm came up, and when that happened the 12 members of the party rushed to lash animal skins together to serve as tents to shelter them from the weather. Since the skins were not tanned, they ruined under the soaking. Afterwards the ruined skins had to be discarded.

There in the Rocky Mountains, each storm meant new work and lost hides for the gold seekers. The story goes that once as they were bedding down, one of the men remarked, "Too bad there isn't some easier way to make tent cloth."

And yes, supposedly Stetson replied, "There is by felting!"

Felting is a process that dates back centuries before Christ. Although a strand of animal fur appears smooth to the naked eye, it is actually covered with scales. When clean fur is matted together, the fur's scales interlock. If the mat is alternately dipped in hot water and then squeezed, the scales lock even more tightly together. The material that is formed is "felt."

Story has it that rather than trying and explain the concept of felting to his companions, John B. Stetson gave them a demonstration on the spot. He did so by taking his axe and sharpening it to a razor's edge before shaving fur off several hides.

After gathering the fur, with a hickory sapling and a leather thong, he made a bow and began agitating the fur, keeping it in the air until the long hairs and dirt were separated. Once it was ready, he then sprayed water over the fur. In a few minutes he had a mat that could be lifted. Stetson then dipped the mat in boiling water. As it began to shrink, he squeezed out any excess water until he had a soft blanket of felt. Stetson then fashioned the limited supply of fur, not into a tent, but into a big hat -- one that would protect a wearer from rain, sun, cold, wind and even hail.

After reaching Pike's Peak, Stetson discovered that mining was very hard work and that only a few of miners were actually making any money. But even though that was the case, as with other die-hards who don't know the meaning of giving up, he decided to linger and keep trying his luck.

While at the camp, he soon discovered that his felt hat had become the talk of the mining camps. And then, one day out of the clear blue sky, it is said that a rough-looking horseman appeared and wanted to try it on. Stetson handed over the hat and the horseman placed it on his head.

Stetson is said to have watched the giant of a man, sitting in a silver-ornate-saddle on a spirited horse, and noticed that he liked Stetson hat. In fact, legend says that the horseman liked it so much that he gave Stetson a five-dollar gold piece for that hat.

He knew that the common hats of the day, the flea-infested coonskin caps, the sea captain hats, straw hats, and wool derbies, were all left-overs from other occupations. Stetson looked at this and knew that fur-felt would work for a lightweight, all-weather, hat suitable for the West.

In 1865, yes the last year of the Civil War, John B. Stetson returned East to Philadelphia. There with $100, John B. Stetson rented a small room, bought tools he needed, and then set out to make a hat that no one had ever seen before. Yes, it was there that he bought $10 worth of fur and the John B. Stetson Hat Company was born.

Stetson’s first output was simply a copy of the style then in vogue in Philadelphia. He put those out while experimenting with other hat designs. But sadly, there were only limited sales and time was running out for his fledgling hat company.

To survive was one thing, but to prevail he know that if he were to avoid disaster that he would have to make a hat different from those being worn in fashionable East Coast circles. However, dealer resistance to anything new was strong.

Slowly going broke, Stetson asked himself the question that would turn his life around: "Why not sell hats somewhere else?"

And yes, it was then that Stetson decided to not to make copies of fashionable hats for Eastern "dudes" -- but instead make hats for hardy Westerners.

He knew that it had to be durable, waterproof, and have a style all its own. Durability alone meant he did in fact do what he set out to do -- manufacture hats suited to the needs of the Westerner. Not Easterners, not citified folks, but a hat for the rugged individualist, those pioneers and settlers, and yes cowboys out West.

Thinking about out that horseman and how he placed his on his head, Stetson knew that the cattle business was a new enterprise in the 1860s and that cattlemen needed hats that distinguished them as cattlemen. Because he saw that the hats they worn were from every walk of life, he saw the cattleman as an untouched market waiting for a hat that would address their unique trade and would give them their own identity.

As with the greatness of America, knowing that nothing worth achieving comes easy, he kept at it until after a year of trial and error, he finally produced what would be known as a Stetson design unique among other designs. It was a design that would make the term "Stetson" interchangeable with what later became known as the "cowboy hat."

In fact, it is said that one day John B. Stetson went out wearing a hat made from the finest fur he could obtain. He named the hat "Boss of the Plains." The hat achieved instant popularity and was the first real cowboy hat.

Yes, with that first very soft felt hat, the name Stetson was on its way to becoming the mark of quality, durability, innovation and beauty. And yes, with his selection of that name "Boss of the Plains," Stetson showed his understanding of the wearer's desire to make his hat a symbol of authority and style.

While some have this belief that the "Boss of the Plains" only came in black, the original designs was a big natural-colored hat with a four-inch brim and a four-inch crown. It came with a plain strap that was used for the hatband.

The hat included a sweatband, a lining to protect the hat, and, as a memorial to earlier designs, a bow on its sweatband, which had the practical purpose of helping distinguish the front from the back. All features still used today. And yes, a high quality hat in good condition was also viewed in some places as a status symbol.

To answer the question as to the reason why a "cowboy hat" is commonly called "Stetson" is because he had his name John B. Stetson Company embossed in gold in every sweatband.

The "Stetson" soon became the most well known hat in the West. In fact, after the introduction of Stetson's "Boss of the Plains" hat, all the high-crowned, wide-brimmed, soft felt western hats that followed were associated with the cowboy image created by Stetson.

The "Boss of the Plains" hat was designed with a high crown to provide insulation on the top of the head, and a wide stiff brim to provide shelter from both sun and rain for the face, neck and shoulders. The original fur-felt hat was waterproof and shed rain. Overall, the hat was as tough as nails and lightweight.

Because the wide brim would protect those outdoors from the hot sun and winter rain, there were those who saw the "Boss of the Plains" as a modified version of a Mexican sombrero. But all in all, the new hat was designed with durable and style in mind.

So what about using beaver you ask? Well, it is said that Stetson worried about the waterproofing his hats for a year until he finally decided to make his hat of beaver felt.

It took about 42 beaver belly pelts to produce a high quality hat. And yes, as with the legend of a Stetson being used a bucket to fetch water for your horse, because of the tight weave of most Stetson hats -- yes, it really was waterproof enough to be used as a bucket.

In the early advertising, Stetson featured of a cowboy watering his horse with water carried in the crown. The wearer could also use the brim as a cup to direct water to a person's mouth.

Of course there is an old story about a cowboy crossing a long dry stretch of prairie. The story goes that since his canteen sprung a leak, he is said to have saved his drinking water by carrying it in his Stetson.

It quickly caught on with cattlemen as they needed in a hat those very things Stetson recognized when he made the original Stetson hat to cope with the rugged Colorado weather. Stetson soon decided to mass market the “Boss of the Plains,” which later became known simply as the "B.O.P."

Obtaining a list of every hat dealer in the Southwest, he sent each one a sample hat, along with a letter asking for an order. And yes, being a good businessman, Stetson made a Western hat for each hat dealer in the "Boss of the Plains" style he had invented during the trek to Pike's Peak.

This was considered a calculated risk because Stetson knew his new hat would either make or break him. His gamble forced him to go into debt to obtain raw materials, but within weeks orders started pouring in. Business was a boom and some dealers even sent cash with their orders in the hopes of getting preferential treatment and expedited orders.

Before long, a big "Stetson" hat became the most distinguishing feature of a cowboy’s outfit almost as identifiable as the type of saddle he used. And yes, like a good saddle, the new hat was a tool for cowboys. The broad brim shielded a working cowboy from blistering sun and driving rain, but also by waving it above his head -- a cowboy could use it to turn cattle during a roundup or even a stampede.

In case of emergency, he could carry oats in the crown for his horse. Many a cowboy climbed into almost inaccessible places, dipped up water in his hat, and carried it out to his horse. He would do as many would and cup the brim to use it as his own drinking vessel.

The hat started out at $4.50, but soon was $10 to $20 or more, which really was a considerable amount of money at the time -- especially when considering the day wage was usually one dollar in the late 1800s.

But all in all, since a Stetson was practically a lifetime investment because it would last almost forever, it was seen as a great buy.

I've read somewhere that supposed "a Stetson with a bullet hole in it has always been a prized possession with cowboys."

But frankly, after reading that -- I laughed. And yes, the last thing I want is someone putting a hole through one of my hats. I would not be happy at all!

By the late 1800s, the Stetson became the best-known hat West of the Mississippi River. Wealthy ranchers wore them, but so did others including the ranch-hand out painting some barn, cowboys moving cattle, teamsters pulling their wagons into town, surveyors charting new towns, engineers and builders of bridges, the lone prospector looking for gold in some cold river. Yes, just about anyone who worked outside.

Of course that included lawmen, the U.S. Marshals, County Sheriffs and their Deputies, from small town City Marshals to big outfits like the Texas Rangers, they all adopted the Stetson.

Before the invention of the cowboy hat, which really means before John B. Stetson came along, cowboys and men of the plains wore castoffs of previous lives and vocations. So thanks to the time that he had spent with cowboys and settlers out West, Stetson knew firsthand that the hats they wore were extremely impractical. He knew that something else was needed.

The straight-sided, round cornered, flat brimmed original "Boss of the Plains" design dominated for about twenty years. Most 19th-century photographs show that the hat doesn't have an intentional crease at all. Most hats were kept open crown.

But, fact is, through use, abuse, and customization by individual wearers, hats were modified from their original appearance. In particular, the crown would become dented, at first inadvertently, then by deliberate choice of individual owners.

Over time the manufactured styles also began to change. The first popular modification was a long crease sloping from the high back down towards the front, called the "Carlsbad crease" after a style used by wearers in Carlsbad, New Mexico. Another design became known as the "Montana peak," which had four dents, originally derived from being handled on top with four fingers.

The brim was often rolled or curved and ornamentation of sorts were sometimes added. Often, these creases and brim shapes began to reflect where a particular hat owner lived or worked, and in some cases, even cowboys on individual ranches could be identified by the crease in their hat.

Yes, as with the tack that a cowboy used, type of saddle, bit, reins, stirrups, and even spurs one wore, all telling volumes about you and where you're from and who've you worked for. And while it is true that most Stetsons were kept open crown, they could be ordered with creases. 

For example, while the overwhelming majority of hats were first shipped as open crowns and it was the hat shops that created the creases and bend designs in them. the original five creases by Stetson became known as the original five "Stetson" creases:


1) The Montana Crease: Back when people traveled less from place to place, regions of the country developed a hat crease unique to their own local land , much like an accent. The Montana Crease or Montana Slope, known today as "The Gus", was created on a Montana ranch and adopted by other Montana cowboys.

2) The Cattleman Crease: The hat crease most people identify today is the Cattleman. It was originally worn by cattle ranchers and buyers in the 1880s. It meant you ran a ranch and probably had a lot of money. That fact is likely why fine Cattleman hats today are like a status symbol. The Cattleman compliments a wider face and squarer jaw and is the crease that was worn mostly by men. Today that has changed as now cowgirls also like to wear a Cattleman crease. 

3) The Pinch Front Crease: Over the years, women lean toward a Pinch Front Crease as it accentuates the narrower jaw line and can make the face look thinner. However, it's important to note that today, both pinch front creases and Cattleman Creases are worn by both men and women.

4) The Telescope Crease: The Telescope crease came from the "Charros" (Mexican cowboys) who came to Nevada from Mexico and South America for work. The low crown covers your head but stops hot air from accumulating and its wide brim provides even more sun protection. The Telescope Crease is often known today as "The Gambler's" hat.

5) The Tom Mix Crease: Hollywood has helped dictate the popularity of some styles, like "The Gus" which was originally called "the Montana Crease". It was made famous by Robert Duvall in Lonesome Dove. Fame can even earn a custom crease style named after you. Such is the case with Tom Mix. Tom Mix was one of the first movie cowboy stars in America and often carried with him a half a dozen or a dozen Stetson Hats which he was known to gave away to important people as he traveled around the world. Imagine that. 

They say the greatness of someone is not only measured in what one creates, but by what one does with his creations. In the case of John B. Stetson, while Stetson profited from his business, he also wanted to give back to his community and did in huge ways. In fact, toward the end of his life, John Stetson began donating a great deal of his money to charitable organizations.

He built grammar and high schools and helped build colleges, including Temple and Stetson Universities. He also helped establish the YMCA in Philadelphia. Stetson donated generously to DeLand University in DeLand, Florida, which was renamed in 1889 to John B. Stetson University. In 1900, Stetson created the first law school in Florida, Stetson University Law School.

John Stetson co-founded Sunday Breakfast Rescue Mission, a homeless shelter and soup kitchen, in 1878. Sunday Breakfast Rescue Mission has since expanded to provide more services and is still in use for the homeless population of Philadelphia.

Under Stetson's direction, The John B. Stetson Company became one of the largest hat firms in the world. Stetson hats won numerous awards, but his company grew, he "faced the challenge of developing a reliable labor force."

Reportedly, at the time it was said that people working in the hat trade at that time tended to drift from employer to employer and absenteeism was rampant.

Stetson, who was "guided by Christian principles," believed that by providing for his employees he would lend stability to their lives and attract higher caliber craftsmen and women.

Unlike most other employers at the time, Stetson decided to offer benefits to entice workers to stay. Stetson also made sure his employees had a clean, safe place to work, while also building a hospital, a park and houses for his 5,000 employees. Stetson's unusual moves helped him build a factory in Philadelphia that grew to 25 buildings on 9 acres.

Some in the Labor Union movement tried to criticize John Stetson's employee policies. Yes, believe it or not, the caring that John Stetson had shown for his employees was demonized by the Labor Unions as "paternalism" which they said was akin to slavery.

Fact is, John Stetson's care for his employees was ages ahead of his day. The safety and cleanliness, the health benefits and the housing allowances, were all years ahead of other employers in the manufacturing industry of the Industrial Age. His feelings of taking providing for his employees came out of Christian kindness and a sense of family.

John Stetson owned a mansion in DeLand, Florida, where he died in 1906. The over 8,000 square ft masterpiece called John B. Stetson House is a mixture of Gothic, Tudor, and Moorish styles.

Stetson is buried in West Laurel Hill Cemetery, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania. And yes, when John B. Stetson died in 1906, his company was making two million hats a year. He left an estate worth seven million dollars. By 1915, nine years after Stetson's death, there were 5,400 employees turning out 3.3 million hats.

While he might not know it at the time, his company's hats would one day be synonymous with the term "cowboy hat" most now commonly refer to simply as Stetsons.

John B. Stetson led the hat industry his entire career by designing new hat styles for fashion and function. When it came to quality, it was his creed and for the past 150 years that it has so stamped the product that the name and the word are synonymous.

Today the Stetson hat factory in Garland, Texas, is one of the largest in the country and produces a line of hats in hundreds of different styles and colors. In spite of its size, nothing has been sacrificed as classic styling and premium quality remain as the driving forces behind each and every hat.

As a result, Stetson hats are the most well known hats in the world. Wherever and whenever hats are discussed Stetson will be mentioned. Stetson is the standard in cowboy hats. And yes, the spirit of the West lives in each as an icon of America. Because of its authentic American heritage, Stetson is a big part of American History.

Yes, John Wayne advertised Stetson
The Stetson cowboy hat was the symbol of the highest quality. Western showmen such as Buffalo Bill Cody, Pawnee Bill, and the famous Annie Oakley all wore Stetsons. And as for Hollywood, yes indeed, most all silver-screen cowboys including Hopalong Cassidy, John Wayne, and Robert Duvall have all worn Stetsons.

Stetson has also made hats for law enforcement departments, such as the Texas Rangers. Stetson's Western-style hats have been worn by employees of the National Park Service, U.S. Cavalry soldiers,  our armed forces. and many U.S. Presidents including Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan.

The "cowboy hat" is truly an example of form following function. Invented by John B. Stetson, today's cowboy hats have remained basically unchanged in construction and design since the first one was created in 1865. In addition to the cowboy hats, Stetson has also made fedoras, derbies, and women's hats, but it is the cowboy hat that Stetson will always be famous for creating.

John B. Stetson experienced trying times in his life, but through it all he relied on the one thing that he did exceptionally well. He was a hat maker. Remember, he was trained by his father, who was a master hatter, and he applied the skills and knowledge he learned from his father to a trade that was really not held in high very regard at the time. It's true, the reason is that back in those days "hatters" had a reputation of being unreliable, lazy, free spirit types who only wanted to make money to have fun.

John B. Stetson changed all that when he built one of America's most well-known and successful businesses. A business which has longevity and history based on innovation and quality. A business that today sells a lot more than just hats.

This article has been compiled from many sources with the hopes of telling you about a man who did not quit, found a way to make his live and others better and did so.  John B. Stetson was an American who typifies the "Can Do" spirit of America . He is someone who should truly be admired as we can all learn a great deal from him.

Let's not forget that he himself was given the death sentence of TB in a time when TB killed millions. He was a hard worker who did not come from money. He strove to produce just the right product, and did just that. He was a creative genius but also smart in business. Because of his Christian ideals, he gave back a great deal to his community and our nation -- all while making the lives of his employees better and safer. Friends, that is someone to be admired.

Yes, I truly admire John B. Stetson.
Tom Correa 


Thursday, December 24, 2015

Merry Christmas My Friends!


Dear Friends,

Thank you for your wonderful support of my blog. I cannot thank you enough for making my blog such a success. I am truly grateful for your support.

While it never ceases to amaze me just how many people out there are interested in the same things that I am, as a kindred spirit I feel blessed that you visit to see what's new. It is great to know that I can provide something that you may enjoy reading. And yes, it also feels pretty good knowing that I can be useful in passing on information whether it be history as it really was, or simply current events that might be buried on the back pages of the news.

I wish you and yours a very Merry Christmas and a wonderful New Year. I pray that God Blesses you and those you love. May the good Lord keep you safe and well.

As always, your friend,
Tom Correa

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

California Gold Rush Christmas & The Christmas Nugget


Christmas was a huge celebration that was always looked forward to during the years of the California Gold Rush. And yes, as with other Christmas celebrations all having their own customs taking place in different regions of the nation, Christmas in the California Far West had it's own customs.

Because the California Gold Rush was such an extraordinary event that brought people from all corners of the earth, many who participated in the Gold Rush were young and far from home. Many from foreign lands, many religions, many customs, and all were factors that added to the intense revelry. 

In its earliest days, the Gold Rush was almost exclusively male and the sentiment was usually a mixture of homesickness, horseplay, and revelry. Yes, Christmas celebrations in the mining camps were typical for 19th Century America. 

A Gold Rush Christmas was usually an unassuming, often spontaneous affair that consisted primarily of eating, drinking, companionship and entertainment. Although, in the mid-19th century, gift giving was becoming fashionable, if there were presents in the gold fields they were practical in nature. 

For example, clothing, hats, knitted socks, scarves, and mittens were always prized. In the towns where there were children, little girls received homemade rag dolls and miniature quilts while little boys received tops or other wooden toys. 

Often Christmas represented the only time when some people, both adults and children, received presents. As a result, Christmas held an important place in the hearts, minds, and memories of 19th century Californians.

There are many accounts of Christmas festivities in the gold fields -- most modest, some complicated, but all heartfelt.

Alfred Doten, who is well known to have chronicled the Gold Rush, was also a friend of Mark Twain. He was widely renowned as a leading "reveler," and he described Christmas in Amador County in 1853. In his account, Doten talked about how he threw a "Christmas Spree" which featured "a glorious game supper of fried deer tongue, liver, quails, and hares, washed down with barrels of cognac and accompanied by fiddle, flute, banjo, clarinet and accordion music." 

Andrew Hall Gilmore wrote about his California Christmas Day experience in 1851 in a letter to his brother in Indiana:

Thursday night - 25th

Dear Brother,
"Christmas Gift to You." Oh, I wish that I could be at home today. I think we would have a Christmas party. We would have the old gobbler roasted with a score of fat hens, pound cakes, pies, and lots of other good things. But the best of all would be the pleasure of seeing you all. Probably if we live we may be with you next Christmas.

I will tell you what kind of a day it has been and what we have been doing. It has been the most rainy day I believe that I have ever seen in this country. … As we had no invitations to any Christmas parties: and feeling no inclination to go on a "bust", we thought we might spend the day as profitably by going down to our diggings and working like fine fellows, even if it was Christmas and awful rainy at that. So Aaron and I encased ourselves in our waterproof suits and went to work …. We made $11.25 each, which was a tolerably good rainy day's work …


An elaborate California Christmas during the Gold Rush was described by Louise Amelia Knapp Smith Clappe in 1851. Better known as Dame Shirley, Ms Clappe wrote a series of letters describing her life in the Gold Rush community of Rich Bar on the Feather River. 

These letters are considered one of the best eyewitness accounts of the California Gold Rush. Here, Dame Shirley recalls the "Saturnalia" of Christmas 1851:

The saturnalia commenced on Christmas evening, at the Humboldt [Saloon], which, on that very day, had passed into the hands of new proprietors. The most gorgeous preparations were made for celebrating the two events. The bar was retrimmed with red calico, the bowling-alley had a new lining of the coarsest and whitest cotton cloth, and the broken lamp-shades were replaced by whole ones. All day long, patient mules could be seen descending the hill, bending beneath casks of brandy and baskets of champagne, and, for the first time in the history of that celebrated building, the floor (wonderful to relate, it has a floor) was washed …. At nine o'clock in the evening they had an oyster-and-champagne supper in the Humboldt, which was very gay with toasts, songs, speeches, etc. I believe that the company danced all night. At any rate, they were dancing when I went to sleep, and they were dancing when I woke the next morning. The revel was kept up in this mad way for three days, growing wilder every hour.

The Christmas Nugget

Yes, then there is the California Gold Rush Christmas story of the "Christmas Nugget" which was recounted in William P. Bennett’s 1893 memoir of the California Gold Rush entitled The First Baby in Camp.

On Christmas Day in 1849, Mrs. William George Wilson delivered a healthy 12-pound baby boy at Canyon Creek, near Georgetown up near Hangtown.

Soon the news spread to a neighboring claim. Then before you knew it, the gold field grapevine had spread the news that Bill Wilson had struck it rich with a 12 pound nugget. 

"News of the big find spread like wildfire up and down the canyon where hundreds of men were at work," wrote Bennett, "At once, there was a grand rush to Bill Wilson's cabin. Every miner was anxious to see the 12-pound lump."

Seeing that most took the news literally, the Wilsons thoroughly enjoyed the moment as the men lined up at the cabin door to get a look at the large nugget. 

"Then a few were let in at a time to view the Christmas nugget." Bennett wrote. "Each of the miners loved being had."

For three more days, the joke continued throughout the area. Bennett wrote of miners who came from more than ten miles away to see the giant "Christmas Nugget."

It turned out to be a very Merry Christmas. One that many talked about for months to come. One that few forgot. After all, it was one that spoke to their struggle and their sacrifice, their hard work and their search, the elusive prize and their belief, and of course their grasp of holding on to those things that mean more than gold. 

For as Bennett recalled, "As each squad came out of the cabin, the men solemnly asserted that the Wilson nugget was the finest ever seen."

Yes, it was a very Merry Christmas indeed. 

Merry Christmas!
Tom Correa





Monday, December 21, 2015

Christmas Traditions -- "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

Dear Friends, as I stated in the last two posts, a few of you have written to ask about my Christmas traditions. And as I've said, I do have a couple of personal things that I do each year at Christmas just for myself.

Almost every year, I have alternated between reading O. Henry's "The Last Leaf" and "The Gift of the Magi", and reading the Sept. 21st, 1897, editorial response by the Editor of The (New York) Sun newspaper which is now simply known as "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

I believe that besides reading of the account of the birth of Jesus Christ on Christmas in the Bible, these stories are very inspirational. I hope you enjoy this as it was published in 1897.

Is There a Santa Claus?

DEAR EDITOR: I am 8 years old.
Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus.
Papa says, "If you see it in THE SUN it’s so."
Please tell me the truth; is there a Santa Claus?

VIRGINIA O’HANLON.
115 WEST NINETY-FIFTH STREET.


Here is the Editor's response:

VIRGINIA, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men’s or children’s, are little. In this great universe of ours man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect, as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, VIRGINIA, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus. It would be as dreary as if there were no VIRGINIAS. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas Eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if they did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that’s no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You may tear apart the baby’s rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, VIRGINIA, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No Santa Claus! Thank God! he lives, and he lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.


-- end of Editorial.



"Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus" is a phrase from an editorial called Is There a Santa Claus?

The editorial appeared in the September 21, 1897, edition of The (New York) Sun and has since become part of popular Christmas folklore in the United States. It is the most reprinted editorial in any English-language newspaper.

Francis Pharcellus Church is the author of the famous editorial. He was an American publisher and editor. He was a member of the Century Association.

He was born in Rochester, New York on February 22nd, 1839, and he graduated from Columbia College of Columbia University in New York City in 1859.

With his brother William Conant Church, they established The Army and Navy Journal in 1863, and Galaxy magazine in 1866 which merged with Atlantic Monthly after 10 years. 

He was a lead editorial writer on his brother's newspaper, The Sun, and it was in that capacity that he wrote his most famous editorial, "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus" in 1897.

Mr. Church was a war correspondent during the American Civil War, a time that saw great suffering and a corresponding lack of hope and faith in much of society. Although the paper ran the editorial in the seventh place on the page. Even though it seemed hidden beneath ads, it was well-received by readers.

On April 11th, 1906, Mr. Church died in New York City at the age of 67.  He was buried in Sleepy Hollow Cemetery in Sleepy Hollow, New York. He had no children.

So How Did This All Start?

In 1897, Dr. Philip O'Hanlon, a coroner's assistant on Manhattan's Upper West Side, was asked by his then eight-year-old daughter,Virginia O'Hanlon (1889–1971), whether Santa Claus really existed. 

O'Hanlon suggested she write to The Sun which was a very prominent New York City newspaper at the time, assuring her that "If you see it in The Sun, it's so." 

In so doing, Dr. O'Hanlon had unwittingly given one of the paper's editors, Francis Pharcellus Church, an opportunity to rise above the simple question and address the philosophical issues behind it.

More than a century later it is the most reprinted editorial in any newspaper in the English language.

"Yes, Virginia, there is (a)..." has become an idiomatic expression to insist that something is true.

In December 2015, Macy's department store in Herald Square, New York City, NY used Virginia's story for their holiday window display. Illustrated in three-dimensional figurines and spanning several windows on the south side of the store along 34th Street between 6th and 7th Avenues. This version of "Yes, Virginia" is based on the 2010 television series of the same name, starring Neil Patrick Harris and Bea Miller.

So who was Virginia O'Hanlon?

Laura Virginia O'Hanlon was born on July 20, 1889, in Manhattan, New York. At the age of 21 in 1910, she married Edward Douglas. Their marriage was brief, and ended with him deserting her shortly before their daughter, Laura, was born. 

In the 1930 United States Census, she was listed as divorced but kept her ex-husband's surname the rest of her life -- "Laura Virginia O'Hanlon Douglas."

Virginia received her Bachelor of Arts from Hunter College in 1910, a Master's degree in education from Columbia University in 1912, and a Doctorate from Fordham University. She was a school teacher in the New York City ISD. She started her career as an educator in 1912, became a junior principal in 1935, and retired in 1959.

Virginia received a steady stream of mail about her letter throughout her life. She would include a copy of the editorial in her replies. In an interview later in life, she credited it with shaping the direction of her life "quite positively."

Virginia died on May 13, 1971 at the age of 81, in a nursing home in Valatie, New York. She is buried at the Chatham Rural Cemetery in North Chatham, New York.

In 1971, after seeing Virginia's obituary in The New York Times, four friends formed a company called Elizabeth Press and published a children's book titled Yes, Virginia that illustrated the editorial and included a brief history of the main characters. 

It's creators took it to Warner Brothers who eventually made an Emmy award-winning television show based on the editorial.

The History Channel, in a special that aired on February 21, 2001, noted that Virginia gave the original letter to a granddaughter, who pasted it in a scrapbook. It was feared that the letter was destroyed in a house fire, but 30 years later, it was discovered intact.

Every year, Virginia's letter and Church's response are read at the Yule Log ceremony at Church's alma mater, Columbia College of Columbia University.

The story of Virginia's inquiry and The Sun '​s response was adapted in 1932 into an NBC produced cantata, the only known editorial set to classical music, a segment of the short film Santa Claus Story (1945), and an Emmy Award-winning animated television special in 1974, animated by Bill Meléndez who had worked on various Peanuts specials.

In 1991 it was adapted into a made-for-TV movie starring Richard Thomas and Charles Bronson. In 1996, the story was adapted into an eponymous holiday musical by David Kirchenbaum (music and lyrics) and Myles McDonnel (book).

The last two paragraphs of Church's editorial are read by actor Sam Elliot in the 1989 film Prancer, about Jessica Riggs, a little girl who believes the wounded reindeer she is nursing back to health belongs to Santa. Jessica's story inspires the local newspaper editor, as Virginia's letter did to Church, to write an editorial which he titles Yes, Santa, there is a Virginia.

On September 21, 1997, the 100th anniversary of the editorial's original publication, The New York Times published an analysis of its enduring appeal.

In 2003, "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus" was depicted in a mechanical holiday window display at the Lord & Taylor department store on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan.

In 2009, The Studio School in New York City, honored Virginia's life and legacy. Janet C. Rotter, Head of School, announced the establishment of the Virginia O'Hanlon Scholarship, speaking passionately about their commitment to offering need-based scholarships for students of merit. 
Virginia's descendants continue her legacy.

In December 2012, radio station WGNA-FM in Albany, NY secured a never before published photo of Virginia finally meeting Santa on Christmas Eve 1969, two years before her death.

From my family to yours, Merry Christmas! May God Bless you and yours! 
Tom Correa

Christmas Traditions -- The Gift of the Magi

Dear Friends, a few of you have written to ask about my Christmas traditions. And while like many of you, I have family traditions, I also have a couple of personal things that I do each year at Christmas just for myself.

In 1976, when I was a young Marine and away from home during Christmas, I was given a book of O. Henry's short stories. I read a few stories, but a couple really struck my fancy -- especially for this time of year.

Since then, almost every year, I have alternated between O. Henry's "The Last Leaf" and "The Gift of the Magi", and reading the Sept. 21st, 1897, response by the Editor of The Sun which is now simply known as "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

I believe that besides reading the account of the birth of Jesus Christ on Christmas, these stories are truly inspirational.

"The Gift of the Magi" is a short story, written by O. Henry, a pen name for William Sydney Porter. It is about a young married couple and how they deal with the challenge of buying Christmas gifts for each other when they have very little money.

This moral lesson about gift-giving, was initially published in The New York Sunday World under the title "Gifts of the Magi" on December 10, 1905. It was first published in book form in the O. Henry Anthology The Four Million in April 1906.  I hope you enjoy this short story.

THE GIFT OF THE MAGI
By O. Henry

One dollar and eighty-seven cents. That was all. And sixty cents of it was in pennies. Pennies saved one and two at a time by bulldozing the grocer and the vegetable man and the butcher until one's cheeks burned with the silent imputation of parsimony that such close dealing implied. Three times Della counted it. One dollar and eighty- seven cents. And the next day would be Christmas.

There was clearly nothing to do but flop down on the shabby little couch and howl. So Della did it. Which instigates the moral reflection that life is made up of sobs, sniffles, and smiles, with sniffles predominating.

While the mistress of the home is gradually subsiding from the first stage to the second, take a look at the home. A furnished flat at $8 per week. It did not exactly beggar description, but it certainly had that word on the lookout for the mendicancy squad.

In the vestibule below was a letter-box into which no letter would go, and an electric button from which no mortal finger could coax a ring. Also appertaining thereunto was a card bearing the name "Mr. James Dillingham Young."

The "Dillingham" had been flung to the breeze during a former period of prosperity when its possessor was being paid $30 per week. Now, when the income was shrunk to $20, though, they were thinking seriously of contracting to a modest and unassuming D. But whenever Mr. James Dillingham Young came home and reached his flat above he was called "Jim" and greatly hugged by Mrs. James Dillingham Young, already introduced to you as Della. Which is all very good.

Della finished her cry and attended to her cheeks with the powder rag. She stood by the window and looked out dully at a gray cat walking a gray fence in a gray backyard. Tomorrow would be Christmas Day, and she had only $1.87 with which to buy Jim a present. She had been saving every penny she could for months, with this result. Twenty dollars a week doesn't go far. Expenses had been greater than she had calculated. They always are. Only $1.87 to buy a present for Jim. Her Jim. Many a happy hour she had spent planning for something nice for him. Something fine and rare and sterling--something just a little bit near to being worthy of the honor of being owned by Jim.

There was a pier-glass between the windows of the room. Perhaps you have seen a pier-glass in an $8 flat. A very thin and very agile person may, by observing his reflection in a rapid sequence of longitudinal strips, obtain a fairly accurate conception of his looks. Della, being slender, had mastered the art.

Suddenly she whirled from the window and stood before the glass. her eyes were shining brilliantly, but her face had lost its color within twenty seconds. Rapidly she pulled down her hair and let it fall to its full length.

Now, there were two possessions of the James Dillingham Youngs in which they both took a mighty pride. One was Jim's gold watch that had been his father's and his grandfather's. The other was Della's hair. Had the queen of Sheba lived in the flat across the airshaft, Della would have let her hair hang out the window some day to dry just to depreciate Her Majesty's jewels and gifts. Had King Solomon been the janitor, with all his treasures piled up in the basement, Jim would have pulled out his watch every time he passed, just to see him pluck at his beard from envy.

So now Della's beautiful hair fell about her rippling and shining like a cascade of brown waters. It reached below her knee and made itself almost a garment for her. And then she did it up again nervously and quickly. Once she faltered for a minute and stood still while a tear or two splashed on the worn red carpet.

On went her old brown jacket; on went her old brown hat. With a whirl of skirts and with the brilliant sparkle still in her eyes, she fluttered out the door and down the stairs to the street.

Where she stopped the sign read: "Mne. Sofronie. Hair Goods of All Kinds." One flight up Della ran, and collected herself, panting. Madame, large, too white, chilly, hardly looked the "Sofronie."

"Will you buy my hair?" asked Della.

"I buy hair," said Madame. "Take yer hat off and let's have a sight at the looks of it."

Down rippled the brown cascade.

"Twenty dollars," said Madame, lifting the mass with a practised hand.

"Give it to me quick," said Della.

Oh, and the next two hours tripped by on rosy wings. Forget the hashed metaphor. She was ransacking the stores for Jim's present.

She found it at last. It surely had been made for Jim and no one else. There was no other like it in any of the stores, and she had turned all of them inside out. It was a platinum fob chain simple and chaste in design, properly proclaiming its value by substance alone and not by meretricious ornamentation--as all good things should do. It was even worthy of The Watch. As soon as she saw it she knew that it must be Jim's. It was like him. Quietness and value--the description applied to both. Twenty-one dollars they took from her for it, and she hurried home with the 87 cents. With that chain on his watch Jim might be properly anxious about the time in any company. Grand as the watch was, he sometimes looked at it on the sly on account of the old leather strap that he used in place of a chain.

When Della reached home her intoxication gave way a little to prudence and reason. She got out her curling irons and lighted the gas and went to work repairing the ravages made by generosity added to love. Which is always a tremendous task, dear friends--a mammoth task.

Within forty minutes her head was covered with tiny, close-lying curls that made her look wonderfully like a truant schoolboy. She looked at her reflection in the mirror long, carefully, and critically.

"If Jim doesn't kill me," she said to herself, "before he takes a second look at me, he'll say I look like a Coney Island chorus girl. But what could I do--oh! what could I do with a dollar and eighty- seven cents?"

At 7 o'clock the coffee was made and the frying-pan was on the back of the stove hot and ready to cook the chops.

Jim was never late. Della doubled the fob chain in her hand and sat on the corner of the table near the door that he always entered. Then she heard his step on the stair away down on the first flight, and she turned white for just a moment. She had a habit for saying little silent prayer about the simplest everyday things, and now she whispered: "Please God, make him think I am still pretty."

The door opened and Jim stepped in and closed it. He looked thin and very serious. Poor fellow, he was only twenty-two--and to be burdened with a family! He needed a new overcoat and he was without gloves.

Jim stopped inside the door, as immovable as a setter at the scent of quail. His eyes were fixed upon Della, and there was an expression in them that she could not read, and it terrified her. It was not anger, nor surprise, nor disapproval, nor horror, nor any of the sentiments that she had been prepared for. He simply stared at her fixedly with that peculiar expression on his face.

Della wriggled off the table and went for him.

"Jim, darling," she cried, "don't look at me that way. I had my hair cut off and sold because I couldn't have lived through Christmas without giving you a present. It'll grow out again--you won't mind, will you? I just had to do it. My hair grows awfully fast. Say `Merry Christmas!' Jim, and let's be happy. You don't know what a nice-- what a beautiful, nice gift I've got for you."

"You've cut off your hair?" asked Jim, laboriously, as if he had not arrived at that patent fact yet even after the hardest mental labor.

"Cut it off and sold it," said Della. "Don't you like me just as well, anyhow? I'm me without my hair, ain't I?"

Jim looked about the room curiously.

"You say your hair is gone?" he said, with an air almost of idiocy.

"You needn't look for it," said Della. "It's sold, I tell you--sold and gone, too. It's Christmas Eve, boy. Be good to me, for it went for you. Maybe the hairs of my head were numbered," she went on with sudden serious sweetness, "but nobody could ever count my love for you. Shall I put the chops on, Jim?"

Out of his trance Jim seemed quickly to wake. He enfolded his Della. For ten seconds let us regard with discreet scrutiny some inconsequential object in the other direction. Eight dollars a week or a million a year--what is the difference? A mathematician or a wit would give you the wrong answer. The magi brought valuable gifts, but that was not among them. This dark assertion will be illuminated later on.

Jim drew a package from his overcoat pocket and threw it upon the table.

"Don't make any mistake, Dell," he said, "about me. I don't think there's anything in the way of a haircut or a shave or a shampoo that could make me like my girl any less. But if you'll unwrap that package you may see why you had me going a while at first."

White fingers and nimble tore at the string and paper. And then an ecstatic scream of joy; and then, alas! a quick feminine change to hysterical tears and wails, necessitating the immediate employment of all the comforting powers of the lord of the flat.

For there lay The Combs--the set of combs, side and back, that Della had worshipped long in a Broadway window. Beautiful combs, pure tortoise shell, with jewelled rims--just the shade to wear in the beautiful vanished hair. They were expensive combs, she knew, and her heart had simply craved and yearned over them without the least hope of possession. And now, they were hers, but the tresses that should have adorned the coveted adornments were gone.

But she hugged them to her bosom, and at length she was able to look up with dim eyes and a smile and say: "My hair grows so fast, Jim!"

And them Della leaped up like a little singed cat and cried, "Oh, oh!"

Jim had not yet seen his beautiful present. She held it out to him eagerly upon her open palm. The dull precious metal seemed to flash with a reflection of her bright and ardent spirit.

"Isn't it a dandy, Jim? I hunted all over town to find it. You'll have to look at the time a hundred times a day now. Give me your watch. I want to see how it looks on it."

Instead of obeying, Jim tumbled down on the couch and put his hands under the back of his head and smiled.

"Dell," said he, "let's put our Christmas presents away and keep 'em a while. They're too nice to use just at present. I sold the watch to get the money to buy your combs. And now suppose you put the chops on."

The magi, as you know, were wise men -- wonderfully wise men -- who brought gifts to the Babe in the manger. They invented the art of giving Christmas presents. Being wise, their gifts were no doubt wise ones, possibly bearing the privilege of exchange in case of duplication. And here I have lamely related to you the uneventful chronicle of two foolish children in a flat who most unwisely sacrificed for each other the greatest treasures of their house.

But in a last word to the wise of these days let it be said that of all who give gifts these two were the wisest. O all who give and receive gifts, such as they are wisest. Everywhere they are wisest. They are the magi.

THE END

From my family to yours, Merry Christmas! May God Bless you and yours!
Tom Correa